61%;“.

23:33:. , , .
:50 $33!. : 5);"

‘ ' . mﬁggggi

; v V .x'.

‘2' P’é'ﬁﬁzﬁi‘ri‘i

H... .31.“,
‘f e

5 11,!355l‘i5

f’

n...

i"
.

>‘r
9.
ﬁ

if; s 1
M. 2%.): #54"?

‘4. £2"«“.§:;‘5%1¥:5 I.
-':§2;3}3m ‘1'

h}.

 

._ , t.
gnu. .7 x " ‘-
Wm: .. -. -.,
{.‘m-uﬁgﬁu” ‘V

a

up...

”"s
cm

wrf‘é“
on v

- HM.

. ,

any,
_ ;

< .«h

 

mm

205%

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

LEARNER CONTROL IN UNDERGRADUATE ONLINE
LEARNING: INSTRUCTOR PERSPECTIVES

presented by

Simone Jurate Jonaitis

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for the

Doctoral degree in Community, Agriculture,
Recreation and Resource

 

 

Studies
)2wa ‘

\mjor Professor’s Signature
’4 1 z 7 I H
Date

MSU is an afﬁrmative-action, equal-opportunity employer

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.
DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE
101909 ww°4mw ( A
" ﬁg 2:11-13
NOV 1 9 2009 7.}
SI;
111809 E

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/07 p:/ClRC/DateDue.indd-p.1

 

LEARNER CONTROL IN UNDERGRADUATE ONLINE LEARNING:
INSTRUCTOR PERSPECTIVES
By

Simone Jurate Jonaitis

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University

in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Community, Agriculture, Recreation and Resource Studies

2007

 

 

5 -— ——-—
at."

ni_ {lei—ti.

 

ABSTRACT

LEARNER CONTROL IN UNDERGRADUATE ONLINE LEARNING:
INSTRUCTOR PERSPECTIVES

By
Simone J urate Jonaitis

This dissertation describes and examines instructor’s observations of the
following four aspects of undergraduate online learning: (1) Learner Self-
Direction; (2) Learner Reﬂection; (3) Learner Community; and (4) Learner
Persistence.

Eleven in-depth interviews were conducted with instructors from a variety
of disciplines teaching an undergraduate course online. This qualitative study
examines the extent to which instructors in online environments consider the
speciﬁc factors that impact students’ learning experiences, as well as explores
ways in which the learner can be encouraged to be more conscious of and
engaged in the learning process.

Several recommendations emerge for instructors of online learning as well
as recommendations for institutional policy. Recommendations for online
instructors include identiﬁcation of the learner’s expectations and motivations,
engagement of the learner through writing, and the construction of Shared learning
objectives. Recommendations for institutional policy include identiﬁcation of the
institutional purpose of the online programming, formal mentoring and learning

opportunities for instructors of online instruction, and commitment to innovation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to thank Dr. Joseph Levine for his guidance and
patience during this journey. His dedication to learning and to his students is remarkable.
I feel privileged to have worked with Dr. Levine and to have received his constant and
unwavering support.

I would also like to thank my committee members, who throughout the journey
have supported me, encouraged me, and above all, have shared their knowledge with me.

Most importantly, I would like to thank my family, my friends, and my colleagues
who recognized when I needed them and who rallied to my side.

Finally, a very special thanks to Roberta Levine, whose understanding and

kindness never failed to provide me with the energy and enthusiasm to persist.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY .................................................................................. 1
Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................... 2
Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................................... 4
Areas of Focus ............................................................................................................... 5
Learner Self-Direction ............................................................................................. 5
Learner Reﬂection ................................................................................................... 6
Learner Community ................................................................................................. 8
Learner Persistence ................................................................................................. 9
Areas of Focus and Lines of Inquiry ............................................................................ 11
Focus Area 1: Learner Self-Direction .................................................................... 11
Focus Area 2: Learner Reﬂection .......................................................................... 11
Focus Area 3: Learner Community ........................................................................ 12
Focus Area 4: Learner Persistence ......................................................................... 12
Deﬁnition of Terms ...................................................................................................... 12
Limitations of the Study ............................................................................................... 15
Assumptions ................................................................................................................. 16
CHAPTER 11
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................................................................................... 17
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 7
Self-Directed Learning ................................................................................................. 17
Role of Instructor ......................................................................................................... 21
Social Integration and Knowledge Building ................................................................ 22
Persistence .................................................................................................................... 24
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 28
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 28
Research Methodology ................................................................................................ 3O
Areas of Focus and Lines of Inquiry ............................................................................ 31
Focus Area 1: Learner Self-Direction .................................................................... 31
Focus Area 2: Learner Reﬂection .......................................................................... 32
Focus Area 3: Learner Community ........................................................................ 32
Focus Area 4: Learner Persistence ........................................................................ 32
Study Participants ........................................................................................................ 33
Interview Guide ........................................................................................................... 38
Procedures for Data Collection .................................................................................... 39
Treating, Coding, and Analyzing Data ........................................................................ 41

iv

Timeline .................................................................................................................... 42

CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................... 43
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 43
Instructor Views of Learner Self-Direction ................................................................. 44
Encouragement of Learner Self-Direction ............................................................. 45
Effective Techniques for Self-Directed Learning .................................................. 52
Barriers That Inhibit Learner Self-Direction ......................................................... 5 3
Emergent Thematic Categories: Learner Self-Direction ....................................... 55
Identifying, Outlining, and Aligning Expectations .......................................... 55
Providing Frequent Guidance, Direction, and Insistence ................................ 56
Recognizing and Accepting Learner Motivations ........................................... 57
Instructor Views of Learner Reﬂection ....................................................................... 57
Encouragement of Learner Reﬂection ................................................................... 58
Effective Techniques for Promoting Learner Reﬂection ....................................... 63
Barriers That Inhibit Learner Reﬂection ................................................................ 64
Emergent Thematic Categories: Learner Reﬂection .............................................. 65
Providing Opportunities for Dialogue, Communication, and Feedback .......... 66
Recognizing and Accepting the Learners Cognitive and Developmental
Ability ......................................................................................................... 66
Expanding the Role of Written Expression ..................................................... 66
Instructor Views of Learner Community ..................................................................... 67
Encouragement of Learner Community ................................................................ 69
Effective Techniques for Establishing Learner Community ................................ 74
Barriers That Inhibit Learner Community ............................................................ 75
Emergent Thematic Categories: Learner Community .......................................... 80
Participating in the Experience ....................................................................... 80
Providing Opportunity for Formal and Informal Communication .................. 80
Recognizing and Accepting Learner Motivations ........................................... 81
Instructor Views of Learner Persistence ..................................................................... 82
Encouragement of Learner Persistence ................................................................. 83
Effective Techniques for Promoting Learner Persistence .................................... 86
Barriers That Inhibit Learner Persistence ............................................................. 87
Emergent Thematic Categories: Learner Persistence .......................................... 92
Providing Individual Contact .......................................................................... 92
Recognizing and Accepting the Inﬂuence of Prior Learning Experiences and
Misaligned Expectations ............................................................................. 92
Recognizing and Accepting the Impact of External Inﬂuences ....................... 93
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................ 94
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 94
Investigation Site Background ..................................................................................... 95
Summary of Findings ................................................................................................... 96
Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................................... 100

Learner Motivation is Central to Self-Direction in Online Learning .................. 101
The Learner and Instructor Must Develop Shared Expectations and Learning

Objectives ...................................................................................................... 1 02
Clarifying the Demands of Online Learning Environments is Critical to
Learner Persistence ........................................................................................ 103
The Learner Must Identify and Articulate the Level and Type of Guidance
That is Needed and Expected ......................................................................... 104
The Instructor Must Recognize Individual Learner Characteristics .................... 105
The Instructor Must Recognize the Value of Writing in the Online Experience.106
The Learners Must Sense the Personal Aspect of the Online Environment ........ 106
There Must be a Reduction of Online Instructor Dependence on Face-to-Face
Teaching Techniques ..................................................................................... 107
Online Instructors Can Beneﬁt from Exchange and Dialogue with Other
Online Instructors ........................................................................................... 108
Instructors Often Have Different Understandings of Important Online
Concepts ......................................................................................................... 108
Recommendations for Online Instructors ................................................................ 109
Recommendations for Institutional Policy ............................................................... 111
Recommendations for Future Study ........................................................................ 113
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 115
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................ 126

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Methods for Encouraging Self-Direction ............................................................. 46
Table 2 Barriers to Learner Self-Direction ........................................................................ 53
Table 3 Methods for Encouraging Learner Reﬂection ...................................................... 59
Table 4 Barriers to Learner Reﬂection .............................................................................. 64
Table 5 Methods for Encouraging Learner Community .................................................... 69
Table 6 Barriers to Learner Community ............................................................................ 76
Table 7 Methods for Encouraging Learner Persistence ..................................................... 83
Table 8 Barriers to Learner Persistence ............................................................................. 88

vii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION OF THE STUDY
Introduction

Many institutions of higher education are engaging in distance education,
particularly in the form of Internet or online courses and programs. It is estimated that
almost half (41%) of schools with less than 3000 enrolled students and 95% of
institutions with enrollments over 10,000, offer some form of distance education
opportunities (GOA-04-78T -2003). According to the National Center for Education
Statistics report, The Condition of Education 2004, enrollments in distance education
almost doubled from 1997 to 2001. Although these ﬁgures include all distance education
modalities and are not speciﬁcally limited to online offerings, they do illustrate the extent
to which institutions of higher education continue to expand distance education offerings
to learners.

Howell, Williams, and Lindsay (2003) submit that the growing need for lifelong
learning opportunities for adults, as well as a predicted growth in college-age learners,
will only increase the demand for access to higher education and that quite possibly
distance education, particularly online Intemet-based opportunities will, “provide a
solution to capacity constraints [that] growing enrollments place on the current higher
education infrastructure.” In addition, more and more learners are faced with the demands
of work, family, and ﬁnancial obligations. Furthermore, The National Center for
Education Statistics reports 79% of the undergraduate population is employed at least
part-time. This type of changing behavior and demographic among college age students
creates a demand for ﬂexibility and convenience which has increased the appeal of

distance education formats, particularly online instruction.

In support of this observation, numerous studies and discussions of online
learning have found convenience and ﬂexibility of format as one of the main, if not the
primary, reasons for selection over traditional face-to-face formats (Ali, Hodson-Carlton,
& Ryan, 2002; Andrusyszyn, Cragg, & Humbert, 2001; Clark & Jones, 2001; Doherty,
2002; Grill, 1999; Roblyer, 1999; and Valenta, Therriault, Dieter, & Mrtek, 2001).

However, as institutions continue to expand distance education offerings, and
despite the actual and perceived beneﬁts, attrition and dropout rates continue to be higher
in online programming than those of traditional face-to-face instruction (Grill, 1999;
Kennedy, 2000; Rovai, 2003; and Zielinski, 2000). This information directs researchers
not only to ask why attrition is higher in online learning environments; it also directs
researchers, learners, instructors, and institutions to deconstruct the various components
of teaching and learning online and to ask if and how Speciﬁc aspects of the experience
inﬂuence the learning experience. Most importantly, how can the teaching and learning
experience of online environments be improved? Do the traditional roles of instructor
and learner change in online learning environments? If so, how have they changed and
how can the individual instructor, learner and institution best accommodate these
changes? Ultimately, how can the online teaching and learning experience be enhanced
and maximized to best meet the expectations and learning outcomes of the individuals
involved in the experience?

Statement of Problem

It is undeniable that the Worldwide Web has impacted academia. In addition to

providing an alternative means of instructional delivery, the Worldwide Web has also

impacted the traditional dynamic of teaching and learning. Learners now have more

choices than the traditional face-to-face classroom experience and can select options from
multiple formats, courses, programs and institutions. Not only are learners given a variety
of options and opportunities, learners are also now required to analyze these options and
determine how they best meet their learning objectives, personal circumstances,
opportunities and limitations. This dynamic, in and of itself, places much more decision
making responsibility on the learner than in the more traditional face-to-face classroom
model of education where choices are relatively limited to Speciﬁc course and content
selection, and limited scheduling options. With online learning options, learners now
have more freedom and ﬂexibility, not only to make decisions about selection, but they
have more freedom and ﬂexibility to accommodate the various demands and interests of
their lives.

Recognizing the Opportunities and challenges inherent in choice, it becomes
increasingly clear that learning is no longer conﬁned to speciﬁc place and time, rather it
transcends these rigid constraints and allows for expanded autonomy and independence.
It could be argued that this expanded autonomy and independence is more aligned with
the intrinsic nature of learning as a transcendent process, yet it could also be argued that
formal learning requires guidance and structure. This tension then requires individuals
and institutions engaged in online learning to examine carefully the traditional dynamic
of teaching and learning, as well as the roles of both the instructor and the learner in this
process. Cannell (1999) submits that the Worldwide Web has facilitated this shift in
educational perspective and concludes that, “contemporary educational practices stress
the importance of meaning making and reﬂection on experience, concept formation and

critical thinking and, in turn, signal a Shift from behaviorist’s notions of teachers as

dispensers of knowledge and students as passive recipients” (p.17). This then directs us
to examine the process and components of the teaching and learning dynamic and how
teaching and learning have been altered by expanded independence provided by online
learning enviromnents. The larger question is how best to maximize these changes to
improve the overall experience afforded by online learning environments.

The problem this study addresses is how instructors can best maximize the online
learning experience and provide the learner the necessary encouragement to take an
active role in and more responsibility for the learning process.

Purpose of the Study

 

The central purpose of this study is to describe instructor’s observations of the
follow'mg four aspects of undergraduate online learning: (1) Learner Self-Direction; (2)
Learner Reﬂection; (3) Learner Community; and (4) Learner Persistence. The secondary
purpose of this investigation is to identify speciﬁc characteristics of the online learning
experience that may assist instructors, learners, and institutions in better understanding
how to improve upon the overall teaching and learning experience of online formats.

This study uses a qualitative approach and is meant to address the complexity of
learning online. It is meant to provide a forum for exploration of the possible ways in
which instructors can best facilitate the online learning process and an attempt to expand
our understanding of online learning. Most importantly it is meant to broaden our
response to the way in which we facilitate and engage the learner in the creation of a
meaningﬁil online learning environment.

Because the interaction between learner and instructor is complex and dynamic,

this study uses a holistic perspective and relies on inductive analysis. The study examines

the extent to which instructors in online environments consider the speciﬁc factors that
impact the learners’ learning experience, as well as explores ways in which the learner
can be encouraged to become more engaged in the online learning process.

Areas of Focus

 

This study examines instructors’ views of four key areas of online learning as
they speciﬁcally relate to the learner. These areas are learner self-direction, learner

reﬂection, learner community, and learner persistence.

Learner Self-Direction.

Learner self-direction is the extent to which the learner takes responsibility and
initiative for planning, implementing and monitoring his or her own learning, with or
without explicit guidance or direction from another (Knowles, 1975; Tough, 1979). All
learners exhibit various levels of self-direction which tend to fall on the continuum of
either a low or high ability to self-direct. Grow’s (1991) linear model of Staged Self-
Directed Learning (SSDL) argues that there are essentially 4 stages of self-directed
learning on the continuum. The low self-directed learner requires a great deal of input
and direction from the instructor, while the learner with high self-direction is able to
work autonomously regardless of the amount of guidance received from the instructor.
Garrison’s (1997) model of self—direction includes self-management and argues that
autonomy does not disregard the social aspects of learning, but recognizes the learner’s
ability to control the situation in a way that is beneﬁcial to the learner. The learner uses
the learning environment and the social interactions as a forum to explore, enhance,

conﬁrm or negate understanding. Garrison also includes motivation and self-monitoring

as aspects of self-direction in his model, arguing that the self-directed learner is conscious
of him or herself as a learner and is conscious of their learning on a meta-cognitive level.
Motivation is concerned with why the learner has initiated the learning activity and why
he or She either continues with or disengages from the activity.

Given the nature of the format and the technology of online learning
environments, a relatively high level of self-direction is desired. In the online learning
environment, the learner is required to work autonomously without the beneﬁt of the
immediate interaction with the instructor or without the immediate interaction with other
learners. The online learner is also required to manage their own educational behaviors
and habits and align them with the autonomy of working in physical isolation.

Learner’s who have high self-direction will rely on themselves to create strategies
that will help them adjust to the learning environment. The learner with low self-direction
will seek frequent clariﬁcation and guidance from either the instructor or other learners.
This clariﬁcation and guidance may or may not be readily and immediately available in

the online environment.

Learner Reﬂection

The ability of the learner to reﬂect on an experience and connect it with new
information is the basis for transformational learning. Mezirow’s (1991) construct of
learning as transformation suggests that the learner is conscious of self and examines
previous held beliefs and assumptions through reﬂection in order to arrive at a new
conclusion. Kolb (1984) provides a model for experiential learning which suggests that

once the learner has an experience, the learner reﬂects upon it, considers what can be

learned from the experience, and essentially experiments with new ways of engaging
with an idea or activity. The learner is an active and engaged participant in the
experience and learning is not a passive activity. Learning is a constant response and
reﬂection of existing experiences and knowledge that creates a new dimension for
experimentation and implementation of ideas in order to gain a stronger View of ones
understanding of the world. Schon’s (1983) view also recognizes the dynamic
relationship with the learning activity and the cognitive engagement of reﬂection as
essential to understanding. Schon dismisses technical rationality for a more complex
view of learning. Schon suggests that the learner engages in a “conversation with the
situation” by reﬂecting on his or her “initial appreciation” of the situation and the
resulting accommodations the learner makes in reconciling previous understanding with
the current experience (p.79).

In online learning environments, not only must the learner engage with and reﬂect
on the content of the course and how he or she understands it, but also must engage in
reﬂective practice on how they learn. Although more and more learners are enrolling in
online courses, most have developed their personal strategies for learning in the
traditional face—to-face environment. The online environment introduces an alternative
delivery format that forces the learner to adapt to the new experience. This necessity to
adapt to a new environment presents the learner and the instructor an opportunity for
exploration of the meta-cognitive aspect of learning which can guide the learner to a

stronger understanding of self and content, which in turn, is an exercise in transformation.

Learner Communiﬁ

The exchange of beliefs and ideas with others optimizes the opportunity to
compare and contrast individual beliefs with those of others. This synergy encourages the
learner to potentially develop a new perspective. Exchanging and engaging in dialogue
with others assists the learners in conﬁrming, negating, or altering previously constructed
knowledge. Habermas (1970) stresses the need for an environment of discourse which
provides the learners with an enviromnent that is open and free of judgmental behaviors,
an environment where participants are free to identify uncertainties and engage in a
dialogue which is supportive of alternative views. Online learning environments,
because of physical separation, present challenges for creation of learning environments
yet a learning community is necessary as a forum for discourse and exchange of ideas.
Baxter Magolda (1992) argues similarly that this dialogue is essential to the development
of beliefs and learner capacity. In addition to the beneﬁts and necessity of engaging in
dialogue and discourse in the learning process, the personal and social aspects of learning
to an individuals sense of well being can not be ignored. Online learning environments
provide ﬂexibility and transcend the constraints of time and place, however, online
learning environments can also lead to feelings of isolation for the learner. This isolation
and lack of connection can lead to an unsatisfactory experience as well as lead to the

complete withdrawal of the learner from the learning experience. (Kember, 1989).

er.

Ll

It‘a

 

 

SUP

 

Learner Persistence

 

Learner persistence is the learner’s decision to continue or terminate involvement
in the learning experience. Although there are no deﬁnitive answers as to why students
depart from a learning experience, persistence and retention in distance education
(Fjortoft, 1995; Kember, 1989; Sweet, 1986) and Speciﬁcally online programming
(Rovai, 2003; Willging & Johnson, 2004; Woodley, 2004) emerges as a concern and has
often been discussed in the literature. Tinto’s (1987) seminal work on persistence
suggests that factors such as work and family obligations often lead to attrition. As noted,
learners who select online learning environments generally do so based on the need for
ﬂexibility and convenience. These reasons for selection can be viewed as an indication of
the multiple demands placed on the learner and the need to seek ways to accommodate
both time and resource constraints. Although the learner may recognize the control they
have regarding when they engage in the learning activity, the learner may or may not be
fully conscious of the additional demands the online course may place on their time.

In order to be successful in the online environment the learner must be willing and
able to balance not only the multiple demands and expectations of the actual learning
experience but also those outside of the formal setting. Although the instructor is not
expected to diminish the demands of the course simply because of the stresses the learner
may experience, there is a role for instructors to recognize these multiple demands and
encourage the learner to develop strategies to address and manage these concerns.
Ultimately, if the learner is too overwhelmed by multiple demands and stresses, the
learner may fail to persist simply on the basis they lack effective strategies or systems of

support to accommodate the experience.

 

 

OI

bll

pal

 

 

 

In recent years, much has been done by way of studying pedagogy and
instructional design in online environments. Although there has been a shift in focus
which has begun to emphasize the learner’s role in the process of learning online
additional exploration is needed. Certainly, learners enter all learning experiences with a
series of expectations, established behaviors and schema; however, individuals engaged
in an online learning experience often bring a new set of dynamics and preconceptions to
the experience. One such variable is the motivation or reason for selecting the online
course. It has been well documented that learners select online courses primarily because
of the convenience and ﬂexibility. The learner is no longer conﬁned to place or time
which, for those with multiple responsibilities, is an essential motivation and beneﬁt. As
a result, the learner is given freedom and control over his or her own learning
environment. Certainly, the beneﬁts are clear when viewed through the learner’s lens.
However, along with these beneﬁts, a level of responsibility, discipline, and self-direction
is implied. These implied expectations may or may not be recognized by the learner, or
quite possibly, even by the facilitator of the learning experience. Furthermore, attrition
rates among learners enrolled in online courses is generally high when compared to face-
to-face instruction. Although this study does not attempt to draw any correlation between
learner self-direction, reﬂection, community, or persistence, it explores these various
aspects of the online learning experience and examines relationships and impact on the
online learning experience. The intent and relevance of this study is to expand and
broaden our response to the way in which we engage the learner in the creation of and

participation in a meaningful online learning experience.

10

This study examines the extent to which instructors in online environments
consider the speciﬁc factors that impact the students’ learning experience, as well as
explores ways in which the learner can be encouraged to be more conscious of the
learning process. The study investigates instructors’ views of the following four areas of
focus: (1) Learner Self-Direction; (2) Learner Reﬂection; (3) Learner Community; and

(4) Learner Persistence.

Area of Focus and Lines of Inquiry
This study uses three speciﬁc lines of inquiry to examine four broader areas of
focus of undergraduate learning online. Each of the areas of focus and their lines of

inquiry are presented below.

Focus Area 1: Learner Self-Direction

The ﬁrst area of focus is learner self-direction. Within this area of focus the ﬁrst
line of inquiry addresses how learner self-direction is encouraged in online environments.
The second line of inquiry addresses whether instructors have seen effective strategies
that encourage learner self-direction. The third line of inquiry addresses the barriers that

inhibit learner self-direction.

Focus Area 2: Learner Reﬂection
The second area of focus is learner self-direction. Within this area of focus the
ﬁrst line of inquiry addresses how learner reﬂection is encouraged in online

environments. The second line of inquiry addresses whether instructors have seen

11

 

 

. I
ml

. i.
if?

/

ac“.

effective strategies that encourage learner reﬂection. The third line of inquiry addresses

the barriers that inhibit learner reﬂection.

Focus Area 3: Learner Community

 

The third area of focus is learner self-direction. Within this area of focus the ﬁrst
line of inquiry addresses how learner community is encouraged in online environments.
The second line of inquiry addresses whether instructors have seen effective strategies
that encourage learner community. The third line of inquiry addresses the barriers that

inhibit learner community.

Focus Area 4: Learner Persistence

 

The fourth area of focus is learner persistence. Within this area of focus the ﬁrst
line of inquiry addresses how learner persistence is encouraged in online environments.
The second line of inquiry addresses whether instructors have seen effective strategies
that encourage learner persistence. The third line of inquiry addresses the barriers that
inhibit learner persistence.

Deﬁnition of Terms

The following examples are the terms that are unique to understanding this study.

Asynchronous Learning Describes when the learner can participate in the learning

activity at a time convenient for him/her. The learner is not required to participate in the

learning activity at a speciﬁed and designated time.

12

Blackboard A computer software platform used in online course design. The Blackboard
system provides the software necessary for the design of the online course and has
several features which facilitate written communication between and among participants

in the online learning experience.

Blog A publicly accessible online journal for an individual. Short for Web-log.

Community An environment where discourse is encouraged and learners are free to

engage in dialogue which is supportive of alternative views.

Dial-up The process by which the Internet is accessed through the use of a telephone

line.

Digital Storytellini A term used to describe story telling through photos, pictures, and

other technology which can be transmitted through the Internet.

Distance Education A term used to describe the learning opportunities provided through

 

various technologies that reach learners who are not physically present in a classroom.
Various types of distance education technologies include, interactive television, satellite,

and online.

Internet The global connection of computers.

13

Learner The learner is the participant in and the recipient of a learning activity. The term

student is often used to describe this individual.

Mp3 audio ﬁle A digital audio ﬁle which can be compressed and transmitted over the

Internet.

Netiquette Term used to describe the etiquette guidelines and rules necessary to maintain
civility in discussions as well as guidelines for standard communication practices through

the Internet. The term is Short for Internet Etiquette.

Online Term used to describe how learners are connected Via Speciﬁc equipment,

generally called a modem, which allows them to access the Internet.

Persistence Learner’s decision to continue involvement in a learning experience rather

than terminate the experience.

Self-direction The extent to which the learner takes responsibility and initiative for

planning, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating his or her own learning with or

without the explicit guidance or direction from another.

SKYPE A computer program which allows individuals to enter into two way interactive

communication using either audio or audio/video signals to communicate.

14

Synchronous learning Term used to described a learning situation whereby all

participants are engaged at a speciﬁed and designated time.

Reﬂection The ability of the learner to consider prior experience and connect it with'new
information. The learner is conscious of self and examines previously held beliefs and

assumptions in order to arrive at new conclusions.

Web-based The same as World Wide Web. A system of connected servers that permit
one to communicate with another, thus allowing access and connections to digital

information.

World Wide Web A system of connected servers that permit one to communicate with

another, thus allowing access and connections to digital information.

Limitations of the Study
There are several limitations to this study. First, this study is the description of
individual experiences and cannot be generalized to the larger population. Secondly, the
study participants were not randomly selected. The study participants were selected from
a limited pool of individuals teaching an undergraduate online course during a Speciﬁc
time period at a speciﬁc institution. The participants were selected from the actual list of
individuals teaching in the online format and their participation was based on a limited

number of selection criteria. Third, the investigator of this study was employed by the

15

institution where the study was conducted. Individual biases Of the investigator may have
inﬂuenced the interview process as well as individual study participants. Finally, the
investigator selected four aspects of teaching and learning which do not include the wide
range of factors that impact and inﬂuence teaching and learning. By limiting the study
to four aspects of teaching and learning, the study may overlook critical components and
relationships that inﬂuence or impact the experience, therefore the study only provides

examination of a limited number of variables.

Assumptions

 

It is assumed that the views of the study participants are based on their actual
online teaching experiences and are a selected snapshot of their experiences as viewed
Speciﬁcally from the following areas of focus: (1) Self-Direction; (2) Learner Reﬂection;
(3) Learner Community; and (4) Learner Persistence. It is also assmned that during the
interview process the study participants were able to reﬂect on their own experiences and
respond solely based on those individual experiences. And ﬁnally, it is assumed that
answers to the interview questions reﬂected the study participants real experiences and

perspectives.

l6

CHAPTER 11: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

Many institutions of higher education are engaging in distance education
particularly in the form of Internet or online courses and programs. Over the past several
years there have been numerous inquires related to the online delivery format and to the
various aspects of online learning. Many studies have focused speciﬁcally on the
technology itself and how it may hinder or enhance learning (Yu & Durrington, 2005;
Ham, 2005; Joo, Bong & Choi, 2000; Lee & Witta, 2001) and have found that if the
learner is without sufﬁcient technical experience it can negatively impact the online
learning and the overall experience. Other lines of inquiry have compared online verses
traditional face-to-face environments (Clark & Jones, 2001; Russell, 1999; Ryan, 2002)
and have found there is no signiﬁcance difference between the two formats. In recent
years there has been a noticeable shift from studying the technical and operational aspects
of teaching and learning online to the social aspects of the experience and how this
impacts overall learning outcomes and student success. This literature review focuses on
four key areas that provide a framework for this study: Self-Directed Learning; Role of
the Instructor; Social Integration and Knowledge Building; and Persistence. The intent of
this review is to provide an overview of the literature as it relates to these four areas.

Self-Directed Learning

 

Garrison, Cleveland-Innes and Fung (2004) explored learner role adjustment in
online environments and, although the primary purpose of their study was to validate
their instrumentation, the authors conclusions suggest that face-to-face learning

environments are generally perceived by the learner as oriented to the social and teaching

17

presence of the experience, while online learning encourages the cognitive dimension of
the learning experience. This suggests that online learning may be perceived as
“requiring greater individual responsibility” (p.70) from the learner.

Boyer (2004) explored this concept in her attempt to determine how online
learning design can be used to assist learners in developing stronger self-directed learning
strategies. Boyer argues that the desire and need to provide clarity for learners has led to
a rigid and technocratic approach to teaching and learning online and suggests online
environments often encourage “compliant learners”, a term used by Ponticell and Zapeda
(2004). Boyer believes that learning in the online environment requires learners be
“granted the responsibilities for planning, searching, ﬁnding and producing learning
objectives, while instructors provide scaffolds, resources, feedback and expertise that is
essential to connect system components” (p.125).

Boyer studied 112 adult learners ages 25-65 enrolled in a variety of university
professional programs and utilized a model based on three concepts: input, process and
output. Input was characterized as the learners’ previous experiences and knowledge;
process, the meta-cognitive aspect of learning, and output, the overall learning gain or
learning product. The researcher utilized a pre- and post-self—diagnostic test as the
intervention. Learners were asked to rate their level of knowledge of the content area
prior to the course. The learners then developed a learning contract both as an individual
learner and as a member of the group. At the end of the course, learners were required to
post a ﬁnal reﬂection of the experiences, and ﬁnally the learner completed a post-test

rating their level of knowledge after having completed the course.

18

Although the learners may have been inﬂuenced to rate their increase in
knowledge high during the post-test, the learner’s self-assessed growth between the pre-
test and the post-test were Signiﬁcant and Boyer concludes that the scaffolds provided by
the learning intervention, the learning contract, provides a meaningful opportunity for the
learner to take responsibility in the learning experience which she concludes, leads to
becoming a stronger self-regulated learner. Although instructors play a critical role in
online learning by way of facilitation and feedback, the learner must also become

involved in guiding the direction of the learning experience.

Richardson and Newby (2006), used the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ)
designed by Biggs (1987) to determine the extent of cognitive engagement of students in
online learning environments. The authors were most interested in which motivations
and strategies learners were utilizing as deﬁned by Biggs’ design — Surface, Achieving
and Deep. The authors conclude that learners who have had more experience with online
environments are more likely to use Deep Strategies, strategies which assist the learner in
discovering meaning by relating knowledge and making connections. It is suggested that
as learners become more familiar with the online environments they “appear to be more
self-regulatory in their strategies” (p.32).

Sharma and Hannaﬁn (2002) suggest that scaffolding is one way of increasing
student self-regulated learning and critical thinking ability. Scaffolding, according to the
authors, is the process by which the instructor supports the increasing development of the
learner’s knowledge base by building upon existing skills and encouraging the learner to
expand beyond that knowledge to develop a new perspective or set of skills. Eventually,

the moderator of the learning experience moves from expert and purveyor of the

19

information to a facilitating role. The intent is to assist the learner in developing higher
order thinking skills through use of prompts or questions that lead to the learner’s
development of meta-cognitive skills and strategies. The researchers addressed how the
learner perceives the use of scaffolding, and what processes impact the development of
critical thinking skills. The participants of Sharma and Hannaﬁn’s study initially
perceived the process, which was primarily a series of questions and examples, as a
directive process developed by the instructor. However, over time most students “began
to perceive scaffolding as a guide to help them achieve their own Special needs”(p.4).
The authors found ﬁve inﬂuencing elements in the development of critical thinking, these
included reﬂection, feedback, problem context, perception of self as learner, and prior
knowledge.

Dabbagh (2003) discusses a model of shared responsibility of both instructor and
learners in the online environment through scaffolding. Learners can assist the
instructors in determining the type of guidance and type of scaffolding the individual
learner needs and argues that the approach or technique of scaffolding encourages the
learners to become self-directed by being included in the learning process. The instructor
then becomes the facilitator and co-creator of an environment where collaboration, self
reﬂection, and awareness of the learning process are encouraged. Although this shift
from the instructor as central focus of the learning environment to the student as the
central focus, is not a new concept (Friere,1970; Knowles, 1975) it continues to be
stressed as a necessity within the online learning environment (Dabbagh, 2004; Palloff &

Pratt, 2001; Smith, 2005).

20

Role of Instructor

The current view of the instructor’s role in the learning process has Shifted from
instructor as the authoritative expert to faculty as facilitators of learning. With this,
instructors are not only guiding the learning through the factual content but assisting the
learner in cognitive development. The instructor also assists the learner in developing the
skills of self-direction and independence. This enhances the role of the instructor and
suggests the need for instructors to continually assess their role and the necessity to adapt
a leamer-centered approach.

Garrison and Cleveland-Innes (2005) recognized the importance of interaction of
the learner with the content of the course as well as with the instructor and other students.
They submit that the role of the instructor is “powerful in triggering discussion and
facilitating high levels of thinking and knowledge construction” (p.137). They compared
four treatment groups, each group of online learners was instructed differently. Two
groups received little interaction with the instructor and were directed to complete tasks
such as analyze readings and respond to text while working in small groups. The
remaining two groups received a great deal of input by the instructor and were asked to
participate in discussions of material. One group was asked to participate on a voluntary
basis and students moderated the discussions, while the other group was heavily guided
by the instructor. The results indicated that the group who received the heaviest
inﬂuence by the instructor engaged in higher —order learning. This study suggests that
“the quality of interaction (i.e., critical discourse) must be a speciﬁc design goal and

interaction facilitated and directed in a sustained manner if deep approaches to learning

21

are to be achieved” (p.141), and suggests that the instructor must be available to facilitate
and guide the discourse in order to achieve cognitive involvement from the learners.

This then suggests that instructors must be willing and prepared to guide learners
through the process of cognitive presence. Richardson and Newby (2006) suggest that
when developing the course, instructors “need to take into account the characteristics of a
population” (p.34) with respect to the learners unique background which includes
program area, age, and prior learning. From their view the instructor must develop
interventions that “would allow students to be exposed to additional strategies”(p.34).

In order to develop these strategies and interventions training and professional

development opportunities exploring these avenues have been recommended. (Galusha,

1998; Lee & Busch, 2005).

Social Integration and Knowledge Building

There is no argument as to the importance of social integration and interaction as
a critical component to learning, yet there are varying perspectives of what constitutes
social integration and the level to which it impacts cognitive development in online
learning environments.

Simpson and Du (2004) conducted a correlational study of 169 masters level
learners to determine the relationship between learning styles, participation and learner
self-reported enjoyment of the online class. The researchers found that learning styles
signiﬁcantly impacted the learner’s self-reported enjoyment of the course, however,
learning styles did not Signiﬁcantly impact learner participation. The overall premise of

the study was based on the level of enjoyment as an indicator of success in the online

22

environment and recorded participation as the total number of posts, accessed pages on
the site, and the total postings read by the learners. The researchers themselves
acknowledge that evaluating learners based on this measure is extremely weak and that
the quality of the posts would be a much better indicator of learning outcomes. Chung,
Chung, and Severance (1999) had also dismissed the idea that simply quantitatively
measuring the number of times a learner comments or accesses the information and
submit that the frequency of interaction alone is not sufﬁcient for knowledge integration
and that the type of interaction is what is most relevant.

Ritchi and Hoffman’s (1997) assessment of online learners concluded that many
students “Simply tend to post their ideas or read others’ ideas without engaging in deep
drinking processes such as analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing ideas and argue that
learners generally browse “superﬁcially” but don’t engage in thoughtful and active
learning. Dreyfus (2001) in his discussion of learning on the Internet, argues that social
interaction is necessary for the learning experience to be successful and suggests that a
level of risk taking, by way of opinion and mastery of the content, must be present in
order for the learner to advance or be transformed. Dreyfus submits that “if each student
is at home in front of his or her terminal, there is no place for such risky
involvement”(p.39), hence leaving the learner no more than a consumer of content rather
than an analytical and critical thinker. Garrison and Cleveland-Innes (2005), maintain
that “high levels of interaction may be reﬂective of group cohesion, but it does not
directly create cognitive development or facilitate meaningful learning and

understanding” (p. 135).

23

It is without question that Simply posting and scanning information, nor
interaction alone, will develop the cognitive transformation required of critical and
analytical thinkers, however it can not be assumed that online environments do not and
can not encourage deeper cognitive development of the learner. In a study of 64 students
enrolled in a online baccalaureate Nursing program, Theile (2003) found that these online
learners scored higher in factual learning in comparison to 42 learners enrolled in the
face-to-face format of the course. Most interesting, however, is the self-reported
comments of learning made by the online learners. Theile questioned the learners on
how they had changed as learners through their involvement in the online asynchronous
format and found that the comments made by 58 (91%) of the learners identiﬁed that they
had become more independent in their learning and “several students indicted their way
of thinking about learning changed” (p.365). The author found four themes that emerged
from the learners’ comments regarding what they felt had impacted their perceived

changes as learners:

0 Format itself increased participation;
0 Convenience and ﬂexibility;
- Prompt feedback;

0 Regular use and increased ability to communicate.

Persistence
Although persistence in online courses iS difﬁcult to track there is a general
consensus that attrition in online learning tends to be higher than that of face-to-face

traditionally formatted courses. Tinto’s (1987) Longitudinal —ProceSS Model of Drop-Out

24

has often been used as a foundation for the discussion of persistence in higher education.
Although Tinto’s work was not aimed at the distance education learner, the model has
found application and appeal among researchers and scholars of distance education
(Kember, 1989; Rovai, 2003; Sweet, 1986; and Woodley, 2004). The model emphasizes
the learner’s social integration with the institution, with the faculty, and with other
learners as critical components of persistence. Kember (1989) expanded Tinto’s model
submitting that social integration as presented in the model does not fully address all
types of integration required of the distance education learner. Kember suggests that
social integration in a distance education environment must take into consideration how
the learner integrates and manages the demands of home, social, and work environments.
Kember found that distance education learners “who receive support and encouragement
from family, friends, and employers which enables them to cope with study in the home
ﬁnd it easier to come to terms with their academic demands” (p. 11). On the contrary,
those who do not receive support and encouragement from these sources had much more
difﬁculty in accommodating the demands of academic pursuits. This lack of support led
to lower GPA and a much stronger likelihood of departure.

Sweet (1986) recognized that most learners enrolled in distance education
courses had a variety of family and job related responsibilities that prevented them from
enrolling in a traditional face-to-face course. From Sweet’s view, social integration with
instructors and other learners “Signiﬁcantly inﬂuenced student commitment and
persistence” (p.201). Furthermore, Fjortoft (1995) found that learners who perceived the
course of study as enhancing work performance and as being directly related to “Speciﬁc

career related factors” (p.6) were much more likely to persist than those learners who did

25

not perceive the course of study as related to their employment and professional
responsibilities.

In addition there have been a number of studies exploring the relationship
between learning styles and various dimensions of online learning, including persistence.
In a study conducted by Terrell and Dringus’ (2000) no correlation between student
learning styles and attrition was found. However, the researchers did ﬁnd that learners
who were identiﬁed as accommodators as described in Kolb’s Learning Styles Inventory
(LSI) had a much higher percentage of departure from the class than did learners who had
been identiﬁed in other categories of the model. Learners who fall in the
accommodating category tend to process information best if they are engaged in an
immediate experience and are provided the opportunity to actively apply concepts to real
situations. These learners generally enjoy working with others to engage and test their
understanding.

It is apparent that multiple reasons for attrition exist and there is no one dominant
reason for departure. Will ging and Johnson (2004) sought to determine the reasons why
learners departed from an online Master’s program at the University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign. Although the study only consisted of 30 learners and no deﬁnitive
conclusions can be drawn, four categories for departure were identiﬁed:

0 Personal reasons such as ﬁnancial difﬁculties, lack of time, scheduling and
family problems;

0 Job related reasons such as lack of support from workplace;

0 Program related reasons such as difﬁculty of assignments, lack of

interaction with instructor and other students;

26

0 Technology related reasons such as the de-personalized nature of the
learning environment and lack of technical support and preparation.

Isolation and limited contact with instructors and others in the class have also
been well documented as central challenges for learners in online environments and can
impact completion rates and successful learning experiences (Cannell, 1999; Link &
Scholtz, 2000; Ricketts, Wolfe, Norvelle, & Carpenter, 2002; and Smith, 2005). Brown
(2001) and Richardson and Swan (2003) argue that community building can limit
feelings of isolation and improves satisfaction, retention and learning. Woodley (2004)
submits that while accepting that social integration is relevant, focusing on how to
increase levels Of integration is necessary.

In recent years there has been a noticeable shift from studying the technical and
operational aspects of online learning to focus on the learning and the aspects of
successful learners and design. This literature has provided the necessary background
for understanding several of the components of learning and how they relate speciﬁcally

to online environments.

27

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY

Introduction

 

Online environments are a relatively new context in which learning takes place.
As a result, studies and observations have been made from a variety of aspects in an
attempt to understand the experience. An area that has prompted inquiry is the high rate
of attrition in online environments. Although there are no deﬁnitive conclusions as to
why attrition iS high, many have used variations and expansions of Tinto’s (1987) model
of the Longitudinal —Process Model of Drop-Out to better understand the phenomenon.

Secondly, some have questioned the quality of learning that takes place and have
compared online learning to traditional face-to-face environments in order to better
understand how the modality of online impacts learning. Many have found that there is
no signiﬁcant difference between the two environments. These studies have primarily
used grade point averages as the measurement for the comparison. Although this, in and
of itself, may be a signiﬁcant interpretation of success, it does not necessarily provide any
insights into the complexity of the learning process. Dewey (193 8), Knowles (1970),
Mezirow (1981), and Schon (1983) hold the view that experience and critical reﬂection
are key aspects of learning and recognize that variables outside the formal setting should
be considered as part of the entire learning experience.

Not all educators Share the same view regarding the role of instructor and the role
of the learner in the learning experience. Many behaviorists believe that course content is
separate from the identity, personal context and experiences of the learner, and that the
learner’s behavior can be manipulated through activities and content. The constructivists

view of learning, however, suggests that the creation of meaning is inﬂuenced by an

28

individual’s reality and that experience is the foundation from which meaning can be
derived and constructed. From this perspective, teaching and learning is a dialogue and
exchange between facilitator and pupil and suggests that learning is reciprocal. The role
of the instructor, therefore, is to facilitate and assist the learner in negotiating meaning.
F urtherrnore, Habermas (1970) and Mezirow (1991) believe learning and transformation
occurs when the individual has reﬂected on an experience and reconciled new
information with prior information and constructs new meaning, which in essence
enlarges the learner’s view of and interaction with the world and prepares the learner for
subsequent experiences. Schon (1983) submits that not only the learner but the
instructor as well must also engage in the practice of reﬂection in order to create new
meaning and understanding of the practice of teaching and learning. This paradigm of
teaching and learning will be used as the philosophical framework for this investigation.

Finally, Garrison’s (1997) model of Self-Directed Learning provides a framework
in which the learner’s role in the learning process is recognized. Using the
constructivist’s lens, Garrison argues, “motivation and responsibility are reciprocally
related and both are facilitated by collaborative control of the educational transaction”
(p.29).

The constructivist’s perspective combined with the theoretical constructs of Tinto
and Garrison imply an iterative and dynamic relationship between learner, instructor,

content and context which will be explored in this study.

29

Research Methodology

The process of learning is a complex human phenomenon that resists any one
formula that would address needs and motivations of the learner, the content and context
for learning, and the social and meta-cognitive dynamic of the learning experience.
Because the interaction between learner and instructor is a complex and dynamic system
that is impacted by individual characteristics and factors, this study used a holistic
perspective and relied on inductive analysis.

In studying this phenomenon it is important to recognize its highly subjective
nature. Certainly, there are aspects to teaching and learning that can be understood
through a positivist perspective, yet the complexity of the phenomenon does not fall
neatly into one theoretical construct. Teaching and learning is not static, it is dynamic.
This very nature of teaching and learning encourages a broader holistic View of a very
human experience and may vary from individual to individual and from situation to
situation. This study does not attempt to draw any conclusions that can be generalized to
a broader population. It does however, attempt to explore the nature of teaching and
learning in one particular experience among a speciﬁc group of individuals. As a result,
a qualitative approach is used and follows the canons and procedures of grounded theory
(Creswell, 2003; Glaser & Strauss, 1967). The process is emic in focus; is concerned
with the perspective of individuals directly involved in the process or activity of learning
online.

The study examined the extent to which instructors in online environments
consider the Speciﬁc factors that impact the students’ learning experience, as well as

explored ways in which the learner can be encouraged to be more conscious of the

30

learning process. The study investigated instructors’ views of the following four areas of
focus: (1) Learner Self-Direction; (2) Learner Reﬂection; (3) Learner Community; and
(4) Learner Persistence.

Each of the areas of focus was guided by a series of inquiry questions which, in
turn, provided the basis for probing questions which were used when gathering Speciﬁc
input from instructors. The inquiry was designed to determine the process of the
phenomenon of online teaching and learning and to focus on how things happen rather

than attempting to give a deﬁnitive explanation of why they happen (Maxwell, 1996).

Area of Focus and Lines of Inquiry
This study used three speciﬁc lines of inquiry to examine four broader areas of
focus of undergraduate learning online. Each of the areas of focus and their lines of

inquiry are presented below.

Focus Area 1: Learner Self-Direction

The ﬁrst area of focus is learner self-direction. Within this area of focus the ﬁrst
line of inquiry addresses how learner self-direction is encouraged in online environments.
The second line of inquiry addresses whether instructors have seen effective strategies
that encourage learner self-direction. The third line of inquiry addresses the barriers that

inhibit learner self-direction.

31

Focus Area 2: Learner Reﬂection

The second area of focus is learner self-direction. Within this area of focus the
ﬁrst line of inquiry addresses how learner reﬂection is encouraged in online
environments. The second line of inquiry addresses whether instructors have seen
effective strategies that encourage learner reﬂection. The third line of inquiry addresses

the barriers that inhibit learner reﬂection.

Focus Area 3: Learner Community

The third area of focus is learner self-direction. Within this area of focus the ﬁrst
line of inquiry addresses how learner community is encouraged in online environments.
The second line of inquiry addresses whether instructors have seen effective strategies
that encourage learner community. The third line of inquiry addresses the barriers that

inhibit learner community.

Focus Area 4: Learner Persistence

The fourth area of focus is learner persistence. Within this area of focus the ﬁrst
line of inquiry addresses how learner persistence is encouraged in online environments.
The second line of inquiry addresses whether instructors have seen effective strategies
that encourage learner persistence. The third line of inquiry addresses the barriers that

inhibit learner persistence.

32

Study Participants

 

The study participants were drawn from a regional state university located in
Michigan. This institution had a predominantly undergraduate focus and enrolled
approximately 22,000 students. Although the University has no formally recognized
online programming, it does offer a relatively large number of online courses, particularly
at the undergraduate level. Most students enrolled in Intemet-based courses generally
come from three counties, all within a 40 mile radius of the university’s main campus.

In 2006, there were 1,580 enrollments in Internet-based courses and the University has
increased the number of sections offered from 18 sections Offered in 2002 to 92 sections
offered in 2006.

The study participants in this study were instructors of online undergraduate
courses. The study participants were identiﬁed through the university’s Ofﬁce of
Distance Education and the sample was drawn from a list of instructors who were either
currently teaching an online course or had offered at least one online course within the
past three semesters. There were 21 instructors on the list provided by the Ofﬁce of
Distance Education who had either taught online during the Spring/ Summer semester of
2006 or the Fall semester of 2006. A contact letter was sent via email outlining the sc0pe
of the study and requesting participation and was followed by a personal contact from the
researcher. The Michigan State University Human Subjects protocol was carefully
followed and executed, as well as that of the study site. Because the researcher was an
employee of the institution where the study was conducted, all respondents were
informed of the researcher’s role within the institution as well as how the data may be

used as a baseline for future studies about distance education within the university.

33

Conﬁdentiality of the study participants was assured. In—depth face-to-face interviews
were conducted with 11 study participants.

Eleven undergraduate instructors were interviewed. The interviews were primarily
conducted in the ofﬁce of the instructor, in a conference room on the campus of the
university, and on one occasion, off the university premises in a public gathering place.

Of the 11 participants, seven of the participants were female and four were male.
They ranged in age from approximately 30 to 65 years of age. Most had been teaching at
the university level for over ﬁve years and had taught multiple sections of online courses.
They varied in professional status from adjunct instructor to associate professor. The
instructors also represented several disciplines including Education, Writing, Criminal
Justice, Liberal Studies and Nursing. Among the participants, six lived within the
immediate vicinity of the university, traveling less than 20 miles to the main campus,
while ﬁve lived 50 or more miles outside the immediate vicinity of the main campus of
the university.

The following is a short proﬁle of each participant. All information is accurate;
however the age of the participants is only estimation. No information other than their
names has been changed. Names were changed in order to honor the conﬁdentiality of

the participants.

Adam Adam had taught at the university for approximately six years and had taught ﬁve
undergraduate courses online. His expertise is technology and has taught several
introductory course on technology in education. He selected to teach online classes

primarily because he enjoys technology and believes future teachers must be prepared in

34

the uses Of technology. Adam is 30-35 years of age. He is married and has two young
children. He ﬁnds that teaching online has created ﬂexibility and afforded him more time
with his family. Adam lives in the immediate vicinity of the main campus of the
institution.

Beg Beth has been teaching for approximately 14 years and has taught ﬁve courses on
line. The course she taught online is a course on diversity. She was initially asked to
teach the course online to accommodate a number of students who were taking classes at
one of the university’s satellite campuses. Beth is 50-5 5 years of age. Beth lives outside
the immediate vicinity of the main campus of the institution and commutes more than 50

miles each way.

Coptic Connie has been teaching for a number of years. She has taught at the
community college and at the university level. Her area of expertise is writing. She
originally taught online to accommodate students at the University satellite campuses but
also taught online in order to fulﬁll her teaching load. Connie is single and is 50-55 years
of age. Connie lives outside the immediate vicinity of the main campus of the institution.
Her main ofﬁce is housed at a university satellite campus which is approximately 230

miles from the main campus.

Denise Denise has been teaching for a number of years both at the community college
level and at the university level. Her area of expertise is educational psychology. She
has taught both undergraduate and graduate courses. Denise chose to teach online

because of the ﬂexibility it affords her. Denise is 45-55 years of age. She lives outside

35

the immediate vicinity of the main campus of the institution and commutes more than

100 miles each way.

Edy/1rd Edward has taught at the university for a number of years and his expertise is
educational technology and teaches the introductory undergraduate course in technology
online. Edward teaches online because the majority of Introduction to Technology
courses offered at the undergraduate level are offered online. He is 50-55 years of age.

Edward lives within the immediate vicinity of the main campus.

.1211le Frank has taught for a number of years and has taught only one course online. He
has taught at the university for approximately two years and spends his summers abroad.
He teaches both undergraduate and graduate courses and has taught one online at the
undergraduate level. Frank chose to teach online primarily during the summer because
he is able to spend the entire summer abroad while continuing to teach. He is 55-60 years
of age. He lives in the immediate vicinity of the main campus and in the summer lives

abroad.

gm; Gloria has been teaching at the institution for over 20 years. She has taught both
undergraduate and graduate courses. She has taught using a variety of technologies to
include satellite and interactive television formats. She also advises incoming students.
She chose to teach online because of the program’s outreach efforts to non-traditional
students. Gloria is 5 5-60 years of age and lives within the immediate vicinity of the main

campus of the institution.

36

Howard Howard has been teaching undergraduate writing courses for over 30 years and
has taught online each semester for the past Six years. The course he teaches online is
required of all university students. The course was offered online originally to provide
options to students. The writing course he teaches is offered primarily online, there are
few face-to- face sections. Howard enjoys teaching online due in part because he
conducts much of his business transactions online and enjoys the ﬂexibility of the format.
He is 55-60 years old and lives within the immediate vicinity of the university’s main

campus.

Irene Irene had taught in several disciplines to include liberal studies, literature and
writing. She has taught two online sections of an undergraduate writing class. This
course is a required course for all university students. She originally was asked and
agreed to teach an online section of the required writing class very late in the semester.
Following that she agreed to teach it a second time. Irene originally taught as a high
school English teacher. She is approximately 30 years old, is married and has two young

daughters. Irene lives within the immediate vicinity of the university’s main campus.

1% Joyce has taught several times at the institution and previously was a tenured
faculty member at one of the large public institutions in Michigan. She has taught ﬁve
sections of online courses including at her previous institution. At the undergraduate
level, she has taught diversity in education. Joyce chose to teach online because She is

located well outside the immediate vicinity of the university, has her own private

37

company and still wants to remain connected to the university environment. She is
approximately 50 years old. She is married and lives approximately 230 miles from the

university’s main campus.

Km Karen has been teaching online for many years and has taught instructional
design. She has taught both graduate and undergraduate students and her expertise is
educational technology in the public school system. Karen has recently joined the staff at
the institution and has taught two sections face-to-face and two sections of an online
undergraduate technology course. She is approximately 50 years old and lives outside

the immediate vicinity of the university’s main campus.

Interview Guide

 

The interview guide was developed to provide the interviewer and the study
participant an opportunity to discuss in-depth the various facets of each of the key areas
of inquiry to include: Learner Self-direction; Learner Reﬂection; Learner Community;
and Learner Persistence. Operational deﬁnitions of each of the key areas were outlined
in order to maintain the continuity between the interviewer and the study participants.
The interview guide not only provided the questions necessary to reveal subtleties of the
teaching and learning dynamic but also allowed for a semi-formal approach to the
interview. This allowed the interview to follow a natural communication and

conversational style and tone. The complete interview guide is found in Appendix A.

38

Procedures for Data Collection

Michigan State University Human Subjects protocol was carefully followed and
executed as well as that of the university where the study was conducted. The
investigator sent out an electronic post, written by the investigator (Appendix B),
explaining the purpose and intention of the proposed study including an invitation to
participate to those instructors currently teaching an online undergraduate course or who
had taught an online course within the past three semesters. The post was followed up
with a personal phone call from the investigator.

Those agreeing to participate were sent an electronic version of the Participant
Consent Form (Appendix C) by the investigator for signature. The Participant Consent
Form insured the participant that although his/her comments would be used in the study,
individual identities would be kept conﬁdential. The investigator provided a self-
addressed stamped envelope to be returned with the signed consent form to the
investigator via the US. Postal Service. Copies of the signed form were provided to the
study participants upon request. Those who agreed to participate and signed the
Participant Consent Form were contacted by the investigator via electronic post or phone
and a day and time for the interview was arranged.

One week before the interview was conducted a post was sent electronically to the
participant reminding him/her of the purpose of the study as well as the time, date, and
location. The investigator also provided the study participants with contact information in
the event any unforeseen circumstances were present and personal scheduling conﬂicts
arose. Several interviews were postponed or rescheduled but no participant, after having

agreed to participate in the study, later declined to participate and withdrew. Before

39

conducting the interview, the investigator asked permission of the study participants to
audio record the interviews in order to accurately capture the interview data. All study
participants agreed to be recorded. It was also made clear that the audio recordings and
the individual transcripts of the interviews would be destroyed after completion of the
investigation. Before each interview, all study participants were given a review of the
purpose of the study and of the interview and asked whether they had any questions or
concerns. They were once again assured of the conﬁdentiality of their identify. If there
were questions or concerns, they were addressed at that time. No study participant
expressed any concerns that were left unresolved.

Semi- structured and in-depth interviews were conducted in- person. Interviews
were audio recorded and a transcribed hard copy was ﬁled for review and analysis. This
aided the investigator in capturing accurate data. The Interviewer Guide was structured
in a manner that allowed for comments and notes to be added during the interview that
did not hinder the ﬂow of the conversation.

The interviewer made every attempt to create a relaxed and casual environment in
which to conduct the interview. All interviews were conducted at a location chosen by
the study participant and all but three were conducted in the study participants’ ofﬁce.
The intent was to create an environment that allowed the interaction between the
participant and investigator that was conversational in style and facilitated ﬂexibility.
Notes were taken during the interviews for added clariﬁcations and observations made
during the interview to include facial expressions and gestures. This aided in clarifying
any ambiguities or subtleties not evident in the audiotape. Immediately following each

interview, the notes and initial observations were expanded and emerging themes were

40

noted for later use when constructing the coding table and rubric for analysis. Following
the “formal” outlined interview, participants were asked whether they had any additional
comments or observations they would like to add, and upon conclusion of the interview,
and were asked permission to be contacted again should there be a need for any
clariﬁcation or follow up. All participants agreed to further contact if required. The
participant was thanked for his/her participation and the interview was concluded.

A formal thank you for participation in the study (Appendix D) was sent to the
participant either the same day as the interview or no later than one week after the
interview was conducted. A postscript was added to the thank you note reminding those

who had agreed to a possible follow up that they may be contacted again in the future.

Treating, Coding and Analyzing Data

Qualitative data analysis requires thorough review of the data gathered and
requires careful attention to themes and patterns. The recorded interviews were carefully
transcribed verbatim. Each transcript was read and re-read numerous times, paying
careful attention to emerging themes and patterns. Codes were developed based on the
emerging themes. This was an iterative process where codes were added, combined,
revised and reﬁned as data were read, reviewed and reﬂected. From this a coding table
was constructed and a rubric developed for interpreting the data. The coding table was
constructed with several factors in mind: it was important to provide a one word or short
phrase description of the theme or concept that was emerging; a tag was assigned with a
speciﬁc operational deﬁnition for the code; a rule for use of the tag was created to further

specify the meaning of the code and when it is used; and ﬁnally an example of a situation

41

identifying when the code was applied and when the code was not applied. The
additional clariﬁcation was to avoid any potential miscoding of the intent and description
of the code.

A matrix was also created after all data were coded. The matrix provided a list of
the codes on the x-axis while Speciﬁcally identifying the direct quotes or paraphrased
comments on the y-axis. This was a large compilation of the data and provided a means
to view the overlaps and redundancies that existed, as well as provided an opportunity to
compare and contrast responses. The matrix provided a means to further organize the data

while providing additional opportunity for careful scrutiny and reﬂection of the data.

Timeline
The interviews were conducted over a period of three months from September
until November of 2006. Transcription and initial analysis of the data was also conducted
during this time frame. Once the interviews and transcripts were completed a careful
analysis was conducted over the months of December, January, and February of 2006-07.

The data and analysis of the data are presented in Chapter IV.

42

CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS

Introduction

 

The central purpose of this study was to describe instructor’s observations of the
following four aspects of online learning: (1) Learner Self-Direction; (2) Learner
Reﬂection; (3) Learner Community; and (4) Learner Persistence. The secondary purpose
of this investigation was to identify Speciﬁc characteristics of the online learning
experience that may assist instructors, learners, and institutions in better understanding
how to improve upon the overall teaching and learning experience of online formats.
This chapter presents the ﬁndings from 11 in-depth undergraduate instructor interviews
which were conducted over a three month period. The instructors who were selected to
be interviewed were either teaching an undergraduate online course during the Fall
semester of 2006 or had taught a course during the previous semester of Summer 2006.
Instructors came from a variety of disciplines including nursing, criminal justice,
education, and the humanities. The site for the investigation was a comprehensive
university located in Michigan’s Lower Peninsula. The University has approximately
23,000 students with approximately 19,000 undergraduate students enrolled in the Fall of
2006.

The study investigated instructor observations of four areas speciﬁcally related to
teaching and learning online. The in-depth interviews focused on instructor views of
learner self-direction, learner reﬂection, learner community, and learner persistence.
Within each focus area, three lines of inquiry were explored. Instructors were asked to
identify how they encouraged the learner, whether they had seen effective strategies that

encouraged the learner, and ﬁnally participants were asked to identify the barriers that

43

inhibited the learner. This process was applied for each of the four areas of focus: learner
self-direction; learner reﬂection; learner community; and learner persistence.

The organization of Chapter IV describes the participant views of the four aspects
of learning online identiﬁed in this study (1) Learner Self-Direction, (2) Learner
Reﬂection, (3) Learner Community and (4) Learner Persistence. Within each area, the

ﬁndings are reported, described, and emergent themes derived.

Instructor Views of Learner Self— Direction

Learner self—direction is the extent to which the learner takes responsibility and
initiative for planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating his or her own learning,
with or without explicit guidance or direction from another (Knowles, 1975; Tough,
1979). In online learning environments learners often work alone and independently.
The learning environment is asynchronous, permitting each learner to participate in the
class at a time they ﬁnd most convenient. Given these characteristics, instructors were
asked to describe their observations of learner self-direction and how they viewed the
role of self-direction in online learning. Do they encourage learner self -direction and if
so, how? Have they seen effective techniques or strategies for self-directed learning and
what, if any, are the barriers that inhibited learner self-direction?

When asked about the importance of self-direction in online learning, the study
participants were very deﬁnite in their views. In addition to viewing self-direction as a
pre-requisite to success in online learning, Beth identiﬁed learner commitment as a

necessary factor for online learning.

44

“I just think it’s a must. Students can’t succeed in online courses, I don’t think, if
they aren’t really committed.” (Beth)

She went on to say:

“I think it’s [online learning] akin to doing independent study. The student has to
be disciplined to do things on his or her own without consistent guidance.” (Beth)

Other study participants were equally clear in their view of the need for learner self-
direction.
“It’s very important. You’ve got to be focused.” (Frank)
“I think it’s absolutely critical.” (Gloria)
“Oh, it’s immense. Self-direction is what makes you check it [online course site] a
couple of times a week rather than just once a week or once every two weeks and
hope that you’re ok on assignments.” (Karen)
“1 think a student needs a high level of self-direction. This being about the 5th
time I’ve done this. Without exception my grades will be bimodal. I will have
students who are highly self-directed. They’ll do the work, they’ll go above and
beyond and they will get A’s. Some might earn B’s. There will be students who
will either drop out or be in the D or F category because they just can’t direct
themselves to do it.” (Joyce)
Irene compared the need for self-direction in an online environment with the need for
self-direction in a face-to-face environment.
“I ﬁnd that my online students have to have a little bit more self-direction than my
students in class because they don’t have me to ask questions of all the time. I’m
not constantly reinforcing what I’m expecting out of their papers.” (Irene)
Encouragement of Learner Self-Direction
Study participants identiﬁed a variety of methods used to encourage self-direction
in online learning. A total of 15 different methods were identiﬁed as being used to

encourage learner self-direction. Table 1 presents the methods identiﬁed by each of the

study participants.

45

Table 1
Methods for Encouraging Self-Direction

 

Post expectations
Post syllabus
Pre-class letter
Online orientation

Ask student
expectations

Face to Face
meeting

Pod casts/stream
casts

Audio tape

Study guides/study
tips

Advising
Calendar/Timelines
Email reminders
Consultant/Assistant
Assignements

Grades/points

 

Adam Beth Connie Denise

X

X

X

X
X
X

Edward Frank Gloria Howard Irene Joyce Karen
X X X
X X X X

X
X
X

 

Three participants identiﬁed one learning method they used to encourage self-

directed learning while many of the Study participants identiﬁed more than one method.

The most common method used by the study participants to encourage self-direction was

to post the syllabus and to provide a detailed explanation of expectations to the online

learners at the onset of the course. Beth and Adam stressed the importance of posting the

information immediately.

“They have my syllabus right away; I usually post it online along with all
the assignments.” (Beth)

46

“I write up snippets of what my expectations are so the very ﬁrst week of

class I talk about what those expectations are, and then I post them to the online
class.” (Adam)

“I give them lots of explanation in the syllabus and again in the orientation. The
orientation is a long discussion of what I’m doing and why I’m doing it.”

(Connie)

Adam also gives additional information to students by providing a link to expectations
that students can access anytime during the semester.

“I have a website that I make and one of the big links on the website is
expectations with regard to class discussions and expectations with regard to

labs.” (Adam)

Beth compared the online course with that of a face-to face course, stressing the need for
students to be more independent in the online learning environment.

“I make it very clear to them [the students] that the expectations for online
learning are deﬁnitely comparable to an in class environment but that they [the
students] are more independent. In order to succeed they have to take
responsibility for that independence and work more independently toward the
goal.” (Beth)

Similarly, Gloria also explicitly reminded students that they must be self-directed in the
online class if they intend to succeed. She also encouraged the learner to evaluate
whether an online format was the best format choice for their learning inclination.
“I think that one thing you have to do with students is tell them what is going to
occur and tell them that unless they are self-directed, maybe taking an online
course is just not the way for them to go.” (Gloria)
Both Beth and Frank contacted the learners shortly before the class began to welcome
them and provide them with an overview of expectations of the course.

“I send all my online students a ‘pre-class’ letter.” (Beth)

“First thing they’ve got is a welcome letter. You tell them
what you’re going to do, how you’re going to do it.” (Frank)

47

Frank also required his students to participate in an online orientation which reviewed the
technical components of online learning.

“They’ve got to do the orientation [online]. I require them to do it.”
(Frank)

Beth speciﬁcally asked students their expectations of the course and what they had hoped
to accomplish as a way to encourage self-direction.

“I have 4-5 questions that I give to them online about what their expectations are
of the course, what they hope to learn.” (Beth)

A number of instructors met face-to-face with students, or attempted to meet face-to-face,
as part of an orientation to the online environment and speciﬁcally to review the syllabus
and expectations of the course.

“The very ﬁrst meeting is face-to-face.” (Adam)

“I bring it [syllabus] with me to my ﬁrst meeting with the students.” (Beth)

“I’ve had problems with the orientation session [held face-to-face].
I make it mandatory and they still don’t come.” (Connie)

Both Frank and Edward used other forms of technology to outline requirements and
course information.
“I made an audio ﬁle for them, which is an mp3 audio ﬁle that they can download,
and it’s welcome and explains to them what they’ve actually read. I’m giving
them all the stuff they may require.” (Frank)
“I tried some things that I thought would help. For example, I started doing
podcasts and streamcasts so that students could have access to the lectures that I
typically do [in face-to-face].” (Edward)
Frank also provided speciﬁc links and documents encouraging learning strategies while
Gloria explicitly outlined the need for self-direction in an online learning environment

during advising sessions with potential online learners.

“There’s a study guide and in this folder are a number of documents

48

that relate to study strategies. There’s note taking guides, study strategies,
preparing to Study, and preparing yourself to succeed.” (Frank)

“I’m also an advisor for students and I talk to them about taking an online format

versus an onsite format. I tell them they really have to keep on schedule, keep up

with the calendar, and keep up to date with all of the assignments because if they

get behind, they’re lost.” (Gloria)
Similar to Gloria, many of the instructors also commented on the need to provide the
learners with speciﬁc timelines, due dates, and deadlines. In some cases, the study
participants provided a detailed calendar and a suggested timeframe for initiation and
completion of tasks. In this way, the learners were explicitly directed in how to manage
their time when involved in an online class.

“Everything is on a deadline.” (Connie)

“I do it with due dates. I set up a very detailed calendar at the beginning of

each of the courses. I do a calendar where I say Unit 1 will start on this date

and will end 5 days later.” (Gloria)

“I always have everything posted and every Friday they turn something in and
they have to have something posted on blackboard.” (Irene)

“There’s a lot of work. It’s all in the syllabus; suggested time frame for
completion of course readings and submission of required tasks. They’ve got it in
the syllabus. I tell them to print it out and pin it on the fridge. This is important.”
(Frank)

“I long ago gave up the proceed-at-your-own- pace type of class for this class.
They [the students] have to do it by a certain time.” (Howard)

In addition to providing the syllabus online, explicitly outlining expectations, and
providing detailed timelines, Adam, Beth, and Irene often found it important and
necessary to periodically remind the learners of due dates and assignments.

“I will email students and say what you’re doing so far is not quite up to par.”
(Adam)

“Typically the ﬁrst time a student misses an assignment I’ll email them and
tell them I didn’t get something this week, and ask them to give it to me get it to

49

me right away, ASAP.” (Adam)

“I’m reminding them on the discussion board all the time of things that are due.

If I notice that some of the students are not keeping pace I remind them that that’s
a must to succeed in this online course.” (Beth)

“When I see that they aren’t doing that [posting], I kind of encourage them.

I usually send speciﬁc emails, just individually to them to remind them, then I say
this is the last time I’m going to remind you, it’s up to you to keep

up to date with this.” (Irene)

“Sometimes they don’t fully appreciate what I’ve spelled out as far as my
expectations so they need more coaxing.” (Beth)

No instructor, other than Irene, was assisted by an “in-class” consultant. In Irene’s case,
the consultant was a writing consultant who was able to work individually with students
twice per week.
“I have an online writing consultant who helps them and she helps every
Wednesday and Thursday. She’s got a couple of hours that she can go on and talk
to them.” (Irene)
Several instructors believed that self-direction could be encouraged through the class

assignments.

“I think that my assignments do that. I think you have to structure it accordingly.”
(Connie)

“Students have to be responsible and some of this is just the way the assignments
are set up force them to be [self-directed].” (Connie)

“I did some work with critical incident reﬂection. I just felt they weren’t being
introspective enough. They were going through the hoops for me, but we weren’t
touching their soul where they live.” (Denise)
Several instructors felt that one way to encourage self-direction among learners was to
provide a direct relationship to the grade or points received on assignments.
“When I do an online discussion, we’ll open the discussion on Monday morning
at 10:00. We’ll close on Sunday night at 10:00. You have to have done the

reading by that point, you have to contribute during that week. If you miss that
opportunity you lose those points.” (Joyce)

50

“I’ll let students know what the parameters are so, if the second week of class
somebody is still falling behind, I’ll let them know again but after that point
they’ll get lower points.” (Adam)

“They’re out there for grades. I guess the only way you can encourage self-
direction is if the grade isn’t reﬂective of what the student wants.” (Karen)

Similarly to Karen, Howard believed that students were self-directed based on outside
motivations particularly as they related to personal objectives, in one particular case,
employment.

“They [the student] may have graduated except for this course. In fact right now I
have one student who is waiting on a job, had the job offer, but can’t take the job
without this course. The student completed everything else, had the interview, got
the job except for this, so he’s well self-directed.” (Howard)

Several study participants felt they had little control over encouraging learner self-
direction.

“I think if there is a way I haven’t really ﬁgured out what it is, but I think it’s
probably an institutional problem. I think it is when students are going to use this
approach in their own learning that they need to perhaps go through some kind of
a quick seminar for an afternoon and talk about the speciﬁc steps it takes to be an
independent learner.” (Joyce)

“I don’t know if I think I have the ability to encourage. I think I have the ability

to facilitate the opportunity for students to become self-directed and be involved

within their own learning. I’m not so sure that I can teach that, I can promote it. I
can facilitate the opportunity.” (Denise)

“I’m not sure if there is anything I could do more that could get them to invest
more.” (Denise)

“I don’t know how to, I don’t know what I do to help with their being self-
directed. I put guideposts out there. So that’s not helping them be self-directed
because they still have to meet those external guideposts, so I don’t know.”
(Karen)

51

Effective Techniques for Self-Directed Learning

Of the 11 participants interviewed, no study participant indicated that he or She
had seen any other instructors apply any effective techniques or strategies for self-
directed learning.

Interviewer: Have you participated in any techniques or seen other faculty or
instructors use similar or different techniques to encourage self-directed learning?

“Oh, no, I have not.” (Adam)
“No” (Beth)

“I haven’t seen. When you do an online class I’ve just adapted what I do to the
online format, so I don’t know how other people do it necessarily.” (Connie)

“We’ve [instructors] discussed it. I guess the way I design my course compared
to the others [instructors] just didn’t lend itself to the online.” (Edward)

“No, not at all.”(Frank)
“Well, not really. I haven’t really talked to anyone.” (Gloria)
Beth indicated she had worked with an instructional designer experienced in online
design to determine the most effective strategies.
“When I was asked to develop this course I got in touch with the instructional
designer. She’s terriﬁc and She’s super knowledgeable. She coached me. She has
a lot and has had a lot of experience before we had met with teaching online and
she shared a lot of her personal experiences and things that worked for her and
things that maybe didn’t.” (Beth)
When asked whether they had seen students use effective self-direction strategies, several
instructors commented on strategies they’ve seen students use which were generally
either through question and answer with instructor and/or other students, or through some
type of calendar or visual reminder.
“Class questions and announcements. Last semester a student posted a question

that said ‘I’m having trouble with this particular assignment, I don’t know how to
get started.’ Other students would then respond and say ‘here’s a strategy I used.’

52

 

So in that sense I can see that other students had kind of self-starting strategies.”
(Adam)

“Most of the time they [questions] are asked to me other students will jump in
before I log in and respond to the student. 80 they help one another.” (Adam)

“They’ve [students] shared things they’ve done. Whether it’s keeping their palm
pilot or keeping a calendar. Some of them post their calendars on the refrigerator
for the whole family to see so that they [the family] know that mom or dad at this
point needs to be doing such and such or they have a big paper due or whatever.”
(Gloria)

“They’re similar to strategies I’ve seen in in-person classrooms, setting up a

calendar, a visual reminder of when they have to do things. I think that’s
especially important in an online class.” (Joyce)

Barriers That Inhibit Learner Self-Direction

Of the 11 study participants, 4 recognized and acknowledged several barriers to

learner self-direction. Table 2 presents the seven barriers identiﬁed by the participants.

Table 2
Barriers to Learner Self-Direction

 

Adam Beth Comic Denise Edward Frank Gloria Howard Irene Joyce Karen
Procrastination X

Lack of technology X
skills

Previous learning X X
experiences/pattems

Student needs more X
support

Expectations X

Lack of community

Lack of conﬁdence
to admit need for
assistance in
writing

 

Adam identiﬁed procrastination as a barrier to self-direction. He also acknowledged that

one reason learners may procrastinate is because of their lack of technology skills.

53

“Students procrastinate a lot. A lot of students procrastinate and I can’t emphasize
that enough because I know when stuff gets turned in and it’s always or almost
always at the last minute for about 80% of the students.” (Adam)

“I think a lot of them procrastinate because they lack some of the technology
Skills.” (Adam)

Adam also identiﬁed previous learning experiences and patterns, particularly the amount
of reinforcement or direction provided by previous instructors as a barrier to self-
direction for some online students.
“There are some students who are so used to going through school and having that
teacher who held their hand all along saying this is what’s due, this is when it’s
due, here’s some class time to work on it, and now suddenly, here’s a week, log in
when you want to and to get stuff turned in you have until Sunday night at 6:00.”
(Adam)
Similarly, Beth felt that some learners required more direction, which she also termed
“hand holding.” Joyce identiﬁed that students may enroll in an online class with a set of
expectations that may not be aligned with the reality of the structure of the course.
“I had a student this week in the face-to-face meeting of this online class who said
to me, ‘You told us this in class but then you didn’t reinforce that by writing
online that this is due at such and such a date.’ My reaction was that if this were a
face-to-face class, I would tell you in class and that would be it. So, somehow he
had a different expectation because it was an online class.” (Joyce)
Karen attributed the lack of community and interaction with other students as a possible
barrier to self-direction in an online environment.
“I think if the student is out there by themselves, if they haven’t become part of
the learning community, I think that hinders them because they don’t get support
from their fellow students as they would in the face-to-face classroom.” (Karen)
Karen also noted that learners may be uncomfortable in acknowledging that they may
need assistance from the instructor and viewed this as a barrier to self-direction.
“I think it’s that students sometimes believe that it’s a point of weakness to ask an

instructor for help; showing that they don’t know what to do. I get that in face- to-
face classes but I think it’s even harder, more difﬁcult for students to email an

54

instructor and state, ‘I don’t understand this, I’m lost’... because it’s written, it’s
there, it’s concrete.” (Karen)

Emergent Thematic Categories: Learner Self-Direction

 

The 15 speciﬁc strategies identiﬁed by the instructors as ways that they encourage
learner self-direction, along with the seven barriers to learner self-direction they
identiﬁed, were further analyzed to see if there were any natural thematic categories that
existed within the data. Three thematic categories emerged from the collected data
through the analysis. The three thematic categories that emerged from the collected data
are: (1) Identifying, Outlining, and Aligning Expectations; (2) Providing Frequent
Guidance, Direction and Insistence; and (3) Recognizing and Accepting Learner
Motivations.

Iden’diying, Outlining, and Aligning Expectations Identifying, outlining, and
aligning expectations early and making those expectations clear and apparent emerged
from the data as an important theme that describes what instructors do to encourage
learner self-direction. Participants identiﬁed the learner’s need to understand how online
learning environments were different than face-to-face learning environments and noted
that the learner did not always recognize the differences between the two learning
formats. This often led to misaligned expectations of the demands and skills necessary for
success in the online learning environment. Although there was recognition among the
participants that identifying, outlining, and aligning expectations were important, not all
study participants communicated their expectations Similarly and a variety of techniques
and strategies were employed. The techniques and strategies to identify and outline

expectations ranged from posting the syllabus, to explicit descriptions and discussion. In

55

several instances study participants held face-to-face meetings, while others used
technology such as audio ﬁles and stream casts to outline and clarify expectations.
However, despite the varying methods used, the relevance and importance of identifying,
outlining and aligning expectations emerged as a common theme among the study

participants with respect to learner self-direction in online learning environments.

Providing Frequent Guidance, Direction and Insistence A second theme that
emerged from the data that instructors identiﬁed as inﬂuencing self-direction among
online learners was the providing of frequent guidance, direction and insistence. There
was a clear recognition from the study participants that students often required additional
reminders or further clariﬁcation beyond the initial outline of expectations and overview
of the course. The study participants provided guidance, direction, and insistence through
various means including face-to-face and personal email contact as well as explicit
outlines and calendars of course timelines. Study participants acknowledged that the
learner must adhere to timelines and due dates and recognized that students often found
adherence to timelines difﬁcult. Study participants identiﬁed procrastination and poor
adherence to timelines as some of the reasons why they provided frequent guidance,
direction and insistence in their online learning environments. The way in which the
study participants provided frequent guidance, direction and insistence took several
forms. Some instructors cajoled the learner through positive reinforcement and
additional opportunities to satisfy requirements while others were strict in their methods

by lower a grade or awarding fewer points to the assignment or project.

56

Recognizigg and Accepting Learner Motivations The third theme that emerged
from the data regarding instructors’ encouragement of learner self-direction was
recognition and acceptance that the decision to self-direct was ultimately the
responsibility of the learner. The study participants believed the decision to self-direct
was often based on the learner’s personal motivations and expectations. In several
instances, the study participants reinforced and/or explicitly stated the necessity for self-
direction, yet they recognized that students were enrolled in the course for a variety of
reasons and were guided by their own personal motivations. These personal motivations
were often key to the learner’s desire and commitment to self-direct and were beyond the

inﬂuence of the instructor.

Instructor Views of Learner Reﬂection

Learner reﬂection is the ability of the learner to reﬂect on prior experience and
connect it with new information. The learner is conscious of self and examines
previously held beliefs and assumptions through reﬂection in order to arrive at a new
conclusion (Baxter Magolda, 1992; Brookﬁeld, 1987; Friere, 1976; Jarvis, 1987;
Mezirow, 1991; Perry, 1981; Schon, 1983). The learner is an active and engaged
participant in the experience and learning is not a passive activity. In online learning
environments instructors are unable to see the physical and non-verbal communications
of the learner, which often reinforce the level of a student’s understanding,
comprehension, and intellectual growth. Given this characteristic, instructors were asked
to identify observations of learner reﬂection they had made and how they viewed the role

of learner reﬂection in online learning. Do they encourage learner reﬂection and if so,

57

 

how? Have they seen effective techniques or strategies for learner reﬂection and what, if
any, are the barriers that inhibit learner reﬂection?

Irene compared how she identiﬁes the reﬂective process in her face-to-face
classroom as Opposed to the difﬁculty in recognizing reﬂection in the online
environment.

“It’s so hard to see in an online class. Students in my [face-to-face] classroom I

can deﬁnitely see it, I can deﬁnitely see that they’re kind of realizing things as

they’re discussing them. But my online students, I really can’t tell.” (Irene)
Karen compared the online class with a face-to-face class and believed that the students
in online classes who were reﬂective, had a tendency to be more open when they
reﬂected in the online environment and were less embarrassed to express their thoughts
than students in face-to-face environments.

“I think those students in an online class will have the tendency to reﬂect a little

more openly, thinking that they’re not saying it to a group of people. So there’s

not that embarrassment to take a stand. So I have found that discussion is a little
bit easier sometimes in personal feelings in an online class than in face- to-face.”

(Karen)

Encouragement of Learner Reﬂection
Study participants identiﬁed a variety of methods they used to encourage

reﬂection in online learning. A total of 12 different methods were identiﬁed as being

useful. Table 3 presents the methods identiﬁed by each of the study participants.

58

Table 3

Methods for Encouraging Learner Reﬂection

 

Class
discus-
sions

Blogs
Survey
Forma-
tive Eval-
uation

Role Play

Digital
Stories

Readings

Writing
Activity

Instructor
Feedback

Peer
Feedback

Points

Assign-
ments
and
teaching
metho-

dology

 

A dam Beth

X

Connie Denise Edward Frank Gloria Howard
X X X

Irene

Joyce

Karen

 

Six of the participants identiﬁed two or more techniques they used to encourage

learner reﬂection while four participants identiﬁed only one technique they used to

encourage learner reﬂection. One of the participants did not identify any technique used

to encourage learner reﬂection.

Class discussions were the most common of the 12 techniques used to encourage

learner reﬂection.

59

“I do that with class discussion. I’ll ask a question over the content.” (Adam)
“I think it's there in the discussion. They will start out in an argument in a
discussion answering a question in one way and as they hear other opinions and
ideas they are changing their opinions.” (Connie)

Connie also added that the changes in the learner’s thoughts during the discussion were

more apparent in an online environment than in a face-to-face environment.
“I think it [online] might make it [reﬂection] more visible to them because they
can see the changes in their thoughts. In a [face-to-face] class discussion you
might start off saying something, by the end of the discussion saying something
else. But since it’s all extemporaneous you might not even remember. But when
it’s in black and white and there’s a record of it all semester you can deﬁnitely see
your change in perspective.” (Connie)

Denise and Joyce commented similarly by suggesting learners are more conscious of

what they are saying online.

“On the discussion board, you’re more conscious of what you’re going to say and
I do ﬁnd that.” (Denise)

“If I hold a class discussion in the [face-to-face] classroom, students are much
more likely to offer opinions and they’re not going to dig in class into the text ﬁnd
the page and quote and bring that up in class. They’re not going to do that very
often. But if you’re sitting at your computer as an online learner and you know the
instructor expects that you support your ideas you will provide support. That
there is a depth that is really wonderful.” (Joyce)

Adam required his students to write blogs during the semester.

“They do six blogs throughout the semester and that’s where I have them do
reﬂection and so it’s possible to do it.” (Adam)

Adam also conducted a weekly survey which he felt encouraged the learners to reﬂect on
their experience.
“I do a weekly survey, the last two questions are ‘what would you change about
this particular online session and what difﬁculties did you have in this online

session.’ (Adam)

Similarly Gloria conducted a mid-term evaluation which she felt encouraged reﬂection.

60

“I put about 4 questions out at the midterm. As a formative evaluation, it’s totally
anonymous. I ask, you know, what is going well with the course, what could the
faculty person do differently, and then what are you [student] doing well and what
could you do better in order to achieve the outcomes of the course. So I guess
those last two questions cause some self-reﬂection.” (Gloria)

Adam also indicated that he used role play as a reﬂection technique.

“Some times I give them a role play and say you be a parent, you be a student,
you be teacher, and you be an administrator. In that sense they’re not reﬂecting on
their own perspective but somebody else’s perspective. But that’s still reﬂecting
on the material but not presenting their own viewpoint necessarily.” (Adam)

Adam added:

“I’m asking them to reﬂect on how they learn and to think of how to think of
students with other learning styles might have learned better had it been done
something different.” (Adam)

Karen used digital storytelling as a way to encourage reﬂection.

“I did some digital storytelling with some students. The digital story is based upon
why they want to become an educator. When we interviewed students on how
they reﬂected upon what they were doing, they were very quizzical as to what I
meant about reﬂection. A couple of students said, ‘I guess I didn’t reﬂect’.
Students don’t understand reﬂection. I’ve been reading up a little bit on
reﬂection to try to weave that more into my digital stories. I think it’s a very
difﬁcult thing for a student to do.” (Karen)

Beth believed that the choices of readings encouraged reﬂection.
“I think because of the readings I select. I don’t use a textbook, I’m always
looking for articles and I put them on e-reserve and I think that those readings
automatically call for self reﬂection and I think my assignments call for self-
reﬂection.” (Beth)

Three of the participants, Connie, Irene, and Karen encouraged reﬂection through writing

activities.
My ﬁnal essay, was a take home exam telling what they learned in class and what
did they do to make it happen. They had to think back on everything we did in

class, everything they did in class and to really make that part of the process.”
(Connie)

61

“I do a meta-cognitive activity. For every draft of the formal papers they write
they have to write a process letter. I have them give their ﬁrst draft to a small
group and they can post their essay on ﬁle exchange. They write comments and
feedback to each other and then discuss them in their own little group discussion
board. It can be like peer editing or a workshop. With this process they have to
reﬂect on what they wrote, why they wrote it, what were their problems in writing
it, what do they think they achieved when they wrote it, what kind of help do they
want from us as collaborators to help them develop their ideas further.” (Connie)

“Hopefully they’re learning about themselves and learning about their ﬁeld. You
can see their excitement in their writing. And you see that you start to see

excitement toward the learning of writing.” (Irene)

“I have them write what they think, what they believe, how they feel, and their
reaction. But it’s difﬁcult.” (Karen)

Howard compared the process of reﬂection in online environments to the face-to-face
environment. Initially he stated there was no difference in how he provided feedback to
students. However, as he continued to speak he acknowledged that he felt that he gave
more feedback while online.
“I don’t think there’s much different from an ordinary [face-to-face] class. I mean
I give the same written feedback I do on papers, I just do it through email as
opposed to writing it on the paper. I actually give a little more thorough feedback
because I can just do it rapidly on the keyboard. I think they [the students] react
to that, reﬂect on that. Positively or negatively and they get the same thing from
other students in the peer feedback.” (Howard)
Howard suggested that students perhaps take peer feedback more seriously online.
“I think they take it a little more seriously, peer feedback. Maybe reﬂect a little
more, which is good and they begin to recognize that these other students in the
class are their audience, their real audience, not the teacher. I think that’s good.”
(Howard)
Both Joyce and Karen encourage reﬂection through points and credit for assignments and
participation.
“1 think they’ve become pretty self aware. They. are very consciously doing these

things. They know because we’ve said in scoring each of these assignments you
earn point for this and this.” (Joyce)

62

“I usually do participation. If they do it then they get the credit for it. I think if I
could get them to reﬂect at all, I think that’s a positive thing.” (Karen)

Connie believed that her methodology and way of presenting the material encouraged
reﬂection.
“I try to set the tone for that in the very beginning with the ﬁrst orientation to the

class, through my methodologies, throughout the syllabus, throughout the course
and through my announcements.” (Connie)

Effective Techniques for Promoting Learner Reﬂection

 

Of the 11 study participants interviewed, no one indicated that he or she had seen
any other instructors apply any effective techniques or strategies for learner reﬂection.

Interviewer: Have you participated in any techniques or seen other faculty or
instructors use similar or different techniques to encourage reﬂection?

“I know that some instructors use weekly quizzes. I don’t think giving a 10
question quiz is necessarily asking your students to reﬂect on their learning or on
the content, it’s asking them to remember.” (Adam)
“No, not really” (Frank)
“No, I haven’t. I haven’t read on it a lot. (Karen)
Adam mentioned that he had not had any students explicitly tell him they had applied any
techniques. However, he did mention that perhaps he should consider adding a question
about strategies students use for reﬂection during his weekly survey.
“I can’t think of anything that a learner has told me they do. I could ask what
students are doing. Maybe that’s a good question for my survey. What strategies
did you use to reﬂect on the material this week or did you reﬂect? I don’t know.
But I don’t do that right now.” (Adam)
Gloria expressed a similar sentiment that perhaps she, as an instructor, needed to talk

more to students about their learning styles and about the online learning environment.

“Maybe we need to build more in so that they we talk to them more in-depth
about their learning styles because it is a bit different environment.” (Gloria)

63

Finally, Denise expressed how the experience of teaching online had forced her to reﬂect

on her own teaching.

“When I started teaching online or even teaching, that shook my world. I had to
start thinking about the way I was doing things. That for me was very powerful.
As a teacher, yes, I have to reexamine totally how I’m teaching. I have to trust the
students to choreograph a conversation that typically I’m in charge of
choreographing. I have to give up some of the way I think it ought to be. And
then I have to teach differently.” (Denise)

Barriers That Inhibit Learner Reﬂection

Of the 11 study participants, 3 participants identiﬁed barriers they believed

inhibited learner reﬂection. Table 4 presents the barriers identiﬁed by the participants.

Table 4
Barriers to Learner Reﬂection

 

Shared

responsibility

Motivat

of learner

Not

expectation

Caution

Adam Beth Connie Denise Edward Frank Gloria Howard Irene Joyce Karen
X

ion X

Level of X

cognitive
development

 

Adam discussed the Shared responsibility of both the instructor and the learners

and recognized that students may not recognize that reﬂection is an expectation.

“I guess it’s probably a shared responsibility. I think instructors probably don’t
ask learners to do that very often. I don’t like to sound negative but I think a lot
of students are just trying to do what they have to do to get the grade they want to
get and move on to the next class. That does sound negative but I think part of
that responsibility is the instructor to make the learning meaningful.” (Adam)

“I don’t think learners know that [reﬂection] is an expectation.” (Adam)

64

Beth believed that a barrier to reﬂection was the students’ own fear of expressing
themselves due to the nature of the content of her course.

“I think that there’s a fear factor with some because of the sensitive things we

discuss; racism, prejudice, stereotypes, hatred. I think some students are

automatically cautious about what they say.” (Beth)

Of the study participants, Karen commented most on reﬂection as an important
aspect of learning and believed that some learners, particularly undergraduate students,
were not cognitively prepared or mature enough to understand the importance of
reﬂection in the learning process.

“I don’t think it’s natural for any undergraduate student to reﬂect. I think when I

get to my graduate students I’ve had an easier time in having them think about it.

Some students will never reﬂect, just can’t reﬂect. They have not had the practice

with it, especially in undergraduate. They just don’t get what you’re asking.”

(Karen)

Karen continued to add:

“I don’t know whether it has been deﬁned to them what reﬂection really is. I don’t
know.” (Karen)

Emeggent Them_atic Categories: Learner Reﬂection

 

The 12 speciﬁc strategies identiﬁed by the instructors as ways that they encourage
learner reﬂection, along with the four barriers to learner reﬂection they identiﬁed, were
further analyzed to see if there were any natural thematic categories that existed within
the data. Three thematic categories emerged from the collected data through this
analysis. The three thematic categories that emerged from the collected data are: (1)
Providing Opportunities for Dialogue, Communication, and Feedback; (2) Recognizing
and Accepting the Learners Cognitive and Developmental Ability; and (3) Expanding the

Role of Written Expression.

65

Providing Opportunities for Dialogue, Communication, and FeedbacL Providing
the opportunity for dialogue, communication, and feedback emerged from the data as an
important theme that describes what instructors do to encourage learner reﬂection. The
study participants provided the opportunity for the learner to engage in dialogue,
communication and feedback with another classmate and/or classmates, as well as with
the instructor through a variety of methods. These included class discussions and role
play activities, as well as formative evaluations. The strategies used to encourage learner

reﬂection, required some form of exchange of ideas or perspective.

Recognizing and Accepting the Learners Cognitive and Developmental Ability
A second theme that emerged from the data that instructors identiﬁed as inﬂuencing
learner reﬂection was recognizing the level of cognitive and developmental ability of the
learner. The study participants acknowledged that it was likely that some students did not
possess the cognitive or developmental ability or skills to reﬂect, nor did all students
understand the role and relevance of reﬂection in the learning experience. Although there
was recognition among the participants that they could not control whether the student
reﬂected, the participants stated it was possible to inﬂuence the process through activities

or exercises that either implicitly or explicitly challenged the learner to reﬂect.

Expanding the Role of Written Expression The third theme that emerged from
the data regarding instructors’ encouragement of learner reﬂection was identiﬁed as
expanding the role of written expression. Writing emerged as a critical and beneﬁcial

aspect of the online experience that encouraged learner reﬂection. The study participants

66

acknowledged that the discussion comments of the online students were often more
prepared and thoughtful than the verbal comments made during discussions in face-to-
face environments. The participants also recognized that although reﬂection was not
always easily identiﬁed in online learning environments, they acknowledged that in
responding to discussions online, the learners were often more conscious of their
comments and often provided more in-depth responses or comments to discussion
questions than learners in face-to-face classes. In addition, the changes in the learner’s
thought process were more apparent in the online environment. This allowed the study
participant to track the process and changes in the learner’s understanding of concepts as
well as of self.

Instructor Views of Learner Community

 

Learner community is an environment where discourse is encouraged and learners
are free to engage in dialogue which is supportive of alternative views (Habermas, 1970).
In a distance education environment, because the learners are separated by time and
distance, opportunities for dialogue and discourse are often limited and as Kember (1989)
suggests, the learner in online learning environments can often feel isolated and may
withdraw from the learning process. Given this characteristic, instructors were asked to
describe their observations of learner community they and how they viewed the role of
learner community in online learning. Do they encourage learner community and if so,
how? Have they seen effective techniques or strategies for creating or sustaining a
learner community and what, if any, are the barriers that inhibit learner community?

When asked the importance of the learner community in online environments,

most participants felt that a community of learners was important for a variety of reasons.

67

Many indicated that the idea of building connectedness and sharing with peers was
critical to the learning experience.

“I think it’s [community] very important. I really want them to learn more from
each other than they do from me.” (Beth)

“I think that it’s important to try out your ideas, sift through other people’s

perception, to hear other people’s ideas. I think that’s where growth takes place.
And if you don’t have a strong learning community, that doesn’t happen.”

(Denise)
“I think it’s important in any class because I think learning isn’t just about an
individual taking on a new topic or a new process and learning that process. It’s a

synergistic process.” (Joyce)

“I feel that sense of community is essential because they [the students] should be
able to learn from each other online” (Karen)

Gloria associated overall student satisfaction of the learning experience with being
connected with the learning environment.

“I think they’re much more satisﬁed with the course if they feel they are part of
the course and part of a learning environment. I think feeling part of that learning
environment is crucial to establish in an online course.” (Gloria)

Edward acknowledged the importance of the learning community but felt that, for him, it
was much easier to promote a learning community in a face-to-face class than it was in an

online environment.

“I think that’s [community] important. And maybe that’s one of the reasons I
prefer face-to-face because it is easy to promote a community feeling.” (Edward)

Denise echoed a Similar sentiment and acknowledged that she also felt She was better
able to encourage a learner community in a face-to-face environment.

“I think I could do a better job of encouraging community face-to—face.” (Denise)

68

Encouragement of Learner Community

The study participants identiﬁed a total of 14 different methods used to encourage
learner community in an online environment. Table 5 presents the methods identiﬁed by
each of the study participants.

Table 5
Methods for Encouraging Learner Community

 

Adam Beth Connie Denise Edward Frank Gloria Howard Irene Jog: Karen
Groups X X X X X X

Photo X X X X

Discussion X X X X
Board

Lounge X X X
Coffee Break

Instructor X X
participation

Phone X
Homepages
Icebreakers

Grades

><><><><

« netiquette »
rules

Face-to-face X X
session(s)

Sharing X
events/articles

Question & X X
answer forum

Bio’s X

 

 

Of the eleven study participants, seven of the participants identiﬁed multiple

approaches to encourage a learning community online. Two participants identiﬁed a

69

single method they used to encourage learner community and two participants did not

identify any method. Small groups and group projects were the most widely reported

methods used by the study participants to promote a learning community online.
“You can establish groups on line.”(Beth)

“I do two exercises where I pair them up or put them in small groups and have
them work together. (Howard)

“One of the things that we do in our online courses is require group projects.”
(Joyce)

“With my online courses I have attempted to do partner work and teamwork.
Some form of collaborative work together. That’s the only way I know how to
encourage it.” (Karen)
Gloria felt that the small groups facilitated connectedness and indicated she noticed the
support students provided to one another in these groups.
“And the students really do become somewhat cohesive in those groups. And you
can see the support. They offer suggestions for interventions, so I think the use of
small groups facilitates that connectedness and they feel supported by one
another.” (Gloria)
Adam, Connie, Frank, and Gloria required the students to post a photo online as a means
of familiarizing the students with one another.
“On the ﬁrst day of class every student will take a picture and I make the little
avatar so every time you make a post your little picture shows up with your
signature. They write their name and what they want to teach. That helps to kind
of illustrate where people are coming from.” (Adam)

“I make them all post a picture and do the homepage thing.” (Connie)

“I ask them for photos of themselves so they actually know what everyone looks
like.” (Frank)

Gloria also recognized that posting a photo of each student not only assisted the others in
the class, she as the instructor also beneﬁted from the photos as they helped her to

associate individual postings with the individual student.

70

“I take pictures and then I post the pictures online with their names on them so
that it not only helps me when I’m reading the discussion board but hopefully it
helps the other people to associate a name and a face with what is being said.”
(Gloria)
Although Joyce has tried to use photos as a tool for encouraging a learner community she
found that students did not always follow up because they either did not know how to
post a photo online or it was too difﬁcult to do.
“I ask them to post photos and they just didn’t know how to do that or it was
cumbersome.” (Joyce)
Another common means for encouraging learner community among the study

participants was the use of class discussions and discussion boards.

“I have weekly discussions and they’re [the students] required to participate.”
(Adam)

“I would ask them on the discussion board about something they’ve read and ask
them to post a comment about it and answer another student’s comment.” (Frank)

Although Edward used discussion boards in his online class, he said that he did not feel

that the tool encouraged the learning community as much as immediate conversation did

in face-to-face environments.
“I guess the discussion board is a great tool but it’s not the immediate thing. If
we’re having conversation and we’re discussing something, I might type
something on a discussion board and three days later somebody might read it and
respond. There’s not that spontaneity that I think you have in actual face-to-face
situations.” (Edward)

Edward also acknowledged that he felt that face-to-face meetings were very important

and that if he were to teach an online class again in the future he would try using a

synchronous method, where students would be required to meet online at a speciﬁc time.
“It’s easy to sit at a discussion board and read my introduction, or if we’re
discussing a particular topic to do the discussion, but there’s got to be a face-to-
face component. If I were going to do this again online I probably would go to a

virtual classroom type of thing, or use something like SKYPE for example. I think
seeing a person is important and having the interaction.” (Edward)

71

Three of the study participants created an online location for informal discussion which
the participants either labeled “lounge” or a “coffee break room”. These discussions
were meant to be informal and casual.
“I set up a coffee break room, and I just say this is just a spot where you can talk
about pretty much what you want to with your peers. So, if you want to share
recipes, if you want to tell them something personal. Whatever you want to share,
that’s your business. I always put it out there, just to make sure they feel
connected with their other classmates. It points an avenue for them to feel that
connectedness which is really vital to establish in an online class.” (Gloria)
“I also have a forum called ‘the lounge’ and I tell them they can talk about
anything except class. I’ll ask if they’ve seen any movies lately. I ask them to
give us a review or I ask whether they’ve read any books, seen any television
shows. The students will jump in and talk. I think it enhances my class greatly
and I think I get to know the community of learners much better when I teach
online and use this lounge than standing up in front of the class.” (Adam)
Adam also went on to say that in addition to being a place for students to connect, ‘the
lounge’ helped him to feel less isolated and more connected to the class.
“I enjoy it [lounge] as much as the students do. It helps me feel like I’m not all
alone. I know that a lot of my students say the same thing. They don’t quite feel
like they’re sitting at home by themselves when they can log in and have a quick
discussion over the best pizza delivery company in the area.” (Adam)
Frank referred to this informal discussion as “one where they can talk about whatever
they want to,” and described it as chatting “about anything with your fellow classmates
just as you would in the classroom.” Frank also observed that females were more likely to

participate in the informal discussions, while males were not as likely to participate.

“It’s all girls that do this, boys don’t get into chat rooms. They won’t share
things.” (Frank )

Both Edward and Connie use some type of introductory activity or icebreaker at the

beginning of the class to encourage the learner community.

72

“We would always do some activities where students would introduce themselves
to the others and that seemed to work really well just from the initial contact.”
(Edward)

“We have some introductory exercises where they might post a public secret.
Those kinds of icebreakers.” (Connie)

Both Beth and Adam believed that the instructor’s participation in the discussions
encouraged a community in the online environment.
“I post online too. I may say, “Guess what happened to me today?” And then tell
them something funny. I don’t know, just things that pop into my mind. Even
though I want them to learn more from each other than they do from me, I want to

keep the lines of communication open.” (Beth)

“I try to make the lounge a fun experience and I try to participate in all the
discussions I can to Show the students I enjoy interacting with them.” (Adam)

In addition to the lounge, Adam also used a forum for question and answers.
“I have a class question forum that’s not required, but any student can pose any
question. So rather than email me a question, they individually post on the Q&A
forum. That way everybody can see my response.” (Adam)
Gloria also used a similar forum for question and answers and found that not only did it
encourage communication among the learners, it eliminated many of the emails and
phone calls she received.
“I set up a forum called ‘questions and answers’. I told the students that this is
their chance to post questions. I told them that maybe the faculty may answer it or
a student may answer if they know the answer. I told them could ask any
question. I don’t have as many phone calls. I don’t have as many personal emails
as I used to. I think it is really an excellent forum for the student to ask
questions.” (Gloria)
Beth encouraged students to post supplemental information such as articles that related to
the course materials.
“If they come across an event, an article, an experience, anything that pertains to

the focus of the class, I encourage them to share it online. Let’s talk about it.”
(Beth)

73

She also encouraged students to exchange phone numbers.
Connie believed that a conversation about civil discourse and communication
assisted in encouraging the learner community.

“When we have those discussions we talk about how to respond, ‘netiquette’
types of things, but beyond that it has more to do with civil discourse.” (Comic)

Connie also believed that she was able to encourage the learner community through
grading and that she believed it was easier to monitor than in a face-to-face class.
“They have to talk to each other if they are going to get any kind of grade. I can
hold their feet to the ﬁre for those discussions in a way that I can’t in a face-to-
face class. In a face-to-face class you can hide in a corner and not say a word. I
might call on a student occasionally, but if a student has a different opinion they
don’t have to put it out there. And somehow I think most of them do offer their
opinion in the online class because it’s harder to fake. ” (Connie)
Finally, referencing her initial face-to face meeting with the online students, Joyce
indicated that without a face-to-face component of the class, it was difﬁcult to develop a
personal relationship online.
“Once there is a face-to-face meeting, you begin to have a personal relationship. I

think it is a very positive thing. But for the student we never ever meet, it’s much
more difﬁcult to create that sense that the professor cares about the student.”

(Joyce)

Effective Techniques for Establishing Learner Community

Several of the study participants said they had participated in conversations about
learner community in online environments. Adam indicated that he had shared some of
the techniques he used to encourage learner community, but did not know whether any of
his colleagues used any of the strategies he shared.

“I don’t know. I go to these meetings and I tell people about the lounge and they
all think it’s a neat idea but I don’t know if any implement it.” (Adam)

74

Adam also mentioned that he felt some frustration among online instructors and their
ability to develop a learner community on line.
“I know people complain about trying to develop community online.” (Adam)
He went on to say that he felt there were several ways to encourage an online learning
community yet the only strategy he had seen others use were group projects.
“I think in some of the models of online classes that I’ve experienced, the only
community is when an instructor creates a group project and says meet with these
people.” (Adam)
Irene indicated she had heard instructors used chat rooms but did not know for certain

whether chats were used as means to encourage learner community by online instructors.

“I’ve heard of people doing a chat, but I don’t know.” (Irene)

Barriers That Inhibit Learner Community

Of the 11 study participants, eight participants identiﬁed a total of 11 barriers they
believed inhibited the learner community online. Table 6 presents the speciﬁc barriers

identiﬁed by the study participants.

75

Table 6
Barriers to Learner Community

Adam Beth Connie Denise Edward Frank Gloria Howard Irene Joyce Karen
Busy Lives X X X

 

Multiple X X X
commitments
Learner x

motivations

Generational X X
differences

Lack of X
responsibility

Motivation for X
selection

Lack of X
collaborative
learning
experience

Student X X
personalities

Technology X X
Content X

Lack of X X X
immediate or
spontaneous
communication

 

A

Adam, Beth, and Denise believed that busy lives and multiple commitments wen
barriers that inhibited the learner community.

“I don’t know. It could be they have busy lives. They’re mothers, fathers, and

have a family. Full-time jobs. They don’t desire to be part of a community. I don’t

know.” (Adam)

“Maybe it’s a struggle with other commitments, a lot of these students are

married, they have families, they work, and they’re going to school pursuing a
degree. They have a lot on their plates.” (Beth)

76

Denise acknowledged that students have active lives but identiﬁed different types of
activities students engage in than did Adam and Beth. Denise drew a distinction between
the motivations students have for taking online classes and how the difference in
motivation may hinder the learner community.
“I think one of the barriers is an active life. There are parties on campus. Students
have a lot of things to do and this online class is kind of an add on. This is
different from the student who is taking an online class because it’s a connection
with a whole bunch of other people that they wouldn’t ordinarily talk to.”
(Denise)
Denise also added that she noticed a generational difference between students that she

believed inﬂuenced the learner community.

“I see a difference in commitment between younger students and older students.”
(Denise)

Similarly, Karen used the example of students passively attending classes to describe
how some students approach the online learning environments.

“Students are not ready for an online environment and they’re taking it thinking
it’s going to be the same things as the face-to-face class. Thinking that it is going
to be purely instructor led and their responsibility is no more than logging on just
as their responsibility is sometimes in a face- to- face is no more than showing
up.” (Karen)

Denise also commented on students attitudes and motivations for participating in the

online class as a barrier to the learner community.

“I also think that a barrier to building community exists within an individual
attitude or an individual perception.” (Denise)

She went on to discuss her concerns about those students taking classes because they did
not have to physically attend the class.
“A student joins the class just because it ﬁts with their schedule and that way they

can take an extra class because they don’t have to Show up at this class. That
worries me a little bit.” (Denise)

77

Karen commented that she felt many students did not know how to collaborate and
participate in a community of learners.

”I think there is a lack of knowing how to exist in a community of learners, how
to collaborate in learning, and how to carry on a discussion.” (Karen)

Additionally, both Adam and Beth recognized that student personalities may be barriers
that hinder the learner community. Adam suggested that some students were not as social
as others and were less likely to participate.

“I think that some students are just not as social as other students or they’re just

nervous that they’re going to look silly if they write something. I know I have

students who don’t or rarely participate in the lounge for example.” (Adam)
While Beth felt that perhaps for those students who were less likely to communicate in
the face-to-face environment might be more inclined to communicate online.

“There are students who are shy in the classroom who might be more apt to

communicate online and then there are students who don’t like the online setting

and would prefer to spend more time in the classroom.” (Beth)
She added that students who may be taking their ﬁrst online class may also be less likely
to communicate online.

Both Adam and Beth believed that technology inhibited learner community.
Adam particularly mentioned that those students who used dial-up connections were less
like to participate in the online community because of the slow speeds and
inconsistencies of dial-up technology.

Beth believed that most students had the technical skills necessary yet recognized
that there may be students who were still unfamiliar with the technology used in online

environments.

“Most of these students are pretty computer savvy, technologically savvy. Then
again maybe a student who is 54 years old who has come back to school after a

78

long absence is not really that familiar with the use of computers and maybe it’s
more of a struggle. So that could be a barrier.” (Beth)

Connie indicated that the material covered and the content of the course can inhibit the
learner community.

“Part of it is the material. The material is highly charged and students can be
sensitive.” (Connie)

Finally, Edward, Gloria, and Howard felt that the lack of immediate and spontaneous
contact and feedback were barriers to the learner community. Edward commented that
the virtual classroom, [a synchronous environment] would be able to facilitate immediate
and spontaneous comments and responses.

“There isn’t the immediate contact. In a virtual classroom if someone makes a
comment it gets me thinking and I can immediately respond and they can
immediately respond and so on. Whereas if I’m typing a message, I might have
had another thought so it’s not the immediate responses to the discussion.”
(Edward)

Gloria compared the lack of spontaneous conversation of the online environment with the
more immediate environment of the face-to-face class.
“When you’re in a regular classroom the students can sit next to each other, and
chat about their children or personal things. You feel that camaraderie. In an
online environment because they don’t sit next to each other, they don’t see each
other face-to-face. It’s more difﬁcult to make them feel like they are a part of a
class taking a class together.” (Gloria)
Howard also commented on the lack of instant response and feedback and expressed that
the online learning community was a different community than that of a face-to-face
environment.
“There’s no body language in email. There isn’t instant feedback like in the face-

to-face classroom. It’s a different kind of community. I don’t even know if you’d
call it a community. It’s kind of a strange thing.” (Howard)

79

Emeggent Thematic Categories: Describe Learner Community

The 14 speciﬁc strategies identiﬁed by the instructors as ways that they
encouraged learner community, along with thell barriers to learner community they
identiﬁed, were further analyzed to see if there were any natural thematic categories that
existed within the data. Three thematic categories emerged from the collected data
through this analysis. The three thematic categories that emerged from the collected data
are: (1) Participating in the Experience; (2) Providing Opportunity for Formal and
Informal Communication; and (3) Recognizing and Accepting Learner Characteristics

and Motivations.

Participating in the Experience Participating in the learning experience emerged
from the data as an important theme that describes what instructors do to encourage the
development of a learning community online. The study participants acknowledged the
relevance of the learners recognizing that the instructor is a part of the learning
community and participates in the exchange of ideas. The participants were also
conscious that it was necessary to convey to the learners that the instructor cared about
the learners’ success in the online course. Several of the study participants commented
that without some type of face-to-face meeting, developing the relationship with the
learners as a group, and more speciﬁcally as individuals, was difﬁcult in the online

environment.

Providing Opportunity for Formal and Informal Communication A second theme

that emerged from the data that instructors identiﬁed as inﬂuencing the learner

community was providing opportunities for both formal and informal communication.

80

All study participants provided opportunities for formal dialogue among and between the
learners as well as with the instructor. This was done in several ways but primarily
through the formal assignment of group discussions or projects. In addition to providing
formal opportunities for discussion and communication, several study participants
provided additional opportunities for learners to participate in informal conversations
completely unrelated to the course content. The study participants who also provided
informal opportunities such as “the lounge” believed these informal opportunities
simulated a similar experience the learner might have in a face-to-face classroom.
Related to this, several of the study participants felt that the immediacy and spontaneity
of the face-to-face class was difﬁcult to replicate in the online environment and believed
that to be a disadvantage of the communication opportunities afforded in online
environments.

Recognizing and Accepting Learner Characteristics and Motivations The third
theme that emerged from the data regarding instructors’ encouragement of a learner
community was recognizing and accepting learner characteristics and motivations. The
characteristics and motivations of the learner were identiﬁed in a variety of ways and fell
along a continuum of manifestations ranging from generational differences among the
participants, to reasons for selection of the course, to personality traits. Each of these
characteristics and motivations, from the views of the study participants, impacted the
degree to which the learner participated in the development of the online learner

community.

81

Instructor Views of Learner Persistence

Learner persistence is the learner’s decision to continue involvement in the
learning experience rather than terminate involvement. Although there are no deﬁnitive
answers as to why students depart from a learning experience, persistence and retention
in distance education (F jortoft, 1995; Kember, 1989; Sweet, 1986), and speciﬁcally
online programming (Rovai, 2003; Willging & Johnson, 2004; Woodley, 2004), emerge
as a concern in the literature. Given this phenomenon of online learning experiences,
instructors were asked to describe their Observations of learner persistence and how they
viewed the role of persistence in online learning. Do they encourage learner persistence
and if so, how? Have they seen effective techniques or strategies for learner persistence
and what, if any, are the barriers that inhibit learner persistence?

Several study participants agreed that encouraging learner persistence was
important and possible. Beth Speciﬁcally acknowledged the importance of instructors
encouraging learner persistence, yet also believed that the student had a role and
responsibility in the process as well.

“I think it’s [encouraging persistence] very important but I also think that we have

to remember that the students are really the ones who have to accept the

responsibility in any type of learning environment.” (Beth)
Adam also believed it was possible to encourage learner persistence and also
acknowledged that many students do not persist in his online course. He attributed the
high rate of attrition to his high expectations of the students in his online course.

“I think it’s probably possible. I have the highest drop out rate of any other

instructor, so more of my students dropout. I think I’m thorough in how I cover
the material and I expect a lot from my students.” (Adam)

82

Encouragement of Learner Persistence

Study participants identiﬁed a variety of different methods they used to encourage
learner persistence in online learning. A total of nine different methods were identiﬁed as
being useful. Eight study participants identiﬁed at least one method they used to
encourage learner persistence. Four study participants identiﬁed more than one method
used. Three study participants did not identify any method for encouraging learner

persistence. Table 7 presents the methods identiﬁed by each of the study participants.

Table 7
Methods for Encouraging Learner Persistence

 

Adam Beth Connie Denise Edward Frank Gloria Howard Irene Joyce Karen

Encouraging X X X
Words

Positive
reinforcement

Individual X X X
communication

F ace-to-face X X
meetings

Clear X
Expectations

Content X
Interesting

Creativity of X
instructor

Instructor X
student
friendly/
positive
attitude

Tips X

Coffee Break X
forum

 

83

Of the nine different methods used by the study participants to encourage learner
persistence, individual communication with the student, offering encouraging words and
positive reinforcement to students emerged as the most frequently identiﬁed.

“1 try to provide some encouraging words. I try to give them feedback in emails. I

might say ‘I know last week was extra hard, this week will be a little easier. I

hope you have a renewed sense of vigor as you approach the class next week’, or

whatever it is.” (Adam)

“I think that you have to give the students positive reinforcement that, yes, this is
going well and positive reinforcement, I think is key.” (Gloria)

Joyce stated that students occasionally explicitly identify their concerns and she indicated
the importance of responding and providing encouragement to the student.
“Sometimes I get emails where the student is feeling frustrated, concerned, or
worried. I always respond to those. I always give back a rather lengthy email
usually addressing the concerns and saying it’s ok, they are on the right track.
They are dong ﬁne. I tell them to have conﬁdence, but I don’t think it’s the same
as in person.” (Joyce)
Connie similarly mentioned that She kept in contact with the students and provided them
opportunities to complete missed assignments.

“I try to keep in touch with them. I have offered remedies at different times. For
someone who has fallen behind I let them make up a couple missing
assignments.” (Connie)

Denise also recognized that students may not persist and believed that by “reaching out”
to the student the instructor may be able to encourage persistence.
“I think that there are a lot of things you can do. I think the professor’s
involvement or visibility is important. I also think reaching out to the student is
important. There are a lot of student that could give up easily.” (Denise)

Much like Denise’s recognition that students can struggle in the class, Karen also

provided opportunity for the student to talk with her.

84

“I had a student who got off to a bad start. There was just no question about that,
a very, very bad start. She wanted to drop the class. I told her let’s talk. We went
through a lot of emails.” (Karen)

Although Karen’s communication with the student was largely through email, She did
encourage the student to meet with her face-to-face.

“We went through a couple emails and ﬁnally she came in face-to-face. We got
her caught up and she was ﬁne. But it was a lot of individual communication
with her. She would write me 2-3 times a day, because She really didn’t know
what to do.”(Karen)

Similarly, Edward saw the value of face-to-face meetings in encouraging persistence.
“I think the three face-to-face meetings are valuable in an online situation because
you can get them back in the classroom and you can say ok now we’ve got to get
back on to this or to this. It’s just easier to direct them.” (Edward)

Adam believed that clarifying expectations encouraged students to persist.

“I think it’s [encouraging persistence] important. I think maybe it’s that I try to
be very clear in the expectations I have right up front. Some students, that scares
them.” (Adam)

Beth placed emphasis on the content and material of the course as a means of
encouraging learner persistence.
“I think the course content overall is interesting stuff. This is an opportunity for
them to learn more about themselves and I think that keeps them persistent. I
think that keeps them participating in it.” (Beth)
She also believed that in addition to interesting course materials her creativity and
attitude also encouraged learner persistence.
“I think the materials I use in this course encourage persistence. I’m always
looking for ways to keep myself fresh. I like variety. I’m pretty creative. I think
all of that keeps them persistent. I think my creativity encourages their creativity
and I think getting to know me keeps them persistent.” (Beth)
“I think a lot of it is the attitude of the instructor. I think that if the instructor has

a positive attitude and instructor is student friendly. I think just naturally my
students know that I really care about their success.” (Beth)

85

Denise provided the students with a sheet that outlines a checklist of strategies students
might employ in order to be successful in the online class, as well as steps to take if they
were considering dropping the class.
“A sheet. It just says, how to survive an online class. It’s got all the things like
organization, print all the material, call me before you think about dropping. It has
about 10-15 suggestions on that check list. I always give that to people. I use it
all the time.” (Denise)
Gloria found that the ‘coffee break’ was a means of encouraging persistence of the online
learner.
“In an online environment I always put the coffee break room for the students. I
say it is not a requirement for the course. I also tell them that I may or may not
read what’s in there. But sometimes I just glance through there and you can see
some work issues; whether they have been really busy at work or whatever. You
can just tell if they’re having difﬁculty with a supervisor. The coffee break could
be the mechanism to encourage learner persistence.” (Gloria”)
Effective Techniques for Promoting Learner Persistence
Of the 11 participants interviewed, none of the participants indicated they had
seen other instructors apply any effective techniques or strategies that encouraged learner
persistence.
“I haven’t. I haven’t heard anyone’s stories but I’m sure they exist.” (Adam)
“Its hard to answer because I’m not sure what instructors do.” (Karen)
Gloria identiﬁed several things she had seen instructors do that She believed did not
encourage learner persistence.
“I think there are some faculty that aren’t cognizant of the student’s issues. I have
heard of some faculty who have put out a whole bunch of information and then
expected a student to take a test the next day. So they aren’t cognizant of students’
work schedules or of their family commitments. They don’t give them adequate

time in order to plan, to be able to complete the requirements for the course.”
(Gloria)

86

She continued to add.
“They [some instructors] put out huge ﬁles, which is a challenge for students with
their Internet connections. I think you have to be cognizant that not everybody has
high speed Internet connections. Not everybody can be sitting by the computer
waiting for the faculty member to decide what they’re going to do. I think it has
to be well organized. If it’s not well organized I think it’s a recipe for disaster.”
(Gloria)
Adam indicated that, in addition to not being aware of any speciﬁc techniques other
instructors may use to encourage persistence, he was not aware of any Speciﬁc strategies
students applied either. Although he indicated he was certain students did have strategies.
“I don’t know what they [students] do but I’m sure they do stuff.” (Adam)
On the other hand, Beth believed that the students encouraged one another to persist. She
attributed it to the online environment providing a less threatening environment for
communication than a face-to-face learning environment which she believed appealed to
some students.
“I think they [students] encourage each other to be persistent. I think it’s a
communication factor. Maybe more freedom for a lot of them, more of a sense of
security online because they’re not really visible, they’re not talking in front of a
person in the classroom and they’re not nervous. They’re at home chances are or
a computer lab but nobody around them knows what they’re saying because
they’re typing it online. They feel safer, less threatened.” (Beth)
Barriers That Inhibit Learner Persistence
The study participants identiﬁed ten barriers they believed inhibit learner
persistence online. All participants stated at least one barrier to learner persistence and

ﬁve participants identiﬁed multiple barriers. Table 8 presents the barriers that inhibit

learner persistence identiﬁed by each of the study participants.

87

Table 8
Barriers to Learner Persistence

 

Adam Beth Connie Denise Edward Frank Gloria Howard Irene Joyce Karen

 

Lack of self- X X X
discipline

Lack of X X
organization

Procrastination X X X X

Lack of X
speciﬁc
meeting times

Perception _ X X
easier than
face-to-face

Lack X
necessary
commitment

Too X X
difficult/more
work than
expected

Work X X
Finances X
Technology X X
Lack of X

connection
with instructor

 

 

Adam compared online environments to face-to-face environments and suggested
that the barriers students face are similar in both learning environments.

“I think students in face-to-face environments that have barriers will have the

same barriers they encounter in online. Some students are going to fail regardless

of the environment they are in and I’m sure that there are some that fail only in
online environments but I don’t know what the barriers are.” (Adam)

88

Although Adam indicated he wasn’t sure what the barriers might be, he did suggest,
along with both Joyce and Irene, that lack of self-discipline may be a barrier to
persistence in online learning environments.

“Students who are not self-starters have much difﬁculty in online learning
because they’re expected to get going on their own and I don’t know what causes
them to not be self-starters.” (Adam)

“I think they think this is overwhelming and they maybe they know they’re not
going to be self-disciplined and be able to keep up with this. Nobody is telling
you what to do or when a paper is due.” (Irene)

“I think some of them are not self-directed enough to do it. To sit down and say I
will block out this time each week for doing this class and doing it online and
communicating during the time period that I need to.” (Joyce)

Coupled with the lack of self-discipline, Denise, Karen, Beth, and Edward recognized
lack of organization and procrastination as barriers to learner persistence.
“Organization. And it’s just more work than they [the student] thought it would
be. And procrastination. It’s online, she’s not collecting it. I don’t have to face
her and tell her I don’t have the work done. All I have to do is not do it. To me
that’s part of that whole organization piece.” (Denise)
“I think they get behind. They truly do not realize that every week usually in an
online class you’ve got some thing, and a lot of it takes much longer to type than
it does to say. Just to speak in a class, I think they just get behind.” ( Karen)
“The slacking. Kind of along with that I think they may post everyday online.
They may respond every day to an article but again it’s likely to be 2 sentences
and there’s no depth.” (Beth)
“I found was there was a lot of procrastination.” (Edward)
As a related comment, Edward shared an anecdote about a student who had completely
forgotten that he had registered for the online class.
“I had one student who came in the last week of class and said he forgot he had

registered for the class. That deals with the persistence thing. It’s hard to believe
somebody would forget they had the class.” (Edward)

89

Beth stated similarly that a barrier was the lack of a speciﬁc meeting time.

“I think maybe some students might think they can get away with more because
they aren’t meeting in the classroom physically on a regular basis.” (Beth)

Connie and Denise believed that the perception that online courses were easier than face-

to-face was a barrier to learner persistence.

“One of the biggest things I see is that they [students] think online means easy. I
think they think it’s self-paced. I think they think it means responding to material
that’s been posted to them and answering questions about it when they feel like it.
They’re not prepared for an online discussion format and the continuous effort
that that takes. Part of it is their misconceptions going in about what the course is
going to involve. I try to make that very clear in the letter I write to them at the
very start that this class is not going to be less work, if anything it’s going to be
more work.” (Connie)

“They think it’s going to be a lot easier than it’s going to be.” (Denise)
Denise continued to add that the level of commitment could hinder learner persistence
and again reiterated that not only students, but some faculty, felt that online courses were
less difﬁcult or easier than face-to-face.
“I’ve had situations where I don’t think students appreciate the constant
commitment they have to have. They have to be organized enough to do the
assignments at a minimal level. And I think there’s a perception, not only
students but faculty as well, that online courses are blow off.” (Denise)
In addition, both Frank and Joyce agreed that some students did not persist because the
online course was actually more difﬁcult and required more time than a face-to-face

class.

“Because it’s too hard. I mean that’s a pretty intense calendar they have to keep
up with.” (Frank)

“I think online classes are actually more work, I think they’re more work for the
student and I think they’re more work for the instructor. It takes more time to do
everything.” (Joyce)

Both Beth and Gloria indicated that work responsibilities were a barrier to persistence.

90

“The student was absolutely overwhelmed with his work schedule. He’s married.
His wife works. Two jobs, I think. He just became overwhelmed and despite my
encouragement he dropped out. I was really sorry to see it.” (Beth)

“These are registered nurses and a lot of them work in a hospital setting.
Mandatory overtime sometimes comes in to play. A lot of times they work short
staffed if they work 12 hour shifts. Two to three 12 hour shifts in a row, that is
difﬁcult. Fatigue becomes a real issue, but sometimes their employers don’t
provide the support they need.” (Gloria)

Gloria also recognized that ﬁnances can be a barrier to learner persistence.

“They drop out usually because of ﬁnancial needs, because there’s been a crisis
in their family one way or another.” (Gloria)

Both Howard and Joyce believed technology was a barrier for some students and
hindered learner persistence.

“I think the barriers certainly are that online is not for everyone. The student
whose technical skills are not up there, and the fact that they have slow download
speeds, they don’t have rapid intemet access and they have dial up access.”
(Howard)

“Some of them have never had an online course before and they don’t understand
sort of the mechanics of an online course. They ﬁnd it frustrating to learn the
blackboard system for example. And to learn how to do everything with email
attachments, they’re just not used to doing that and they don’t want to invest at
that particular moment.” (Joyce)

Finally, Joyce compared the online environment with the face-to-face environment and
suggested that the lack of connection a student may feel in an online environment may
hinder their persistence.
“Some of them [students] get frustrated because it’s not face-to-face. They can’t
make a connection in the same way that you can in the classroom. At the end of
the class the student can’t just stop up at the professor’s desk and chat for a few
minutes. This is the way a lot of students, particularly timid students, I think,

begin to feel that they can get comfortable in the class. They can’t do that online.”
(Joyce)

91

Emergent Thematic Categories: Learner Persistence

The nine speciﬁc strategies identiﬁed by the instructors as ways that they
encourage learner persistence, along with the 11 barriers to learner persistence they
identiﬁed, were further analyzed to see if there were any natural thematic categories that
existed within the data. The three thematic categories that emerged from the collected
data are: (1) Providing Individual Contact; (2) Recognizing and Accepting the Inﬂuence
of Prior Learning Experiences and Misaligned Expectations; and (3) Recognizing and

Accepting the Impact of External Inﬂuences.

Providing Individual Contact Providing the learner with opportunities for

 

individual contact with the instructor emerged from the data as an important theme that
describes what instructors do to encourage learner persistence. Although not all study
participants insisted learners meet with the instructor individually, the study participants
recognized that the learners often needed individual encouragement and reinforcement
particularly if it was becoming clear that the learner was experiencing difﬁculty in the
course. Some instructors did rely on_face-to-face contact to accommodate this
relationship with the learner but many of the instructors often sent numerous emails to the
individual. A positive attitude and accessibility of the instructor emerged as an inﬂuence

in learner persistence.

Recognizing and Accepting the Inﬂuence of Prior Learning Experiences and

 

Misaligned Expectations A second theme that emerged from the data that instructors
identiﬁed as inﬂuencing learner persistence was recognizing and accepting the inﬂuence

of prior learning experiences and misaligned expectations. There was a common theme

92

among the participants that learners believed that the online learning format was much
easier than that of the traditional face-to-face learning environment. All acknowledged
that this was an incorrect assumption and that quite often the online course was much
more difﬁcult than the face-to-face course and often required much more time and effort
not only on the part of the learner but often on the part of the instructor as well. There
was also recognition that learners often approached the online course with similar
strategies and patterns they would apply to a face—to-face class which did not often
beneﬁt the learner because of the differences between the two formats. It was cited that
learners did not always recognize the level of self-discipline and lacked the necessary

organization skills required of them in the online format.

Recognizing and Accepting the Impact of External Inﬂuences The third theme

that emerged from the data regarding instructors’ encouragement of learner persistence
was recognition and acceptance of how external inﬂuences impact the experience.
Outside or external inﬂuences emerged from the data as a theme inﬂuencing learner
persistence. Such factors as work, family obligations, technology, and ﬁnances emerged
as inﬂuencing learner persistence. It was acknowledged that these factors often created
situations for the learner where continuing with the course was made much more difﬁcult

and often the learner would drop out of the course due to these outside inﬂuences.

93

CHAPTER V: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Introduction

 

This chapter presents and discusses the key ﬁndings from this study and provides
recommendations for application and future research. The central purpose of this study
was to describe instructor’s observations of the following four aspects of undergraduate
online learning: (1) Learner Self-Direction; (2) Learner Reﬂection; (3) Learner
Community; and (4) Learner Persistence. The secondary purpose of the investigation
was to identify speciﬁc characteristics of the online learning experience that may assist
instructors, learners, and institutions to better understand the learning experience. Most
Speciﬁcally, how can the online teaching and learning experience be enhanced and
maximized to best meet the expectations and learning outcomes of the individuals
involved in the experience?

This chapter expands on the emergent thematic categories within each area of
focus outlined in Chapter IV and draws conclusions. This chapter also identiﬁes several
recommendations that can be drawn from the conclusions. Although the conclusions are
reported as they relate to the four main areas of inquiry, it is important to note that there
is overlap in the ﬁndings within and between areas of inquiry. This should not be
interpreted as needless redundancy but as an indication of the fundamental inter-
connectedness of each of the lines of inquiry and the impact one has on the other with

respect to the online learning experience.

94

Investigation Site Background

In order to provide additional context in which to draw conclusions as they relate
to the data collected in this investigation, it is relevant to note several speciﬁc
characteristics about the investigation site. The institution offers only Internet-based
courses and does not offer complete degree programs online. Learners can take
individual courses via the Internet but can not complete an entire degree online. It is also
relevant to note that there is no centralized ofﬁce or department that monitors the
development of online instruction, nor provides training and development activities for
either faculty or learners engaged in the process. Rather, it is a decentralized approach
where any and all instructors are neither encouraged nor discouraged from offering
courses online. There are few formal protocols that determine or identify what
constitutes online learning at this institution other than courses are not to exceed three
face-to-face meetings and it is recommended that section size not exceed 15 students.
However, enrollment capacity is ultimately the decision of the academic unit offering the
online section. Although 15 students per section is the norm, some academic units have
allowed more than this maximum. Expanding beyond the capacity is done in order to
accommodate special circumstances of the students or because the instructor is willing to
make additional accommodations to address a speciﬁc capacity need of the department.

The institution does not distinguish students as “distance” students and many of
the students enrolled in the online sections of courses are often residential students living
on the main campus of the university. There is also no explicitly stated institutional

strategy for the develOpment of online courses and programs. The approach is organic in

95

nature and is driven by individual faculty member’s desire to provide instruction via the
Internet.

Finally, it is important to understand the role of the investigator of this study at
the institution where the study was conducted. The investigator had been employed at the
institution for approximately 14 years and had served in several leadership capacities. At
the time of this study, the investigator was the executive director of continuing education
whose primary responsibility was to extend learning opportunities to non-traditional and
adult learners. Hence, the interest of the investigator in understanding the dynamic of
teaching and learning online were key motivations for this investigation.

Summm of Findings

The study participants recognized and acknowledged the critical importance of
learner self-direction in online learning environments and acknowledged that without a
relatively high level of self-direction, leamers were less likely to be successful in the
online experience. This is consistent with the view of Garrison, Cleveland-Innes and
Fung (2004) who suggest that online learning may require “greater individual
responsibility” (p.70) and that it is imperative for learners to possess a certain level of
self-direction in order to maximize the experience.

The data also shows that procrastination and poor organizational skills are
common among learners participating in online environments. This behavior among the
learners often led instructors to supply the learner with initial information and
expectations. It also prompted instructors to provide further reinforcement and additional

reminders to the learners.

96

This type of response from instructors echoes the observation Boyer (2004)
makes, that the concern to provide clarity for the learners can lead to a rigid and
technocratic approach to teaching and learning online, and can lead to “compliant
learners”. This suggests that in the attempt to encourage learner self-direction through
clarity of expectations and timelines, it may actually perpetuate dependence rather than
encourage learner self-direction and independence.

The study participants also recognized that the motivations of the learners
enrolled in the online environment impacted their self-direction. The various motivations
that the study participants identiﬁed generally fell in one of two categories. The data
indicated that one category of learners who enrolled in the online courses were often
residential learners who, unable to accommodate their schedule with traditional face-to-
face classes, were able to add a class because of the lack of time speciﬁc constraints
afforded by the online environment. One participant illustrated this type of motivation as,
“[The] student [who] joins the class just because it ﬁts with their schedule and that way
they can take an extra class because they don’t have to Show up at that class.” This type
of motivation is in vast contrast to the second category of learner who, because of outside
obligations such as family, work, or distance, has limited opportunities for accessing
face—to-face classes and ﬁnds online learning a more viable option.

The study participants recognized and acknowledged the critical importance of
learner reﬂection in online learning environments yet acknowledged the difﬁculty in
being able to recognize whether a learner was actually engaging in reﬂective practices.
However, it was evident that the study participants recognized value in providing ample

opportunity for conversation and dialogue among and between the instructor and peers

97

and believed this practice facilitated reﬂection. This is consistent with the views of
Habermas (1970) and others, that the exchange of beliefs and ideas with others optimizes
the opportunity to compare and contrast individual beliefs with those of others.
However, as Ritchi and Hoffman (1997) point out, Simply posting ideas does not
necessarily equate to deeply engaging with and becoming actively involved with the
material and with one another. There was recognition among the participants that simply
posting was not sufﬁcient evidence of the learner’s reﬂection and there were attempts on
several levels to quantify responses by providing rubrics which outlined levels of
appropriate and well thought out responses. There was also recognition by the
participants that not all learners understood the relevance and beneﬁts of reﬂection in
learning. The participants recognized that learners were often at various stages of their
cognitive development.

One particularly beneﬁcial aspect of online learning environments was the
necessity for and the process of writing with respect to learner reﬂection. This
fundamental means of communication in the online learning environment, the use of
written communication, forced learners to explicitly state reactions and ideas. Depending
upon the expectation of the instructor and the learning activity, the learners were forced
to reﬂect on their responses more carefully, rather than spontaneously, react. Many of the
participants believed that this process encouraged deeper, more critical analysis of
concepts and ideas. Through this, the study participants acknowledged the power of
writing in the online environments. Not only was the instructor able to track the
responses of learners over time, writing also provided the opportunity for learners to

visibly view and track their own learning over time. Aside from the identiﬁed beneﬁts of

98

 

writing, instructors were very conscious of the time and energy required for both student
and instructor when writing activities were used in online environments. However, it was
also evident that although the study participants acknowledged the beneﬁts of writing on
line, it was also evident that writing also carried a burden for both instructor and the
student in terms of the amount of time required to thoughtfully engage in the process.

The importance of the participation by the instructor of the online class emerged
as an important aspect to encouraging learner community. However, the quality of the
interaction was of utmost importance. The study participants recognized the need for the
learner to know that the instructor acknowledged the learner as an individual,
highlighting the necessity of human interaction and a level of investment in the learner’s
overall success and learning experience.

There was also a distinction between formal communication and non-formal
communication Opportunities for learners to interact. In part, this was an attempt to
replicate both the formal activities and the spontaneous interactions that occur in face-to-
face environments. Although comments were made that suggest some learners
participate in the informal online interactions, it was also acknowledged that participation
in informal interactions was often the result of a learner’s personal preference. Several
study participants selected non-formal mechanisms that mirrored the current social
practices of technology users to include blogs and chat rooms which they believed
encouraged the development of the learning community.

It is interesting to note that many of the study participants stated that developing
the personal connection and stressing the human aspect of the interaction was difﬁcult

without at least one face-tO-face interaction. One participant commented that She needed

99

to “totally reexamine how to teach. I have to trust the students to choreograph a
conversation that typically I’m in charge of choreographing.”

It was clear from the data collected that the personal relationship that is developed
between the instructor and the learner is important in encouraging learner persistence. In
addition, the inﬂuence of the learner’s prior learning experiences also played a signiﬁcant
role in how the learner approached the online experience and whether his/her
expectations were aligned with the realities of online learning. It was identiﬁed that
many learners approached the online experience with the expectation that the online
experience would somehow be much easier than the traditional face-to-face environment.

The data described learners with little online experience as often being at a
disadvantage as they had no other point of reference other than their prior learning
experiences which were primarily, if not solely, in face-to-face formats. This is
consistent with Richardson’s and Newberry’s (2006) view that those learners who were
more familiar with the online environment were more likely to develop the necessary

strategies for success.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The experience of teaching and learning online is a personal and complex
dynamic which is inﬂuenced by a number of factors. However, the views of the study
participants serve to underscore several conclusions that Should be considered before,
during, and after participation in the online environment. This section presents several
conclusions that are drawn from the data of the study. As each conclusion is presented

and described, recommendations drawn from the conclusion are also presented.

100

Learner Motivation Is Central To Self Direction In Online Learning

The learner must recognize and reﬂect on his/her motivations and expectations
for taking the online experience. Clariﬁcation of expectations, coupled with the
importance of learner motivation, appear to be extremely important in encouraging
learner self-direction. AS a result, it is clear that the learner himself/herself must identify
his/her own expectations and motivations rather than relying on the instructor of the
online environment to make this determination. By insisting that the learner acknowledge
personal expectations and motivations there is not only a stronger likelihood the learner
will take responsibility for his/her own learning but the exercise will assist the learner in
developing a more realistic View of the commitment and demand of the experience.
Furthermore, by acknowledging these expectations and motivations, the likelihood of
aligning them more closely with the instructor’s expectations is improved. This is
supported by Boyer’s (2004) observations that although the instructor plays a critical role
in the online learning process by way of facilitation, the learner must also become
involved by guiding the direction of the experience.

Based on this conclusion, several recommendations are suggested. Instructors of
online learning need to consider how to develop strategies and techniques that encourage
the learner to identify and carefully reﬂect on his/her motivations and expectations of the
online class. This then allows the learner to best align these expectations with the reality
of the course and provides the learner more control to adjust and/or clarify expectations.
This encouragement from the instructor assists the learner to recognize the level of
commitment he/ she brings to the experience and the implications these motivations have

on the success of their individual learning experience.

101

The Learner And The Instructor Must Develop Shared Expectations And Learnirg

 

Objectives

The learner and the instructor must develop shared expectations and learning
objectives. The expectations of both the instructor and the learner must be aligned in
order to facilitate a successful experience. It is clear that instructors and learners often
approach the online learning experience from varied perspectives and with varied
expectations about the success and outcome of the course. As a result, the instructor
holds speciﬁc expectations and assumptions which often may not be aligned with the
expectations and assumptions held by the learners. By not addressing the potential
differences and misalignment of expectations the instructor is solely responsible for
directing the learning experience. The learner, in turn, is denied control and relinquishes
responsibility in the learning process. By denying the learner some control in the process,
not only does the learner relinquish responsibility, the learner is more likely to become a
passive, rather than active, participant in the experience. Several authors and educators,
including Friere (1970), Habermas (1970), and Schon (1983) reject this notion of
positioning the learner as a passive recipient of information. Furthermore, misaligned
expectations can lead to frustration for both the instructor and learners and, most
importantly, endorses the learner’s passive role in the process.

In addition to instructors clearly and explicitly outlining expectations, it is
recommended that instructors encourage the learner to reﬂect on his/her own
expectations. Most importantly, the instructor must recognize the possibility of
misaligned expectations and encourage and engage in an honest and open discussion

about aligning expectations. This suggests a level of willingness on the part of the

102

instructor to relinquish some control over the process, and a willingness to be open to the
development of an alternative view based on the combined expectations of both the

instructor and the learner.

Clarifying The Demands Of Online Learning Environments Is Critical To Learner
Persistence

Outlining and clarifying to the learner the demands of online learning
environments is critical to learner persistence. Often an inaccurate impression of the
demand of the online environment can lead the learner to dissatisfaction and
disengagement from the learning experience. A more realistic understanding of the
demands of online learning is critical. Although the inﬂuences of external factors is
consistent with Tinto’s ( 1987) model of persistence, it is evident from the data collected
in this study, few instructors encourage learners to consider the external factors
inﬂuencing the experience which include family responsibilities, work, and personal
obligations.

It is recommended that instructors provide learners with an orientation to the
experience before enrolling in the online course. The content of the orientation must be
expanded to include issues of personal and outside inﬂuences on the experience and must
go beyond the generally accepted overview of technology needs. There is little doubt
that learners must have the appropriate technology hardware and software as well as the
technology skills necessary to accommodate this mode of delivery. However, an
orientation should be broadened to include the learner’s reﬂection and acknowledgement

of personal learning preferences, skills, and attitudes necessary for the online experience.

103

In addition the orientation should include reﬂection and acknowledgement of the
necessary social support required for a successful experience to include family,
employers, and peers.

Online learning opportunities may better accommodate the learners and the
instructors if institutions were to distinguish the types of learners interested in
participating in online learning environments. It was evident in the data from this study
that some similarities and commonalities of learners was beneﬁcial. This is not to suggest
exclusivity in learning opportunities but to encourage a thoughtful discussion of the
differences between residential students enrolled in online courses compared to those

learners enrolled because of Situational necessity.

The Learner Must Identify And Articulate The Level And Type Of Guidance That Is

 

Needed And Expected

It is important for the learner to identify and articulate the level and type of
guidance he/ she needs and expects. The learner must reﬂect on his/her own level of self-
direction and determine for himself/herself the level and type of guidance they need and
have an opportunity to articulate this to the instructor. This is not to say that the learner
will be completely conscious of what is needed or required but it will provide the
necessary opportunity to reﬂect in order to gain a stronger understanding of himself or
herself as a learner. This greater understanding of self will enable to learner to better
seek the personal and individual strategies they require to be successful and self—directed

learners.

104

Consistent with this conclusion, instructors must develop ways learners can be
encouraged to reﬂect on their own self-direction. This can be done in a variety of ways
and can be supported by way of learning contracts and scaffolds that the learner and

instructor, working together, can create based on the individual learner’s needs.

The Instructor Must Recognize Individual Learner Characteristics

The role of individual learner characteristics, as an inﬂuence on instruction in the
online experience, must extend beyond demographic characteristics to include cognitive
development and learner capacity. Instructors must recognize and acknowledge the
cognitive level of development and learning capacity of the learner. It must be
understood that not all learners are at identical cognitive development levels and stages.
The instructor must recognize this in order to facilitate an environment that best meets the
developmental needs of the learners and enables and encourages them to develop
appropriate and effective strategies for success.

In order to best prepare instructors to develop the necessary skills and
understanding to assist and encourage the learner, instructors must be trained in
developmental and cognitive development of college and adult learners. In general,
instructors competencies lie with their discipline and the connections that exist between
student and adult development theories and practices are limited. If instructors gain the
necessary understanding of how individuals learn, the instructor will be able to modify
activities, techniques and strategies in the online enviromnent.

The constructs of student development theory may be viewed as applicable

outside of the formal experience and primarily relegated to student life activities. These

105

theories and constructs should be embraced by instructors of online learning and used to
maximize activities and the design of the course encouraging all to recognize individual

learner’s stages and encourage growth through reﬂective practice.

The Instructor Must Recognize The Value Of Writing In The Online ngperience

There is a need for instructors to recognize and maximize the multiple beneﬁts of
the writing process in the online experience. Most apparent is the opportunity to build
upon the writing process as a means of encouraging learners to become more conscious
of their beliefs and ideas. More integration and expansion of the theories and techniques
of the writing process must be incorporated into the online learning design as well as
integrated into the training and orientation efforts for both instructors and learners is

recommended.

Learners Must Sense The Personal Aspect Of The Online Environment

The need to create an environment, which is personal and attentive to the learners, is also
apparent in the data presented in this study. The quality of the online experience is linked
to the human interactions present in the experience. Without this personal attention and

interaction, both instructor and learner can feel isolated and disconnected.

106

There Must Be A Reduction Of Online Instructor Dependence On Face-To-Face
Teachig Techniques

There is a level of dependence on techniques used in face-to-face environments by
instructors and learners. The need to reconstruct or mimic the climate of the face-to-face
environment is apparent. This transference and attempt to mirror face-to-face
instructional techniques and learning strategies may not be effective or sufﬁcient in
online learning environments. Although this is a natural response, given face-to-face
instruction is the reference point for most instructors, it is important to acknowledge that
online instruction is not face-to-face instruction. It requires new and innovative strategies
for community development. This seeming dependence on face-to-face techniques also
suggests that instructors may hold some assumptions about the characteristics of the
learners enrolled in their online courses that may be in direct conﬂict with the
motivations and expectations of the learners. Furthermore, the desire to host face-to-face
meetings with the online learners suggests a level of control instructors may be unwilling
to relinquish to the learner.

With the rate of technological development and the use and dependence of
technology of current learner populations, relying on conventional face-to-face practices
does not necessarily keep pace with more innovative approaches being used by
individuals to maintain and develop community in an online environment. Furthermore,
the paradigm of community in higher education may need to be examined more closely to
determine what online learners perceive as an appropriate and engaged community, rather

than relying on the instructor to direct and orchestrate the environment. Understanding

107

and exploring the social dynamics of current practices outside the classroom could

greatly impact and inﬂuence community building in the online “classroom”.

Online Instructors Can Beneﬁt From Exchange And Dialogue With Other Online
Instructors

It is apparent from this study that online instructors would beneﬁt from exchange
and dialogue with other instructors of online learning. It is also evident that instructors
Share similar realities as the learner. Although instructors often found the ﬂexibility and
convenience of teaching online appealing, the challenges of working in isolation were
also evident. It was clear that instructors rarely communicated with one another about
the opportunities and challenges that exist in online learning environments. The need for
more dialogue and community building among and between the instructors of online
learning was clearly discernable. Implementation of both formal and informal
opportunities for exchange of ideas and discourse among the instructors is highly
desirable. It is important that institutions provide orientations for instructors addressing

the logistical, personal, and social aspects of teaching and learning online.

Instructors Often Have Different Understandings Of Important Online Concepts
Although every attempt was made to clarify the deﬁnitions used in this study, the
participants often viewed these deﬁnitions subjectively and it was clear that
understandings differed from instructor to instructor. This reinforces the personal
subjectivity and complexity of the exploration of attributes and characteristics of teaching

and learning. Although the operational deﬁnitions of teaching and learning online are

108

often viewed differently by individuals and determined by Situational and personal point
of view, the opportunity for engaging in dialogue and discourse about the meaning and
importance of terminology associated with teaching and learning online is palpable.
Recommendations for Instructors of Online Environments

Although motivation is a factor in face-to-face learning environments, the
motivation for participating in an online learning environment is largely driven by
convenience and ﬂexibility. This motivation, although valid, has several dimensions that
are not always considered. Instructors must assist the learner in recognizing how
motivations can impact the learning experience. This can be accomplished in a variety of
ways to include explicitly asking the student why he/she has enrolled in the online
course. However, insisting on an answer that must be shared with others in the group is
unlikely to result in an honest examination and reﬂection by the student. Journal writing
or reﬂection papers are tools that should be considered. Although not all students are
likely to honestly reﬂect on their motivations, what is gained is that the learner has
become cognizant of the connection between their motivation and their success as an
online learner.

Another Similar factor that is critical to the success of the learning experience is
determining and identifying the learner’s expectations. One dimension of convenience
and ﬂexibility implies that online learning may be a less difﬁcult option for the learner in
terms of the level of commitment required. This expectation, in addition to other
expectations and beliefs about the rigor of online learner, encourages the learner to make
assumptions that lead to a disengaged approach to the experience. Again, the importance

of explicitly designing practices and activities through journal writing or reﬂective

109

activities must be underscored if the learner is to engage in and understand his/her role in
the success of the experience.

Furthermore, instructors must ask themselves about their own motivations for
teaching online. Instructors Share similar beneﬁts and challenges as the learner in an
online environment. A critical and honest reﬂection of motivations and expectations is
also essential for the instructor if he/She is to maximize the teaching and learning
experience.

Instructors must also recognize the necessity and the opportunity to develop
shared learning objectives with the learners. Although the instructor is the content
expert, each individual has a unique strategy for processing and evaluating information.
Although potentially cumbersome, jointly developing learning contracts with the learner
can greatly enhance the learner's commitment to the experience. In addition, and perhaps
most importantly, developing learning contracts opens the possibility for the learner to
have input into how they will engage in the process. It allows the learner to develop a
plan which is suitable to their needs and expectations. Allowing the learner a level of
control requires the instructor to be comfortable with a learning experience that emerges
rather than meets a prescribed design. The beneﬁts of allowing learners a level of control
over the experience can also be applied to online discussions. Rather than assigning
students a series of questions and comments to respond to, the use of case studies and

simulations would encourage interconnectivity of thought and analysis.

110

Recommendations for Institutional Policy

Institutions must integrate student learning theory and adult learning theory into
the development of online practices. All individuals have unique cognitive levels of
development which can not be ignored. One developmental characteristic of traditional
aged students is the duality in which they view the world (Baxter-Magolda, 1992).
Traditional aged students are more likely to see an issue from only one dimension, while
adult learners (over 25 years of age) often rely on their experiences to understand the
complexity of an issue (Knowles, 1975). This is relevant to instructors of online courses
as they design activities, particularly as they attempt to encourage the learner to critically
engage in discussions online. Without understanding the cognitive level of development
of the learners, instructors may have unrealistic expectations of the learners both as
individuals and as a collective group.

Student affairs and student development divisions within institutions are often
separated and alienated from the academic affairs divisions. This separation does not
allow for the integration of knowledge of content and experience into the process of
learning. Institutional leaders must acknowledge and support the relationship between
the two. Although this has not been common practice in higher education, joint research
and publications between student affairs and the academic divisions of the institution
would highlight the strong interrelated dimensions and the combined contributions each
makes to student learning.

Most importantly, institutions must consider the purpose for pursuing online
programming. Often the institution responds to demands for online pro gramming or

programming delivered via technology without carefully considering the implications to

111

the learning experience. Institutions must determine their target audience for online
progranrming. Is the institution reaching out to the residential student who has difﬁculty
scheduling a full compliment of classes? Is the institution providing Opportunities to
students who wish to take an additional class but whose schedule will exceed the
traditional scheduling block? On the other hand, is the institution seeking to attract new
students and provide opportunities to individuals who have limited access to higher
education because of geographic or commitment constraints? Both models and audiences
provide institutions with tangible and intangible beneﬁts. Providing these opportunities to
residential students provides increased tuition revenue and improved time to graduation
rates. Providing these opportunities to new students with geographic constraints also
provides increased tuition revenue without impacting the physical infrastructure of the
institution. However, trying to meet the needs and expectations of both audiences can
tax the structure and can undermine quality. Identifying the intent and audience of the
online program provides a more stable environment to develop the necessary teaching
and learning tools and support for the online instructor and learner. Identifying the intent
and audience enables the institution to clearly identify the beneﬁts, challenges, and the
demands that may be placed on systems and structures.

Finally, institutions must recognize that in order to develop a quality online
program, a commitment to the instructors and the students must be present. It has been
noted throughout this discussion that online teaching and learning requires time and
energy, particularly on the part of the instructor. Class Size must be examined to
determine what is feasible and equitable to the instructor as well as what is in the best

interest of the learner. Along with this, institutions must consider the economic

ll2

feasibility of the endeavor. Small class capacities may be more suitable to the individual
learner’s needs, the instructor’s abilities, and the development of community; small class

capacity may also stretch the resources of the institution.

Recommendations for Future Study

This investigation was an exploration Of four speciﬁc areas of focus relating to
instructor’s views of learners in online education. This study yielded a rich set of data
from which a clearer understanding of the challenges facing the online instructor has
emerged. Further identiﬁcation of additional areas of focus relevant to the teaching and
learning experience need to be explored and examined. An examination of how writing
impacts learning online as well as examination of how writing can be maximized in the
online learning environment. In addition, examining institutions with varying levels of
organizational development and maturity in the online environment would shed light on
differences that may exist between institutions, particularly those with centralized and
decentralized approaches to online instruction. Further exploration of learner motivations
as indicators Of success in online environments, as well as an exploration of instructor
motivations, may also provide Opportunity to enhance orientation programs for both
instructors and learners. With this, there is opportunity to draw distinctions between
speciﬁc characteristics of learners by age, gender, and grade level. Finally, and most
importantly, if the experience of teaching and learning online is to be enhanced and
maximized it is important to allow the perspectives and views of the learners to emerge in

addition to those of the instructors.

113

Appendices

114

Appendix A

Interview Guide:

Key Informant: Online Instructor

Background:

Gender

How long have you been teaching at the university level?

How many courses have you taught online over the past 3 years?
What were some of the reasons why you decided to teach online?

nguiry Area 1 - Ir_r_structor Views of Learper Self-Directiop in Online Learning

T he ﬁrst set of questions that I will be asking deals with the concept of learner self-
direction in an online course. In other words, the extent to which a learner accepts some
level of responsibility for their own learning. ”

Inquiry Question 1.1 How do instructors encourage learner self-direction?

Probing Question 1.1.1 Do you feel it is possible for the instructor of an
online course to encourage learners to be self-directed? Why do you feel
that way? Please explain.
Probing Question 1.1.2 How important do you feel it is for the instructor to
encourage learners to be self-directed in an online course? Why do you
feel that way? Please explain.
Probing Question 1.1.3 Do you encourage learners to be self-directed in
your own online courses?
If “NO”, why not?

If “Yes”, how do you encourage learners to be self-directed?
Probing Question 1.1.4 Are you able to assess whether a learner is
engaging in self—directed learning in your own online courses?

If “NO”, please explain

If “Yes”, how do you assess whether a learner is engaging in self-
directed learning?

115

Inquiry Question 1.2 What self-directed learning strategies have instructors seen
used in the online environment that are effective?

Probing Question 1.2.1 Have you seen or participated in any online
courses where the instructor effectively encourages learners to engage in
self-directed learning? If “Yes”, please describe what you have seen.

Probing Question 1.2.2 Have you seen an effective self-directed learning

strategy that a learner has created and used in an online course? If “Yes”,
please describe what you have seen.

Inquiry Question 1.3 What are the barriers that inhibit learner self-direction?

Probing Question 1.3.1 What do you see as the major barriers that may
limit or inhibit self-directed learning in the online learning environment?

nguiry Area 2 — Instructor Views of Learper Reﬂection in Online Learning

The next set of questions that I will be asking deals with the concept of learner reﬂection
— the process by which the learner draws meaning from what is being taught. ”

Inquiry Question 2.1 How do instructors encourage reﬂection?

Probing Question 2.1.1 Do you feel it is possible for the instructor of an
online course to encourage reﬂection ? Why do you feel that way? Please
explain.

Probing Question 2.1.2 How important do you feel it is for the instructor
to encourage reﬂection in an online course? Why do you feel that way?

Please explain.

Probing Question 2.1.3 Do you encourage reﬂection in your online
courses?

If “NO”, why not?

If “Yes”, how do you encourage reﬂection?
“T his next set of questions deals with two different types of reﬂection that a learner may
be involved with during an online course. T he ﬁrst type of reﬂection is concerned with

the learner reﬂecting on the content of the course. The second type of reﬂection is
concerned with the learner reﬂecting on his/her own learning process. ”

116

Probing Question 2.1.4 Do you feel it is possible for the instructor of an
online course to encourage the learner to reﬂect on the content of the
course? Why do you feel that way? Please explain.

Probing Question 2.1.5 How important do you feel it is for the instructor
of an online course to encourage the learner to reﬂect on the content of

the course? Why do you feel that way? Please explain.

Probing Question 2.1.6 Do you encourage learners to reﬂect on the content
of your online courses?

If “No”, why not?

If “Yes”, how do you do you encourage learners to reﬂect on the
on content?

Probing Question 2.1.7 Do you feel it is possible for the instructor of an
online course to encourage the learner to reﬂect on his or her own learning
process? Why do you feel that way? Please explain.

Probing Question 2.1.8 How important do you feel it is for the instructor
of an online course to encourage the learner to reﬂect on his or her own
learning process? Why do you feel that way? Please explain.

Probing Question 2.1.9 Do you encourage the learner to reﬂect on his or
her own learning process in your online courses?

If “No”, why not?

If “Yes”, how do you encourage the learner to reﬂect on his or her own
learning?

Probing Question 2.1.10 Are you able to assess whether a learner is
engaging in reﬂection in your on line courses?

If “No”, please explain

If “Yes”, how do you assess whether a learner is engaging in
reﬂection?

ll7

Inquiry Question 2.2 What strategies that encourage reﬂection have instructors
used in the online environment that are effective?

Probing Question 2.2.1 Have you seen or participated in online courses
where the instructor effectively encourages learners to engage in
reﬂection on content? If “Yes”, please describe what you have seen.

Probing Question 2.2.2 Have you seen or participated in online courses
where the instructor effectively encourages learners to reﬂect on their
learning process? If “Yes”, please describe what you have seen.

Probing Question 2.2.3 Have you seen an effective reﬂection strategy that

a learner has created and used in an online course? If “Yes”, please
describe what you have seen.

Inquiry Question 2.3 What are the barriers that inhibit learner reﬂection?
Probing Question 2.3.1 What do you see as the major barriers that may
limit or inhibit learner reﬂection in the online learning environment?

Inguiry Area 3 - Instructor Views of Learner Communig in Online Learning
“The next set of questions deals with the concept ofa ‘community of learners ’ — the
situation that can occur in an online course when the learners begin to bond to each
other and work in a collective fashion. ”

Inquiry Question 3.1 How do instructors encourage learner community?
Probing Question 3.1.1 Do you feel it is possible for the instructor of an
online course to encourage learner community? Why do you feel that
way? Please explain.

Probing Question 3.1.2 How important do you feel it is for the instructor
to encourage learner community? Why do you feel that way? Please
explain.

Probing Question 3.1.3 Do you encourage learner community in your own
online courses?

If “No”, why not?

If “Yes”, how do you encourage learner community?

118

Probing Question 3.1.4 Are you able to assess whether learners are
engaging in a learner community in your own online courses?

If “No”, please explain

If “Yes”, how do you assess whether a learner is engaging in a
learner community?

Inquiry Question 3.2 What effective strategies that encourage learner
community have instructors used in an online environment?

Probing Question 3.2.1 Have you seen or participated in any online
courses where the instructor effectively encourages learner community?
If “Yes”, please describe what you have seen.

Probing Question 3.2.2 Have you seen an effective strategy that a learner

or learners have created and used that encourage learner community in an
online course? If “Yes”, please describe what you have seen.

Inquiry Question 3.3 What are the barriers that inhibit learner community?
Probing Question 3.3.1 What do you see as the major barriers that may
limit or inhibit the development of learner community in the online
learning environment?

Inguiry Area 4 - Instructor Views of Learner Persistence in Online Learning

“The next set of questions deals with the concept of ‘learner persistence ’ — the desire of
the learner to continue with an online course rather than dropping out. ”

Inquiry Question 4.1 How do instructors encourage learner persistence?
Probing Question 4.1.1 Do you feel it is possible for the instructor of an
online course to encourage learner persistence? Why do you feel that
way? Please explain.

Probing Question 4.1.2 How important do you feel it is for the instructor
of an online course to encourage learner persistence? Why do you feel that

way? Please explain.

Probing Question 4.1.3 Do you encourage learner persistence in your own
online courses?

If “No”, why not?

119

If “Yes”, how do you encourage learner persistence?

Inquiry Question 4.2 What effective learner persistence strategies have
instructors used in the online environment?

Probing Question 4.2.1 Have you seen or participated in any online
courses where the instructor effectively encourages learner persistence?
If “Yes”, please describe what you have seen.

Probing Question 4.2.2 Have you seen an effective strategy that a learner
has created and used that encourages persistence in an online course? If
“Yes”, please describe what you have seen.

Inquiry Question 4.3 What are the barriers to learner persistence?
Probing Question 4.3.1 What do you see as the major barriers to

persistence in the online learning environment?

This concludes my set of questions relating to online learning and your views of learner
self-direction, learner reﬂection, learner community, and learner persistence. Are there
other thoughts that you have/comments that you would like to make about these topics
that I have not covered?

120

Appendix B

Letter of Introduction

Hello,

My name is Simone Jonaitis and I am a doctoral student at Michigan State University. I
am currently working on my dissertation and am interested in better understanding the
online learning experience in order to broaden our response to the way in which we
facilitate and engage the learner.

I understand you have taught several sections of online courses and I am very interested
in your input and thoughts about teaching and learning using an online format. If this is
something that is of interest to you, I am hopeful you would consider participating in my
research. Certainly, all participation is conﬁdential and is in no way connected to the
study site’s online programming other than providing me with a ﬁeld site for my
research.

Again, I am most interested in your perspectives and would like to ask you to consider
participation in the research. I recognize the many commitments and demands on your
time yet am hopeful you will consider participating. I anticipate no more than an hour of
your time and will diligently pursue a time and location for a conversation which is most
convenient for you.

Please let me know whether you would be interested in assisting me in this research. I
can be contacted via Email at pnaitis@gvsu.edu or by phone at 331-7356 or 791-7823.

 

Sincerely,

Simone J onaitis

121

Appendix C

Participant Consent Form

Learning Online: An exploration of instructor’s perspectives of learner responsibility

This research study is intended to gain an understanding of instructor’s experiences working with
online learners. Your thoughts and comments will assist in expanding the understanding of
online learning and possible ways to broaden responses to engaging the learner in the learning
process.

Should you choose to participate in this study, it is important you understand how the study will
be conducted, your rights as a participant and how the information obtained will be used. It is
anticipated there will be one, one hour interview where we will discuss your observations and
experiences as an online instructor. I will take notes during our conversation and if given your
permission, will audio-record our conversation which will then be transcribed. This will provide
me with an additional account of your comments and will facilitate my overall analysis of
instructor’s responses. I will also be inviting interested individuals who have participated in one
to one interviews to also participate in a small group discussion where I will share my
observations and provide another opportunity for conversation about online learning. All notes
and recorded information will be kept conﬁdential. However, the information will be
summarized and analyzed and presented as my doctoral dissertation.

From the researcher’s perspective there are no known risks associated with your participation and
your identity will be kept conﬁdential. The beneﬁts to your participation in this study may
provide you an opportunity for reﬂection on teaching and learning online. Your participation may
also contribute to expanding the overall understanding of teaching and learning in online
environments by multiple stakeholders, to include learners, instructors and organizations.

Notes obtained during the interviews will not contain any of your personal identiﬁcation
information, will be kept in my possession in a secure location, and upon completion of the
dissertation and subsequent defense, will be destroyed. You are free at any time to withdraw
from the study. Your participation is completely voluntary and there is no penalty should you
choose to withdraw. Your decision to withdraw your consent and discontinue participation in the
investigation will be honored promptly and unconditionally.

It is also important to note that although I am employed by the institution where this study will be
conducted, this research study has not been commissioned by the institution and the data gathered
will not be used to further any institutional agenda.

If at any time you have questions about the study you may contact me at jonaitis@gvsu.edu or by
phone at 616.791-7823 or 616.331-7356. Dr. Joseph Levine, my doctoral dissertation chair can
also be reached should you have questions or concerns. Dr. Levine can be reached at
levine@msu.edu or by phone at 517.349-6623.

 

122

In addition, if you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a participant, about the
manner in which the study is conducted, or are dissatisﬁed at any time with any aspect of this
study, please direct any comments or concerns, anonymously if you wish, to:

Michigan State University
Peter Vasilenko, Ph.D., Director of Human Research and Protections
Phone (517) 355-2180
Fax(517) 432-4503
e-mail — irb@msu.edu
202 Olds Hall, Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824-1047

 

By completing and signing this form I agree to participate in this study and support the methods
of Simone Jonaitis. I understand my rights are protected to the maximum extent allowable by
law.

I, , agree to participate in the 2006 doctoral dissertation of instructor’s
perspectives of online learning conducted by Simone Jonaitis

Simone Jonaitis has my permission to audiotape this interview. Yes No

 

 

Signed Date

123

Appendix D

Follow up Thank You Note to Study Participants

Dear Professor X,

I wanted to again thank you for meeting with me earlier this week. Your
contributions for my study are very valuable and your time spent with me is greatly
appreciated. As discussed during our conversation, I will contact you again should I
need additional information or clariﬁcation.

And of course, should you like to continue the conversation or have any additional
questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at 331-7456 or by email at
_'Lonaitis@gvsu.edu

 

Thanks again for your time and valuable contributions.

Sincerely,

Simone J onaitis

124

Bibliography

125

 

.ﬂ—‘—_

 

Bibliography

Ali, N.S., Hodson—Carlton K., Ryan, M. (2002). Web-based professional

education for advanced practice nursing: A consumer guide for program selection. The
Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 33(1), 33-38.

Andrusyszyn, M., Cragg, C.E., & Humbert, J. (2001). Nurse practitioner
preferences for distance education methods related to learning style, course content, and
achievement. Journal of Nursing Education, 40(4), 163- 170.

Baxter Magolda, M. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: gender-related
patterns in students’ intellectual development. San Francisco: J ossey-Bass.

Biggs, J .B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne:
Australian Council for Educational Research.

Boyer, N. (2004). Who’s in charge? A system of scaffolds that encourages online
earners to take control. Association for Educational Communications and Technology
27’“, Chicago, IL, October 19-23, 2004 Retrieved March 2006 OCLC FirstSearch.

Brown, RE. (2001). The process of community-building in distance learning
classes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5 (2), 18-35.

Cannell L. (1999). A review of literature on distance education. Theological
Education, 36(1), 1-72.

Clark R.A., & Jones D. (2001). A comparison of traditional and online formats in
a public speaking course. Communication Education, 50(2), 109-124.

Chung, S., Chung, M., and Severance, C. (1999). Design of support tools and
knowledge building in a virtual university course: effect of reﬂection and self-
explanation prompts. Webnet 99 World Conference on the WW and Internet
proceedings (Honolulu, HI, Oct. 24-30).

Chyung, Y., Winiecki, D., & F enner, J .A. (1999). Evaluation of effective
interventions to solve the dropout problem in adult distance education. Proceedings of
EdMedia 1999, 51-55. Seattle, WA 1999.

126

Cooper, L.W.(2001). A comparison of online and traditional computer
applications classes. THE. Journal, 28(8), 52-58.

Creswell, J .W. (2003). Research Design; Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
Method Approaches. 2"“ edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage

Dabbagh, N. (2003). Scaffolding: An important teacher competency in online
learning. T echT rends, 47(2), 39-44 Mr/Ap2003 F irstsearch. Oclc Retrieved March 2006.

Dewey, J. Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books, 1938.
Doherty, K.M. (2002). Students speak out. Education Week, 21(35), 19-24.
Dreyfus, H. (2001) On the Internet. London & New York: Routledge.

Fjortoft, NP. (1995). Predicting persistence in distance learning programs. Paper
presented at the Mid- Western educational meeting (Chicago, IL, October 1995).

F reire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressea’. New York: Continuum
International Publishing Group (1993).

Galusha, J .M. (1998). Barriers to Learning in Distance Education. [online].
Retrieved September 2002. http://www.infrastruction.com/barriers.htm

Garrison, D. R. (1997). Self-directed learning :Toward a comprehensive model.
Adult Education Quarterly, 48(10),18-33.

Garrison, R. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. (2004). Student role Adjustment
in online communities of inquiry: model and instrument validation. Journal of
Asychronous Learning Networks (2) April 2004. Retrieved June 2005.

Garrison, R.D., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in
online learning: interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education,
19(3), 133-148. Retrieved March 2006.

127

 

Glaser, B.G. & Stauss, A. (1967). Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for
Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine Transaction.

Grill J ., (1999). Access to learning: rethinking the promise of distance education.
Adult Learning, 10(4), 32-33.

Grow, G. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly,
41(3), 125-149.

Habermas, J. (1970). Toward a rational society; student protest, science, politics.
Boston: Beacon Press.

Ham, M.(2005). Students’ perceptions of web-based learning: A study of
satisfaction and success. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 53 (1), 21 -33.

Howell, S.L., Williams, M.S. & Lindsay, N. K.(2003). Thirty-two trends
affecting distance education: an informed foundation for strategic planning. Online
Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Volume VI, Number III, Fall 2003.
State University of West Georgia, Distance Education Center. Retrieved July 2005.
http://www.westga.edu/~distance/oidla/fall63/howell63.html

Joo, Y., Bong, M., & Choi, H. (2000). Self-efﬁcacy for self-regulated learning,
academic self-efﬁcacy, and internet self-efﬁcacy in web-based instruction. Educational
Technology, Research and Development Washington. ProQuest. Retrieved September
2002.

Keegan, D. (1986), The Foundations of Distance Education, London: Croom
Helm.

Kember, D. (1989). A longitudinal process model of drop out from distance
education. Journal of Higher Education, 60 (3). May/June pp.278-301.

Kennedy, CA. (2000). What inﬂuences student learning in an online course?
Information Analyses (070).

Knowles, MS. (1975). Self-directed learning. New York: Association Press.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

128

 

Leasure, R., Davis L., & Thievon, S.L. (2000). Comparison of student outcomes
and preferences in a traditional vs. world wide web based baccalaureate nursing research
course. Journal of Nursing Education, 39(4), 149. ProQuest Education Complete.
Retrieved September 2002.

Lee, J ., & Busch PE. (2005). Factors related to instructors willingness to
participate in distance education. The Journal of Educational Research; Nov/Dec
2005:99,2; Wilson Education Abstracts pg.109.

Lee, C., & Witta, EL. (2001). Online students’ perceived self-efﬁcacy: does it
change? Annual proceedings of selected research and development Practice papers

presented at the national convention of the association for educational communications
and technology (24th, Atlanta, GA, November 8-12, 2001).

Levin, S.R., Levin, J .G., Guell, J .G, & Waddoups, G.L. (2002). Curriculum,
technology, and education reform (CETER) online: evaluation of an online master of
education program. T echTrends, 46(3), 30-38

Link, D. & Scholtz, S. (2000) Educational technology and the faculty role: What
you don’t know can hurt you. Nurse Educator. 25 (6), 274-278.

Maxwell, J. 1996). Qualitative Research Design. An Interactive Approach.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Mezirow , J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S.B., Caffarella, R. S., (1991). Learning in Adulthood, San Francisco:
Jossey Bass Inc.

Moore, MG. and Kearsley, G. (1996), Distance Education: A Systems View.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.

National Center for Education Statistics report, The Condition of Education 2004
(GOA-04-78T -2003).

129

National Center for Education Statistics. Distance Education at Postsecondary
Education Institutions http://nces.edg2,ov/surveys/peqis/publications/20030l7/ Retrieved
March 2007

 

Palloff, R.M. and Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons ﬁom the cyberspace classroom .'
the Realities of Teaching Online, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Patton, MO. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods, Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications

Ponticell, J .A. and Zepeda, SJ. (2004). Confronting well-leamed Lessons in
supervision and evaluation. NASSP Bulletin, 88 (639), 43-59.

Richardson, J .C., and Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online
courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. JALN 7(1). 68-88.

Richardson, J .C., and Newby, T. (2006). The role of students’ cognitive
engagement in online learning. The American Journal of Distance Education , 20(1), 23-
37. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Retrieved March 2006.

Ricketts, J ., Wolfe, P. H., Norvelle, E. and Carpenter, E. H. (2000)
Asynchronous distributed education — a review and case study. Social Science Computer
Review, 18(2): 132-146.

Ritchie, DC, and Hoffman, B. ( 1997). Incorporating instructional design
principles with the World Wide Web, Web-based instruction, New Jersey, Educational
Technology Publication, Inc., 149-158.

Roblyer, MD. (1999). Is choice important in distance learning? A study of
student motives for taking intemet-based courses at the high school and community
college levels. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 32 (1), 157-71.

Rovai, A. (2003). In search of higher persistence rates in distance education
online programs, Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 1-16.

Russell, TL. (1999), The No Signiﬁcant Difference Phenomenon. Raleigh, NC:
North Carolina State University.

130

 

Ryan, W.J. (2002). Online and in the classroom: the numbers and what they might
mean. A presentation to the league for innovation in the community college Innovations
conference. (Boston, MA, March 19-20, 2002).

Schneider S.P., & Germann CG. (1999). Technical communication on the Web:
A proﬁle of learners and learning environments. Technical Communications Quarterly
8(1), 37-48.

Schon, D. (1983). The Reﬂective Practitioner: How professionals think in action.
Basic Books, Inc. United States of America.

Shanna, P., & Hannaﬁn, M.J. (2002). The evolution of critical thinking and use of
scaffolding in a technology-mediated environment. ED-Media 2002 World Conference

on Educational multimedia, hypermedia & telecommunications. Proceedings (14th,
Denver, CO, June 24-29). http:///www.aace.org/DL. Retrieved March 2006.

 

Simpson, C. & Du, Y., (2004). Effects of learning styles and class participation on
students’ enjoyment level in distributed learning environments. Journal of Education for
Library and Information Science, 45 (2) Spring 2004. ISSN: 0748-5786. The H.W.
Wilson Company. Retrieved March 2006.

Smith, P.J. (2005). Learning Preferences and Readiness for Online Learning.
Educational Psychology 25(1) 3-12.

Sweet, R.(1986). Student Drop-out in distance education: An application of
Tinto’s Model. Distance Education, 7(2) 201-213.

Terrell, S.R. & Dringus (2000) An investigation of the effect of learning style on
student success in an online environment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems
28 (3) 231-38.

Thiele, J E (2003). Learning patterns of online students. Journal of Nursing
Education; Aug 2003; 42, 8; Wilson Education Abstracts pg. 364. Retrieved March
2005.

Tinto, V. Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition.
Chicago, IL: The University Press, 1987.

131

 

Tough, A. (1979). The Adult ’5 Learning Projects: A Fresh Approach to Theory
and Practice in Adult Learning (2nd ed.). Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in
Education.

Valenta A., Therriault D., Dieter M., & Mrtek R., (2001). Identifying Student
Attitudes and Learning Styles in Distance Education. [online]. Retrieved June 2003.
h_ttp://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/Vol 5 issue2/Valenta/Valenta.htm

Willging, RA. and Johnson, SD, (2004). Factors that Inﬂuence Students’
Decision to Dropout of Online Courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks
Volumn 8 (4) December 2004. [online]. Retrieved November 2005 .
http://sloan-c.org/publications/ialn/v8n4/v8n4_willgingasp

Woodley, A. ( 2004). Conceptualizing student dropout in part-time distance
education: pathologizing the normal? Open Learning, 19(1), 47-63.

Yu, C. & Durrington, V., (2005). Student perceptions of computer skills needed
when enrolled in online courses. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education 53(2).
Spring 2005. pp. 12-23.

Zielinski D., (2000). Can you keep learners online? Training, 37(3), 64-75.

132

 

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Will/Ill!!!lllll/HllllllllllllHlfWWl

3 1293 02845 8150