Student Actions and Community in Online Courses: The Roles Played By Course Length and Facilitation Method
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i4.1269Keywords:
Online Learning Environment, Community,Abstract
Fostering a strong sense of community among students within online courses is essential to supporting their learning experience. However, there is little consensus about how different facilitation methods influence students’ sense of community or behaviours. This lack of understanding means instructors do not have the information they need to select an appropriate facilitation method when teaching online. This challenge is further complicated by a poor sense of how community building is influenced by the length of an online course. To better understand the relationship between these factors, we explored students’ sense of community across four graduate-level online courses. Two of these courses employed an instructor-led form of facilitation and two employed a peer-led form of facilitation. For each facilitation method, one course lasted an entire term (12 weeks) and the other lasted half a term (6 weeks). This two-by-two between-subjects design enabled the study of both variables and possible interaction effects. The findings revealed students in instructor-facilitated courses experienced a stronger sense of community. Longer courses were also associated with a stronger sense of community, although the relationship was weaker than that of facilitation. No interaction effects were detected between facilitation method and course length. Follow-up analyses examined the relationship between facilitation style, course length, and a set of twelve student behaviors (e.g., note writing, note reading, and replying). The results revealed that both facilitation style and course length were associated with differences in the length of students’ notes, the grade level of their text, and the frequency of their replies. Collectively, these findings offer evidence that both facilitation style and course length are related to students’ sense of community and the behaviors they exhibit online.
References
Akyol, Z., Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). The impact of course duration on the development of a community of inquiry. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(3), 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820902809147
Anastasi, J.S. (2007). Full semester and abbreviated summer courses: An evaluation of student performance. Teaching of Psychology, 34(1), 19-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280709336643
Arend, B. (2009). Encouraging Critical Thinking in Online Threaded Discussions. The Journal of Educators Online, 6(1), 1-23.
Austin, A.M. & Gustafson, L. (2006). Impact of Course Length on Student Learning. The Journal of Economics and Finance Education, 5(1), 26-37.
Authors (2016a). Authors. In American Educational Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting. Washington, D.C.: AERA.
Authors (2016b). Authors Online Learning Journal. Author DOI
Authors (2016). Authors New York: Elsevier. Author DOI
Author (2005). Author. Journal of the Learning Sciences. Author DOI
Author. (2007). Author. Computers & Education. Author DOI
Baran, E., & Correia, A-P. (2009). Student-led facilitation strategies in online discussions. Distance Education, 30(3), 339–361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587910903236510
Belcher, A., Hall, B., Kelley, K., & Pressey, K. (2015). An analysis of faculty promotion of critical thinking and peer interaction within threaded discussions. Online Learning, 19 (4), 37–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.544
Brooks, C., Panesar, R., & Greer, J. (2006). Awareness and Collaboration in the iHelp Courses Content Management System. In W. Nejdl & K. Tochtermann (Eds.), Innovative Approaches for Learning and Knowledge Sharing (pp. 34–44). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11876663_5
Brown, R. E. (2001). The process of community-building in distance learning classes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 18-35.
Bull, S., Greer, J. E., McCalla, G. I., & Kettel, L. (2001). Help-seeking in an asynchronous help forum. In Proceedings of Workshop on Help Provision and Help Seeking in Interactive Learning Environments, International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED). San Antonio, TX, USA. Retrieved from http://users.sussex.ac.uk/~bend/aied2001/bull.pdf
Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2010). Asynchronous online discussion: instructor facilitation vs. peer facilitation. In C.H. Steel, M.J. Keppell, P. Gerbic & S. Housego (Eds.), Curriculum, technology & transformation for an unknown future. Proceedings ASCILITE. Sydney, Australia (pp.179-183). Retrieved on July 25, 2017 from https://repository.nie.edu.sg/bitstream/10497/4658/1/ChuengWS_HewKF_2010_a.pdf
Conrad, D. (2005). Building and maintaining community in cohort-based online learning. Journal of Distance Education, 20(1), 1–20.
Correia, A. P., & Baran, E. (2010). Lessons learned on facilitating asynchronous discussions for online learning. Educação, Formação & Tecnologias-ISSN 1646-933X, 3(1), 59-67.
Correia, A. P., & Davis, N. E. (2007). The design of collaboration in the virtual classroom. In M. Simonson (Ed.), 30th Annual Proceedings of Selected Papers on the Practice of Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 84–87). Bloomington: Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Retrieved on July 25, 2017 from http://www.aect.org/pdf/proceedings07/2007I/07_12.pdf
Daniel, E. L. 2000. A Review of Time-Shortened Courses across Disciplines. College Student Journal 34(2), 298-306.
Davie, L. (1988). Facilitating adult learning through computer-mediated distance education. Journal of Distance Education 3(2), 55-69.
Drouin, M. A. (2008). The relationship between students’ perceived sense of community and satisfaction, achievement, and retention in an online course. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9, 267–284.
Dueber, B., & Misanchuk, M. (2001). Sense of community in a distance education course. In Mid-South Instructional Technology Conference (pp. 1-18).
Ferguson, J. M., & DeFelice, A. E. (2010). Length of online course and student satisfaction, perceived learning, and academic performance. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 11(2), 73-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v11i2.772
Fowler, F. J. (2009). Survey research methods (4th ed). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Ghadirian, H., & Ayub, A. F. M. (2017). Peer moderation of asynchronous online discussions: An exploratory study of peer e-moderating behaviour. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2882
Guzdial, M. (1997). Information ecology of collaborations in educational settings: Influence of tool. In R. Hall, N. Miyake, & N. Enyedy (Eds.), In Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 83-90). Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Harting, K., & Erthal, M. J. (2005). History of distance learning. Information Technology Learning and Performance Journal, 23(1), 35.
Haythornthwaite, C., Kazmer, M. M., Robins, J., & Shoemaker, S. (2006). Community Development Among Distance Learners: Temporal and Technological Dimensions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1), 0–0. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2000.tb00114.x
Hew, K. F. (2015). Student perceptions of peer versus instructor facilitation of asynchronous online discussions: further findings from three cases. Instructional Science, 43(1), 19-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9329-2
Hirshhorn, R. (2011). Assessing the economic impact of copyright reform in the area of technology-enhanced learning. Retrieved from http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ippd-dppi.nsf/eng/h_ip01074.html
Horspool, A., & Lange, C. (2012). Applying the scholarship of teaching and learning: student perceptions, behaviours and success online and face-to-face. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(1), 73-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.496532
Hulon, S. (2013). Face-to-face discussions versus online threaded discussions: Can we have the best of both worlds? In R. McBride & M. Searson (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 577-582). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
MacKnight, C. B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussion. Educause Quarterly, 4, 38−41
Nully, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What can be done? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602930701293231
Poole, D.M. (2000). Student participation in a discussion-oriented online course: A case study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 162 – 177
Richardson, V. (2003). Constructive Pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1623- 1640
Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.001
Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2002). Using peer teams to lead online discussions. Journal of interactive media in education, 2002(1). Retrieved on July 25, 2017 from http://jime.open.ac.uk/articles/10.5334/2002-1/
Rovai, A. P. (2002a). Building sense of community at a distance. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1), 1-16
Rovai, A. P. (2002b). Development of an instrument to measure classroom community. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(3), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00102-1
Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. The Internet and Higher Education 10, 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.001
Seamon, M. (2004). Short and long-term differences in instructional effectiveness between intensive and semester-length courses. Teachers College Record, 106(4), 852-874.
Scott, P. A. 2003. Attributes of High-Quality Intensive Courses. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2003(97), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.86
Shackelford, J. L., & Maxwell, M. (2012). Sense of community in graduate online education: Contribution of learner to learner interaction. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 13(4), 228-249.
Shea, P., Li, C. S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.06.005
Song, L., & McNary, S.W. (2011). Understanding students’ online interaction: Analysis of discussion board postings. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 19(1), 1-14.
Swan, K. (2004). Learning online: current research on issues of interface, teaching presence and learner characteristics. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds) Elements of Quality Online Education, Into the Mainstream. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education, 63-79.
Thompson, T. L., & MacDonald, C. J. (2005). Community building, emergent design and expecting the unexpected: Creating a quality elearning experience. Internet and Higher Education, 8(3), 233−249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.06.004
Vassileva, J., Deters, R., Greer, J., McCalla, G., Bull, S., & Kettel, L. (2001). Lessons Learned in Deploying a Multi-Agent Learning Support System: The I-Help Experience. In J. D. Moore, C. L. Redfield, & W. L. Johnson (Eds.), International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) (pp. 410–421). San Antonio, TX, USA: IOS Press. Retrieved from http://publicat.bham.ac.uk/7565/
Vassileva, J., McCalla, G. I., & Greer, J. E. (2016). From Small Seeds Grow Fruitful Trees: How the PHelpS Peer Help System Stimulated a Diverse and Innovative Research Agenda over 15 Years. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(1), 431–447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0073-9
West, R. E. (2010). A student’s guide to strengthening an online community. TechTrends, 54(5), 69
Wise, A. F., & Chiu, M. M. (2011). Analyzing temporal patterns of knowledge construction in a role-based online discussion. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6, 445–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9120-1
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
