The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Building Learning Communities in Online Courses: the importance of interaction
Abstract
This article discusses course design factors affecting the success of asynchronous online learning, with a specific focus on the social development of learning communities through online discussion. It reports on an empirical investigation of correlations between 22 course design factors and student perceptions of satisfaction, learning, and interaction with instructors and classmates using data collected from 73 courses offered through the State University of New York Learning Network (SLN) in the spring 1999 semester. Data analyses revealed that three factors were significantly related to student perceptions—clarity and consistency in course design, contact with and feedback from course instructors, and active and valued discussion. An explanation for these findings may center on the importance of creating opportunities for interaction in online learning environments. In this vein, preliminary findings from research on the development of community in online course discussions is presented. Drawn from content analyses of asynchronous discussions in an online graduate course in education, this research examines the ways in which course participants use verbal immediacy indicators to support the development of online community. Findings support an equilibrium model of social presence in online discussion which suggests that as affective communications channels are reduced, discussion participants use more verbal immediacy behaviors to support interaction among classmates. Taken together, the findings support the importance of interaction for online teaching and learning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hamlet on the holodeck: the future of narrative in cyberspace
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-1342 · Cited by 2,780
Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment
Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997) · American Journal of Distance Education · doi:10.1080/08923649709526970 · Cited by 2,005
ASSESSING TEACHING PRESENCE IN A COMPUTER CONFERENCING CONTEXT
Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, R., & Archer, W. (2001) · Online Learning · doi:10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875 · Cited by 1,885
SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVIST PERSPECTIVES ON TEACHING AND LEARNING
Palincsar, A. S. (1998) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.345 · Cited by 1,565
Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., & Maher, G. (2000) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.2190/w4g6-hy52-57p1-ppne · Cited by 433
Self-citation
Cited by
A Systematic Review of Social Presence: Definition, Antecedents, and Implications
Oh, C. S., Bailenson, J. N., & Welch, G. F. (2018) · Frontiers in Robotics and AI · doi:10.3389/frobt.2018.00114 · Cited by 1,032
Shea, P., Sau Li, C., & Pickett, A. (2006) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.06.005 · Cited by 740
(2009) · Indiana Magazine of History (Indiana University) · Cited by 599
Kemp, N., & Grieve, R. (2014) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01278 · Cited by 434
WALLACE, R. M. (2003) · Education, Communication & Information · doi:10.1080/14636310303143 · Cited by 405
Metadata
- Authors
- Swan, K.
- Venue
- Education, Communication & Information
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2002-05
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-49
- ISSN
- 1463-631X (ISSN-L)
- 1470-6725
- OpenAlex
- W2005880885
- Cited by
- 799
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 71.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Building Learning Communities in Online Courses: the importance of interaction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/1463631022000005016
- The paper
- Swan, K. (2002). Building Learning Communities in Online Courses: the importance of interaction. Education, Communication & Information. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463631022000005016
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.