- Special Academic Support

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Introduction

Introduction to the Problem

Online course offerings at community colleges are growing at a rapid rate. By 2008, an estimated 4.6 million students in the United States alone had already enrolled in higher education through online learning programs (Allen & Seaman, 2010).

This constituted a 17% increase over 2007. A Chronicle of Higher Education (2010) compilation of online demographics shows dramatic growth in the number of students taking only online courses, increasing from 2.14 million students in 2009 to a projected 3.97 million in 2014.

Ninety-six percent of all higher education public institutions provide opportunities for online learners, and associates degree-granting institutions such as community colleges enroll more than half of all online learners. The state of Michigan passed a curriculum requirement effective in 2012, mandating all high school students to take one online course as a requirement of high school graduation.

Both institutional and individual benefits of offering distance education in the form of web-based online learning have been analyzed and substantiated in several studies (Anderson, 2004; Bach, Haynes & Smith, 2007, Curtis & Lawson, 2001; Stick & Ivankova, 2004,).

At the community college level, the majority of administrators now view online course offerings as a critical strategic success factor both for the institution and in response to student demand. The delivering institution benefits from online course offering since this type of learning module are not only cheap to offer to interested learners. It can also be designed and structured much easier.

For students, accessibility to education and certain specific training needs is highly enhanced since the limitation that was earlier posed by distance and time are non-prevalent in online learning.

The growth of online course offerings is not without challenges, particularly at two-year institutions and community colleges: studies (Bambara, 2009, Kennedy, 2001; York, 2003) of online student completion rates conducted at individual community colleges substantiate Carrs (2000) findings that course attrition and failure rates increase when the instructor and student are indifferent

With high schools and post-secondary institutions adding online courses and programs at a rapid rate, the number of students will increase significantly, and with the education and learning outcomes of millions of students at stake, it is critical that a focus on the quality of course design and content be maintained. One primary component of the instructional design of an online course is the degree and type of interaction.

The separation of learner and instructor in the distance learning equation has been at the root of debate on instructional design for online learning since the inception of the field. As model builders and theorists have attempted to bring order to the complexities of how learning is accomplished when the learner is separated from the instructor by time and space, interaction emerges as one key component.

Several leading theorists (Beldarrain, 2008; Holmberg, 1995; Moore, 2003) put the interactions of the learner in an online environment at the center of the learning process.

Does the quantity of interactions promote student persistence in a course? Can the number and type of interactions designed into a course by the instructor contribute to student success? What types of interactions do course participants prefer, and why? This study is designed to answer these questions.

The interaction itself is a complex and multi-faceted issue, and though considered a critical component of the learning process, it is surprisingly difficult to find a clear and precise definition of this concept in the education literature (Anderson, 2004, p.43).

Wagners (1994) definition of interaction within a distance education framework is elegant in its simplicity: reciprocal events that require at least two objects and two actions. Interactions occur when these objects and events mutually influence one another (p. 8).

In the arena of Internet-based online learning, interactions are conducted in a wide variety of formats, and instructors incorporate discussions, emails, blogs, and forums using an increasingly large number of both synchronous and asynchronous modes to provide a sense of connectedness.

Background of the Study

Interaction has been viewed as an integral part of successful learning for eons. Roblyer and Wiencke (2003) commented that interaction has come to be considered a sine qua non for successful distance courses (pg.77) and online interaction has been recognized as a contributing factor to the success of students in online community college course offerings (Battalio, 2007, Benbunan-Fich and Hiltz, 2003, Walker, et al. 2007).

Quantity interaction still remains an area of interest since online course designers and instructors do not have sufficient guide in spite of the fact they are the key architects in this form of the learning module. The rule of thumb has been least supported when designing and delivering these courses.

Calvani et al. (2010) analyzed the quantity and content of collaborative group interactions to determine the effectiveness of such interaction, and Drouin (2010) reviews empirical studies on student perception and desire for community and interaction in online courses and finds a great deal of variability in substantive findings.

Statement of the Problem

It is not known to what extent the quantity of student interaction in online courses correlates to high course completion rates. The preference of students for a particular type of interaction is also unknown and may have an impact on individual student completion rates. The literature base indicates that various instructional design strategies result in differing degrees of interaction.

Most research, however, focuses on the need to assess the qualities of interaction to ensure effectiveness. An additional component of the instructional design is the quantity or frequency of interactions between student and instructor, (I-S), student and student (S-S), and student-content (S-C) and the impact of the frequency on a students course completion success.

Is there a higher degree of participant persistence if there is more interaction in an online course, and the course design is such that interaction is promoted? Does the quantity of interaction directly correspond to higher persistence rates?

Research and theory of online learning indicate that interaction is a key characteristic of successful courses, yet there is little research to indicate whether achieving a high number of interactions or, more specifically, what kinds of interactions predict higher course completion rates.

As community colleges continue to increase the number of courses offered through web-based instruction, it is important to identify if an increase in interactions may improve successful completion rates. Instructional designers and instructors need to know how to design either (or both) the frequency and type of interactions to ensure higher rates of persistence.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this mixed-method study will be to research the frequency and type of interaction taking place in online courses in support of the body of research advocating purposefully designed and actively rendered interaction.

In addition, course participants will be surveyed to determine their interaction preference. Research indicates that interaction in online learning courses is a necessary component of success and that there is a positive effect from the addition of interaction in online courses.

There is little research on a specific frequency, methods, or techniques for the standardized design of interaction that can be incorporated into the overall design to correlate to maximum completion and success rates.

The purpose of the study is to investigate and analyze the quantity and types of interactions and their impact on successful completion in community college courses to add to the existing body of research on the topic and fill a gap in the analyses of interaction in online course instructional design.

Rationale

Interaction in online courses continues to be debated among researchers, scholars, and practicing faculty on the front line of improving student persistence and raising the percentage of students successfully completing online courses. Additional research is required to understand the relationship between interaction and academic performance, particularly at the community college level, where there is a large nontraditional population.

By exploring the relationship between online course interaction and course completion, this research will contribute to the body of mixed methods research and will provide practical application to those charged and challenged with the design and delivery of online courses.

Increasing the understanding of interaction may assist instructional designers with detailed and specific methods for increasing the frequency of the right types of interaction to help reduce the attrition rates currently experienced at the community college level.

Research Questions

The focus of this study is a mixed-methods analysis to determine if there is a statistically significant correlation between the number of interactions and student success rates in online courses. Every attempt will be made to avoid drawing causal conclusions yet provide useful statistical correlation to contribute to the body of knowledge for the topic. With those guidelines in mind, the following research questions were developed:

Primary: To what extent does the number of interactions, categorized as instructor-student (I-S), student-student (S-S), and student-content (S-C) in an online course predict the individual participants course completion rate?
Secondary: a) What is the relationship between the aggregate number of interactions in an online course to the overall course completion rate? b) What is the relationship of a participants total number of interactions in an online course to the individuals successful course completion? c) What is the relationship of a participants preferred method of interaction in an online course to the individuals successful course completion?

Other sub-research questions that will be worth considering the paper include: Is student-student interaction a prerequisite in online course programs? Why is there a conflicting approach to conventional expectations of online courses as put forward by practitioners and theorists? What are the specific objectives of crafting out online learning as embraced by those who design offer instruction in online courses? What are some of the reasons why students prefer online courses? Are there any quantifiable results as well as rationale that can be succinctly identified out of online learning programs? Is it possible to identify other alternatives in online course interaction that can be beneficial in ensuring that the attrition rate is brought to the minimum level possible?

Significance of the Study

The importance of this study is in researching, analyzing, and quantifying interactions in online courses and determining if there is a correlation between the number and types of interaction and the course completion rate. The significance of this study lies within the perimeter of seeking better delivery methods for online courses in order to improve the standards of education in a college community.

It is common practice for instructors to assume that a higher quantity of interactions in a course correlates to higher course completion rates, but much of the evidence is qualitative or anecdotal. The information from this formal and informal research is valuable; however, this study will add a quantitative component to further add to a larger body of available research.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are defined to ensure a semantic understanding of this study.

Asynchronous interaction: Interactivity between student-student, student-instructor, or student-content that does not take place in real-time but allows for communication at a time convenient for the student or instructor.

Attrition: A reduction of the number of learners in a course due to student withdrawal, administrative withdrawal, or lack of persistence.

Interaction: For the purpose of this dissertation, Wagners (1994) definition will be used defining interaction as reciprocal events that require at least two objects and two actions that mutually influence one another. Online interaction falls into the following categories, as defined by Moore (2003).

I-S: Interaction between the instructor and student via synchronous or asynchronous technologies in a learning management system using tools such as discussion boards, wikis, blogs, assignment feedback, or chat sessions.
S-S: Peer interaction between student and student via synchronous or asynchronous technologies in a learning management system using tools such as discussion boards, wikis, blogs, assignment feedback, or chat sessions.
S-C: Interaction between the student and content, including the structure, strategies, and skills needed for effective creation (Anderson, 2003). Includes interaction with materials, assignments, and readings, for example, via synchronous or asynchronous technologies in a learning management system using tools such as discussion boards, wikis, blogs, assignment feedback, or chat sessions.

Course completion rate: The percent of students enrolled in a course that successfully complete the course with a final grade of C or better

Distance education: Learning taking place when the learners and instructors are separated physically by time and space. Access to learning is not limited by geography or physical demands and may involve the use of computer technology and the Internet.

Learning Management System: this refers to a myriad of tools hosted through the World Wide Web used to deliver course content and ensure a smooth flow of communication between computers and humans. A synonymous term is a course management system. Popular examples include Blackboard and WebCT.

Online learning: A course where most or all of the course content is delivered via the Internet, usually in a learning management system, and no face-to-face meetings are required. Online learning is a subset of distance education

Persistence: The actions and skills required of a student to successfully complete a course with a passing grade.

Satisfactory achievement: Completion of a course with a final grade of C or better.

Synchronous interaction: Interactivity between student-student, student-instructor, or student-content that takes place in real-time but occurs at a distance. Includes technologies such as chat, voice over internet protocol (VOIP), or phone.

Assumptions and Limitations

The underlying hypothesis of this study is that the frequency of interactions by an individual student or in aggregate correlates to a higher course completion rate.

A related assumption is that certain categories of interaction will be greater in number and more significant in terms of raising successful completion rates than others. A third assumption is that students will have preferred methods of interaction.

This mixed-methods study looks only at the number and type of interactions in community college online courses. There is no qualitative analysis included though considerable research has been conducted by others in this area.

Demographic and cultural factors such as gender, cultural mores, ethnicity, and age, which may influence the frequency and preference for a particular type of interactions or may affect course completion, are not considered.

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

The remaining chapters in this study include the Literature Review, Methodology, Data Analysis, and Results, and finally, Conclusions and Recommendations. The function of the Literature Review is to highlight past and current research on the relationship of interaction to successful online course completion rates. The Methodology chapter provides a detailed view of the mixed methods used to conduct the research in this study and the respective data collection procedures.

Literature Review

Introduction

As online learning opportunities have expanded at a rapid rate over the last two decades in community colleges, researchers have developed many theoretical frameworks to determine the relationship between the online learning environment and learners ability to be successful in that environment (Tapscott, D. (2009).

A broad view of theories indicates that the factors to be considered in successful online learning are large in number and complex in nature. Khan (1997) developed a framework for e-learning that included learning issues in eight categories, including interface design, evaluation, management, institutional, pedagogical, technological, ethical, and resource support factors.

Gilroy (2001), taking a constructivist stance, stated that learning is both experiential and social, and it is the context of learning- wrapping each learners experience around the content-that is most critical. Gilroys theoretical construct is that low success rates occur because of learner dissatisfaction, and the cause of the problem is the separation of people in time and space.

Corbeil (2003) developed a framework with a strong individual learner focus, arguing that there is a relationship between student success and the online technologies self-efficacy, internal locus of control, and self-directed learning readiness.

When fine-tuning the focus to explore the issue of interaction in online learning and the relationship to the successful course completion, three primary theories have a major role: the schools of learning (behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism), Moores (1980) theory of transactional distance and Tintos (1975) theory of persistence.

Each of the primary schools of learning has contributed to instructional design strategies for online learning, and each has a place in the development of effective means of interaction (Barr & Tagg,1995). A behaviorist approach to learning views the mind as a blank canvas focusing only on behaviors that can be observed, quantified, and measured without regard to the effect of the mental processes.

Behaviorist forms of interaction in online learning include a statement of learning outcomes, so learners have a clear outline of measurable expectations, assessments to determine achievement and feedback from instructor and/or peers to evaluate if measurable outcomes are achieved.

Learning is an intrinsic process that entails myriads of other cognitive abilities such as the process of thinking as well as memorize facts, according to Ally (2004). The cognitivist learning model has information processing at its core with a learner receiving sensory input, processing the input to a sensory store, then moving the information to work memory, and finally, on to long term memory.

Cognitivist instructional design strategies specifically addressing interaction in online courses include the use of discussion and feedback aimed at promoting perception and attention. Examples include the use of pre-requisite testing, exercises where learners dialogue on the application of the learned information to their life experience, and dialogue that incorporates the cognitive or learning style of the individual learner.

Finally, the constructivist school states that learners should be allowed to construct knowledge rather than being given knowledge through instruction (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996), and online interaction should incorporate standards of social constructivism that emphasize real-world, practical problem-solving.

Emerging from the works of psychological theorists Piaget and Vygotsky, the theoretical concept is that there are multiple representations of reality, and learning is an active, holistic event. The emphasis in the constructivist learning model is on active rather than passive learning, whereby each learner is processing information and creating an individual contextualized outcome.

Key components of constructivist based instructional design strategies focusing on interaction include opportunities for collaborative and cooperative student-student learning, opportunities for reflection promoting the internalization of information, and highly interactive design to promote higher-level learning.

The three schools of learning, behaviorist, cognitivist, and constructivist, all have a role in effective online learning and successful interaction.

In recent years, education has seen a shift toward constructivist strategies in online learning, in part due to the perception that individual context is critical and constructivist activities assist in building community through interaction, but there remains a place for each theory to be represented in the design of interaction.

Conventional theories

In order to create viable online learning programs, student-student interactivity has been identified as an essential element. Online learning communities may only be successful if such a form of interaction is promoted at all costs. Although this has been the general view held by most practitioners, critics of student-student interaction as a paramount component in online course offerings have a conflicting opinion.

It is, however, known that effective online communities may only be enhanced in environments where interaction has been strengthened.

This is still a conventional theory and practice, and it may not be justified to refute other innovative ways of promoting online course programs, bearing in mind that this form of learning is highly dynamic. Hence, although student-student interaction is a necessary ingredient in online learning, it may not be a total requirement.

According to Barr and Tagg (1995), the pedagogical reforms of the 1990s saw the need to not only revolutionize e-learning platform, but it also emphasized the need for more effective participation and active learning in online courses.

These reforms also stressed the need for allocating more thinking space for students as part and parcel of creating knowledge on their own rather than wholly relying on the instructors for what may be referred to as spoon-feeding.

For a long time now, utmost mastery of course content has been a preserve of the instructors to the peril of students who end up either duplicating the contents learned per se in order to merit or failing the course content altogether.

This demands that the traditional stance by instructors should be given up since it does not allow students to be creators of knowledge. Rather, they merely develop dependency syndrome on the acquisition of academic knowledge.

Some skeptics have never supported this. However, proponents argue that no single educational institution, whether within the context of online learning or real physical environment, may be proud of the student lot, which is not active (Buchholz, 1997).

Moreover, the design of online course programs should be such that student-student interaction is given a priority as part of the objectives to be met in the course of learning (Tapscott, 2009). Perhaps, the most practical way to comprehend this would be t draw parallels between online learning and classroom environment where face-to-face teaching and learning take place.

In the latter case, it is found that student-student interaction is often at its best. For instructors, active participation is by far and large, a more practical approach of ensuring that course comprehension and completion rates are at the optimum level.

Therefore, achieving an effective level of interactivity between students can be enhanced through myriads of available electronic components and discussion forums (Palloff & Pratt, 2005).

The social constructivist elements can indeed be used as benchmarks when identifying and determine various preference levels for online interactions among students (Burbules, 2000).

Such a wide array of availability of several tools for interaction accounts for the rationale of why student-student interaction in online courses is still an imperative consideration for professional designers of the very courses. Nonetheless, a stickier and perhaps challenging point is how to prove constructivist methods.

From the backdrop of both theory and practice derived from mainstream principles, it may be quite an uphill task to lay the clear ground for proving such claims whenever online course offering is being discussed. Even for most publications on online teaching and learning, this dilemma stands out as a perspective that is still quite tricky to bring on the surface.

Consequently, skeptics have a reason to defend their claim on this subject bearing in mind that some of the latest empirical studies have equally laid doubt on the assertions put forward by constructivism (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006; Meyer, 2004). Moreover, a critical inquiry has also evaded other traditional perspectives of active learning through student interaction.

It is most likely that this might be the very reason why Cuthrell and Lyon (2007) reiterate that it is pertinent to recognize claims by adult e-learning students since underestimating or ignoring such claims may not do justice to the very students who are the very subjects anticipated to benefit from the online program.

Besides, their assertions may hold some water since most of the data used from recent research have been gathered from adult respondents who are, by all means, expected to be independent-minded and thinkers. As Cuthrell and Lyon (2007) observe, the ability and potency to direct their online studies will be improved when their claims are recognized.

The reason given is that they will have greater autonomy in selecting options that best fit their learning needs. Better still, such recognitions will also jumpstart more independency alongside reducing the degree of dependency on group or teamwork activities.

On the same note, online postings for students enrolled in e-learning modules will be a major cause of the interruption and superfluous in a bid to enhance communication among students (LaPointe & Reisetter, 2008).

Similarly, skeptics also demonstrate that compulsory participation in online learning may as well lead to mediocre learning since it will fail to a difference between classroom learning and that which has been defined by space and time.

Ordinarily, the latter form of learning is expected to be a notch higher both in terms of efficiency and learning outcomes (Gulati, 2008). Additionally, if participation is enforced as a requisite element in online courses, it is highly likely that stigmatization will be prevalent and adversely impact the very virtues of the learners (Beaudoin, 2002).

Moores research and theoretical framework address the component of interaction that is directed at the separation of the learner and the instructor. This separation of instructor and learner is the core underpinning of Moores Transactional Distance Theory (TDT) that states, distance education is not simply a geographic separation of learners and teachers, but, more importantly, is a pedagogical concept describing the universe of teacher-learner relationships that exist when learners and instructors are separated by space and time. (Moore,1993).

At the heart of this universe are three key variables that form the fundamental constructs of distance education: structure, learner autonomy, and dialogue. The degree of transactional distance in an online course is a function of these three variables resulting in a level of transactional distance defined as a psychological and communications space to be crossed, a space of potential misunderstanding between the inputs of instructor and the learner (p.23).

Moore felt his theory of transactional distance effectively fused the pedagogical traditions of behaviorism, emphasizing strong instructor control and constructivism, highlighting more open-ended, unstructured dialogue.

The variable of learner autonomy defined by Moore (p.31) argued from a constructivist stance that learners are more successful at a distance if given responsibility for at least a portion of their own learning process. If allowed to participate in dialogue and interact with the instructor and peers, the feeling of distance and isolation is reduced.

When the set objectives are relatively rigid, then it accounts for stricture. This defined level of rigidity extends beyond just the objectives; it also prevails in the teaching and assessment methods. Moore explains that it is only through the structure of education that each learners needs can be catered for. A poor course structure may vastly fail to address the various learning needs of each individual student.

The concept of instructional dialogue, defined as an interaction or series of interactions having positive qualities that is purposeful, constructive and valued by each party..who is a respectful and active listener, a contributor and [who] builds on the contributions of the other party or parties (p.24.), allowed for multi-faceted communications between and among participants.

Moore defined an early model of distance learning communication, clearly defining the components of instructor-student, student-student, and student-content interactions. Moores theory is the more dialogue that takes place in any of the key areas; the less transactional distance will be perceived on the part of the student and instructor.

The importance of interaction has long been prominent in discussions of successful web-based instruction. As a component of Moores (1993) Transactional Distance Theory (TDT), interaction has been systematically validated by a number of educational theorists including Saba (2003) who argues that accountability for interaction is of utmost importance in a systems approach and Garrison (2000, 2003) who envisions a shift from organizational structure to one of transactional importance in distance education.

Whether Transactional Theory should be fully accepted as a global theory is still under debate in spite of the fact that Gokool-Ramdoo (2008) fully supports the ideology. Gorski and Caspi (2005) have investigated empirical studies that attempt to validate or support TDT.

Dissertation research in the arena of TDT has touched on evaluation of the structure component (Sandoe, 2005), an investigation of the educational transaction within a videoconferencing learning environment using Moores Theory of Transactional Distance, associated adult learning and distance education theories as theoretical frameworks (Chen, 1997) and a study of online students surveyed to measure transactional distance using traditional definitions (Lowell, 2004).

Focusing on the interaction/dialogue component of TDT, Roblyer, and Weincke (2003) designed a useful rubric to measure and assess effective interaction in distance education. The framework of the design incorporated Wagners (1994) prerequisite stipulations for making interaction a more useful construct for informing instructional design and research in distance learning environments.

Though much of Moores research was conducted prior to the development of Internet-based online courses delivered via a course management system, the theoretical underpinnings of the transactional distance theory hold tru

Click Here To Order Now!