The present research has been conducted since the implementation of interuniversity Master’s programme “Educational treatment of diversity” carried out in four universities in 2008. It is the continuation of the research “Effectiveness of interactive e-learning organization and quality assurance in European interuniversity master studies” (Birzina et. al., 2009)

The research objectives are to analyze which opportunities of using self-organized learning communicative environment improve students’ competences and learning outcomes and how they change in the three dimensions of the reality: study experience, self-feeling and social recognition (Reich, 2005).

The research questions:

- how do interactive self-organized e-learning studies promote the development of students’ competences and learning outcomes,

- how do they change in the three dimensions of the reality: study experience, self-feeling and social recognition, thus forming an appropriate communication culture?

With e-learning it has become more topical to research the process of e-communication. In scientific literature studies on computer-mediated communication (CMC) have a dominating role, focusing rather on the conception of the technologies as a tool than emphasizing the importance of constructed environment. Communication in e-environment is closely connected with human experience, including understanding how people behave in creating, exchanging, and interpreting messages. As "metacommunication", which includes intrapersonal communication, interpersonal communication, group communication (Aitken, et al, 2008), is observed in study process, the constructivistic approach to learning and cooperation system (Maslo, 2006) becomes essential.

The conceptual framework of the present research is based on:

- systemic-constructivistic learning (Reich, 2005), where the individual’s perception of the reality, taking into consideration the three dimensions: experience, self-feeling and social recognition are of great importance. These dimensions manifest that different people may have their desires and expectations, motivation and physical status, illnesses and physical symptoms, which explain the variety of learners’ expectations from the study process.

- connectivism or network learning (Siemens, 2004), in which effective knowledge management system not only provides a vehicle to share information, but also builds a community of learners.

- learning as social practice (Greeno et all, 1996; Mayes & Freitas, 2004). Learning networks are self-organizing (Siemens, 2005), and very different individuals take part in them which may cause not always foreseen situations in learning process. That is why study process can be considered as well from the contextual perspective (learning as social practice) (Greeno, Collins & Resnick, 1996). It also focuses on learning outcomes that are dependent upon the establishment of collaborative learning outcomes, and on learning relationships with peers.

- teaching and learning transaction model (Garrison et al., 2000, 2005), elaborated in the text-based communication environment. The model assumes that in e-community, learning occurs through the interaction of three core components: cognitive presence, teaching presence, and social presence (Garrison et al., 2000). Only the theoretical ideas on the social presence component are considered in this research.

1. Aitken, J. E., Shedletsky, L. J. (2008). Internet and Theory of Meaning-Making for Communication Harmony China Environment Research, 4(4).2. Altheide, D. & Johnson, J. (1994). Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (eds). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 485-499.3. Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. (2004). Theory and Practice of Online Learning. Athabasca University. 4. Birzina, R., Kalnina D., Janevica J. & Cernova, E. (2009) Effectiveness of interactive e-learning organization and quality assurance in European interuniversity master studies. 16 [2010.16.01] Accessible from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/186734.pdf5. Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7(2), 161-86.6. Dockrell, W.B., & Hamilton, D. (1983). Nuevas Reflexiones sobre la Investigación Educativa. Madrid Editorial Narcea. 18.7. Garrison, D R & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer.8. Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: Interaction is Not Enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133.9. Greeno, J.G., Collins, A.M. & Resnick, L. (1996) Cognition and Learning. In D.C. Berliner & R.C. Calfee (Eds) Handbook of Educational Psychology, NY: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.10. Mayring, P., Huber, G.L. and Gurtler, L. (Eds). (2007). Mixed Methodology in Psychological Research. Sense Publishers.11. Maslo, I. (Eds). (2006). No zināšanām uz kompetentu darbību. Rīga: LU Akadēmiskais apgāds. 186.12. Reich, K. (2005). Systematisch-konstruktivistische Pädagogik – Einführung in Grundlagen einer interaktionalistisch-konstruktivistischen Pädagogik. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz Verlag.13. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: Learning as network-creation.[2008.10.11.] Accessible from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/networks.html14. Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.15. Taylor, W. (eds.). (1973). Research perspectives in Education. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 217