Bringing Face-to-Face Engagement to Online Classes Developing a High-Presence Online Teaching Method
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The trend to shift courses online is accelerating. Some students are gravitating toward asynchronous online classes; however, many still prefer in-person educational experiences. These students often are less engaged when taking online courses, and their willingness to pay for online courses is frequently less than for in-person courses. There is a need to bridge the gaps between online and traditional class delivery formats. This paper reports on a high-presence online teaching method that approximates the in-person experience by affording face-to-face conversations, real-time interaction, and features the instructor placed front-and-center with the lecture material. The paper reports a case study test of this method as applied to a graduate process reengineering course. Students in the course report that the method provides better student-instructor interaction and overall engagement than they expect from in-person classes. Students also report that the method approximates what they expect from in-person courses regarding the quality of interactions they have with their classmates.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
References
Anderson, G. (2020). Students Turn to Courts for Refunds. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/04/20/students-sue-universities-tuition-and-fee-refunds
Anderson, T., Liam, R., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context.
Baker, C. (2010). The impact of instructor immediacy and presence for online student affective learning, cognition, and motivation. Journal of Educators Online, 7(1), n1.
Bettinger, E. P., Fox, L., Loeb, S., & Taylor, E. S. (2017). Virtual classrooms: How online college courses affect student success. American Economic Review, 107(9), 2855-2875.
Binkley, C. (2020). Unimpressed by online classes, college students seek refunds. Retrieved from https://apnews.com/article/f18a0a48925a19586e4d810f6e88eff3
Cole, A. W. (2016). Testing the impact of student preference for face-to-face communication on online course satisfaction. Western Journal of Communication, 80(5), 619-637.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. Research in organizational behavior, 6, 191-233.
Daniels, N. (2020). When the Pandemic Ends, Will School Change Forever? Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/05/learning/when-the-pandemic-ends-will-school-change-forever.html
Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating Effective Student Engagement in Online Courses: What Do Students Find Engaging?. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1-13.
Fernandez, V., Simo, P., Sallan, J. M., & Enache, M. (2013). Evolution of online discussion forum richness according to channel expansion theory: A longitudinal panel data analysis. Computers & Education, 62, 32-40.
Ferschke, O., Yang, D., Tomar, G., & Rosé, C. P. (2015). Positive impact of collaborative chat participation in an edX MOOC. Paper presented at the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education.
Gomez, C. J., Gautam, C., Rothermel, M. A., & Olsen, J. D. (2020). Students' Perceptions of a Token Economy in an Undergraduate Science Flipped Class-Room. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 20(2).
He, W., Xu, G., & Kruck, S. (2019). Online IS education for the 21st century. Journal of Information Systems Education, 25(2), 1.
Icon By The Noun Project. (2020). Some students might choose to withdraw if fall classes are online. BizEd.
IE University. (2020). WowRoom-Building the Future of Education. Retrieved from https://www.ie.edu/madeofchange/
J. Mack Robinson College of Business. (2020). Room of the Future. Retrieved from https://robinson.gsu.edu/graduate-programs/stackable-certificates/room-of-the-future-4/
Jaggars, S. S. (2014). Choosing between online and face-to-face courses: Community college student voices. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(1), 27-38.
Keil, M., & Johnson, R. D. (2002). Feedback channels: Using social presence theory to compare voice mail to e-mail. Journal of Information Systems Education, 13(4), 295.
Lamborn, S., Newmann, F., & Wehlage, G. (1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools, 11-39.
Liu, S.-H., Liao, H.-L., & Pratt, J. A. (2009). Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 52(3), 599-607.
Liu, Y. C., & Burn, J. M. (2007). Improving the performance of online learning teams-A discourse analysis. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18(3), 369.
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205-222.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. In: Taylor & Francis.
O'Brien, B. (2020). With classroom time reduced, U.S. college students demand tuition cuts. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/BigStory12/idUSKBN26I0FU
Ott, L. E., Carpenter, T. S., Hamilton, D. S., & LaCourse, W. R. (2018). Discovery Learning: Development of a Unique Active Learning Environment for Introductory Chemistry. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 18(4), 161-180.
Romero-Hall, E., & Vicentini, C. R. (2017). Examining distance learners in hybrid synchronous instruction: Successes and challenges. Online Learning Journal, 21(4).
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications: John Wiley & Sons.
Singh, A., Rocke, S., Pooransingh, A., & Ramlal, C. J. (2019). Improving Student Engagement in Teaching Electric Machines Through Blended Learning. IEEE Transactions on Education, 62(4), 297-304.
Tichavsky, L. P., Hunt, A. N., Driscoll, A., & Jicha, K. (2015). " It's Just Nice Having a Real Teacher": Student Perceptions of Online versus Face-to-Face Instruction. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(2), n2.
Wanstreet, C. E. (2009). Interaction in online learning environments. The perfect online course: Best practices for designing and teaching, 425.
Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage publications.
Zhao, Y., Wang, A., & Sun, Y. (2020). Technological environment, virtual experience, and MOOC continuance: A stimulus–organism–response perspective. Computers & Education, 144, 103721.