1. Online learner’s ‘flow’ experience: an empirical study Adviser: Ming-Puu Chen Adviser: Ming-Puu Chen Presenter: Li-Chun Wang Presenter: Li-Chun Wang Shin, N. (2006). Online learner’s ‘flow’ experience: An empirical study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5), 705-720.

2. 2 Abstract Theory: On the basis of Csikszentmihalyi’s theory of flow, reflective construct composing of ‘enjoyment’, ‘telepresence’, ‘focused attention’, ‘engagement’ and ‘time distortion’ on the part of learners.On the basis of Csikszentmihalyi’s theory of flow, reflective construct composing of ‘enjoyment’, ‘telepresence’, ‘focused attention’, ‘engagement’ and ‘time distortion’ on the part of learners.Purpose: Examine the empirical relationships between measured flow antecedents, flow experiences and flow consequence-course satisfactionExamine the empirical relationships between measured flow antecedents, flow experiences and flow consequence-course satisfactionResults: Students’ perceptions of their level of ‘skill’ and ‘challenge’ specific to each course are critical to determining the level of flow,Students’ perceptions of their level of ‘skill’ and ‘challenge’ specific to each course are critical to determining the level of flow, Flow is a significant predictor of course satisfactionFlow is a significant predictor of course satisfaction Other than flow, individual differences such as ‘gender’ and ‘having a clear goal’ can make a significant difference in the level of flow in a virtual course.Other than flow, individual differences such as ‘gender’ and ‘having a clear goal’ can make a significant difference in the level of flow in a virtual course.

3. 3Introduction Flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990)Flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990) –Intrinsically motivated, interested in challenging tasks at hand, being unconscious of themselves while performing the task, feeling a unity between consciousness and activities, and oftentimes losing the sense of physical time. The definitions of flow vary from study to study.The definitions of flow vary from study to study. Two distinctive ways defined in CME or HCI research studies:Two distinctive ways defined in CME or HCI research studies: –Flow as a mental mode: represented by the combination of some characteristics that individuals experience. A sense of control over the interaction with a computerA sense of control over the interaction with a computer One’s focused attentionOne’s focused attention Curiosity aroused during the interactionCuriosity aroused during the interaction The user’s finding the interaction intrinsically interestingThe user’s finding the interaction intrinsically interesting –Flow as a function between skill and challenge Skills : an individual’s capabilities to deal with tasks encountered during activitiesSkills : an individual’s capabilities to deal with tasks encountered during activities Challenge: the degree to which individuals find it difficult to cope with specific tasks involvedChallenge: the degree to which individuals find it difficult to cope with specific tasks involved

4. 4Introduction Flow is defined as:Flow is defined as: –A balanced ratio of challenges to skills (LeFevre, 1988, p.307) –An optimal experience that stems from people’s perceptions of challenges and skills in given situations (Ellis, Voelks & Morris, 1994, p.337) According to Siekpe, flow studies concerning information technology have mostly adopted: According to Siekpe, flow studies concerning information technology have mostly adopted: –A reflective model: represented as factors reflecting the hidden higher order construct –A formative model: represented as antecedents influencing the flow

5. 5 Research Questions On the flow antecedents:On the flow antecedents: 1. Does the flow condition (skill–challenge) have, in fact, a significant relationship with one’s level of flow? 2. Are the variables of individual differences related to one’s level of flow? On the flow construct:On the flow construct: 3. How would the empirical relationships between the five subconstructs and the flow construct be depicted? On the flow consequences:On the flow consequences: 4. Do the flow antecedents and the flow experience predict the student’s satisfaction with the course?

6. 6 To examine the relationships between flow antecedents and the actual level of flow:To examine the relationships between flow antecedents and the actual level of flow: Data Analysis and Results Flow condition (fc) as the gap between skill and challengeFlow condition (fc) as the gap between skill and challenge When the fc score gets closer to 0, the student is likely to be in a high- flow stateWhen the fc score gets closer to 0, the student is likely to be in a high- flow state

7. 7 The result of the correlation analysisThe result of the correlation analysis Data Analysis and Results Fc scores seems to be a fairly good predictor of one’s flow levelFc scores seems to be a fairly good predictor of one’s flow level

8. 8 Discussion The flow construct in a conceptual research model as being affected by observable variables such as enjoyment, time distortion, focused attention, telepresence or engagementThe flow construct in a conceptual research model as being affected by observable variables such as enjoyment, time distortion, focused attention, telepresence or engagement Individual differences affecting the degree of flowIndividual differences affecting the degree of flow –Although the gender variable was not influential in determining one’s level of flow –The student’s perceptions of their own skill and challenge The effect of the flow as a significant predictor of student satisfactionThe effect of the flow as a significant predictor of student satisfaction

9. 9 Implications Learners: be ‘autotelic’Learners: be ‘autotelic’ –A student’s level of flow goes hand in hand with the level of his motivation –Having a clear goal has been counted as the first step of being intrinsically motivated. Instructors: flow ‘with’ studentInstructors: flow ‘with’ student –It is natural that students are ‘in’ and ‘out’ of flow within a unit of course (Pearce & Howard, 2004). –Pearce and Howard suggest that instructors should monitor the process of flow as students’ perceptions of skill and challenge change as time goes by. Instructional designers: pursue ‘technology transparency’Instructional designers: pursue ‘technology transparency’ –Technology interfaces should be transparent; otherwise, learners could attend more to using technology than to be reflective of learning (Gayol, 1998).