‘Running Head: ETECSI2 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT. 1 ETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT OF ENGLISH ONLINE INC. Manedare Vowk pre ft Essay Kons ‘Melanie Briar Jamieson Case St ys | University of British Columbia pe | A | GS | F \ fh prenar’s : youkBTECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT een) Table of Contents“ (pa 70 hoe 1. Introduction nee VY 2. Embodiment Y 3.Space 6 [« line Learning English Online Ine. ; 4 8 A sees , WIS Pepseg: av ae L / YB CRIMES Cre 25 sae) on a / PRORDICG § wit TAG SS Sark eRelee \ SV South acco ucETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 3 ETECS12 Embodiment in the Online Learning Environment of English Online e 7 YS ee taqwel- Introduction This paper is an exy hu the concept of embodiment in the online learning. environment within my prof context; [plan for and administer an online program for = 7 Cele is etc adults who want to learn English to aid in their settlement to Canada (www ynyen a). He ine ei e SCMELAILY [fete ba, The Go of embodiment are ‘new to me’ and provide a different lens through which to view A oe the engagement of our language leamers."Af eee Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, and Dreyfus, ae of — = rysenek med the design ofthe learning environment for the seemingly discorporate leamer {the sndewstture We Phenre st unseen online leamer is oa only viewed through a variety of traditional synchronous and yy ween ¢ aa, ' Mes va asynchronous assignment ‘most abstzzet, the online learner is recorded in learning" Agere: Ble a LS meee analytics captured through the learning management system. My exploration of the complex eamue) RIC. ROCp er of s, technology and wayfe § concept of embodiment i design of learning f ARORA = seographical location across the globe led me to concepts of online ner approach. Considering the diversity in learner engagement. This paper should be read as an exploration of my still forming understanding of embodied learning. G: Yen, OA Freces5 The paper begins with various perspectives of embodiment from Desé&rte’s position, to idegger’s phenomenological experience of mind and body connection, followed by Morfeau- Popes explanation of space and juxtaposed against, Depyfus. This philosophical discussion is flowed bya brie sprey ofthis cemuy’s theories online space an the wiquitous metaphor — ag = Vceotta.,20 61h ee of online users as travelers including: Prensky’s theory of digital natives and immigrants which NY is juxtaposed with the more recent aftivals and departures (Ross, Gallager & MacLeog) Re ze 5 (White and LeComy). Lu residents and etETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 4. r Gre Faucet This essay concludes with a Cetin of the self-directed le design of English Online Gene. ee ee ee ” a : HES support the embodied leaming of me payantes, personas. The analysis of activities, technology and design initiated a change in delivery “/ eecetcen) Ny i i ar yor currently informs a transition of the navigation of materials, and rethinking of activities. a . or Connwne 2. Embodiment ano ENCAREHO) For an inte, embodiment is an clusiye'term to define given the breadth of adoption in disciplines from philosophy, psychology, sociology and computer scienc Far, Price, Jong 7 yw 2012) and the development in understanding human cognition over the past 400 years. In the Kes > cers A 16th Century, the popular philosophy of knowing was that the consciousness of the mind was wo nur, philosophy of knowing v bus : 7 es 2 ev newic ind was an overt — Meek sets i ind and an organic body. Thif Euclidian approach suggests.that the ce ay Grhire tuenney sone gor __-corisGiousness without requiripg a bodily container and therefore is disengaged from the body ‘egnsesaee:y “ (Young andl Whitty, 201 ined mind esta it physical restrictions or geographic distances. This is an important consideration for online eon one fe in 00g earners who can also overcome the physical and geographical space restrictions thri aro compute Internet connections, The affordances of modem technology seemingly allow fora /y7eeeo 26 _ SUA CEC Cartesian disembodiment. However, the mind and body are rejoined with later philosophers. Caoee on , In The Question Concerning Technology, Heidegger (1953/J977H982F, describes the use of tool as a way of shaping the world and considers how humans learn skills through the master’s Tool as aw 5B eee engagement of the world via the extension of tools (1953/1977/1982). Knowledge is embodied Jo nae cue ee rene f Grr once the body has moved to mastery, this influences understanding of learning and the body in . oO og t the body needs " in order to ee bereee Le “al ~ padues! ced In the Phenomenology of Perception, Merleau-Ponty (1945/1962) he limitations Mey peg ee of Descartes’ dualism of mind and body separation, The phenomenological importance of ane ETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 3 J hy “shown context is interwoven into Merleau-Ponty’s explanation of embodied knowledge’ qyp%riential ‘chological arguments we eet rapl ).A phantom limb 2 oy! $ conscious awareness in both space and time (1945/1962, p,§8-99). In this example the limb isan 64 “experiential body that engages with the world” (Youngané-Whitty, 2010, 214). Perceptionis | engagement, Merleau-Ponty specifies through both physiological and that knowing requires the movement of the body as “being-in-the-work aa has memory and experience of a time when the limb could [manipulate the environment with a nal just sensory experience but placed within a timeline of past memory and current situated environment. An important consideration made by Merleau-Ponty in the Phenomenology of Percep! the concept of interaction with real-world objects, He likens the intention of touching your body's knee to when a YK, \ wer} wees typist performs the necessary movements on a typewriter, these movements are governed the intentions does not posit the keys as objective locations. Itis. _dosity: space gor This extension of the bodily space is further developed in the inter-corporeality.of Merleau- 744 oe 6 oes ‘woven and it is, at least in rela ——— ‘com ehension 3945/1982, 273), Further, the extension of the body through objects includes Jo the perceiyed world the general instrument of my / te cultural cont in which he agent is situated, C77 vat! as am We ait! their philosophy has current relevance in the discussion of online leaning, Itis the concept of lnsnn VD rind, body, space, time and cultural context that this essay uses to understand online learners fa) —ETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 6 ‘Writing 50 years later, Dreyfus (1998) has the benefit of living and working in an era that Ae a has newer media tools available to integrate into the delivery of education. ‘Similar to Merleau- Ponty, Dreyfus sees the body as fundamentally shaping human perception (Burbules, 2002; Peters, 2002). However, cyte ony Ge of technology as.an extension of ‘encesoe — Dreyfus (1998) decries virtual space as producing “anonymity, playfulness and | WE Cte? vate fs Work only in the nearness of the classroom and laboratory; never in cyberspace” (Dreyfus, ‘malleable identities” qualities which limits the ability for learning online which he believes vS 123). Dreyfus" view of learning on the Internet disembodies learning so that, in a Heideggerian-like breakdown, online leaming environments is only capable of providing competence of skills and knowledge nojaffastery (Peters, 2002). 3. Space Tradl ‘ming spaces meant classrooms and lecture halls and the requirement of the physical presence of a professor and student, with content housed a brick and mortar library. The spai pi is still the predominant metaphor used to describe online learning (Edwards, J gf 2014: Kitchin, 1998); and online learners have been described as travelers within digital learning ’ ‘ ns My gt contents (Prensky, 2001a, 2001b; Ross, Gallagher & Macleod, 2013; White & Le Commu, 2011), a 08 oe “ penn) si! Atthe tum of he 21" century, Prensky posited that the “frst generation grow up with o a - ; mt 9 technology” (Prensky, 2001, p,1) would be much more fluid in their digital literacy (digital ae —_— Meee a @ Petives) than their aging parents and teachers (digital immigrants) who were late adopters of ELS da 800 “ ee technology. Prensky's argument has come oe gm over its ageist perspectiveand A“ © | yy forits inaccurate comparison with language acquisition (White & LeCornu, 2 oo ay Prensky's argument has flaws, the native and immi 2 wt v e ‘a ). Although mastery of technology will depend greatly on the practice and use of a variety of tools. In online ye, —— > ~ = ~ $ leangjge it is important 19 consider tha mers will come with a spectrum of peri at or eT fe & , ee ay at & A apt ert s Pp PPD PIE yh ie at ye fe "e ra ae ee, ed a 3%ETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 7 \ > pa. al noe readiness to learn, Prensky’s use of terminology used for emigrating is strongly esosrapheal spne and politi boundaries, may ye finda lg in understanding online spaces / For instance learning technologists often use terms like migration to describe process of moving . to a new computer systems, or moyirig data from one learning management system to another. ee Eman coast LBEriigeers, ry are not vif Lat OV As the term digital citizenship continues, one might consider where one belongs to WE RetD digital citizen, A iS APD Seon, we ee Soe Lee ey Ae teng Aloutyett, White and Le Cornu (2011) move the metaphor of online space to a status of visitor and Cea WW eter nd on an — oe ner a Ate! s Dreyfus (1998) description of the anonymous. o 2 commitment phobic learner. Distance leamers then who are o1 ly Atos if they are not actively Wp, Mgyee7 a ss, ‘engaged in the learning environment or technology and use tools as a means to an end, woyone - a S cave te and Le Cornu’s (2011) typology proposes, “that place is primarily a sense of being t - mcntatt © pest with othe! ). This definition of space seems related to Merleau-Ponty's idea ofthe oO ys body's sensual conception of “space as the indivisible system governing the acts of unification. performed by a constituting mind” (p 284). White and Le Cornu’s Residents establish habitual acts that develop a stable online identity; this allows others in the same space to perceive g yiffual SH tte 1). Projections of selfon online “ey body within an imagined online spectacle (Merleau-Pont Social platforms are still connected to a whole being, although the perecived may only reveal a 4. 4S particular persona. Merleau-Ponty captures this perspective: “Here I can see only the south side ©*4* 2 wee ep nse only th oumelp 1 esstGo0% the street, whereas if | erossed over I should see the northside” (p 385). In online afer Bees giney - te 7 OM vironments people may choose to only show one side of themselves. ae BS e Drips, gut Ate The research team of Ross, Gallagher and Macleod (2013) investigate the notion of space Zewet.S a” #80" or higher-education learners and deseribe their engagement as periods of assembly and use the aBETECSIZ EMBODIMENT INTHE ONLINELEARNING ENVIRONMENT 79 ACA? “BH eae S “ eat - metaphor of arrivals (nearness), departifes (distance), and returns. Periods of activity and 2 00" arrivals (neamess), departires (distance), and retur ts of acy — jgweel as norms) £i@Gfuntions fordistance gy? nal - eo} learners who are seen h¢ cally with complex work, life commitments. Unlike Prensky or ite and Le Commu, Ross, Gallagher and Maclead suggest ways teachers can support leamers . value shifts in HOF online space, and design openings for returns. Henan’ Aum it bo tate hi S lience or affinity for returning; these include: recognize effort and aff smney FS na POU English Online Inc. (EO) is a not-for-profit organization that provi anBUaEE™ $s A7e Sorel?) is a not-for-profit oma 2 y EE one learning resources siafetdementotueven 18 to the province of Manitoba,)A variety of & learning resources range from instructionally designed asynehs ted content (mec modules to facilitated synchronous drop-in classes and mini-courses are available for leamers to : . 7 Grrmontt! choose. In order to deliver these learning materials, EO uses a variety of computer-mediated foeres vous ‘communication tools as a means for learning delivery, Ors weenitier” This section of the essay outli .¢ learning components of the EO environment. The first gut Lee ODIs) PRR LEM AS Fbetes thdes section reviews the hiS‘orical development of fhe learning options, as a response to learner needs. Goceurt LS “ Foch Chk te theory of embodiment and metaph 2. and 3, BO’s e-learning environm f learners as travelers presented in sections /=peap## tool of delivery, and LLC 3)immeitncy of feedback. This serutiny allows me to step béck from EO’s programming to eC tn ae understand how learning design affects the whole leaner’ longi spectrum oftravelling arr" 0 porete. « wee metaph look at some ofthe changes hata being implemented in'partbocase ot AONE -_ SONSE wot The | tions at EO hi al w Cees es |The easing options at EO have grown organs avr the pas six ya pnd were pacnier? the developed as a response to leamer requests. Self-directed learning modules were the fist and pyp/atesoy) ? | only content for the first two years of operation, The assumption was that (e : : i [oe Pratt? MEO Bg,ETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT. ° already employed and unable to attend traditional face-to-face classes. Ref] assumption, leamers might be equated with White and Le comusGee, frregular users of a _ : ae om modules, leaving no evidence of online SD a more leamers reached out with We®E A : EG, Be questions about the modules, s0 facilitators creatéd handouts to support the self-directed modes pgesten’ pot! ‘These early handouts always included answers but more learners wanted feedback on their ie ~ Zino us oMAmPLE>> nd responses. Wo. Were oviB0ee 4S ? nee } a Leamers wanted more than self-access content. In order fo practice listening and speaking, #2&* ped and delivered. These group classes were also a ly as creating efficiency for fac 1 schedule of drop-in online elasses were d A seon organiza lem (LMS), did not have many of the functions for these additional learning acti f jor time, Fine Learning Management O s s poe pda social bookmarking (Delicious) open access wiki (Wikispaces), miero-blog (Twitter), and mor pl Own aw wpreet Ore Belase ZomPyn meg . cant PHS FeaEeco™ y wyt) » Om Me B in the LMS so facilitators responded by created content that (tates ee see ee 4 fr panel ott changed weekly. An e-Portfolio was created within the LMS to help leamers create, track goals 6 42 and reflect on leaming (ieson & Cochrane, 2015)-As leaming options grew, there was need cote —— ee pigetl orientation clpsses to point learners to the variety of activi n which they could engage. Neon Nw a Drop in classes specifically on digital literacy were created as facilitators were spending a PACE jors sought other tools to support different activities; synchronous classroom (WIZIQ), e recently & socal platform (FaceBook). *y | significant amount of time individually supporting leamers” use of technology. en, C077 OR_ PKI ABE AOR Beant NO Fie Bicone _Averetate Psy ital immigrants metaphor but many learners needed support on using the rious tools for learning engagement, for instance not being familiar with synchronous ARC ©° Cec? AEAY 20+ Hots ‘The history of learning option development is an important consideration in understanding I OTT ep ert how the ini tfnsion was to ot one specific learner's need and then grew to support a ee pio 8 teeg” ap Pnteng FF # yuat (5 Orestes otc’ Cutt oP bel Ge Lew 1 milipomrannenec: FUG Agere) Gareal WS ie tid GE wane Paerkitrd AF awe RR UC HAI wHe speETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 0 r ym spectrum of leamer personas. Facilitators were designing learning around individual needs, in a— ae — (0 essence treating each leamer as embodied learners with unique needs; however, as each « Ree iq a — no 7) customized handout was then shared with the broader learning community the cohesiveness of As these independent activities grew, each learning option was then to every leamer, which in effect siced leaning, and leamers into separate, disjointed Yaey jes. As created Table I (below), started to question how learners were understood as yp yg, pa WI) u gai bs whole beings, as the artifacts of their participation was broken down by different activities, Suen over diferent modules. Vos, Sivuch 0€ fever bude Table 1 ante pawttetee. SAI GET fe / Sete o fuk y / aoe er ° we fk ee ae English Online’s Learning Options 4s Lins ten = Lenn tvoaeste € ve ‘Options Interaction direction Tpg]g ve 8? OE” | Feedback cee aan’, Learner —computer- | Open access 8i'y yet) Automatic a weney bv er oo a a B leaner website ag os (asynchronous) captor? Tdioms ‘Leamer — online ‘Agcessed on open Facilitator feedback Vv (asynchronous) | content ~ wikis Answers | within 48 hour, bp 7 ited wit = pte submitted withinLMS | ac an gy (| ale Leamer—Facilitator- | journal leccdey leamer / te TS : = of a Drop-in workshops | Leamer—Facilitator— | Accessed via LMS; __| Facilitator few Def a eee pleat Nasynchronous & | Ieamer~ delivered on WIZIQ | synchronous Mnopee. synchronous) Answers submitted | feedback; follow up Leamer—peers(often | within LMS journal _ | activities sent within unknown to gach other) LMS are responded to 7 Cr ponerte ¢ yret Year prot HersETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT n ~[Mini-courses (4 | Tearer—Peers (same | Accessed via LMS; weeks) group) delivered on WIZIQ__| synchronous (asynchronous & Answers submitted | feedback; follow u synchronous) Facilitator — Group within LMS journal activities sent within — YouTube Channel _| LMS are responded to Leamner ~Facilitator~ | (some content) within 48 hours; learner Accessed via LMS; | Peer contribution on specific conversations | discussion boards dependant on current | varies LZ module enrollment Summer MOOC | Facilitator Group | Aecessed on open ‘(asynchronous & - i contribution varies; synchronous) _“//] Leamer~ Peers “Answers submitied | peer contribution also ~ an i in LMS journal | varies; peer Leamer -Facilitator~ | Peer generated work | contri } learner ‘on blogs, instragram, | discussion boards flickr or in Discussion | varies Boards Coffee chats Learner = Peers Delivered on Skype; Peer and Facilitator (asynchronous & Pinterest (for some | synchronous informal synchronous) Facilitator Group content) feedback Volunteer match | Learner = Skype Volunteer provides (synchronous) an Email mediate synchronous | some follow. ies via email Social Media Twitter Interaction varies, (asynchronous) Facebook informal Facilitator - learner DeliciousETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT BR ‘Pinterest | a YouTube As Table 1 was flushed out, the addition of more technological tools conjured Heidegger's wey ce eee a ~ AS (1953/1977/1982) explanation of technology as a means to an end via four causes op Each tool geer® interpreted through Heidegger has a- materiality, form) putpose and-outputjover which its ser Lene Eee ‘ This strive for mastery. However, lg disibuted use of dierent tools Hroughout different learning “3 7 a see i prema makes it hard for learners to déveloy in order to embody the technology. Unlike pent, ‘Merleau-Ponty’s typist, EO leamerg’may nobmove beyond the tools’ function: / oe 7 ee ‘o its purpose for the learning activity. I questioned the use of so many online spaces for learners &e ” wn ~ , Meee nant to engage for learning, S Vet © LATE pein 1@ next drop-in workshop to get any other type of settlement information; this the next workshop on ‘Maternity Leave’ is 10 months away. Furthermore, a py earner would not know that there is content about Maternity Leave because specific workshops Perle a oF 6, ne only provided in quarterly schedules. ene) wt Lg 4 oe i. Self-access content may fif some learners’ needs; however, how a learner is sustained as a gon * a wove e]longeterm resident is not evident. Learners move disjointedly through a schedule of drop-in or i yh? 7 - fend Iini-courses that have litle o connect the flow of the activities. Leamers do not move together yay eeue with a cohort, and the amount of resilience described by Ross, Gallagher and Macleodis quite @¥3 “6 See eee Y a Geter ay Coee Tat ) pe rane uret seen ane: eonoen NE aETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT B Changes Concurrent to the writing of this essay, the vendor of EO’s LMS provided an “End-of-Life Letter” that stated the LMS would be shut down at _ 2015. The iho ‘end-of- life’ was not lost on me as I was immersed in considerations of the earner body and its KS ae - SD ester relationship to technology. Afier investigating more LMS tools, I realized that another course Siete Sena “pany / wore? ‘management tool was not where a leamnerytesides. Instead it is a sense of epaunity that I ae of comunity has helped shape the YEA EN brs thyloeces; design of the future website for EO learners, AG ARERR ae = wanted to perpetuate for leamers. The social engagement of cor that were -w design of leaming options will start to bring together the activi ¥ ‘9 ran 6 al" developed as ‘one-off, "as ifthe activity themselves w@ detached Som eahesive bby of hi ws of a CE” knowledge, into broader thematic settlement categories. FFurther, EO is working on moving yee POTD “ * wo content Veto login. his way learners who want to just ‘visit’ the cont w 5H ay sure witl,the pressure to participate, as well as have access to content when they need that content, not when it is dictated to by the EO schedule. ‘The delivery of the activities and the collection of learner evidence, the learner is only seen ye A 7 un ‘y'through separate assignments in separate workshops av —— (© broader based discussion forums where they can cons nae ly learn with community members. new design learners will part of a ws pe yor a freer 5. Conclusion Online leaming has become ubiquitous in adult education. This rise in opportunities for earning has grown with the affordances of online communication technologies and the growii body of research interested in educational technologies. Technology in online learning affords greater connection between learner, instructor, content and peers (Anderson, 2008). vo onesETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT “ While thee is arse of online education, educational technologists iene how to create online environments to encourage leaning. The explorat nn of embodiment and learning sp space forced pf to question/my professional context's effectiveness in supporting learning. I even / a tiveness in supporting 8. / questioned if online learning for mastery was even obtainable afte reading Dreyfus’ (1998) Soe argument for physical connection. This essay pushed me to analyze the design of our activities yory were Mra tcc D> and learner engagement. EO slowly transitioning its materials to a more open website. We are till using an LMS plug-in, o save on time, but will be incorporating, a community plug-in. In the design of a new ecm Website and the structure of content and interactivity with community members, earners will be say choose to be resident or visitor, Leamers will also be given many opportunities to arrive, and likewise not judged for ther deporte. ae eure re Be CArelt< As leamers are transports via different technologies, space and tng a. > learner but rather acts as amplifiers or extensions of their embodied veil In the new design of | our website and content delivery, of settlement and English lessons, it is the enduri earners will find meaning and connections within their offline space. : Apcesy sweet : ") LOMA IAR FOV S UND 4 2 ak Bf Nbeers REVERS re, . shave & are BE popes euner ay we vt (awe Senge PRO Bove, ABI ven Sires re #1 AP Reny aed FUWUeesBTECS12 EMBODIM apes ‘THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT is vat References Anderson, Tsmry-(2008). Towards Theory of Online J&aming. in The theory and practice of online learning. Edmonton; AU Press. Ed. Anderson, T., DOAB: Directory of Open Access “aus? 7 ao AeR. Books, & Canadian Publishers Collection - non-CRKN. Retrieved from Ow Cibo byes COVED hup://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/120146 gove _7 Patoles, N.C (2002). Like a version: Paying with online identities, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 34(4), 387-393. doi:10.1080/001318502200001 1781 coven, ‘halie E. (2012) Configuring the Networked Self: Law, Code, and the Play of Everyday Practice. Yale University Press.) _ Dall’ Alba, G. & Bamacle, R. (2005). Embodied Knowing in Online Environments, Educational _Teilosopby and Theory 37(5): pp. 719-744. Josie H.L, (1998). Education on the intemet: Anonymity vs, commitment, The Internet and 016/81096-7494(99)80174-3 _ Edwards, Rierard, (2014), Spatial theory in networked learning, Proceedings of the 9th “ Gged International Conference on Networked Learning. Ed. Bayne, S., Jones, C., de Laat, M "ate Rybert, T. & Sinclair, C. Retrieved from Eoed Be. ootad ort hutp:/Avww networkedleamingconference.org.uk/abstracts/pdtfedwards.pdf / thes, D. (2010). Heidegger’ technologies: Postphenomenological perspectives. New York Fordham University Press. CRIUD aw Marte.) frie M, (1953/1977/1982). The question concerning technology. In M. Heidegger, The 2 Gnse? toe question conceming technology and other essays (WW. Lovitt, Trans.) New York: Harper & / /e“ em c a Row. p 3-35 hes poend op Mee h —re ‘a peso “We ETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 16 Pwwieso Use, UAE Journal of Edueational Technology and eLearning, Yar Gum bae —— pw cone cee hnp:/ejournal het ac.aelarticle/eportfolins-Ianguage-leaming-theory-development-use VE itchin, R. M. (1998). Towards geographies of cyberspace. Progress in Human Geography, 22(3), 385-406, doi:10.1191/03091329866833 1585 _Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962) Phenomenology of perception, (Colin Smith, Trans.) New York; (( ge7™ Aes ree hart 7 Peters, M. (2002), Dreyfus lism, Edi Philosophy and Theory, 34(4), 403-406. doi:10.111 1/).1469-5812.2002.tb00514.x Prensky, Maso{2001). “Do they really think differently?” On the Horizon, velsme 9, nem.) y/Prensky%20- 3%20-%20Part.pdt _/ oss, J, Gallagher, M., & Macleod, H. (2013). Making distance visible: Assembling ne: in an online distance learning programme. The Intemational Review Of Research In Open And Distributed Learning, 14(4), Retrieved from http:/Avww.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodi/article/view/1545 _/ White, D., & Le Comu, A. (2011). Visitors and Résidents: A new typology for online / Wright, Fiona, White, David, Hirst, Tony & Cann, Alan, (2014), Visitors and Residents: mappit engagement. First Monday, 16(9). doi 5210/fm.v16i9.3171 7 student attitudes to academic use of social networks, Learning, Media and Technology, 39:1, 126-141, doi: 0.1080/17439884,2013.777077ETECS12 EMBODIMENT IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 7 Jaws Garry and Whitty, Monica T. (2010). lySearch ofthe Cartesian, SI: An 2Xamination of _pibodimen ‘within 21st-Century. Communication Theory & Psychology, 20: 209-229, 7710959354309345633