Community or Efficiency? The Perceived Importance of Community of Inquiry in Online Community College Courses

References

• Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2008). The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: Understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive, and teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3–4), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v12i3.72
   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(3–4), 133–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bird, K., Castleman, B. L., & Lohner, G. (2022). Negative impacts from the shift to online learning during the COVID-19 crisis: Evidence from a statewide community college system accessed 8 April 2022. https://www.edworkingpapers.com/sites/default/files/ai20-299.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, P. W. (2008). Analyzing students’ perceptions of their learning in online and hybrid first- year composition courses. Computers and Composition, 25(2), 224–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2008.01.002
   Google Scholar
• Caskurlu, S., Maeda, Y., Richardson, J. C., & Lv, J. (2020). A meta-analysis addressing the relationship between teaching presence and students’ satisfaction and learning. Computers & Education, 157(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103966
   Google Scholar
• Choo, J., Bakir, N., Scagnoli, N. I., Ju, B., & Tong, X. (2020). Using the community of inquiry framework to understand students’ learning experience in online undergraduate business courses. TechTrends, 64(1), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00444-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cochran, J. D., Baker, H. M., Benson, D., & Rhea, W. (2016). Business student perceptions of online learning: Using focus groups for richer understanding of student perspectives. Organization Management Journal, 13(3), 149–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/15416518.2016.1218195
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, P. A. (1980). Effectiveness of student-rating feedback for improving college instruction: A meta-analysis. Research in Higher Education, 13(4), 321–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00976252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deslauriers, L., McCarty, L. S., Miller, K., Callaghan, K., & Kestin, G. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA. 116(39), 19251–19257. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821936116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diaz, S. R., Swan, K., Ice, P., & Kupczynski, L. (2010). Student ratings of the importance of survey items, multiplicative factor analysis, and the validity of the community of inquiry survey. Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Estelami, H. (2016). An exploratory study of the effects of online course efficiency perceptions on student evaluation of teaching (SET) measures. American Journal of Business Education, 9(2), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.19030/ajbe.v9i2.9613
   Google Scholar
• Fox, L. (2017). What motivates community college students to enroll online and why It matters. Insights on Equity and Outcomes. Issue 19. Office of Community College Research and Leadership. Office of Community College Research and Leadership. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED574532
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, M. (1937). The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 32(200), 675–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1937.10503522
   Google Scholar
• Garrison, D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
   Google Scholar
• Gliem, J., & Gliem, R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Paper presented at the 2003 Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing and Community Education, the Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/bitstream/handle/1805/344/Gliem+&+Gliem.pdf?sequence=1
   Google Scholar
• Gregory, C. B., & Lampley, J. H. (2016). Community college student success in online versus equivalent face-to-face courses. Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 12(2), 63.
   Google Scholar
• Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens. Online education as a new paradigm in learning. Internet and Higher Education, 3(1), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00032-4
   Google Scholar
• Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review accessed 8 April 2022. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning
   Google Scholar
• Hosler, K. A., & Arend, B. D. (2012). The importance of course design, feedback, and facilitation: Student perceptions of the relationship between teaching presence and cognitive presence. Educational Media International, 49(3), 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2012.738014
   Google Scholar
• Jaggars, S. S. (2013). Online learning in community colleges. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 594–608). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lake, E., & Pushchak, A. (2006). Better allocating university resources to create on-line learning environments for non-traditional students in underserved rural areas. Innovative Higher Education, 31(4), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-006-9025-5
   Google Scholar
• Lederman, D. (2018). Online options give adults access, but outcomes lag. Inside Higher Education accessed 8 April 2022. https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2018/06/20/online-education-gives-adults-access-student-outcomes-lag
   Google Scholar
• Liu, S., Gomez, J., & Yen, J. (2009). Community college online course retention and final grade: Predictability of social presence. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 165-182. https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/efl_fac_pubs/10
   Google Scholar
• MacDonald, K. (2018). A Review of the literature: The needs of nontraditional students in postsecondary education. Strategic Enrollment Management Quarterly, 5(4), 159–164. https://doi.org/10.1002/sem3.20115
   Google Scholar
• Majeski, R., Stover, M., & Valais, T. (2018). The Community of Inquiry and emotional presence. Adult Learning, 29(2), 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159518758696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, F., Ritzhaupt, A., Kumar, S., & Budhrani, K. (2019). Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Course design, assessment and evaluation, and facilitation. The Internet and Higher Education, 42(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.04.001
   Google Scholar
• McCrum-Gardner, E. (2008). Which is the correct statistical test to use? British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 46(1), 38–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2007.09.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500307
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill, D. K., & Sai, T. H. (2014). Why not? Examining college students’ reasons for avoiding an online course. Higher Education, 68(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9663-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pace, C. R., & Kuh, G. D. (1998). College Student Experiences Questionnaire, fourth edition. Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning, Indiana University.
   Google Scholar
• Park, J. H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207–217. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/jeductechsoci.12.4.207
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71(1), 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.001
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, S. L., & Council, M. L. (2021). Distance learning in the era of COVID-19. Archives of Dermatological Research, 313(5), 389–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00403-020-02088-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED580852.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Shahsavari, S. (2014). Efficiency, feasibility and desirability of learner autonomy based on teachers’ and learners’ point of views. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(2), 271-280. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.2.271-280
   Google Scholar
• Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education. Computers & Education, 52(3), 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simamora, R. M. (2020). The Challenges of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: An essay analysis of performing arts education students. Studies in Learning and Teaching, 1(2), 86–103. https://doi.org/10.46627/silet.v1i2.38
   Google Scholar
• Singh, S., Rylander, D., & Mims, T. (2012). Efficiency of online vs. offline learning: A comparison of inputs and outcomes. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 2(1), 93–98.
   Google Scholar
• Snow, K. (2016). Opting in or opting out: The role of hybrid learning course design on student persistence decisions in an indigenous pre-nursing transitions program. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 31(1). http://ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/viewFile/948/1610
   Google Scholar
• Strage, A. (2008). Traditional and non-traditional college students’ descriptions of the “ideal” professor and the “ideal” course and perceived strengths and limitations. College Student Journal, 42(1), 225–231. https://go.galegroup.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA177412572&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&=01463934&p=AONE&sw=w
   Google Scholar
• Traver, A., Volchok, E., Bidjerano, T., & Shea, P. (2014). Correlating community college students’ perceptions of community of inquiry presences with their completion of blended courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.09.001
   Google Scholar
• Wickramasinghe, S. R., & Timpson, W. M. (2006). Mid-semester student feedback enhances student learning. Education for Chemical Engineers, 1(1), 126–133. https://doi.org/10.1205/ece06012
   Google Scholar
• Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. S. (2011). The effectiveness of distance education across Virginia’s community colleges: Evidence from introductory college-level math and English courses. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 360–377. https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/distance-education-virginia.html
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar