A reference model for online learning communities.

MOTIVATION AND INTRODUCTION

Information and communication technology renews society and, with it, the skills expected to be developed in education. The new platforms for communication provide ubiquity and persistence for information, and they distinguish themselves through interactivity and the means they provide for structuring data, communication and processes. They set apart successful platforms in their services to a community. Education may benefit from those platforms, provided the platforms are designed to meet the requirements education poses.

In this article, we present as our main contribution, a reference model for online learning communities. This reference model structures the design of online communities and gives guidelines on how to design a medium for learning.

We think of online learning as a process that takes place at the intersection of social and technological systems. Accordingly, the models that we provide take equally social and technological perspectives into account. The framework employs, to some extent, concepts and language of computer science, since requirements for learning have eventually be translated to computer science to build those platforms. For modeling, we employ the media approach of Schmid (1997; Schmid & Lechner 1999; Lechner & Schmid, 2000) on communities and their media. Moreover, we think of learning to take place in any community and in collaboration. Therefore, we introduce, with an online learning community, a general framework for modeling the people involved in learning and the medium for learning that constitutes this community. A medium comprises the carriers for the transport of information, together with the syntax and semantics of information and the organizational context of roles, protocols and processes in which the carrier s are embedded (Schmid, 1997). In modeling, we focus particularly on the role of a medium in structuring knowledge and communication in learning and for supporting meta-cognition. In this article, we focus on executive and higher education with their didactic goals and on platforms provided by information and communication technology for education.

This article is organized as follows. We discuss didactic goals in higher and executive education and the role of communication platforms in striving towards those goals. The theoretical framework of communities and media is introduced in the next session. Then, the concept of online learning communities is explained. Based on this concept, we then present the reference model for online learning communities. We then conclude the article with a brief discussion and further work.

LEARNING -- DIDACTIC GOALS AND LEARNING PLATFORMS

Learning forms have undergone changes in the past, and those changes have been triggered both by technology and society. Changing requirements for higher education provokes the discussion about new learning forms. In the literature, many pedagogic models of interactive instructional design are proposed. Each of them has its dimensions to be considered for the instructional design of a system. Well known, for example, is the model of Reeves (1992) with its 14 dimensions for the evaluation and positioning of interactive learning systems. This model provides methodical guidelines but neglects technological aspects for the design of learning environments. Apart from the pedagogic model, the literature provides a number of technology-oriented frameworks, for example, the E-Learning Architecture Model of Milius (1999). Typically, in these frameworks, methodical and community organizing aspects are not considered in those frameworks.

However, both the requirements for higher education and the potential of technology have to be considered in the design of learning methods and platforms for education. Online learning is a process that takes place at the intersection of complex social and technological systems. Education is supposed to develop skills necessary in a society increasingly influenced by information and communications technology. Let us discuss the requirements towards education concerning knowledge, learning methods, meta-cognition and context.

Regarding knowledge, information and communications technology contributes to the increasing amount of information available. The goal in education is to teach knowledge not additively, but interlinked by means of questions arising from business practice and scientific research. Only such inter-linked knowledge can be consciously disposed of in concrete situations. The quantity of information and the speed information gets outdated demands that formative, open-up knowledge be taught which enables learners to apply knowledge creatively to problem-solving, and, gives them the opportunity to create new knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). The linkage of factual knowledge and creative problem solving techniques may constitute such formative open-up knowledge.

Regarding the learning method, process-oriented learning methods gain more and more importance compared to subject-oriented or product-oriented methods. The reasons are twofold. First, actively accomplished knowledge in learning and thought processes facilitates future problem solving by similar modes of thinking and learning in an environment where the mere quantity of information and the speed at which it outdates increase. Second, objectively correct truth of knowledge that the learner is required to accept and store in their entirety can no longer be assumed. This holds true, in particular, in executive education, where students and teacher share knowledge gained in individual careers. The role of learners as passive recipients is reconsidered, as the community of teachers and students share knowledge following collaborative learning methods way (Johnson & Johnson, 1994). Complex learning settings foster the acquiring of formative, open-up knowledge in a process-oriented, collaborative process.

With regards to the steering and controlling, meta-cognition has to be fostered as a crucial capability for acquiring and applying open-up knowledge. Learners must develop meta-cognitive capabilities, to plan, supervise and judge their own learning processes, reflect upon their own achievements and, in the event of failures, reflect upon ways of remedying them. Such meta-cognitive capabilities are best fostered in complex learning situations (Seufert & Seufert, 1999).

Concerning the context of learning, complex learning situations provide the linkage between disciplines, between practical application and scientific research and provide the basis for collaboration to share knowledge among students and teachers. One goal of executive education is to foster the collaboration among teachers and students such that this collaboration evolves into a network that lasts beyond the learning in a course (Pressley, Harris, & Marks, 1992). All participants in this community contribute with their experiences, knowledge and connections to other communities to which they belong. Other context settings restrict the interaction in the classroom and consider only the knowledge to be taught, for example, the traditional teacher-centered learning methods.

Conventional media used in learning such as books can only support aspects of knowledge, method, controlling and context. They can't be updated when information becomes outdated. They can be used in process-oriented learning and for collaborative learning, but they can hardly support the interaction and processes, themselves. The same holds for conventional teaching in a classroom. Process-oriented learning, especially online in a computer-mediated form, needs sophisticated services to support it. The media provided by information and communication technology provide properties that set them apart from traditional media. They provide ubiquity and persistence to information, are interactive and provide various means for representing, supporting and structuring data, communication and processes. In this article, we present a framework for designing online platforms.

Note however, that it is not technology alone that renews learning. Ubiquity and interactivity of the carriers facilitate distance learning or computer-supported collaborative learning. Those learning forms are basically electronically mediated forms of traditional learning. With the means to represent, structure and support processes, media can be designed to support learning much better than conventional carriers. This means more freedom in choosing pedagogic approaches and using process-oriented methods, collaborative approaches and complex learning situations become feasible.

From a pedagogic point of view, Paloff and Pratt (1999) have analyzed learning communities to be a new model for innovative learning. They provide methodical guidelines and effective strategies, building learning communities in "cyberspace," but do not consider technology -- with its means for structuring and organizing, opening and linking knowledge and communities -- which enables organization of long-lasting communities with persistent communication and knowledge in an open way. Harasim, Hiltz, Teles and Turoff (1995) provide a similar approach with the concept of "learning networks." We aim to explore, in particular, those dimensions in design. The translation of pedagogic goals into requirements towards a platform yields the following requirements:

* a means to present both factual knowledge, creative problem-solving techniques and the linkage between them, as well as interdisciplinary linkage of knowledge and linkage of business practice and scientific research,

* support for subject-oriented and process-oriented learning. The platform has to present knowledge to be considered objectively true, along with processes to strive towards shared knowledge and means to share individual knowledge within a community,

* support fostering, self-steering capabilities and meta-cognition, to supervise processes and provide guidance if necessary,

* support complex learning settings with an integration of business practice and scientific research in collaborative learning, and

* foster a long-lasting, evolving community.

Platforms for learning can be designed to meet those requirements. However, models and design method have to take both methodical and technological perspectives into account. In the following section, we introduce such a comprehensive model.

COMMUNITIES, MEDIA AND COMMUNITY SUPPORTING PLATFORMS

Learning, as other communication or collaboration, involves carriers of information provided by technology, and it is embedded in organizational and social systems. The goal of the design of a platform is to provide the channels for communication, as well as the services for structuring and organizing information and processes according to the requirements of the organizational and social systems. The model for online learning takes both the technological and the social perspectives into account. However, learning cannot be considered a process to be isolated in space and time. And since learning platforms can take advantage of services employed for other ways of interaction -- complex learning settings and inter-linked knowledge -- we base the model of online learning community on Schmid's general model for communities and the notion of a learning medium on Schmids generic model of a medium (1997; 1999).

At the beginning of the 1990s, important promoters of the Internet such as Esther Dyson (1997) and Howard Rheingold (1993) succeeded in fully establishing the term "community" -- although it could be argued that they over-idealized the concept in parts. Armstrong and Hagel (1996) were the first not only to see a social phenomenon in the concept of virtual communities, but also to combine this with a new business model, which uses new possibilities for communication on the Internet to generate electronic market places and to enhance customer relations. A community is defined as an ensemble of agents sharing a language and a world with values and pursuing common interests. As Lechner and Schmid describe, the agents are connected via a medium on which they act in roles (Schmid, 1999; Lechner & Schmid, 2000). Online communities distinguish themselves by using electronic media.

We define media as information and communication spaces that enable communication and coordination within a community of human and artificial agents. A platform is an implementation of a medium. According to the media model of Schmid (1997), media are described in terms of:

(a) a shared logical space of the language employed in communication,

(b) a channel system to transport information over space and time, and

(c) an organization with roles to describe rights and obligations of agents and with protocols the way interaction takes place.

Let us give an example for a medium and its platform. A learning unit is a medium. It is characterized in terms of: (1) the language employed by teachers and students, the natural language with a subject-specific vocabulary, (2) the channels for transport of information over space such as air, blackboards, books and online learning environment as carriers of information that transport information over space and time, and (3) roles as "teacher" and "students" that are assigned to agents and protocols as "lecture" suggesting that the teacher lectures while the students listen silently. The community is defined in terms of this medium and the people participating in the course.

As a platform for this medium, the physical part of a medium, one can employ a collaborative learning environment, a shared application such as NetMeeting or a (conventional) classroom. These three platforms distinguish themselves by the degree in which they actively support the community and the degree in which they implement the medium. A collaborative learning environment may implement the roles of teachers and students with the respective protocols for interaction so that, for example, the input devices for students are blocked as long as the teacher lectures. Here, the platform supports learning and implements significant aspects of a medium. A shared application provides means for communication. However, it neither restricts nor supports interaction in a learning-specific way, according to the learning methods with their roles and protocols. The platform facilitates communication, but does not actively support the community in learning and implements only the channel system of a medium but not the servi ces, organization and processes. This is similar to a traditional classroom that provides the means for interaction -- blackboard, whiteboard, air to communicate voice, and so forth. Those carriers do not support the organization and the processes -- students may chat while the teacher lectures. While a shared application can make interaction persistent, a traditional classroom even lacks this capability.

Figure 1 illustrates, a medium can be implemented on a variety of platforms. We are particularly interested in platforms that provide more than mere facilities for communication. We would like to take advantage of the means for structuring information and processes and in the interactivity of novel carriers that facilitate the platform to play an active role in the community. To be able to initiate, support and foster online communities properly, a deep knowledge of their structure and components is required. We consider a community to be constituted by a set of agents and the medium. The interdependence of the two constitutional components of online communities implies that to support online communities, the appropriate medium has to be built. This medium then enables the required communication and coordination forms and storage facilities required by the community. This relationship between community and platform, of social and technological perspective and the kind of services a community needs is detailed in the media reference model (Schmid, 1999).

The four phases distinguish four kinds of communication acts with their services to communicate, structure and organize communication that is relevant for collaborative achievement of targets in a community setting. The services provide the channels offered by the medium. We distinguish communication and services:

(1) for knowledge, more concisely for information which is known and available in the medium,

(2) for communicating of intentions, which express interests, needs, requirements, requests and offers of community participants (intention phase),

(3) for negotiation of binding contracts between agents documenting obligations of agents necessary for achieving common goals (negotiation phase), and

(4) for settling obligations with the respective means for cooperation and coordination to perform the in a contract agreed upon task (in the settlement phase).

These four views of the reference model also provide a guideline on how to structure the design and implementation of building a medium for online communities. The first step is the identification of the community of agents with their interests, the common logical space for capturing the information to be communicated and the organizational structure (Stanoevska-Slabeva & Schmid, 2000). This step is represented by the community view to design the organizational model. In the implementation view, the scenario model is planned and the descriptive model of the community view is related to the required or available services. Here, the services are determined and combined in processes. The service view designs the interaction model for the community. Finally, the infrastructure view aims to create the technological model of the learning community supporting platform. Note however, that those steps can be combined in a different way, for example, to design the scenario model for a community with its pedagogic appro ach from a given set of services implemented in some given technology. Here, the community view on the one hand, and the service and technology view on the other hand, have to be provided for the process model.

ONLINE LEARNING COMMUNITIES

The concept of an online learning community is derived from the general concept of community to be constituted by agents and a medium on the one hand and the didactic objectives of learning on the other hand (Figure 2).

We define online learning communities as ensembles of agents, who share a common language, world, values in terms of pedagogical approach and knowledge to be acquired. They pursue a common learning goal by communicating and cooperating through electronic media in the learning process. The common interest of this type of community is the common interest in learning.

Usually, within online learning communities, several communities can be distinguished. Similar to academic or corporate universities, campus-wide activities and social life can be differentiated from the activities in a classroom. We distinguish two kinds of online learning communities:

* the "Campus Community" characterizes the campus-wide community, including course management activities -- applying for courses, choosing electives, offers and demands for internships, and so forth -- as well as social life and knowledge exchange activities that happen informally and are not initiated by any course design or didactic approach; and

* the "Classroom Community" identifies the formalized community of a class in a study program. Here, the learning takes place following a designed didactic approach. More or less concretized learning goals are planned for the knowledge exchange and transfer among the students that takes place in a more formal learning setting combining different learning methods.

The key question that we would like to answer in the next section is how the issues in learning can be implemented in a structured way in media and on a platform. By applying learning processes and approaches into the media reference model we will present a reference model for online learning communities.

THE REFERENCE MODEL

In this section, we map the above-described learning methods and courses into the generic media reference model that results in a reference model for online learning communities. We proceed as follows. Figure 3 gives the reference model of online learning communities and, subsequently, we explain the views beginning with the Community view.

COMMUNITY VIEW

The community view defines the "organizational model." Here, the goal of the community, its language and the organization in terms of roles and protocols are determined in that order. We proceed as follows. We explain the interest first, then protocols and roles and then define the language.

COMMON INTEREST

The common interest of a learning community is "learning." The goal of a community can be described in terms of knowledge, processes, metacognition and social aspects - the context which is to be established. According to those four dimensions that can be applied to the initial community and the goal to be achieved in learning, we distinguish three study categories: (1) contact studies, (2) self-studies, and (3) context studies.

* Contact Studies: At the beginning of a study program, in a community with little common knowledge, organization and language on which to base learning, the focus is on guided learning processes and socializing processes. Face-to-face contacts play an important role. The instructor assumes a very active role, directly conducting and controlling the learning processes. In contrast, the learners remain inactive, as they are assigned the passive role of recipients of instruction. The methods of choice are instructor-centered, such as lectures, and question-and-answer sessions.

* Self-Studies: At a more advanced learning level, less frontal-approach methods of teaching (indirect leadership) can be applied. Here, all activities come under the heading of self-studies or self-directing learning and are controlled by the learners themselves. They guide, plan and supervise their own activities and learning processes, thus fostering meta-cognitive development. Learner-centered methods are integrated, such as learning with self-study materials, learning with webquests, case studies, and field studies with problems to be solved. Each of them allows learners to work independently.

* Context-Studies: At the highest achievement level, the emphasis can be laid even more strongly on the learners' own creation of knowledge, in consultation with the instructor. Work in groups leads to critical reflection and can, thus, contribute to the building up and maintenance of values. Examples of such team-centered methods are role-playing, or virtual seminars using different, conducted discussion-forms. Webquests, too, can be developed as group work, often in combination with role-playing. The individual members take an active part, although the group-interaction is of chief importance. The learning situations are extremely problem-oriented corresponding to "real world projects" focusing on multidisciplinary aspects.

Note that a course typically uses a variety of learning methods to accomplish a learning goal, stepwise. We refrain from discussing this combination of goals, learning methods and media here. These three study categories are to be applied depending on the state of the community and the goal to be achieved. In Figure 4, from left to right, the students are given more and more scope for an informal exchange of information so that an informal learning community can flourish, with, if so de-sired, the additional presence of experts to play the part of consultants. The changing function of the teacher from direct instruction to indirect instruction and, finally, to learning consultation reflects, after all, the various didactic goals previously mentioned. Formative, opened-up knowledge should be taught -- especially for beginners -- to prepare for self-guidance and focused on process- and context-oriented, collaborative learning. Each learning community applies one specific combination of learning methods and cour ses, or several of them. The specific combinations define the required services and processes that should be made available by the medium. Note that in this first step in the design of a learning community, we do not distinguish campus and classroom community. Both have to design their goals to be achieved in learning, and in both cases, they state in an initial community status.

PROTOCOLS AND ROLES

After the goal in terms of pedagogic aspect is determined, the organization to reach this goal has to be chosen. This organization is also given in terms of the pedagogic approach, the learning method to be applied. Here, we focus on online learning methods.

The protocols of the community deal with the interaction on the campus in general, with management, organization of courses, selection of courses and informal interaction. Examples of protocols that organize the campus community are the following:

* protocols for the course management -- for application processes, career services, information and help desk services, and

* protocols for "informal learning communities" and social forums -- "Netiquette", code of ethics, and so forth.

The protocols for the classroom community as didactic guidelines which capture the methodical approach of the learning setting are to be designed. To determine the basic components and services of learning platforms, we will briefly refer to known learning methods. Hereby, the interaction mode is the key variable for this categorization in four types of learning methods. Those learning methods, together with their instances, are depicted (Figure 5) and explained.

1. Online Teaching: The interaction happens between the teacher, who is the dominant expert, and the students. The methods of choice are instructor-centered, such as online lectures, online symposium, or teacher-oriented dialogue. The teacher is the expert and the learners are firmly guided and receive precise instructions as to what they are to learn. During the learning process, prepared knowledge and thinking structures are imparted. The instructor assumes a very active role, as learners are assigned the passive role of recipients of instruction (Becker & Carnine, 1980).

2. Online Tutorials: The interaction takes place between students and a learning system. Feedback is given by the system implemented in the program. Guided tutorials and drill and practice systems are more teacher- or system-oriented, enabling a low degree of flexibility for the learners. Hypermedia and simulation systems provide a higher degree of flexibility and are more learner-centered. Students can guide, plan and supervise their own activities and learning processes (Jonassen, 1992).

3. Online Assignments: The interaction happens between students and tutors communicating via an Internet-based learning platform. With web course authoring tools, tutors can develop assignments, webquests or assessments very easily. The learning situations are framed in such way as to elicit more and more complex responses to questioning, for which particular information and materials must be at hand. The teacher gives individual feedback to the students but the teachers function of guidance and assistance is gradually relinquished as the learners become more and more capable of learning on their own (Seufert & Seufert, 1999).

4. Online Discussions: The focus is on group learning and interaction among learners. Work in groups leads to critical reflection and can, thus, contribute to the building up and maintenance of values. Examples of such team-centered methods are several discussion formats, group reports or learning cycles. The instructor works as a coach who makes suggestions and encourages the meta-cognitive development of the learners by reflecting the learning and dynamic group-processes (McDermott, 1999). The individual members take a very active part, although the group interaction is of chief importance.

Those learning methods are based on a number of roles. AUTONUMRoles describe the different types of memberships, including their rights and duties, which the agents in a learning community can possess. The campus community is constituted of those who organize campus-wide activities and are not related to a specific course or study program. Table 1 shows some examples for roles and their descriptions.

The roles forming the classroom community are mostly determined by the learning method that is designed for the course delivery in an online environment. For two learning methods, the roles are given in Table 2.

LANGUAGE

To complete the organizational design of the community, the common language and world has to be determined. In learning, mostly natural languages are used. They are enriched by subject specific symbol systems, ontologies and theories.

The community has to capture which information it thinks to be objectively true and which is not. It has to determine which books or other media it uses within the course and which of them provide information relevant for the common learning goal. In addition, the community has to decide in which form the information will be made available, for example: a) in downloadable form as an HTML or XML document, b) as a hypertext allowing also unstructured search and access, or c) as a link to a physical resource. To sum up, the community has to determine its logical space for learning with syntax and semantics.

The community has to agree on a formal and structured representation of this world, such that information processing by services and the use of the services are being given.

Note that again, campus and classroom community both have to determine this logical space.

* The campus community has to agree, for example, on a language for describing courses, on a language of marking and on the value of education and degree.

* The learning community has to agree on a common understanding of learning method with their roles and on the knowledge on some subject to be communicated in the medium.

IMPLEMENTATION VIEW

The implementation view characterizes the "interaction design" or "process model." Here, the architecture of the learning platform is to be determined. This architecture describes the mapping of the community view to services and technology in scenarios and workflow processes. This architecture includes: (1) the selection of the services, and (2) the composition of services to form the scenario in which the processes takes place (that are given in the service view).

The main design decision is in how far the learning methods are to be implemented on the platform. In other words, to what degree does the medium rely on the platform to communicate information, to structure and govern information, communication and processes.

More design decisions are how far the platform is able to control and govern the interaction, the degree in which the capability of information processing is being utilized and how the language used for teaching is translated to formal representations to be utilized by the services technology. Design decisions to be made also include the sharing of information and services both among courses on a campus and between course and campus community.

In this view, rights and obligations of roles have to be implemented in the interaction with the service. For example, the teacher with the right to provide knowledge and the student with the right to obtain knowledge may access an information service accordingly. Dually, a well-designed platform will not allow the student to change information the teacher has provided when the community follows the teacher-oriented approach of learning. Such a service may monitor the classroom protocols describing what pieces of information are to be learned by a student for an exam. The service for communication of knowledge may monitor whether the students, indeed, access all the information they are required to know. And, the service may react proactively in notifying students and teachers. Note that the knowledge service ranges from a service designed and implemented for this course, an online library in which students look for the relevant information by themselves to a web-page with course material.

Figure 6 illustrates that the community model is mapped via processes to the services. Each process or workflow implements protocols with their roles. Each workflow passes the four phases and utilizes the services of those phases. Consider the learning method of online assignments in the classroom community. In the implementation view, the sequence of learning steps is implemented in a workflow within the "scenario" of services. For example, a service for communicating knowledge -- such as online teaching material, information on assignments and how the requirements of an assignment can be met -- are provided by the service of the knowledge phase. The student is supported in developing intentions on what kind of material to study for the assignment and which part of the assignment to do first, by some recommendation agent as part of the service of the intention phase. Then the student makes a plan and schedule on how to proceed: which material to read, which parts of the assignment to do first in the online p lanning service as part of the contracting phase and, finally, the online service of the settlement phase guides the student through the schedule.

Note that the learning methods -- the protocols -- can be implemented by a variety of workflows. Those workflows can be structured or unstructured. Note, furthermore, that the platform may have the ability to provide the means for interaction, to supervise the actors, to control them and even to govern them. Consider an online assignment with several questions to be answered in a given sequence. A workflow can be designed in a such a way that the student can do the parts of an online assignment in any sequence, such that the adhering to the sequence is strongly suggested by providing the student with a single choice of what to do next or such that the next question is only available when the last question has been answered correctly. Such a scenario can integrate services designed for learning as well as services designed for some other purpose. In complex learning settings, such external services are to be utilized for learning.

Note that structured workflows that guide the student are typically used in more subject-oriented, teacher-focused learning methods. They are not adequate in process-oriented, collaborative learning methods. Determining the scenarios on the basis of services, the decision that service should take and how structured or unstructured a workflow is comprises the third step in the design -- after determining goal, language and education. Note that at this point, one can take advantage of the general model of media -- to have a model of services in general, such that external services that have not been designed to support learning can be integrated in that model. Note furthermore that, at this point, one determines the role of the platform -- which role it plays in structuring and organizing data, communication and processes.

SERVICE VIEW

The implementation of the learning processes happens by using the generic services of the service view. This view constitutes the "channel design" of the community that determines the transport and transfer of knowledge. It includes several basic services, for example: services for content management, task analysis and learning objectives, the negotiation and management of learning tasks and the evaluation of the learning results. The various services are explained in terms of the specific phase and stage in the interactions of the different scenarios (Stanoevska & Schmid, 2000).

In the Knowledge Phase, knowledge about the community and its members, the medium or the knowledge domains is provided and communicated. The community members -- lecturers, students, alumni -- may obtain knowledge about the behavior expected from them, the communication channels on which to exchange information and the protocols and guidelines to follow in communication. Here, the information, common world and common values are determined and communicated within the services. This includes, in particular, knowledge within the domain about which students learn within this medium. Knowledge and discovery services are offered to use the platform as a knowledge medium.

In the Intention Phase, agents of the community signal their intentions, developed from the knowledge provided in the knowledge phase and from their desires and goals. For example, market services in the campus community provide channels for offers and demands of internships, self-organized study groups and topics for thesis. In the classroom, community instructors plan and signal their learning objectives intended by the course.

In the Contracting Phase, agents negotiate contracts to obtain commitments from the agents participating the learning community. In some cases, this phase is more formalized and ends, in the case of success, with a "contract" -- e.g., details, negotiations about a thesis, mentoring contracts, task lists of a study group. Other examples don't have this strict, formalized character, and this phase is just indicated by the commitment of the community members.

In the Settlement Phase, services are provided for instructors, students and students groups to fulfill the intended learning objectives and tasks. For example, the students or student groups process the learning tasks and the results (project report, expertise) are evaluated by defined feedback processes (review process, grading process).

Examples of services provided by the campus community are given in Table 3:

The services for the classroom community are partly determined by the applied learning method (Table 4).

INFRASTRUCTURE VIEW

The infrastructure view designs the "technological model" and provides communication, coordination and collaboration components. These components are utilized to implement the services and the processes that connect those services. The design decision to be made at this level is which technology and which components to employ to implement the services.

These components may be designed to be used for learning or for coordination and communication in general. With the trend towards process-oriented learning and complex learning situations, closed learning environments with view services that are not much more than electronic counterparts of traditional media lose importance. We think a modern learning environment consists of: a) components that can be shared among courses and for use in classroom and campus communities, b) are composed according to a variety of learning methods, c) are open enough to be used in complex learning situations, and d) flexible enough to last beyond the lifetime of a medium.

Software components supporting the campus community are typically based on Internet technologies such as databases - Lotus notes databases for yellow pages, "product catalogue" listing all courses, seminars; asynchronous and synchronous communication media - e-mail, chat, newsgroups, threaded discussions, videoconferencing tools; community tools or content management systems; and user profiling. As Figure 6 exemplifies, the campus components provide channels for "added value information" (access to libraries, knowledge directories) as well as for communication and collaboration channels (chat, whiteboard, discussion forums).

To design the online classroom supporting the classroom community, one may consider further software components that are developed for that reason such as course authoring tools and learning environments in general - WebCT, Learning Space, Top Class or WebCourse in a Box. A variety of tools exist to support learning scenarios in a classroom, for example, grading tools for assessment, case generator, project management tools and team rooms for study groups. The tools can be used to offer channels for the classroom members, for example, study folders for students and work folder for teachers that contains task lists, personal information or an individualized "electronic school bag."

Note that the technological design provides a set of tools, a "toolbox" to offer the different services for the campus and classroom communities. Figure 7 illustrates an example of software components for the two kinds of communities. We distinguish campus components that are more likely to be used at the whole campus from classroom components that are more likely to be used for a specific class - like a student folder. Note, however, that the process view decides which components are to be individual for a course and which are to be individual to a teacher. A student folder may exist at the course level while the students collect all material in their electronic schoolbags that accompanies a student during this affiliation with the campus community as a student and later as an alumni. Similarly for a teacher, who has a folder for a course and an account on the campus for research and teaching.

Components such as a course directory with a schedule provide structure at the campus level and within a single course.

CONCLUSION

Learning is facing new challenges in the Digital Age. Online learning communities are a new phenomenon and provide the means for coping with these challenges. In online learning communities, students may acquire a wide range of fundamental knowledge in the form of efficient learning methods from such sources as web-based tutorials and assignments using the online library, all of which is independent of time and space. A significant additional benefit is that one learns to use modern tools for knowledge-acquisition. From a didactic point of view, online learning communities offer most attractive opportunities for a method mix. In this way, a gradual transition from chiefly directed to self-directed and collaborative learning -- the "transfer" to the ability to apply acquired knowledge and to engage in critical reflection -- can be intensively encouraged. In the form of the electronic platform, students are given tools that enable them to plan their learning processes, carry them out, evaluate them and constant ly improve upon them. Meta-cognitive strategies are thereby promoted and consciously discussed in learning units. Knowledge thus gained can -- in contrast to discussion and reflection in a real classroom -- easily be documented and therefore becomes more transparent and subsequently readily retrievable.

To take advantage of the potential of online learning communities, the appropriate medium has to be designed and the platform has to be built. Methods and implementation guidelines are required which consider, in an integrated manner, pedagogical requirements as well as social and technological aspects of learning communities. This article illustrates the generic reference model for online learning communities. The organizational model, interaction model, channel or service model and the technology model are interdependent for the learning community to perform in an appropriate way. This reference model for online learning communities can be applied to:

* structuring the requirements analysis upon platforms for learning communities,

* evaluation of existing technology for supporting online learning communities,

* extraction of specific reference models dedicated to specific learning methods or types of online communities (for example, online classroom and online tutorials), and

* classification of technologies and components for online learning platforms according to the services they offer.

We are successfully using this model by designing, managing and evaluating the platform for an online learning community of MBA students (www.media-mba.unisg.ch).

Figure 4

Study categories

     Contact-             Self-               Context-
     Studies              Studies             Studies

* Focus on teacher-  * Focus on student-  * Focus on team-
 centered learning     centered learning    centered learning
  methods,             methods,             methods,

* Higher guidance    * Student's Self-    * Context situations:
  of the student,      guidance and         Network of Experts
                       control,             and Partners,

* More physical      * Less physical      * Mix of physical
  contact and          contact.             and virtual contact.
  socializing.
Table 1.

Roles in campus communities

Role                 "Campus Community"

Host                 * establishes and designs the
                       learning environment platform,
                       debugging, and technical support,
                       and
                     * provides and controls access for
                       the community participating member
                       with the corresponding access
                       rights.

Content Manager/     * act as information specialists --
"Librarian"            for searching and monitoring, up-
                       to-date information, course
                       material,
                     * act as lectors, experts in
                       indexing and organizing key words
                       (for integrating).
                     * act as editors -- for publishing
                       on the Web, eventually multimedia-
                       based, and
                     * responsible for updating and
                       quality of the learning contents
                       (e.g. checking the web-links).

Interested Student/  * reads guest information,
Applicant              questions and answers,
                     * applies online, and
                     * gets an invitation, enrollment.

Student              * initiates a permanent information
                       process about course structure an
                       contents, and learning tasks,
                     * uses existing (course) material
                       and searches actively for further
                       information/resources (Glossary,
                       digital library), and
                     * socializes, exchanges informal
                       knowledge.

Campus Group         * builds informal communities,
                       "communities of interest" and
                       clubs, and
                     * initiates self-study groups or
                       network organizations on the
                       (online) campus (e.g., alumni,
                       clubs), organizes events.

Alumni               * uses the knowledge database and
                       updates personal knowledge,
                     * searches for knowledge experts,
                       and
                     * socializes: staying in contact
                       with other alumni, getting in
                       contact with new students, or
                       organizing events.

Business/            * searches in the knowledge
Corporate Partner      databases, to update,
                     * searches for knowledge experts
                       and students, and
                     * uses recruitment services.
Table 2

Roles in classroom communities


Roles                           "Classroom Community"

Learning Method: Online Assigs

Lecturer                        * has more a passive role during
                                  the lesson,
                                * generates assignments: case
                                  studies, correspondence studies,
                                * supports individual feedback, and
                                * is responsible for grading the
                                  assignments.

Test Generator                  * generates online exams and
                                  questions databases, and
                                * is responsible for the assessment
                                  and feedback-information (e.g.,
                                  as online documents).

Student                         * has more an active role,
                                  self-studies,
                                * uses existing (course) material
                                  and searches actively for further
                                  information/ resources (Glossary,
                                  digital library),
                                * studies cases, assignments, tests
                                  and
                                * analyzes his/her learning
                                  progress with help of personal
                                  given feedback.

Learning Method: Online
 Discussions

Moderator                       * moderates discussion formats,
                                * controls the access of closed
                                  discussion groups,
                                * implements and supervises rules
                                  for interaction,
                                * stimulates the discussion
                                  participants to questions,
                                  comments and summarizes important
                                  points, concludes some
                                  statements, and
                                * initiates topics, sends news,
                                  updates discussion information.

Study Group                     * works on team assignments,
                                  realizes project work (in
                                  cooperation with companies), or
                                  generates reports (e.g.,
                                  evaluation studies, expert
                                  report),
                                * organizes team work by managing
                                  (self-organized or predetermined)
                                  roles and processes (e.g.,
                                  editors, discussion-leader), and
                                * opens and moderates online team
                                  spaces (e.g., for closed user
                                  groups, especially if competitive
                                  team work).

Student                         * has more an active role,
                                  collaborative learning, learning
                                  from each other,
                                * studies team work, and
                                * peer review and personal
                                  feedback.
Table 3

Services for the campus community

Campus Community

Phase:                Examples of Services
Type of Interaction

Knowledge Phase:      * Information Services about
Information             community members, medium,
exchange,               or knowledge domains
true-false              (homepages, Netiquette,
                        guided tour about the
                        research worlds), and
                      * Knowledge and Discovery
                        Services:
                      - Online Library, Glossary,
                        case repository,
                      - search engines, retrieval
                        functionalities,
                      - personalization, user
                        profiling, and
                      - knowledge mapping.

Intention Phase:      * Course Management Services:
Signaling intentions    course offers, offers,
(e.g., offers,          demands of electives, and
demands)              * "Market Services":
                      - Thesis: offers, demands for
                        research topics,
                      - Internships: offers, demands
                        for positions, and
                      - Open forums, blackboard:
                        requests, demands, offers,
                        open questions.

Contracting Phase:    * Course Management Services:
Commitments             application, registration
(e.g., contract,        and course enrollment, and
task lists)           * "Market Services":
                      - Thesis: matching
                        offers/demands, negotiations
                        of the thesis's research
                        questions and methods,
                      - Internships: matching
                        offers/demands, contract
                        for positions, and
                      - Open Forums, blackboard:
                        matching offers/demands,
                        contracts, negotiations,
                        answers to questions.

Settlement Phase:     * Course Management Services:
Actions, settlements    course delivery and
                        certification, and
                      * "Market Services":
                      - Actions: Writing thesis,
                        monitoring internships, and
                      - Reviewing/ Evaluating
                        thesis, internships.
Table 4

Services for the classroom community

Classroom Community

Phase:                        Examples of Services
Type of Interaction

Knowledge Phase:              * Information Services about
Information                     community, members, medium,
exchange,                       course, and course content
true-false                      (homepages, Netiquette, guided
                                tour about the course and course
                                structure), and
                              * Knowledge / Course Content
                                Services.:
                              - Organizing course material,
                              - search engines, and
                              - personalization, user profiling.

Intention Phase:              * Instructor/Student/Student Group
Signaling intentions            Services:
(e.g., Offers, demands)       - Planning/offering learning
                                objectives and tasks, and
                              - demands for learning objectives
                                and tasks.

Contracting Phase:            * Instructor/Student/Student
Commitments (e.g., contract,    Group Services:
 task lists)                  - Matching offers/demands,
                                negotiations about learning
                                objectives and tasks,
                              - course design: design of learning
                                scenarios (creating online
                                assignments, case studies, team
                                projects, exams), and
                              - schedule, task lists for students
                                or student groups.

Settlement Phase:             * Instructor/Student/Student Group
Actions, settlements            Services:
                              - Course delivery: Working on the
                                assignments, presentations of the
                                results, monitoring the learning
                                progress, team spaces for project
                                work,
                              - assessment and feedback of the
                                learning results and progress, an
                              - evaluation of the course.

REFERENCES

Armstrong, A., & Hagel III, J. (1996). The real value of online communities. Harvard Business Review, May-June, 134-141.

Becker, W. C. & Carnine, D. W. (1980). Direct instruction: An effective approach to educational intervention with the disadvantaged and low performers. Advances in Clinical Child Psychology 3, 452-468.

Dyson, E. (1997). Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age. New York: Broadway.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive and individualistic learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Jonassen, D. H. (1992). What are Cognitive Tools? In P. D. Kommers, D. H. Jonassen, & J. T. Mayes, J. T. (Eds.), Cognitive tools for learning, (pp. 1-6). Berlin: Springer.

Lechner, U., & Schmid, B. (2000). Community and media: Towards a reconstruction of communities on media. Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Systems Sciences, Hawaii, 2000.

Harasim, L., Hiltz, S.R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995) Learning Networks. A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge: MA/London: MIT Press.

McDermott, R. (1999). Learning across teams. Knowledge Management Review, 3(8), 32-36.

Milius, F. (1999). E-learning framework. Information Management & Consulting, 14(1), 37-45.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. New York: Oxford University Press.

Pressley, M., Harris, K. R., & Marks, M. B. (1992). But good strategy instructors are constructivists! Educational Psychology Review, 4, 3-31.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. Cambridge, MA: The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series.

Reeves, T. (1992). Effective dimensions of interactive learning systems. Proceedings of the Informa-tion Technology for Training and Education Conference (ITTE '92), University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Rheingold, H. (1993). The virtual community. Homesteading on the electronic frontier. New York: Addison-Wesley.

Schmid, B. (1997). The Concept of Media. Proceedings of the Electronic Markets Workshop, Maastricht.

Schmid, B., & Stanoevska, K. (1998). Knowledge media: An innovative concept and technology for knowledge management in the Information Age. Proceedings of the 12th International Telecommunications Society Conference: "Beyond Convergence," Stockholm, Sweden.

Schmid, B., & Lechner, U, (1999). Logic for media. The computational media metaphor. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

Seufert, S., & Seufert, A. (1999). The genius approach: Building learning networks for advanced management education. Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

Stanoevska, K., & Schmid, B. (2000) Community supporting platforms. Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

SABINE SEUFERT, ULRIKE LECHNER, AND KATARINA STANOEVSKA, INSTITUTE FOR MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT (MCM INSTITUTE), UNIVERSITY OF ST. GALLEN, MULLER-FRIEDBERGSTRASSE 8, ST. GALLEN, SWITZERLAND

E-MAIL: [e-mail]

E-MAIL: [e-mail]

E-MAIL: [e-mail]