The Roles of Students in the Development of a Collaborative Learning Community through

Networked Learning: A alaysian !erspe"tive

Amelia Abdullah
ohamed Amin #mbi
Abstra"t
This paper aims at to identifying the different roles that students play in the development of a
collaborative, networked learning (n-learning) community through an asynchronous environment. The
respondents for this case study involved included twenty- three undergraduates TES students in
their ninth semester. These students, undergoing enrolled in the Introduction to Literature course, are
were pursuing their degrees in a private institution of higher education, in on a branch campus in
!erak. This study employed the a "ualitative research method as the research methodology. The
instruments used in the data gathering process were included interaction threads analysis and semi-
structured interviews. The analysis of the data showcased suggests that the students played
significantly different roles in developing the collaborative learning community. The students# roles are
categori$ised into two types% positive and negative roles. The negative roles can be seen as threats to
the sanctity of an online learning community&& therefore, they have tomust be minimi$ised. 'n
developing a successful n-learning community, students should learn to take control of their own
learning by adopting . This means the students are able to adopt appropriate roles according to the
needs of the community. Each student has their his or her own significant roles to play to ensure that
a collaborative n-learning community is successfully developed.
$ntrodu"tion
(ith the dawning of the knowledge era, the field of education becomes more challenging. The sharing
of ideas are is no longer limited to formal education but is also accomplished through electronic
mediums that transcends the timetemporal, geographical or and disciplinary limits ()$ulkifli *++,).
The 'nformation c-ommunication and tTechnology has been the a catalyst in thefor education reform
in .alaysia. /s the aspect of sharing and networking becomes more important in a technologically
driven society, education has to cater adapt to those needs. 0ohnson and 0ohnson (1223) have
mentioned noted that the whole society has transformed from product- based careers, whereby the
workers work individually, to technological and information- based careers, where the workers need to
work collaboratively and cooperatively. )ue Thus, to that fact, it is vital for that every .alaysian to beis
e"uipped with positive social skills to work successfully in collaborative environments.
The application of the 'nternet in to the .alaysian education system is a new development,scenario
especially in the higher institution education. field. 4romThis development has resulted in the creation
of many new terms, this scenario, many terms such as virtual learning, online learning , cyber
education (5osenberg *++1& 0ones 1222), e-learning and networked learning. are coined. 4or the
purposes of this study, the term networked learning or n-learning has is used. been chosenThis term
as it refers to the a learning process carried out through a computer network which that emphasi$ises
on collaborativecollaboration learning among the learners and the instructor (6arasim 1227). The
research by Schutte (1223) as well a and by !hipps and .erisotis (in !aloff 8 !ratt *++1) illustrates
that learners who are in a virtual collaborative class have shown significantly better results as
compared to the learners who are in the face-to-face classes. -ollaborative learning helps learners
students to achieve a more meaningful knowledge through through shared goals and the mutual
construction of new meaning the construction of the same goals, sharing and e9ploring together in
building new meaning ( !allof 8 !ratt *++1). -ollaborative learning is seen as an effective method
that tocan e"uip the learners with valuable social skills to forbe used in the workplace.
Literature Review

The rapid development of the educational system causes has caused massive significant changes in
the roles taken ofby the instructor and the learners students in the classroom. earners Students
become more independent and autonomous in a networked environment whereby where they
manage their own learning according to their individual needs. The instructor merely acts as a
facilitator, aiding the students to in achievinge their learning ob:ectives. ;oth the instructor and the
learners students need to diversify their roles according to the demands of the learning process.
!aloff and !ratt (*++1) have identified several roles played by the learners students in a networked
learning environment.%
a. <nowledge =enerators
earners construct the their knowledge that they gain they get from the learning process
and adapt it according to their needs. The new knowledge will is then be utilised in their
everyday lives.
b. -ollaborators
/s a part of a collaborative learning community, the learnersstudents should be able to
work together with their peers and the instructor to achieve the learning outcomes. 'n
doing so, the learnersstudents need to be able to provide and receive feedback as well as
to self evaluate their own learning progress. /s !aloff and !ratt (*++1) emphasi$ise, in a
networked learning environment, the learners students are e9pected to be able to
collaborate successfully in constructing a deeper and more meaningful knowledge.
c. 'nitiators and (rappers (6ara et. al. 122>)
earners Students must have to be active learning agents in a networked environment. 'n
contrast, ?n the other hand, the instructor#s role has is minimi$ised. become more
minimal. The @i'nitiatorA starts the discussion going while the @wrapperA summari$ises it.
To ensure a successful networked learning environment, the studentslearners have
mustto be able to be both initiators and wrappers. The instructor needs to hand in over
the bulk of the responsibility to the learners and monitor the learning process to ensure it
goes on smoothly.
?ther roles that can be taken adopted by the learners students in a collaborative learning community
areinclude the following%
a. .ediator B Tthe go- between who attempts to solve indifferences or conflicts in the
community.
b. !rovoker B =goading other learners to respond.
c. )iscussion initiator B !posing thought- provoking "uestions to spark meaningful
discussions.
d. Social network builder (5ourke *++1) B Cusing the online interaction to build an effective
condusive soscial environment.
/part 'n addition to from the positive roles mentioned above, there are also negative roles which are
found in a collaborative learning community.%
/. urkers - learners
urkers are students who do not make any contribute toions in the learning community.
These learners students lurk in silence and can be considered or are simply being
passive contributors. They only absorb the contributions of others and do not reciprocate
in return. E9treme lurkers only register as a group members and then disappear
completely from the community. /ccording to Salmon (*+++), there are three categories
of lurkers%
i. 4reeloaders B Tthose using who use the contributions of others
without contributing anything backin return.
ii. Sponges B Tthose who re"uire more time to adapt themselves to
thein the networked learning environment. These sponges students
lurk in the beginning, and when they are more confident, they will
start contributing.
iii. Students who lurk The lurkers who lurk due to technical access
problems or lack of computing skills.
!reece (*+++) also lists out reasons why the learners become lurkers%
a. ack of ing in confidence in providing ideas and, feeling that their ideas are not good or
tangible enough.
b. )ifficulties in accessing the network.
c. )o ack of not have the understanding of the concept of a learning community,
thereforeleading to a lack of , do not have a close-knit and reliable relationships with
other community members.
d. 6aving low motivation levels.
e. .ore i'nterest ed in obtaining knowledge without the online interaction.
;. 4lamers
4lamers are learners who are frustrated with the entire situation and illustrate their
frustrations through harsh words or revert byto bullying other learners. They will write
comments that would offend their peers and the instructor. The act of flaming is
unprofessional and could disrupt the conduciveness effectiveness of the collaborative
learning environment.
-. )ominantsce
/ dominant learner will takes overcon"uer more thant D+E of the entire discussion. 'n
addition, aThese students dominant learner does do not necessarilyy have the most
knowledge. Some learners students have the a tendency to attract the attention of
others and will do not allow their peers to contribute the ideas. !aloff and !ratt (*++1)
further categorise dominance into two types%
i. !ersonal dominance B learners dominate the discussion with issues
unrelated to the learning process.
ii. /cademic dominance B learners who are highly knowledgeable who
tend to dominate the discussion by providing most of the information
without allowing others to participate. as actively.
)ominants are able to hinder others from e9pressing their own views, therefore thereby halting the
formation of a successful collaborative learning community. Therefore, )ue to that, these negative
roles must be monitored and minimised. The instructor#s intervention is needed in to curbing these
negative roles so and prevent them from getting out of as not to let them get out of control.
The This study is was conducted to identify the roles played by the students in developing and
maintaining a collaborative learning community through networked learning.
ethodology
The This study conducted used a is "ualitative in methodologynature to find determinethe answer to
the "uestion about the roles undertaken adopted by the learnersstudents in the development of a
collaborative, networked learning community. / "Fualitative research is was deemed suitable for this
study to obtain a deeper understanding on of novel issues as well as to garner obtain details on the
naturalistic environment which that could not be obtained though "uantitative methods (Strauss 8
-orbin 122+). This study employeds the an interpretive approach, focusing on the whole entire online
interaction and as well as at the same time dissecting the meaning inside of each utterance
(=unawardena et. al. 1227& 6illman 1222).
Twenty- three undergraduate students (;achelor of Education B TES) who taking courses part-time
are undertaking the course part time in a private higher education institution as well and an one
instructor are were involved in this study. The students comprise were of in- service teachers who
ofare teaching English in their respective schools. The instructor involved hads been a tutor for a year
and hads ade"uate online teaching skills. Each student is was identified by an alphabetic codes such
fromas S/ to , S;, S- until S(. The instructor is was identifiedknown as .rs. S. The interview
respondents consisted of four students from the studied group and .rs. S. / total of ,+, online
messages are were archived and analysed for the purpose of this study.
The respondents go participated in through a blended learning mode, in which whereby the learning
sessions are were conducted both done online and through face-to-face. 6owever, this study is
focussed only focusing on the asynchronous online interactions between the instructor andwith the
learners students and among the learners students themselves. The study is was conducted for 1,
weeks (one semester).
The data collected from the online asynchronous interaction and the interviews are were archived,
transcribed and coded according to the prepared coding scheme (see Tables 1a and 1b).
Roles $ndi"ator
1. 'nitiator and (rapper 'nitiator B learner who starts the discussion
(rapper B learner who summari$ises the
discussion
*. )iscussion 'nitiator !rovidesing "uestions that can spark deep and
meaningful discussions among community
members.
,. <nowledge =enerators 1. earners who fre"uently answers the
instructor#s "uestions
*. ?ften starting the topics to be discussed
G. .ediator H !roblem Solver /ctsing as the middle person to solve conflicts or
differences.
5. Socsial Ietwork ;uilder
)evelopsing an environment that has a social
presence.
Table 1a % !ositive 5oles
Roles $ndi"ators
1. urkers
)oes notIo contributeion at all. ogs in merely to
obtain information from other members.
2. 4lamers
Csesing harsh and insulting words to offend the
other members of the community.
3. !assive -ontributors
1. -ontributes sSporadically contribution
*. ?nly a/grees with others# opinions without
offering hisHher own.
4. )ominatornce
)ominates and controls more than half of the
discussion. . and the messages are not centreered
on :ust academic messages.
Table 1b%. Iegative 5oles
%indings
!ositive Roles
Initiator and Wrapper
/s mentioned beforepreviously, an @initiatorA is the one who starts the discussion, while the a
@wrapperA summari$ises the whole discussion (6ara et .al., 122>). The analysis showeds that eight
respondents take took on the role of initiator. These students fre"uently started new topics to be
discussed and debated. 'n addition, two of the eight students becaome initiators after the face-to-face
tutorials have werebeen carried out. ST is was the biggest contributor in the community, while !4SF is
was the most active participant and posed fre"uent "uestions. who often poses "uestion.
As we know, most of us cultivate reading habits from the reading materials that were
interesting or with personal purposes. We read for info, pleasure and general
knowledge in etensive reading. In short, etensive reading matters most in this worlds
of knowledge. What is your take on this!"
(S4, .essage 1*, Tutorial 1)
The initiator is vital in a networked learning community to ensure that the interaction goes
continueson. (ith an active initiator, the instructor does not need to be the one who always starts
the discussion.
/ccording to 6ara et. al. (122>), the wrapper has the responsibility fories in summing up and
closing the particular discussion. The findings illustrate that only five respondents acted as the
wrappers. /s 4or e9ample% a e9ample,
#i all, I agree with what $rs said. I like to sum it up by sharing with you using the book
%&idy your room, &aya' for (r ). I had to try out the conversation between all the
characters in the book as a short drama. Although it is simple and short they really
en*oyed it. I think by doing this kind of activity, they can remember the story better and
they are able to use the language." (S!, .essage *G, Tutorial D)
4rom the findings, the researcher concludes that the initiators or the wrappers are were not from
necessarily those who contributed the most. 4or instance, S0 is was the second largest contributor in
the online forum. 6owever, S0 is was neither the initiator nor the wrapper. 'nstead, she is was more
inclined to answer "uestions from the instructor or her peers.
Discussion Initiator
There are some differences between the initiator and the discussion initiator%
a. )iscussion initiator % i) )oes not start the discussion. ?ften poses a lot of "uestions
while the discussion is ongoing.
ii) !oses "uestions to spark off a discussion.
b. 'nitiator % i). ;egins a discussion or a new topic.
ii). ;egins a discussion with opening statements.
Through the threaded analysis, the researcher find found that only four respondents showed the
characteristics of a discussion initiator. They are % S4, SF, S' and S=. S= happens to be a late
contributor. 6e starts began postingto post messages after Tutorial ,. 6owever, once he starts
started contributing, he becaomes a proactive participant. / total of 1* messages have werebeen
posted by S=, and those messages are thought provoking, as illustrated by the following
vignetvignette%
In pre-reading activities, it should be able to activate students' background knowledge.
What do you think the kind of background knowledge we epect from our students in
teaching Lit! +nowledge of the language or knowledge that relate to the poem or
story!" (S=, .essage *+, Tutorial D)
The above message is was successful in generating a lengthy discussion on the said topic% ten . /
number of 1+ responses were ds are recorded. Those with better ideas will posed "uestions to be
discussed and debated together ( 5espondent Two, interview). /nother indicator that shows the role of
a discussion initiator is through the way the learner provokes his peers# ideas. The provocation should
be academically and professionally based. The learner will poses provoking provocative statements to
prod the other members of the community to respond. 6owever, the findings from this study does not
illustrate the presence of such a provoker. The researcher assumes that the learners students in this
learning community do not feel that there is no the need to resort to such acts. / wrongly poorly
e9ecuted provocation can lead to a hostile learning environment and can lead to the breakdown of the
community.
Knowledge generators
The role of a knowledge generator is divided into two categories%
i. 4re"uently answering the "uestions from the instructor
ii. 4re"uently sharing the information through the contribution of articles, illustrations
or notes in the forum
The analysis shows that there are were three students who compliedy with the above characteristics.
/ll three responded to every "uestion poseds by the instructor. The responses were given are highly
intelligent and are able to increased the understanding of the other students.
...#ow does a stylistic approach differ from Literature as content approach!"
(.rs. S, .essage 1D, Tutorial *)
#i, A language basedlanguage-based approach is studying of the tet will help to
intergrateintegrate the language. -tudents will be involved in detailed analysis of the
language to make meaningful interpretation. In content approach, the history and
characteristics of literary movements, social, political and historical backgrounds are
taught."
(S-, .essage 17, Tutorial *)
In stylistics-grammar items are stressed. Literature as content involves scrutinising
tets through under scope of eploring the tets which include developments of literary
movements, politics and historical background. In short, stylistics approach re.uire us to
focus on language forms and functions to interpret the tet."
(S4, .essage 12, Tutorial *)
4or the second category of knowledge generators, the researcher finds found seven students who
showed such characteristics. These students shared a lot of information from various sources with
their peers. They posted messages with articles, notes and websites to be utilised by everyone.
Some knowledge generators provided detailed and in- depth information, while the others merely
give provided out the website addresses or simplistic information without any e9planation.
#ere, I would like to share a short synopsis of &he /rover's Wife. &he /rover's wife
struggles to protect her children from a dangerous snake. -he and her faithful dog
bravely fight and kill the snake. &he story is set in the Aust. bush. We are introduced to
a very harsh and rough nature. $oral of the story 0 life is a series of struggles and one
muste be brave and strong to overcome difficulties."
(S!, .essage 3, Tutorial G)
I've some ideas in tet selection to share1
2. 3ind natural boundaries if u need to divide it into sections.
4. 5reak the long sentences into shorter ones.
6. 7emove as many ad*ectives as possible
). &ry to keep only content or keywords."
(S/, .essage D, Tutorial 1)
The knowledge generators has demonstrated the effort to obtain information from the other members
of the learning community. This illustrates the willingness of the students to admit their own
knowledge gaps and the desire to overcome those gaps. /s ;ruffee (122,) and ;arnes (*++,)
claimstate, the students are in the comfort $one of the collaborative learning community if they are
able to admit their knowldegeknowledge gaps and relying on their peers as well as the instructor to fill
ion those gaps. 4or instance%
#i friends,
&hank you for the ideas. 5ut can you suggest any suitable methods or techni.ues that I
can use for the lowest class! 8ot only to make it interesting but also to motivate my
students to read more."
(SI, .essage ,>, Tutorial 1)
Problem solver / Mediator
The problem solver helps in by providing suggestions or solutions to the predicaments faced by
hisHher peers. The analysis shows that there are were no particular students who undertake adopted
this role. 'nstead, tThe researcher finds found that this role is was played adopted by the ma:ority of
the community members (1D students altogether). Each student takes took the initiative to help and
guide the other members of the community without waiting for the responses from the instructor.
I am teaching in primary school so it is difficult to me because some of them don't
understand my communication. -o how! &hanks."
(S, .essage 7*, Tutorial *)
-ince most of us are primary school teachers we can adapt to our students situation.
8ow in primary school in (r ) and 9, literature is introduced. What we can do is, start at
most simple task as looking at the cover of the book, illustrations and ask your students
to create their own cover and you will be surprise to see the result."
(S., .essage 7,, Tutorial *)
/ mediator#s role is different from that of a problem solver. The mediator refers to the person who
acts as the pacifierpeacemaker, solving conflicts among the members of the learning community.
6owever, here, the researcher does did not identify any instances whereby in which a mediator is
was present online, due to the absence . This situation is due to the absent of any unresolved
conflicts or disagreements. 6owever, through based on the interviews, it seems that sometimes
disagreements sometimes do occur, and someone will steps in to resolve them.
-ometimes I have to be the mediator when there is conflicting opinions and no one is
backing down. I will try to resolve it as diplomatically as possible by giving suggestions
which can be agreed by conflicting parties.
(5espondent 1, 'nterview data)
When there is a conflict, the rest of the group will try to intervene so as not to let the
disagreement get out of hand. In each community, there should be a good mediator. If
there is no one who can be the mediator, the instructor is the best person to solve the
conflicts. -ometimes conflicts are good so that the minds are more susceptible to new
changes." (5espondent *, 'nterview data)
Social Network Builder
/ccording to /nderson (*+++) and 5ourke et. al. (*++1), social presence is vital to develop an
condusive effective and collaborative n-learning community. @Social presenceA refers to the way
students e9press their thoughts and ideas in a social conte9t, through social cues. Social cues area
statements or parts of statements which that are not related to the learning content (6enri, 122*). 'n
other words, to build a learning environment with social presence, students need to be social network
builders.
The interaction data shows that the students used informal statements in their messages. They even
resorted to using simple language that consistings of short formsabbreviations, such Lit :Literature;,
-s :students; and & :&eacher;. The d)ata also illustrates that each student who posted makes posting
online is was a social network builder. The messages posted are in the form of greetings, closures
and appreciation.
Social cues also refer to statements in the forms of encouragement, motivation and the use of humour
in the interaction (6enri, 122*). 6owever, the researcher does did not find any evidence of
humouroushumorous statements in the threaded discussion. This is probably due to this because% the
students may feel that it is inappropriate for them to make :okes in an academic setting.
Negative Roles
Passive Contributors
!assive contributors refer areto those who post messages sporadically and erratically. / total of
four4our students have werebeen identified as passive contributors in this community % S=, S', SI
and S?. Each of them has contributed less fewer than five messages individually. S= merely posteds
in the @J/ssignmentA# slot whereby toshe en"uires about how to e9ecute the assignment. She does did
not make any effort to :oin in the other discussions and soon falls dropped off the out of the radar
completely. S' only posteds three messages altogether duringin the whole course of the study. Cnlike
S=, S' does did attempt to answer some of the instructor#s "uestions. ?n the other hand, !OS?, who
makes had five postings, tendeds to contribute deep and meaningful messages. 't is a pity that he
does did not contribute regularly, as he could have been a valuable contributor in ther collaborative
learning community.
I feel the selection of tets by the teacher is an important factor. &the selected tet
should be based on the students' language competence, their background and
interests. <nly then they will be able to interact and en*oy the poems or short stories.
Also, teachers must bear in mind other factors affecting the students like maturity,
eperience, educational and emotional state." (S?, .essage GD,
Tutorial ,)
/ll four students have waited until Tutorial G to start posting their messages. The researcher feels that
the students do did so as because they are were only interested in obtaining the DE marks which is
allocated for the online participation and that they are were not interested in becoming a part of the
learning community. This is evidenced from by the "uality and the "uantity of their messages they
make.
urkers
/s mentioned by Salmon (*+++) in the previous section, there are three types of lurkers%
a. freeloaders
b. sponges
c. lurkers who have problems in accessing the forum
The d)ata illustrates that lurkers in the (c) category is were none9istent. 6owever, there are was
evidence of the presence of the other two categories. S( has wasbeen identified as the a lurker in the
(b) category (she also happens to be one of the interview respondents (51)). . She , who also happens
to be one of the inteview respondents (51), only starteds to post messages in Tutorial ,. 6owever,
once she feels felt comfortable and secure in the community, she becomes became one of the most
active contributors. She has posted a total of 1*twelve messages in throughoutthe whole the course.
/ccording to S(, this is was due to the insecurities she initially feels feltinitially. (ith the support from
other members and the instructor, she becomes became more confident in voicing out her ideas and
opinions.
't is a totally completely different scenario with S; and SK, who do did not contribute anything at all in
the forum. 't cannot is notbe certain for sure whether they :ust logged in and lurked or did not , or they
do not access the forum at all. The interview with S; (also known as 5espondent G) e9plaineds the
reason why she does did not contribute anything at all. S; is was aware of the importance of her
contribution to the development of the learning community. 6owever, because of other pressing
matters, she has chose to forego the DE marks allocated for the online interaction. /ccording to
her,She stated that she hads more important issues, such as teaching e9am classes and tending to
her family needs, which demanded her attention more than participation online.
The tTime factor is one of the main reasons why people refrain from interacting online. )ata from the
interview also highlighteds several other reasons for non-e participation%
a. family responsibilities % to the family& small children needing attention, little or no support
from the spouses
b. financial problems% B e9pensive telephone bills to access the 'nternet
c. attitudes% i) being indifferencet towards the importance of the interaction
ii) la$iness to about going to the cyber cafes
iii) assuming that DE does not affect the overall grade
iv) uncomfortable interacting online
v) lack of not interested in interacting online
'n ensuring that lurkers contribute in the online forum, the instructor has to play a significant role as
well. The d)ata shows that .rs. S gives gave occasional reminders once in a while to the learners
students to start contributing as early as possible. 6owever, it should be the students# responsibility
ities of the students to contribute online. The instructor#s role is :ust to monitor and offer advicse to the
learners.
Through the interview data, the researcher finds found that the presence of lurkers is was not well
accepted by the rest of the contributors. urkers are were seen as selfish individuals who do did not
think as a community. ?nce a learner registers online, he or she automatically becomes part of the
community and should act as a responsible member of a learning community (.c-onnell, *++3).
urkers will only hinder the development of a successful learning community. ;elow are some of the
opinions given by the interview respondents on about lurkers%
It is fair that everyone should contribute something. #owever, the case with this group
is different. -ome *ust disappear right after registering. It is inappropriate for these
people. <nce you register, you should think as a group. 8eed to take the initiative and
share ideas with others. It's not fair for the rest if you are only thinking of yourself."
(5espondent ,, interview data)
&o me, it is an un*ust situation. &he concept of sharing is the basis in online learning. It
is ok if you are not active, it's enough if you can contribute once in a while. &his is a
group effort. -o, everyone has his own role to play in making sure the community
functions smoothly. . (5espondent 1, interview data)
!lamers
The researcher does did not find any evidence of flaming in the interactions. There is was no sign of
statements with that have negative connotations or that can might offend the others. 6owever,
through the interviews, the researcher finds found that flamers do did e9ist, albeit discreetly.
<bvious flamers are not present. <n the other hand, there are some who use cynical
words and snide remarks. &here are also some whose styles of writing tend to sound
condescending. $aybe this is *ust their styles of writing. &o avoid conflicts from
happening, we need to ask for clarification or *ust ignore the messages if you could.
(5espondent ,, interview data)
/ccording to ;arnes (*++1), flamers are more harmful compared thanto lurkers. This is due to the
fact thatbecause flamers can drive the others away from the community. Their harsh words used will
offend others, and eventually the others will stop contributing at all. Therefore, the instructor has to
be aware of the presence of flamers and take immediate action if things start to go out of hand.
Dominatornce
S4 is was the biggest most fre"uent contributor in the community. 6e posteds ,> messages overall.
6owever, the whole percentage of S4#s messages were only come up to only 1*.DE of the total
messages. Therefore, S4 cannot be identified as a dominant contributor. 6e is merely an active
contributor.
Through the analysis of the threaded discussion, the researcher finds found that none of the
members in this community acted as dominant contributors. Each member has had e"ual opportunity
to make en"uriesen"uiries or provide ideas and suggestions. The learners in this community, even
with a few lurkers and non- participants, do did not depend on the instructor to achieve their learning
ob:ectives.
Dis"ussions
'n a collaborative community , a learner does not work alone (Kygotsky, 127>). The constructivist
environment stresses on collaboration to construct a higher order knowledge (0onassen, .yers 8
.c<illop, 1223). Thus, )ue to this, learners in a collaborative environment need to play positive and
proactive roles to ensure that the learning process runs smoothly.
This study has identified two types of roles learners adopted by studentsplay% positive roles and
negative roles. The positive roles help in the development of a collaborative n-learning community,
whereas the negative roles could hinder the this process from occurring.
Eight learners have werebeen identified as the initiators of the community, while another five have
werebeen identified as wrappers. 4rom ?f this total, four students played both roles. The This
number is enough for the community to work actively. / as according to ewis and /llen (*++D% 11*),
@/a minimum of four or five members is re"uired to launch off the interaction by providing the type of
diversity of ideas and e9perience that will enable people to learn through collaboration.A
The diversity of roles helps in developing an effective conducive learning environment. !reece
(*+++) stresses that each individual in the community should have specific roles that can give an
impactaffect on the development of the learning community.
4rom the study, 1> learners have werebeen identified as knowledge generators. /lthough the "uality
of each individual message differs, the most important part aspect is the students# effort done by the
students in sharing the knowledge so that everyone benefits from it. The sharing of knowledge is at
on par with /lavi and )ufner#s (*++D) opinion that s where they claim the knowledge will isbe
constructed effectively when the learners interact actively in to completeing their tasks.
Thise study is able to identifiedy several roles which that have the potential to hinder the
development of a collaborative learning community. The findings show a total of si9 students
(*3.+2E) who have werebeen identified as lurkers and passive contributors. The percentage of these
students is considerably lower compared thanto the findings from Salmon#s study (*+++), which
recordeds at ,+E, and !reece (*+++), which recordeds between >+E and 2+E. =raham 8
Scarborough (1222) stress that lurkers are not considered as part of the learning community,
whereas Loungblood, Trede and di -orpo (*++1) see lurkers as students who have no discipline.
urkers are seen as a normal phenomenon if the learners are new learners toin the online learning
scenarioMfor , for instance, first year students (;arnes *++,& =raham 8 Scarborough 1222& ewis 8
/llen *++D& !reece, *+++). Iew learners need time to adapt themselves to the new environment.
?nce these learners are in their comfort $one, they will become active participants.
?n the other hand, the researcher feels that there should not be any lurkers in this community. This
These is because these students are in their final year and have been using the online mode of
communication for the past eight semesters. They should have known what is e9pected of them
online. 4or some communities, the presence of lurkers is due to an inefficient instructor. /n ineffective
instructor who does not respond fre"uently can be the a significantmain cause of lurkers and
dropouts (.ason 1221& Salmon *+++). 6owever, the instructor in this community cannot be blamed
for the presence of lurkers. .rs. S has provided the students with the time and opportunityies for
everyone to participate and even reminded them from time to time to post messages.
The main reasons given by those who do not participate actively is are time limits and having other
responsibilities to tend to. 4or tThese students , they should get their priorities straight. ?nce they
have registered to be students in a learning community, they need to be a part of the community.
They need to manage their time well to participate online. 't is tThe sense of sharing that is more
important. The students do not have to access the forum every day. 't is enough if the students post
messages once in every two days (!reece *+++& Salmon *+++). .c-onnell (*++3%G*) has summed
up the importance of each student to takingtake up theirhis or her responsibilityies as an online
community members seriously%
=roup members need to understand their roles in the mutual group, and believe that
each student is e.ually important and vital for the success of the collaborative group.
&his form of collaboration re.uires high order of involvement, high willingness to share
and belief that individual development is enhanced by working together."
Con"lusion
To build a successful n-learning community, learners need to participate to the optimallyum. The
d)ata from thise study haves shown that not everyone in the community participates in the
constructionng of knowledge. /lthough the number is "uite insignificant, the condition should be
monitored so as that it does not not to let it hinder the development of the learning community.
The passive contributors and lurkers have mustto change their attitudes. They can no longer think
only of themselves. -ollaborative learning benefits every member in of the community, and not :ust
specific individuals (.oll 122+& Kygotsky 127>). There is no @JindividualismA# in collaborative learning.
The learners need to think as a group and be ready to play different roles to share their ideas in and
constructing new knowledge. 'n addition, learners should not depend so much heavily on the
instructor to build an effective conducive learning community. They should shoulder that
responsibilityies together.
/s 'na conclusion, the most important factors for students# online learning success are collaborative
attitudes andthing s are the change of attitudes as well as ade"uate mental preparations from the
learners to undergo their learning processes online.
Referen"es
/lavi, .. 8 )ufner, ). (*++D) @ Technology-.ediated -ollaborative earning% / 5esearch
!erspective.A 'n 5.S. 6ilt$ and 5. =oldman (eds.) Learning &ogether <nline1 7esearch on
Asynchronous Learning 8etworks. awrence Erlbaum, .ahwah.
.
;arnes, S.;. (*++,) >omputer-$eduated$ediated >ommunication1 #uman-to-#uman
>ommunication Across the Internet. !earson Education % ;oston
;ruffee, <./. (122,) >ollaborative Learning1 #igher ?ducation, Interdependence and the Authority of
+nowledge. 0ohn 6opkins, ;altimore.
)$ulkifli /bdul 5a$ak (*++,) <ut of the 5o1 $emimpin dan $emaknakan -ebuah @niversiti
Aenyelidikan dalam ?ra +-?konomi. CS. !ublishing, CS..
=raham, /. 8 Scarborough, 6. (1222). @-omputer-.ediated -ommunication and -ollaborative
earning in an Cndergraduate )istance Education Environment,A Australian Bournal of
?ducation &echnology, Kol 1D, Io 1, pp*+-G3.
=unawardena, -.I., owe, -./. 8 /nderson, T. (1227) @ /nalysis of a =lobal ?nline )ebate and the
)evelopment of an 'nteraction /nalysis .odel for E9amining Social -onstruction of <nowledge in
-omputer -onferencing,A Bournal of ?ducational >omputing 7esearch, Kol 17, Io. G, pp ,27-G,1
6ara, I., ;onk, -.0. 8 /ngeli, -. (122>) @ -ontents analysis of ?nline )iscussions in an /pplied
Educational !sychology,A -entre for 5esearch on earning and Technology (-5T) Technical
5eport, Io *-2>, pp 1-,,.
6arasim, ., 6ilt$, S., Teles, . 8 Turoff, .. (1227) Learning 8etworks1 a 3ield =uide to &eaching and
Learning <nline. .'T !ress% -ambridge
6enri, 4. (122*) @-omputer -onferencing 8 -ontent /nalysisA in /.5. <aye (ed.) >ollaborative
Learning through >omputer >onferencing1 the 8a*adeen Aapers. Springer, Iew Lork.
6illman, ).-. (1222) @/ Iew .ethod for /naly$ing !atterns of 'nteractionA. &he American Bournal of
/istance ?ducation. Kol 1,, Io *, pp ,7-G7.
6ilt$, 5.S. 8 =oldman, 5. (*++D) (eds.) Learning &ogether <nlineC research on Asynchronous
Learning 8etworks. awrence Erlbaum, .ahwah.
0onassen, ).6., .yers, 0... 8 .c<illop, /... (1223) @4rom constructivism to -onstructionism%
learning with 6ypermedia 5ather than from 't.A 'n ;.=. (ilson (ed.) >onstructivist Learning
?nvironments. Educational Technology !ublications, Englewood -liffs.
ewis, ). 8 /llan, ;. (*++D) Dirtual Learning >ommunities- a =uide for Aractitioners. .c=raw-6ill,
;erkshire.
.c-onnell, ). (*++3) ?-Learning =roups and >ommunities. .c=raw-6ill, ;erkshire.
.oll, .-. (122+) Dygotsky and ?ducation1 Instructional Implications and Applications of
-ociohistorical Asychology. -ambridge Cniversity !ress% Iew Lork.
!aloff, 5... 8!ratt, <. (*++1) Lesson from the >yberspace >lassroom1 the 7ealities of <nline
&eaching. 0ossey-;ass 'nc % -alifornia
!reece, 0. (*+++) <nline >ommunities1 /esigning @sability, -upporting -ociability. 0ohn (iley%
Susse9
Salmon, =. (*+++) ?-$oderating1 the +ey to &eaching and Learning <nline. <ogan !age% ondon.
Kygotsky, .S. (127>) $ind In -ociety . 6arvard Cniversity !ress% -ambridge
Loungblood, !., Trede, 4. 8 di -orpo, S. (*++1) @4acilitating ?nline earning% a )escriptive StudyA
/istance ?ducation, Io. ***, pp *3G-*>G