Vol. 30 No. 2 (2015)
Research Brief

An Exploratory Study of Levels of Interaction Occurring with Graduate Students in an Online Literacy Course

PDF HTML ePub
  • Tina Selvaggi
Tina Selvaggi
West Chester University of Pennsylvania
Bio

Published 2016-01-04

Keywords

  • Distance Education,
  • Graduate Students,
  • interactions

How to Cite

Selvaggi, T. (2016). An Exploratory Study of Levels of Interaction Occurring with Graduate Students in an Online Literacy Course. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education Revue Internationale Du E-Learning Et La Formation à Distance, 30(2). Retrieved from https://ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/939
Copyright Notice

Abstract

This study surveyed graduate students prior to, and immediately following, a literacy course offered online to determine their interactions with the content, interactions with the instructor, and interactions with peers throughout the semester. The study also examined graduate students’ opinions about the convenience and perceived benefits of taking this course in an online format.  Findings indicated that, prior to the course, less than one quarter of the graduate students (22%) expected the online experience to enhance their understanding of course content at a high level. Prior to the course more than half of the students (52%) also expected a high level of frequent and meaningful interactions with the instructor. When asked about their expectations of meaningful interactions with peers, more than half (52%) of the students indicated high-level expectations on this item. Following the course, students were again asked to rate their interactions with course content, with the instructor, and with peers.  In all instances interactions were described as high level and increased following the course. This exploratory study provides interesting insight into the importance of aligning course content and instruction with student expectations when taking online courses.  More research is needed to evaluate the impact interactions with content, instructors, and peers has on the learning experience for graduate students enrolled in online courses. 

 

PDF HTML ePub

References

  1. Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online in the United States. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group.Retrieved from: http://faculty.washington.edu/rvanderp/DLData/AllenSeaman2013.pdf
  2. Bernard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Borokhovski, E. Wade, C. A., Tamim, R.M., Surkes, M.A., Bethel, E.C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79 (3), 1243-1289.
  3. Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R., Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., & Sokolovskaya, A. (2012). Are contextual and designed student–student interaction treatments equally effective in distance education? Distance Education, 33(3), 311-329.
  4. Bouhnik, D., & Marcus, T. (2006). Interaction in distance-learning courses. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(3), 299-305.
  5. Cherng-Jyh, Y., & Abdous, M. (2012). A Study of the Predictive Relationships Between Faculty Engagement, Learner Satisfaction and Outcomes in Multiple Learning Delivery Modes. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 10(1), 74-87.
  6. Cole, M.T., Shelley, D.J., Swartz, L.B., & Adeoye, B.F. (2014). Does student and instructor use of social media facilitate online learning: A look at two universities. In R. Neves-Silva, G. Tshirintzis, V. Uskov, R. Howlett, & J. Lain (Eds.), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications: Vol. 262. Smart Digital Futures 2014 (pp. 553-564).
  7. Daniels, H. (2002). Literature circles: Voice and choice in book clubs and reading groups. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
  8. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. (2012). Enrollment in distance education courses, by state (NCES Publication No. 2014-023). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014023.pdf
  9. Dennen, V.P., Darabi, A.A. and Smith, L.J. (2007). Instructor-learner interaction in online courses: The relative perceived importance of particular instructor actions on performance and satisfaction. Distance Education, 28(1), 65-79.
  10. 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
  11. Ferguson, R. (2010). Peer interaction: the experience of distance students at university level. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(6), 574-584. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00386.x
  12. Garcia, A., Abrego, J., & Calvillo, M. (2014).A study of hybrid instructional delivery for graduate students in an educational leadership course. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 29(1), 1-15.
  13. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking and computer conferencing: A model and tool to assess cognitive presence. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1) 7-23.
  14. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2010). The internet and higher education: The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. JAI Press, 13 (1–2) 5–9. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.003
  16. Goertzen, P. and Kristjansson, C. (2007). Interpersonal dimensions of community in graduate online learning: Exploring social presence through the lens of systemic functional linguistics. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 212 – 230.
  17. Gosmire, D., Morrison, M., & Van Osdel, J. (2009). Perceptions of interactions in online courses. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5(4), 609-17.
  18. Hughes, G. (2008). Diversity, identity and belonging in e-learning communities: Some theories and paradoxes. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(5-6), 709-720.
  19. Kayode C.V. Ekwunife-Orakwue, Tian-Lih Teng, The impact of transactional distance dialogic interactions on student learning outcomes in online and blended environments, Computers & Education, 78, 414-427.
  20. Kehrwald, B. (2008). Understanding social presence in text-based online learning environments. Distance Education, 29(1), 89-106.
  21. Kranzow, J. (2013). Faculty leadership in online education: Structuring courses to impact student satisfaction and persistence. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(1), 131-139.
  22. Kuboni, O. (2013). The preferred learning modes of online graduate students. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 14(3), 228-249.
  23. Johnson, S.D., Aragon, S. R. Shaik, N., & Palma-Rivas, N. (2000). Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outcomes in online and fact-to-face learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11 (1) 29-49.
  24. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2008). Cooperation and the use of technology. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. van Merriënboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  25. Koper, R. (2015). How Do Students Want to Learn in Online Distance Education? Profiling Student Preferences. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(1), 307-329.
  26. Martin, F., Parker, M. A., & Deale, D. F. (2012). Examining Interactivity in Synchronous Virtual Classrooms. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(3), 227-261.
  27. Moore, M. J. (1993). Three types of interaction. In Harry, K., John, M., & Keegan, D. (Eds.), Distance education theory (pp. 19-24). New York: Routledge.
  28. Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3 (2), 1-6.
  29. Osborne, R. E., Kriese, P., Tobey, H., & Johnson, E. (2009). And Never the Two Shall Meet: Student vs. Faculty Perceptions of Online Courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(2), 171-182.
  30. Parker, K., Lenhart, A., & Moore, K. (2011). The Digital Revolution and Higher Education: College Presidents, Public Differ on Value of Online Learning. Washington, DC: Pew Social and & Demographic Trends. Obtained 10-28-15 from: http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media/Files/Reports/2011/PIP-Online-Learning.pdf
  31. Reisetter, M., LaPointe, L., & Korcuska, J. (2007). The Impact of Altered Realities: Implications of Online Delivery for Learners' Interactions, Expectations, and Learning Skills. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(1), 55-80.
  32. Shea, P., Li, C.S., and Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9, 175-190.
  33. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
  34. Tuovinen, J.E., (2000). Multimedia Distance Education Interactions. Educational Media International, 37 (1), 16-24.
  35. Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8 (2), 6-29.