Exploring
Community College Student
Perceptions of Online Learning:
Community of Inquiry
Terry Ann Morris, Ed.D.
Associate Professor
Harper College
tmorris@harpercollege.edu
Instructional Technology Council
ITC Webinar
March 15, 2011
2
Need for the Study
• Continued growth in higher education online
enrollments (Allen & Seaman, 2008)
• Lower course completion rates for community
college online students than for classroom
students. (Instructional Technology Council, 2008; Conklin, 2008)
• Online student lower completion needs to be
addressed to promote student success
• Qualitative study:
– Explore community college student
perceptions about online learning
3
Research Questions
How do community college students in an online
course perceive and describe their educational
experience in terms of:
•social presence?
•teaching presence?
•cognitive presence?
•course satisfaction?
4
Theoretical Framework
The Community of Inquiry Framework
– Social Presence
– Teaching Presence
– Cognitive Presence
(Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000)
“The fusion of the three elements
… provides an educational
environment conducive to the
collaborative construction
of knowledge –
“knowledge in action”
(Redmond & Lock, 2006, p. 271)
Image Source: http://communitiesofinquiry.com/model
5
Student Success Factors
Six categories of student
success factors:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Situational
Dispositional
Institutional
Technological
Social
Pedagogical
(Aragon & Johnson, 2008; Cross, 1992; Finnegan et al., 2008; Herbert, 2006; Holder, 2007; Liu
et al, 2007; Menchaca & Bekele, 2008; McGivney, 2009; Morris et al., 2005; Muilenberg &
Berge, 2005; Nash, 2005; Puzziferro, 2008; Rinear, 2003; Tello, 2007; Welsh, 2008).
Research Methodology
6
“Qualitative research seeks to understand the world from the
perspective of those living in it” (Hatch, 2002, p. 7)
• Qualitative Phenomenological Approach
– Setting: A large suburban community college in the Midwest
– Purposeful Sampling
• 144 potential questionnaire participants
• Online students in liberal arts, social science, information technology
– Procedure
•
•
•
•
Open-ended Online Questionnaire, n=25, 17% Response Rate
Open-ended Interviews, n=7
Course Artifact Review
Interpretative Analysis
Interpretive Data Analysis
7
• Five Emergent Themes
– communication/interaction
(social presence)
– instructor involvement/support (teaching presence)
– instructional design (teaching presence)
– learner engagement with content (cognitive presence)
– learner characteristics/needs (dispositional and situational factors)
Findings: Questionnaire Participants
o Gender
• 64% Female
• 36% Male
o Age
•
•
•
•
40% Age 18-24
24% Age 25-34
24% Age 34-44
12% Age 45-54
o Student Status
• 48% Full-time
• 48% Part-time
• 4% Decline to answer
o Course Discipline
• 64% Liberal Arts
• 20% Social Science
• 16% Information Technology
o Degree Objectives
• 64% Associate Degree
• 16% Decline to Answer
• 8% Transfer without a Degree
• 12% No Degree Objective
o Online Course Experience
• 8% None
• 32% One previous course
• 28% Two previous courses
• 32% Three or more
o Course Login Frequency
• 4% Once or twice per week
• 52% Three to six times per week
• 44% Every day
8
Findings: Questionnaire Participants
o Gender
• 64% Female
• 36% Male
o Age
•
•
•
•
40% Age 18-24
24% Age 25-34
24% Age 34-44
12% Age 45-54
o Student Status
• 48% Full-time
• 48% Part-time
• 4% Decline to answer
o Course Discipline
• 64% Liberal Arts
• 20% Social Science
• 16% Information Technology
o Degree Objectives
• 64% Associate Degree
• 16% Decline to Answer
• 8% Transfer without a Degree
• 12% No Degree Objective
o Online Course Experience
• 8% None
• 32% One previous course
• 28% Two previous courses
• 32% Three or more
o Course Login Frequency
• 4% Once or twice per week
• 52% Three to six times per week
• 44% Every day
• 100% Expected to successfully
complete their online course
9
RQ 1: Findings
10
How do community college students in an online course perceive and
describe their educational experience in terms of social presence?
– Student perception of social presence (76%)
– All the courses in the study provided a discussion board.
• 60% required discussion board participation.
• Four courses (80%) provided additional communication opportunities:
virtual classroom, Facebook group, or online chat
– Discussion board participation was a major source of engagement for students.
• Most engaged when communicating with other students in the discussion
board (65%)
• However: One student specifically registered for a course because it did not
have required discussion board participation.
Social presence was perceived differently by the participants, depending on their
own characteristics and needs as learners.
RQ 1: Student Voices
• Female, Age 45-54, Over three previous online courses
Web Development (Discussion Board required)
“I think throughout the course then you
develop a camaraderie
within the course and you sort of develop a friendship
with those students because they seem to
reply more frequently to maybe your posts
but you try to cover everybody
in the class to be inclusive.”
11
RQ 1: Student Voices (2)
• Male, Age 18-24,
No previous online courses
Geography
(Discussion Board optional)
“I mean there are a couple of us who respond more than others,
so just knowing that there’s other people who are looking to
respond is something cool. I feel like it helps me connect to the
material more. I definitely makes me enjoy it a little more. I’ve
always been a person who’s just enjoyed social interaction. So,
interacting with other people on topics that we have is kind of
interesting.“
12
RQ 1: Student Voices (3)
• Female, Age 35-44, One previous online course
Philosophy (Discussion Board required)
“Definitely interactions with the other students. I mean the reading
is very important, but on its own it would not be nearly as valuable.
You learn a lot more and the interaction with other students also
solidifies things. You may say, oh, wait, was
that in the reading, you know, ‘cause it’s a
lot to read. The teacher suggests that you
do go back and re-read, that it takes more
than once for this type of
reading. But, definitely, the
interaction is huge.”
13
RQ 2: Findings
How do community college students in an online course perceive and
describe their educational experience in terms of teaching presence?
– Student perception of teaching presence (92%)
– 64% described an action taken by their instructor as the most affirming or
helpful action taken during the online course
– The instructional design varied in use of discussions, tests, and assignments.
– 24% attributed success to aspects of instructional design, such as clear
expectations and an easy-to-follow course structure.
Issue: Facebook was not well-utilized by social science students due to lack of clear
purpose.
– 32% Noted the helpfulness of early non-graded feedback
review games, practice quizzes, instructor draft review, peer draft review
Teaching presence in the form of instructional design or instructor
involvement/support was perceived differently by the participants,
depending on their own characteristics and needs as learners.
14
RQ 2: Student Voices
• Female, Age 18-24,
Four or more previous
online courses
Web Development
Most helpful or affirming action:
Instructor Involvement
Survey Response:
“Teacher involvement in keeping in contact with students through
e-mail: sending reminders, posting things up on Blackboard, and
making sure that students know that the teacher is there to help.”
15
RQ 2: Student Voices (2)
• Male, Age 35-44, Two previous
online courses
Geography
Most beneficial aspect of the
course: Instructor notes and
course organization
“The instructor’s notes. The
instructor’s notes and his setup on
Blackboard is beyond thorough.
He’s so detailed and incredibly
thorough…”
16
RQ 2: Student Voices (3)
• Female, Age 35-44, Two previous online courses
Philosophy
Most helpful or affirming action: Instructor Review of Draft
Survey Response: “The teacher’s offer to receive draft versions of our paper
and return with comments to have a better final version. This was great.”
“... But I think it’s really beneficial to be able to get that feedback,
especially if you’re a little off the mark. Or, if you’re on the mark the
positive feedback is certainly can be just as valuable.
... really the point of the courses isn’t just to get a grade, it’s to
understand. It’s to be thought-provoking. It’s to learn. And I think that that
really is a model that encourages not whipping through a paper to get the
grade. It’s to help make sure that the student is really understanding and
really thinking. You know, really, that’s one biggest parts of philosophy,
thinking.”
17
RQ 3: Findings
How do community college students in an online course perceive and
describe their educational experience in terms of cognitive presence?
–
Student perception of cognitive presence (68%)
–
Most beneficial course activities:
• discussion board participation (28%)
• practice quizzes (28%)
• reading instructor notes (28%)
• completing lab activities (14%)
–
86% of interview participants indicated that they learned more through
independent study than from the instructor or from other students.
–
Engagement with content while preparing to post or reply on the
discussion board.
–
Cognitive presence was perceived differently by participants, depending
on their own characteristics and needs as learners.
18
RQ 3: Student Voices
•Male, Age 18-24
No previous online courses
Geography
Engaged in independent learning:
“The fact that I’m learning the material for the first time as an independent.
It’s very self-fulfilling being able to study on an online course and enjoy the
material without someone lecturing.”
19
RQ 3: Student Voices (2)
• Female, Age 35-44, Two previous online courses
Philosophy
Survey Response: “I knew the course would be thought-provoking,
it’s turned out to be more exciting and rewarding than anticipated. … The
work isn’t difficult, it just requires time for reading and for reflection and for
consideration to answer one of the discussion boards.”
“Although on the one hand it would be neat to be engaged in real time
discussion, I do really like that you can read somebody’s posting and go
back and re-read it. And then you see somebody’s response and you can
go back and re-read the initial one. You really get a full sense, a concrete
sense, especially after you think about things or read additional material,
you’d say, oh, wow, wait, somebody said something about that – you can
go back to it and I do find a lot of value in that. ”
20
RQ 4: Findings
How do community college students in an online course perceive and
describe their educational experience in terms of course satisfaction?
– Satisfied with their online course experience (80%)
– All expected to successfully complete their online course.
– Reasons for satisfaction and dissatisfaction varied:
• Individual Learner Characteristics (28%)
self-efficacy, enjoyment of learning, self-improvement, convenience, and
meeting expectations.
• Instructional design was indicated both as positively (20%) and negatively (8%)
influencing course satisfaction.
• Communication/interaction (12%) and instructor involvement/support (12%)
also positively contributed to course satisfaction
Satisfaction with the course was perceived differently by the study
participants, depending on their own characteristics and needs as
learners.
21
RQ 4: Student Voices
• Female, Age 18-24, One previous online course
English
Survey Response:
“I am satisfied with this course because it helped me improve my writing
skills.”
• Male, Age 35-44, No previous online courses
Web Development
Survey Response:
“So far, I am enjoying it. The instructor’s engagement with us on the
discussion boards contributes heavily to my enjoyment.”
• Female, Age 45-54, Over three previous online courses
Web Development
Survey Response:
“I am satisfied with the course I am currently enrolled in because of my own
self-expectations, goals, and accomplishments.”
22
RQ 4: Student Voices (2)
• Male, Age 18-24
• No previous online courses
Geography
“I’d say it’s gone very well. I feel like everything’s good as-is.
He’s got it really well laid out and, as I said, if you want to get to
really know the material it’s there for you. I think maybe if there
were more discussion board requirements than there is then
you’d get more social interaction between the kids in the class.”
23
Limitations
• Due to the design of the qualitative study the
number of participants was small
• Participants Characteristics:
– 100% of the participants
expected successful completion
of the online course
– Most participants were experienced online learners
• Due to student privacy issues there was no
verification that student success goals were met.
24
Conclusions
Perceived as beneficial to online community college students:
– Regular interaction and communication
– Prompt and helpful instructor support and response
– Clearly written and well-organized course materials
– Non-graded formative assessment
– Opportunities for collaborative work including peer review
– Technology use tied to learning outcomes
– Variety of course activities and materials to support varied
learning preferences and individual needs
Dispositional and situational factors play a role in the satisfaction
and success of online students.
25
Recommendations for
Practice and Future Research
• Design online courses with a variety of learning activities
to provide for individual learner characteristics,
preferences, and goals, including:
– mandatory discussion board participation
– formative assessments
– collaborative peer review
• When choosing to incorporate new technologies,
purposefully utilize activities which support learning
outcomes and are of perceivable benefit to students .
• Place a priority on providing prompt, supportive
responses to online students.
• Further research in this area may explore larger
populations or utilized mixed methods.
26
Questions or
Comments?
Contact Information:
Dr. Terry Ann Morris
tmorris@harpercollege.edu
http://terrymorris.net
27
References
Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the course: Online education in the United States. Retrieved April 17, 2008, from Sloan-C Web site:
http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/staying_the_course.pdf
Aragon, S.R., & Johnson, E.S. (2008). Factors influencing completion and noncompletion of community college online courses. The American Journal of Distance Education,
22(3), 246-158.
Conklin, E. (2008). Student academic achievement in online and traditional courses at a New York State community college. Retrieved from ProQuest database. (AAT 3312893)
Cross, K.P. (1992). Adults as learners: Increasing participation and facilitating learning. San Francisco: JosseyBass. (Original work published 1981)
Finnegan, C., Morris, L.V., & Lee, K. (2008). Differences by course discipline on student behavior, persistence, and achievement in online courses of undergraduate general
education. Journal of College Student Retention, 10(1), 39-54.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education,
2(2-3), 87-105.
Herbert, M. (2006). Staying the course: A study in online student satisfaction and retention. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 9(4).
Holder, B. (2007). An investigation of hope, academics, environment, and motivation as predictors of persistence in higher education online programs. The Internet and Higher
Education, 10(4), 245-260.
Instructional Technology Council. (2009). 2008 distance education survey results: Tracking the impact of e-learning at community colleges. Washington, D.C.:
Author.
McGivney, R. J. (2009). Adult student persistence in online education: Developing a model to understand the factors that affect adult student persistence in a course. Retrieved
from ProQuest database. (AAT 3312893)
Menchaca, M.P., & Bekele, T.A. (2008). Learner and instructor identified success factors in distance education. Distance Education, 29(3), 231-248.
Morris, T. A. (2009). Anytime/anywhere online learning: Does it remove barriers for adult learners. In T. Kidd (Ed.), Online education and adult learning: New frontiers for
teaching practices. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Morris, L.V., Finnegan, C., & Wu, S. (2005). Tracking student behavior, persistence, and achievement in online course. The Internet and Higher Education. 8(3), 221-231.
Muilenburg, L. Y., & Berge, Z. L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. Distance Education, 26(1), 29-48.
Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online technologies self-efficacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of final grade and satisfaction in college-level online courses. The American
Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 72-89.
Redmond, P., & Lock, J.V. (2006). A flexible framework for online collaborative learning. The Internet and Higher Education. 9(4), 267-276.
Rinear, K. (2003). How to deliver integrated support to your students. Distance Education Report, 7(21), 3-6.
Tello, S. F. (2007). An analysis of student persistence in online education. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 3(3), 47-62.
Welsh, J.B. (2007). Identifying factors that predict student success in a community college online distance learning course. Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text
28
database. (AAT 3300982)