Instructor Impact on Differences in Teaching Presence Scores in Online Courses

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i3.5456

Keywords:

online learning, Community of Inquiry framework, teaching presence, higher education, direct instruction

Abstract

Using three interdependent constructs: social, cognitive, and teaching presence, the Community of Inquiry framework is a theoretical process model of online learning. Specifically, teaching presence contains three sub-elements—(a) facilitation of discourse, (b) direct instruction, and (c) instructional design and organization—that work together to create a collaborative-constructivist learning environment. Data from the Community of Inquiry survey from 160 learners in 11 course sections were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine whether statistically significant differences existed in teaching presence scores between sections of two online courses with identical course design taught by different instructors. Results showed significant differences between individual instructors’ teaching presence scores for each of the two courses. Specifically, significant differences were found in each sub-element of teaching presence except for one course’s instructional design and organization. Conceptual and methodological explanations of the findings are provided, and implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Author Biographies

Holly Fiock, Purdue University

Holly Fiock is an instructional designer in the Learning Design and Technology program, Curriculum and Instruction Department at Purdue University.

Yukiko Maeda, Purdue University

Dr. Yukiko Maeda is an Associate Professor in the Educational Psychology & Research Methodology program in the Department of Educational Studies at Purdue University.

Jennifer C. Richardson, Purdue University

Jennifer C. Richardson is a Professor in the Learning Design and Technology program in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at Purdue University.

References

Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2008). The development of a Community of Inquiry over time in an online course understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence. Online Learning Journal, 12(3), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v12i3.72

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conference context. Online Learning Journal, 5(2), 1–17. https://www.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875

Arbaugh, J. B. (2008). Does the Community of Inquiry framework predict outcomes in online MBA courses? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v9i2.490

Arbaugh, J.B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S.R., Garrison, D.R., Ice, P., Richardson, & Swan, K.P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3-4), 133-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003

Arbaugh, J. B., & Hwang, A. (2006). Does “teaching presence” exist in online MBA courses? The Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.12.001

Archer, W. (2010). Beyond online discussions: Extending the community of inquiry framework to entire courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 69-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.005

Argon, S. R. (2003). Creating social presence in online environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 100, 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.119

Blignaut, A. S., & Trollip, S. R. (2005). Between a rock and a hard place: Faculty participation in online classrooms. Education as Change, 9(2), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/16823200509487114

Boston, W., Díaz, S. R., Gibson, A. M., Ice, P., Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2010). An exploration of the relationship between indicators of the Community of Inquiry framework and retention in online programs. Online Learning Journal, 14(3), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v13i3.1657

Brower, H. H. (2003). On emulating classroom discussion in a distance-delivered OBHR course: Creating an online community. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(1), 22–36. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40214163

Caskurlu, S. (2018). Confirming the subdimensions of teaching, social, and cognitive presences: A construct validity study. The Internet and Higher Education, 39, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.05.002

Caskurlu, S., Maeda, Y., Richardson, J. C., & Lv, J. (2020). A meta-analysis addressing the relationship between teaching presence and students’ satisfaction and learning. Computers and Education, 157, 103966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103966

Castellanos-Reyes, D. (2020). 20 Years of the Community of Inquiry framework. TechTrends, 64, 557–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00491-7

Cole, A. W., Nicolini, K. M., Anderson, C., Bunton, T., Cherney, M. R., Fisher, V. C., Draeger, R., Jr., Featherston, M., Motel, L., Peck, B., & Allen, M. (2017). Student predisposition to instructor feedback and perceptions of teaching presence predict motivation toward online courses. Online Learning Journal, 21(4), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i4.966

Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S., & Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating online learning: Effective strategies for moderators. Atwood Publishing.

Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2004). Building trust in virtual teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 47(2), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.11045703

Epp, C. D., Phirangee, K., & Hewitt, J. (2017). Student actions and community in online courses: The roles played by course length and facilitation method. Online Learning, 21(4), 53–77. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i4.1269

Fiock, H. (2020). Designing a Community of Inquiry in online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 135–153. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.3985

Garrison, D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2013). The Community of Inquiry theoretical framework. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 104–119). Routledge.

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the Community of Inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001

Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133−148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2

Gurley, P. (2018). Educators’ preparation to teach, perceived teaching presence, and perceived teaching presence behaviors in blended and online learning environments. Online Learning Journal, 22(2), 197–220. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i2.1255

Hailey, D. E., Grant-Davie, K., & Hult, C. A. (2001). Online education horror stories worthy of Halloween: A short list of problems and solutions in online instruction. Computers and Composition, 18, 387–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/S8755-4615(01)00070-6

Hart, C. (2012). Factors associated with student persistence in an online program of study: A review of the literature. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 11, 19–42. http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/11.1.2.pdf

Harwell, M. R., Rubinstein, E. N., Hayes, W. S., & Olds, C. C. (1992). Summarizing Monte Carlo results in methodological research: The One- and two-factor fixed effects ANOVA cases. Journal of Educational Statistics, 17(4), 315–339. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986017004315

Huberty, C. J., & Morris, J. D. (1989). Multivariate analysis versus multiple univariate analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 302–308. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.2.302

Khan, A., & Rayner, G. D. (2003). Robustness to non-normality of common tests for the many-sample location problem. Advances in Decision Sciences, 7(4), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1155/S1173912603000178

Kozan, K., & Caskurlu, S. (2018). On the Nth presence for the Community of Inquiry framework. Computers and Education, 122, 104–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.010

Lowenthal, P. R., & Parscal, T. (2008). Teaching presence online facilitates meaningful learning. The Learning Curve, 3(4), 1–2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265376234_Teaching_Presence_Online_Facilitates_Meaningful_Learning

Morgan, T. (2011). Online classroom or community-in-the-making? Instructor conceptualizations and teaching presence in international online contexts. International Journal of E-Learning and Distance Education, 25(1), 1–13. http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/721/

Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace. Jossey-Bass.

Phirangee, K., Epp, C. D., & Hewitt, J. (2016). Exploring the relationships between facilitation methods, students’ sense of community and their online behaviours. Online Learning Journal, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i2.775

Phirangee, K., & Malec, A. (2017). Othering in online learning: An examination of social presence, identity, and sense of community. Distance Education, 38(2), 160–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2017.1322457

Privitera, G. (2017). Statistics for behavioral sciences (3 edition). Sage.

Puzziferro, M., & Shelton, K. (2008). A model for developing high-quality online courses: Integrating a systems approach with learning theory. Online Learning Journal, 12(3–4), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v12i3-4.1688

Richardson, J. C., Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Ice, P., Swan, K., & Garrison, D. R. (2010). Using the Community of Inquiry framework to inform effective instructional design. In L. Moller & J. Huett (Eds.), The next generation of distance education (pp. 97–125). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1785-9_7

Richardson, J. C., Ice, P., & Swan, K. (2009, August 4–7). Tips and techniques for integrating social, teaching, & cognitive presence into your courses [Poster presentation]. Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning, Madison, WI.

Rovai, A. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. The Internet and Higher Education, 1(1), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.001

Shea, P., Hayes, S., Vickers, J., Gozza-Cohen, M., Uzuner, S., Mehta, R., Valchova, A., & Rangan, P. (2010). A reexamination of the community of inquiry framework: Social network and content analysis. Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.002

Shea, P. J., Fredericksen E. E., Picket A. M., & Pelz, W. E. (2003). A preliminary investigation of “teaching presence” in the SUNY learning network. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Practice direction (Vol. 4., pp. 279–312). Sloan-C. http://hdl.handle.net/1802/2783

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

Shea, P. J., Pickett, A. M., & Pelz, W. E. (2003). A follow-up investigation of “teaching presence” in the SUNY Learning Network. Online Learning Journal, 7(2), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v7i2.1856

Shea, P., Vickers, J., & Hayes, S. (2010). Online instructional effort measured through the lens of teaching presence in the community of inquiry framework: A re-examination of measures and approach. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v11i3.915

Stewart, M. K. (2017). Communities of Inquiry: A heuristic for designing and assessing interactive learning activities in technology-mediated FYC. Computers and Composition, 45, 67–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2017.06.004

Swan, K., Garrison, D., & Richardson, J. C. (2009). A constructivist approach to online learning: The Community of Inquiry framework. In C.R. Payne (Ed.), Information technology and constructivism in higher education: Progressive learning frameworks (pp. 43–57). IGI Global. http://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-654-9.ch004

Swan, K., Shea, P., Richardson, J., Ice, P., Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2008). Validating a measurement tool of presence in online Communities of Inquiry. E-Mentor, 2(24), 1–12. http://www.e-mentor.edu.pl/_xml/wydania/24/543.pdf

Watson, S. L., Watson, W. R., Janakiraman, S., & Richardson, J. (2017). A team of instructor’s use of social presence, teaching presence, and attitudinal dissonance strategies: An animal behaviour and welfare MOOC. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18, 69–91. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i2.2663

York, C. S., & Richardson, J. C. (2012). Interpersonal interaction in online learning: Experienced online instructors’ perceptions of influencing factors. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 16(4), 83–98. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ982684.pdf

Downloads

Published

2021-08-23

How to Cite

Fiock, H., Maeda, Y. ., & Richardson, J. C. . (2021). Instructor Impact on Differences in Teaching Presence Scores in Online Courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(3), 55–76. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i3.5456

Issue

Vol. 22 No. 3 (2021)

Section

Research Articles

License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. The copyright of all content published in IRRODL is retained by the authors.

This copyright agreement and use license ensures, among other things, that an article will be as widely distributed as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific and/or scholarly archive.

You are free to

  • Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
  • Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms below:

  • No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.