Understanding the learning context in shaping the relational experience in online recovery college courses: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose In learning context, interaction among learners is a fundamental mechanism of action that contributes to learning, a principle exemplified by Recovery Colleges (RCs). RCs offers universal access to mental health, well-being and recovery courses that focus on the nature of social interactions as a central mechanism of action. During the pandemic, some RCs had to switch from face-to-face to online courses, which made it more difficult to maintain the quality of social interactions between learners and trainers. This study aims to describe the relationships experienced by learners in online Recovery College (RC) courses and to identify the contextual elements that contribute to connectedness among them. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative study was conducted using exploratory focus groups and individual interviews with 26 participants. The data were analyzed using an inductive thematic approach. The elements of the learning context that contribute to connectedness among learners have been schematized. Findings The first theme that emerged from the analysis concerns the study participants’ relational experiences describing the relationships experienced in the course, the postures they adopted and the benefits they gained. In addition, the elements of the learning context that contribute to connectedness are the climate, the course format, the trainers’ and learners’ influence and the RC principles and values. Research limitations/implications The small sample size constrains the diversity of perspectives captured, and thus, the findings should be interpreted with caution. The study may not fully encompass the range of negative or dissatisfying experiences that learners could encounter. The findings may also be influenced by social desirability bias. Finally, this study would have benefited from the involvement of a broader range of collaborators with diverse types of knowledge throughout the research process. Practical implications This study provides practical advice for trainers wishing to implement elements that promote connectivity between learners in online course. Key strategies include clearly outlining RC values and principles from the outset, designing activities that promote discussion and consistently modeling inclusive, supportive, authentic behaviors. The trainers have a central role in cultivating a positive and connected online learning environment. Social implications Since the pandemic, many training initiatives, such as RC, have changed their operations and transitioned online. While online courses can be convenient, flexible and accessible, they also present several challenges. These findings can benefit any online training initiative related to mental health and recovery. The elements of the learning context that contribute to connectedness among learners. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first published study to focus exclusively on the relationships among learners in online RC courses and the contextual elements that influence these relationships.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".