This interesting and readable report discusses using online learning communities (OLCs) in both online and face-to-face classes. The authors remind the reader at the beginning that online communities have been used in many settings, from secondary school and higher education to the professional development of workers. They acknowledge that the results reported in much of the literature range from very helpful to not at all helpful.

The authors claim that earlier studies lack an understanding of student learning styles and how they affect student learning in all settings (but most specifically in online settings). They identify studies that distinguish active learners--those who want to use the information they have learned right away--from reflective learners--those who want to first think about what they have learned before using the information.

The authors say that the purpose of this particular study was to “determine the impact of [OLCs] on active and reflective [learners],” in terms of “learning performance and attitudes towards instruction.” They state: ”Specifically, the study compared the learning performance and learners’ attitudes between [the] course with OLC [for discussion] and [the] course without OLC [for discussion], as well as between active and reflective learners.”

The study compared the performance outcomes and attitudes among the learners in four situations: reflective learners in an OLC and a no online learning community (NC); active learners in an OLC and a NC; OLC intervention between the reflective and active learners; and NC intervention between the reflective and active learners. The purpose of the study was to explore the effect of OLCs on active and reflective learners “in an undergraduate digital design course.” Both learning performance and student attitudes were studied.

With respect to learning, the study supported the hypothesis that OLCs are effective in enhancing performance in reflective learners. One reason given for this is that students have time to reflect on the material before reacting.

A second hypothesis that active learners would perform better without the intervention failed; this might simply suggest that both kinds of learners take the discussion more seriously when it is online. The hypothesis that reflective learners would do better than active learners in the course with OLC was significantly supported, and the hypothesis that active learners would do better in face-to-face discussions was supported.

With respect to attitude, the results indicate that OLCs enhance positive attitudes in reflective learners, but do not enhance the attitudes of active learners. No significant differences were found in the attitudes of either group (“contrary to expectation”). However, the results partially support the hypothesis that “active learners would have better attitudes than reflective learners in the course with face-to-face [interaction].”

This study offers convincing evidence for the position that adding an OLC to a face-to-face course enhances both the performances and the attitudes of the learners. As a reflective learner myself, I find this result quite important and potentially helpful for all reflective learners.