Exploring differences between students’ interactions, online presence, and cognitive presence

References

• Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 4(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v4i2.149
   Google Scholar
• Arbaugh, J.B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S.R., Garrison, D.R., Ice, P., Richardson, J.C., & Swan, K.P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3), 133–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arvaja, M., & Hämäläinen, R. (2021). Dialogicality in making sense of online collaborative interaction: A conceptual perspective. The Internet and Higher Education, 48, 100771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2020.100771
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (structure of the observed learning outcome). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.723162
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çebi, A. (2023). How e-learning readiness and motivation affect student interactions in distance learning. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 2941–2960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11312-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, N.-S., Wei, C.-W., Wu, K.-T., & Uden, L. (2009). Effects of high-level prompts and peer assessment on online learners’ reflection levels. Computers & Education, 52(2), 283–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung, W. S., Hew, K. F., & Ng, C. S. L. (2008). Toward an understanding of why students contribute in asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(1), 29–50. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.38.1.b
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costley, J., Courtney, M., & Fanguy, M. (2022). The interaction of collaboration, note-taking completeness, and performance over 10 weeks of an online course. The Internet and Higher Education, 52, 100831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100831
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dabbagh, N., & Bannan-Ritland, B. (2005). Online learning: Concepts, strategies, and application. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Dabbagh, N., & Dass, S. (2013). Case problems for problem-based pedagogical approaches: A comparative analysis. Computers & Education, 64, 161–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darabi, A., Arrastia, M. C., Nelson, D. W., Cornille, T., & Lang, X. (2011). Cognitive presence in asynchronous online learning: A comparison of four discussion strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(3), 216–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00392.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darabi, A., Liang, X., Suryavanshi, R., & Yurekli, H. (2013). Effectiveness of online discussion strategies: A meta- analysis. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(4), 228–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2013.837651
   Google Scholar
• Davies, J., & Graff, M. (2005). Performance in e-learning: Online participation and student grades. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4), 657–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00542.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delahunty, J., Verenikina, I. & Jones, P. (2014). Socio-emotional connections: Identity, belonging and learning in online interactions. A literature review. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23(2), 243–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.813405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• deNoyelles, A., Zydney, J. M., & Chen, B. (2014). Strategies for creating a community of inquiry through online asynchronous discussions. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 153–165. http://jolt.merlot.org
   Google Scholar
• Du, J., & Xu, J. (2010). The quality of online discussion reported by graduate students. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 11(1), 13–24. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/106661/
   Google Scholar
• Eom, S. B., Wen, H. J., & Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(2), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4609.2006.00114.x
   Google Scholar
• Ertmer, P. A., & Koehler, A. A. (2015). Facilitated versus non-facilitated online case discussions: Comparing differences in problem space coverage. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 27(2), 69–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-015-9094-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galikyan, I., & Admiraal, W. (2019). Students’ engagement in asynchronous online discussion: The relationship between cognitive presence, learner prominence, and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 43, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100692
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2015). Toward the development of a metacognition construct for the community of inquiry framework. Internet and Higher Education, 24, 66–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071
   Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001
   Google Scholar
• Hou, H.-T. (2011). A case study of online instructional collaborative discussion activities for problem solving using situated scenarios: An examination of content and behavior cluster analysis. Computers and Education, 56(3), 712–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou, H.-T. (2012). Analyzing the learning process of an online role-playing discussion activity. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 211–222. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.15.1.211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huss, J. A., Sela, O., & Eastep, S. (2015). A case study of online instructors and their quest for greater interactivity in their courses: Overcoming the distance in distance education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(4), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n4.5
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Supporting problem solving in PBL. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 5(2), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1256
   Google Scholar
• Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. K. (2007). Examining the effect of problem type in a synchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 439–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9045-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, H., & Hannafin, M. J. (2008). Grounded design of web-enhanced case-based activity. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56, 161–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9010-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, D., Park, Y., Yoon, M., & Jo, I. H. (2016). Toward evidence-based learning analytics: Using proxy variables to improve asynchronous online discussion environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 30, 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koehler, A. A., Cheng, Z., Fiock, H., Wang, H., Janakiraman, S., & Chartier, K. (2022). Examining students’ use of online case-based discussions to support problem solving: Considering individual and collaborative experiences. Computers & Education, 179, 104407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koehler, A. A., Fiock, H., Janakiraman, S., Cheng, Z., & Wang, H. (2020). Asynchronous online discussions during case-based learning: A problem-solving process. Online Learning, 24(4), 64–92. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i4.2332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A., Belland, B. R., & Schroder, K. E. E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(1),16–39. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i1.1338
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, J., & Martin, L. (2017). Investigating students’ perceptions of motivating factors of online class discussions. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5), 148–172. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.2883
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim, J., & Hall, B. M. (2015). Intersubjectivity in theoretical and practical online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 16(4), 45–60. https://www.infoagepub.com/qrde-issue.html?i=p570d9703bd190
   Google Scholar
• Mehall, S. (2020). Purposeful interpersonal interaction in online learning: What is it and how is it measured? Online Learning, 24(1), 182–204. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i1.2002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
   Google Scholar
• Morueta, R. T., López, P. M., Gómez, Á. H., & Harris, V. W. (2016). Exploring social and cognitive presences in communities of inquiry to perform higher cognitive tasks. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 122–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.07.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oyarzun, B., Stefaniak, J., Bol, L., & Morrison, G. R. (2018). Effects of learner-to-learner interactions on social presence, achievement and satisfaction. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(1), 154–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9157-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozogul, G., Zhu, M., Phillips, T. M. (2022). Perceived and actual cognitive presence: A case study of an intentionally-designed asynchronous online course. Online Learning, 26(1), 38–57. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.3051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, J. C., & Ice, P. (2010). Investigating students’ level of critical thinking across instructional strategies in online discussions. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, J. C., Sadaf, A., & Ertmer, P. A. (2012). Relationship between types of question prompts and critical thinking in online discussions. In Z. Akyol & D. R. Garrison (Eds.) Educational communities of inquiry: Theoretical framework, research and practice (pp. 197–222). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, 68–88. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v7i1.1864
   Google Scholar
• Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.001
   Google Scholar
• Sadaf, A., Kim, S.Y., & Olesova, L. (2022). Relationship between metacognition and online community of inquiry in an online case-based course. Online Learning Journal, 26(4), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i4.3474
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadaf, A., Kim, S. Y., & Wang, Y. (2021). A comparison of cognitive presence, learning, satisfaction, and academic performance in case-based and non-case-based online discussions. American Journal of Distance Education, 35(3), 214–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2021.1888667
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadaf, A., & Olesova, L. (2017). Enhancing cognitive presence in online case discussions with questions based on the practical inquiry model. American Journal of Distance Education, 31(1), 56–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2017.1267525
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadaf, A., & Olesova, L. (2020). Exploring the relationship between interaction and the structure of questions in online discussions using learning analytic. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 23(1), 46–60. https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2020-0004
   Google Scholar
• Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T.J. (2005). Instructional design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Swan, K. (2001) Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, 22(2), 306–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791010220208
   Google Scholar
• Tawfik, A.A., Giabbanelli, P.J., Hogan, M., Msilu,F., Gill, A., & York, C.S. (2018). Effects of success v failure cases on learner-learner interaction. Computers & Education, 118, 120–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trespalacios, J., Snelson, C., Lowenthal, P. R., Uribe-Flórez, L., & Perkins, R. (2021). Community and connectedness in online higher education: A scoping review of the literature. Distance Education, 42(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1869524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tu, C. H., & McIsaac, M. S. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15389286AJDE1603_2
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649409526852
   Google Scholar
• Wang, Y., & Liu, Q. (2020). Effects of online teaching presence on students’ interactions and collaborative knowledge construction. Journal of computer assisted learning, 36(3), 370–382.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie, K. & Ke, F. (2011). The role of students’ motivation in peer-moderated asynchronous online discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(6), 916–930. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01140.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar