Abstracts
Abstract
The goal of this single-phase and convergent mixed methods study was to compare the differences in the effectiveness of the Community of Inquiry (CoI) presences of a community college blended block instructional model with the in-person counterpart. Data were gathered from the Community of Inquiry Survey, Blackboard LMS reports, and course evaluation surveys. The results indicate that students had a better overall experience with the blended course. The blended block model provided flexibility while achieving course goals. Further, findings reveal differences in all three CoI presences between the two course formats with more student awareness of the presences in the in-person course.
Keywords:
- blended learning,
- community college,
- community of inquiry,
- teaching presence,
- social presence,
- cognitive presence,
- mixed methods
Résumé
L'objectif de cette étude utilisant des méthodes mixtes convergentes et en une seule phase était de comparer les différences dans l'efficacité des présences de la communauté d'enquête (CE) d'un modèle d'enseignement hybride en blocs d'un collège communautaire avec son homologue dans la modalité présentielle. Les données ont été recueillies à partir d’un sondage sur la communauté d'enquête, des rapports tirés du système de gestion de l’apprentissage Blackboard et des sondages d'évaluation des cours. Les résultats indiquent que les étudiants ont eu une meilleure expérience globale avec le cours hybride. Le modèle de blocs hybrides offrait de la flexibilité tout en atteignant les objectifs du cours. De plus, les résultats révèlent des différences dans les trois présences de la CE entre les deux modalités de cours, les étudiants étant plus conscients des présences dans le cours en présentiel.
Mots-clés :
- apprentissage hybride,
- collège communautaire,
- communauté d’enquête,
- présence pédagogique,
- présence sociale,
- présence cognitive,
- méthodes mixtes
Appendices
Bibliography
- Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teacher presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1–17.
- Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. Internet and Higher Education, 11, 133–136. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.457.2233&rep=rep1&type=pdf
- Arsenijevic, J., Belousova, A., Tushnove, Y., Grosseck, G., & Živkov, A. M. (2022). The quality of online higher education teaching during the Covid-19 pandemic. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering & Education, 10(1), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2022-10-1-47-55
- Bates, T. (2019). Teaching in a digital age (2nd ed.). Pressbooks. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/teachinginadigitalagev2/
- Bhowmick, T. (2006). Building an exploratory visual analysis tool for qualitative researchers. In Proceedings of AutoCarto 2006. Cartography and Geographic Information Society. http://www.cartogis.org/docs/proceedings/2006/bhowmick.pdf
- Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2005). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. Pfeiffer.
- Bozkurt, A., Akgun-Ozbek, E., Yilmazel, S., Erdogdu, E., Ucar, H., Guler, E., Sezgin, S., Karadeniz, A., Sen-Ersoy, N., Goksel-Canbek, N., Dincer, G. D., Ari, S., & Aydin, C. H. (2015). Trends in distance education research: A content analysis of journals 2009–2013. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i1.1953
- Broadbent, J. (2017). Comparing online and blended learner’s self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.004
- Broadbent, J., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2018). Profiles in self-regulated learning and their correlates for online and blended learning students. Educational Technology Research & Development, 66(6), 1435–1455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9595-9
- Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
- Castellanos-Reyes, D. (2020). 20 years of the Community of Inquiry framework. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 64(4), 557–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00491-7
- Cavanaugh, J. K., & Jacquemin, S. J. (2015). A large sample comparison of grade-based student learning outcomes in online vs. face-to-face courses. Online Learning, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i2.454
- Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles of good practice in undergraduate education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39(7), 2–6. https://aahea.org/articles/sevenprinciples1987.htm
- Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2010). The role of learner in an online community of inquiry: Instructor support for first-time online learners. In N. Karacapilidis (Ed.), Web-based learning solutions for communities of practice: Developing virtual environments for social and pedagogical advancement (pp. 167–184). Information Science Reference.
- Cleveland-Innes, M., & Wilton, D. (2018). Guide to blended learning. Commonwealth of Learning. http://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/3095
- Community of Inquiry. (n.d.). Community of Inquiry survey. https://coi.athabascau.ca/coi-model/coi-survey/
- Cornelius, S., Calder, C., & Mtika, P. (2019). Understanding learner engagement on a blended course including a MOOC. Research in Learning Technology, 27, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v27.2097
- Courduff, J., Lee, H., & Cannaday, J. (2021). The impact and interrelationship of teaching, cognitive, and social presence in face-to-face, blended, and online masters courses. Distance Learning, 18(1), 1–12.
- Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage publications.
- Daigle, D. T., & Stuvland, A. (2021). Teaching political science research methods across delivery modalities: Comparing outcomes between face-to-face and distance-hybrid courses. Journal of Political Science Education, 17, 380–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2020.1760105
- Drachsler, H., & Kirschner, P. A. (2012). Learner characteristics. In Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 1743–1745). Springer.
- Fryer, L. K., & Bovee, H. N. (2018). Staying motivated to e-learn: Person- and variable-centred perspectives on the longitudinal risks and support. Computers & Education, 120, 227–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.01.006
- Garrison, D. R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Online Learning Journal, 11(1), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v11i1.1737
- Garrison, D. R. (2017). E-learning in the 21st century: A community of inquiry framework for research and practice (3rd ed.). Routledge/Taylor and Francis.
- 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, 87−105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
- Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T, & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071
- Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002
- Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
- Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles and guidelines. Jossey-Bass.
- Groen, J., Ghani, S., Germain-Rutherford, A., & Taylor, M. (2020). Institutional adoption of blended learning: Analysis of an initiative in action. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(3), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2020.3.8288
- Honig, C. A., & Salmon, D. (2021). Learner presence matters: A learner-centered exploration into the Community of Inquiry framework. Online Learning, 25(2), 95–119.
- Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2011). The rise of K-12 blended learning. Innosight Institute, 5(1), 1-17. https://www.inacol.org/resource/the-rise-of-k-12-blended-learning/
- Jafar, S., & Sitther, V. (2021). Comparison of student outcomes and evaluations in hybrid versus face-to-face anatomy and physiology I courses. Journal of College Science Teaching, 51(1), 58–66. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27133141
- Kim, G., & Gurvitch, R. (2020). Online education research adopting the Community of Inquiry framework: A systematic review. Quest, 72(4), 395-409. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2020.1761843
- Kintu, M. J., Zhu, C., & Kagambe, E. (2017). Blended learning effectiveness: The relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4
- Krzyszkowska, K., & Mavrommati, M. (2020). Applying the Community of Inquiry e-learning model to improve the learning design of an online course for in-service teachers in Norway. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 18(6), 462–475. https://doi.org/10.34190/JEL.18.6.001
- Kuo, Y. C., Eastmond, J. N., Bennett, L. J., & Schroder, K. E. E. (2009). Student perceptions of interactions and course satisfaction in a blended learning environment. In G. Siemens & C. Fulford (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2009—World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 4372–4380). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
- Lacaste, A. V., Cheng, M.-M., & Chuang, H.-H. (2022). Blended and collaborative learning: Case of a multicultural graduate classroom in Taiwan. PLoS ONE, 17(4), Article e0267692. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267692
- Larson, D. K., & Sung, C.-H. (2009). Comparing student performance: Online versus blended versus face-to-face. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v13i1.1675
- le Roux, I., & Nagel, L. (2018). Seeking the best blend for deep learning in a flipped classroom – Viewing student perceptions through the Community of Inquiry lens. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15, Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0098-x
- Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 557–584. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-19518-005
- Lumivero. (2022). NVivo (Version 12) [Computer software]. https://lumivero.com/products/nvivo/
- Martin, F., Wu, T., Wan, L., & Xie, K. (2022). A meta-analysis on the Community of Inquiry presences and learning outcomes in online and blended learning environments. Online Learning, 26(1), 325–359. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.2604.
- McKenna, K., Gupta, K., Kaiser, L., Lopes, T., & Zarestky, J. (2020). Blended learning: Balancing the best of both worlds for adult learners. Adult Learning, 31(4), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159519891997
- McNaught, C., & Lam, P. (2010). Using Wordle as a supplementary research tool. Qualitative Report, 15, 630–643.
- Meda, L., & ElSayary, A. (2021). Establishing social, cognitive and teacher presences during emergency remote teaching: Reflections of certified online instructors in the United Arab Emirates. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11073
- Melton, B. F., Bland, H. W., & Chopak-Foss, J. (2009). Achievement and satisfaction in blended learning versus traditional general health course designs. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(1), Article 26. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2009.030126
- Meyer, K. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 55–65.
- Owston, R., York, D., & Murtha, S. (2013). Student perception and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. Internet and Higher Education, 18, 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.003
- Parrish, C. W., Guffey, S. K., Williams, D. S., Estis, J. M., & Lewis, D. (2021). Fostering cognitive presence, social presence and teaching presence with integrated online–team-based learning. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 65, 473–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00598-5
- Patwardhan, V., Rao, S., Thirugnanasambantham, & Prabhu, N. (2020). Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework and course design as predictors of satisfaction in emergency remote teaching: Perspectives of hospitality management students. Journal of E-Learning & Knowledge Society, 16(4), 94–103. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135315
- Raes, A., Detienne, L., Windey, I., & Depaepe, F. (2020). A systematic literature review on synchronous hybrid learning: Gaps identified. Learning Environments Research, 23, 269–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09303-z
- Redstone, A. E., Stefaniak, J. E., & Luo, T. (2018). Measuring presence: A review of research using the Community of Inquiry instrument. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 19(2), 27–36.
- Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v5i2.192
- Shand, K., Farrelly, S. G., & Costa, V. (2016). Principles of course redesign: A model for blended learning. In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of 2016 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 378–389). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/172311/
- Smith, N. V. (2013). Face-to-face vs. blended learning: Effects on secondary students’ perceptions and performance. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 89, 79–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.813
- Stenbom, S. (2018). A systematic review of the Community of Inquiry survey. The Internet and Higher Education, 39, 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.06.001
- Stewart, M. K., Hilliard, L., Stillman-Webb, N., & Cunningham, J. M. (2021). The Community of Inquiry in writing studies survey: Interpreting social presence in disciplinary contexts. Online Learning, 25(2), 73–94.
- Swan, K. P., Richardson, J. C., 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, 24(2), 1–12. https://e-mentor.edu.pl/_xml/wydania/24/543.pdf
- Taliaferro, S. L., & Harger, B. L. (2022). Comparison of student satisfaction, perceived learning and outcome performance: Blended instruction versus classroom instruction. Journal of Chiropractic Education, 36(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.7899/JCE-19-33
- Tang, M., & Byrne, R. (2007). Regular versus online versus blended: A qualitative description of the advantages of the electronic modes and a quantitative evaluation. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(2), 257–266. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ754635
- Taylor, M., Vaughan, N., Ghani, S. K., Atas, S., & Fairbrother, M. (2018). Looking back and looking forward: A glimpse of blended learning in higher education from 2007–2017. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 9(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAVET.2018010101
- Tseng, H. W., & Walsh, E. J., Jr. (2015). Blended vs. traditional course delivery: Comparing students’ motivation, learning outcomes, and preferences. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 17(1). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hung_Tseng2/publication/301204339_Blended_vs_Traditional_Course_Delivery_Comparing_Students'_Motivation_Learning_Outcomes_and_Preferences_Quarterly_Review_of_Distance_Education_171/links/57bdac2d08ae882481a51517.pdf
- Vaughan, N. D. (2007). Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(1), 81–94. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255567084_Perspectives_on_Blended_Learning_in_Higher_Education
- Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. Athabasca University Press.
- Vaughan, N. D., & Garrison, D. R. (2005). Creating cognitive presence in a blended faculty development community. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.11.001
- Vo, H. M., Zhu, C., & Diep, N. A. (2017). The effect of blended learning on student performance at course-level in higher education: A meta-analysis. Studies in Education Evaluation, 53, 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.01.002
- Wandler, J., & Imbriale, W. (2017). Promoting undergraduate student self-regulation in online learning environments. Online Learning 21(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i2.881
- Yin, B., & Yuan, C.-H. (2022). Detecting latent topics and trends in blended learning using LDA topic modeling. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 12689–12712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11118-0
- Young, J. R. (2002, March 22). “Hybrid” teaching seeks to end the divide between traditional and online instruction. The Chronicle of Higher Education, A33.
- Zydney, J. M., McKimmy, P., Lindberg, R., & Schmidt, M. (2019). Here or there instruction: Lessons learned in implementing innovative approaches to blended synchronous learning. TechTrends, 63, 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0344-z