Regent online degree program

ABSTRACT

The researcher, an online instructor at the graduate level, considered whether more frequent delivery of instructor-initiated personal (text-only) emails outside of required class discussion formats would result in more favorable student perceptions of the student/faculty relationship, higher student ratings of perceived sense of online community, and a higher degree of satisfaction with the overall learning experience than would less fequent delivery of such instructor-initiated personal emails. The researcher was also interested whether more frequent delivery of personal emails would result in higher levels of student participation in required group discussion formats. Results: regardless of the number of personal emails sent to students throughout the semester, a statistically significant difference between groups could not be identified along the lines of perceived sense of community, satisfaction with the overall learning experience, or personal relationship with the instructor. More frequent delivery of personalized email did not increase the amount of student participation in required discussion formats. The same positive results were achieved whether the instructor sent two (2) or fifteen (15) personal emails. Explanations for the findings are offered along with suggestions for future research.

INTRODUCTION

Faculty teaching online must play both intellectual and social, or "nurturing," roles (Mason, 1991). Faculty must balance substantive exchanges related to the subject matter with more personal (non-subject or non-content matter) student exchanges designed to build relationships and foster a sense of community (Dede, 1996; Wiesenberg & Hutton, 1995; Moller, 1998). These personal exchanges must be of sufficient quality (i.e., depth, tone, length) to communicate a sense of intimacy, openness and a desire for connectedness or community (Dolence & Norris, 1995). They must also be of a sufficient immediacy (Baker, 2001) and frequency to communicate a sense of co-presence and responsiveness to student needs (Boettcher, 1999).

But while most would agree that a "high degree" of faculty-student interaction is important (Kearsley, 2000), few would agree on levels of frequency or approximately how many contacts in any given setting is "high" enough to rise to the level of "sufficiency" when it comes to maintaining student relationships or fostering a sense of community among learners. Most researchers and scholars simply place the "impetus" on the individual moderator to develop an appropriate level of social presence in his or her specific class setting (Baker, 2001, p. 63). Little effort has been made to empirically support anecdotal "rules of thumb" or principles to help guide instructors' frequency of social interaction in various online course settings.

A lack of sufficient frequency of faculty-initiated communication with online students may be attributed to a number of variables, such as faculty computer illiteracy, faculty resistance to online education, different philosophical beliefs about the nature of communication online, and heavy faculty workloads. Furthermore, as class sizes grow in the online setting it becomes increasingly difficult for professors to respond in detail to every student request or give some students as much personal attention as they might need. When instructional team members or co-instructors are unavailable, the difficulty for faculty to address student needs or seem involved becomes even more pronounced. Faculty must then deal with complaints about the depth of faculty involvement and the quality of the course. Students simultaneously report feeling "disconnected" or lacking a sense of "belonging." Others indicate feeling overwhelmed by course work. Such complaints invariably lead to greater amounts of student procrastination, a lack of participation in required group discussion, increased program attrition, and poor faculty evaluations.

As a step toward better understanding the relationships between the frequency of instructor-initiated communication and learners' perceptions of and participation in online learning, this exploratory study reports on the following questions:

1. Will more frequent delivery of instructor-initiated personal (text-only) emails outside of required class discussion formats result in (a) more favorable learner perceptions of the faculty/student relationship, (b) higher learner perceptions of online community, and (c) a higher degree of learner satisfaction with the overall learning experience than will less frequent delivery of instructor-initiated personal (text-only) emails outside of required class discussion formats?

2. Will more frequent delivery of instructor-initiated personal (text-only) emails outside of required class discussion result in higher levels of student participation in required group discussion than will less frequent delivery of instructor-initiated personal (text-only) emails outside of required class discussion formats?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

Student evaluations for several online courses at Regent University, Virginia Beach, Virginia, indicated low levels of satisfaction with the quantity and depth of faculty interaction. Several students indicated feeling isolated from faculty and other students in class. These same students demonstrated high levels of procrastination and low levels of participation in required online group discussion. In an attempt to better meet the needs of online students at Regent--and to help instructors more efficiently manage their personal communication with students in large classes--administrators became interested in studying the frequency of instructor-initiated personal interaction in those courses where faculty received favorable student comments related to amount and depth of interaction.

The author, as an online instructor in graduate level courses at Regent University, was one of several facilitators who had received positive overall course evaluations from students in previous semesters. The author's evaluations were noticeably favorable in regard to frequency of interaction, levels of perceived intimacy and overall satisfaction with the learning experience. The author thus set out to systematically monitor and record the frequency of his personal interaction with students during a single 15-week semester and determine what effects, if any, varying degrees of frequency might have on students' online learning experience. The literature reviewed, along with the author's estimate of the frequency of personal interaction in previous online courses at Regent, suggested that a higher frequency of instructor-initiated personal interaction with students apart from required group discussion would result in more positive student perceptions of and participation in the online learning experience than lower levels of frequency.

Regent University has been delivering online education since the early 1990s. Regent offers graduate level degrees in the online format in communication, business, counseling, education, divinity, law and organizational leadership. The Center for Leadership Studies (CLS) offers masters and doctoral degrees in Organizational Leadership. CLS uses a cohort model of instruction whereby students progress through the same coursework as a single group (Regent University, 2001). Courses are taught entirely in the online setting apart from a brief on-campus summer residency required for the doctoral degree only. Communication exchanges throughout the semester between faculty and students are primarily conducted, in conjunction with email, through a web-based course management platform designed to facilitate threaded discussions.

A doctoral level CLS course in Organizational Communication provided the context for the author's case study on the frequency of personal contacts in online learning. Forty students in their second year of study in organizational leadership were enrolled. Required group discussion comprised 20% of the students' overall grade for the course. Grades for weekly dialogue were assessed on the basis of both quantity and quality of student contacts during the period set aside for discussion (usually 2 weeks for each set of weekly questions). The course management platform known as TopClass was used to facilitate threaded (asynchronous) discussion among students randomly assigned to one of seven discussion groups. Students were restricted to posting and replying to their assigned groups but were permitted to view dialogue in other groups. The rest of each student's grade was made up of three summative performance assessments in the form of individual research papers and group projects. A major assignment was due approximately every four weeks.