STUDIES BYJory Hadsell, Sacramento City College

Tracy Kent, CSU Sacramento

December 1, 2011DET/CHE Conference

Faculty Perceptions of Online Student Engagement:California Community Colleges and 

The California State University

Changing Times

Question:Do we really understand how to actively engage our students in a changing world?

Introduction

• Student engagement is commonly viewed as a key element in predicting and ensuring the success of online learners.

• It can be difficult to separate effective engagement strategies from ancillary course administration activities.

• Researchers have taken multiple approaches to defining student engagement -- the universe of elements construed as contributing to engagement of online students can seem very broad.

• Is student engagement in the "eye of the beholder" -- in this case, the faculty teaching online?  If so -- how do faculty define and perceive engagement?

• Purpose:o Exploring faculty attitudes and perceptions of student

engagement in online courses California Community Colleges (Hadsell) California State University system (Kent)

• Scope:o Mini-qualitative research projectso Comparative analysis:

Sacramento City College CSU Sacramento

• Focus:o Explore the faculty perspective of student engagement in the

online learning environment.

Background

Online Engagement

• The instructor may use his or her role to evoke student motivation and spur students to persist in online learning environments.  (Christian & John, 2010)  

• Students who feel disconnected or physically isolated from their classmates are more likely to drop out of online programs.  (Angelino, et. al, 2007) 

• Maki and Maki (2007) found that students were often required to do more in online courses than in traditional courses. They wrote that to be effective, online instructors need a strong methodology and opportunities for students to interact with each other and the instructor. 

• Synchronous tools can assist in humanizing the classroom with interaction between student-student and instructor (Kolsaka, 2001).  

• Preliminary Researcho Qualitative interviewso Comparative analysis of interviews and artifacts

• Data collectiono Interviews with faculty who teach online (at least two years

experience); Los Rios CCD and CSU Sacramento o Limited by a small sample sizeo Conducted a review and analysis of artifacts (Syllabi,

assignments, related articles, etc.)o Identification of emergent themes in each study

Preliminary Research Approach

FIVE EMERGENT THEMESBASED ON PRELIMINARY RESEARCH

• Background / Mental Modelso Who the faculty member iso Background

Training and certifications  Relating to experiences as an online student

o Instructional Mental Models Interest in student learning & progress Interest and tendencies relating to technology

experimentation

• Structure and Contento Organizational strategyo Variety and clarity of assignmentso Construction of syllabuso Multi-modal approach (videos, podcasts, textbook, etc.)

Emergent Themes

• Community/Interactiono Frequency and depth of interaction

(faculty-student, student-student, whole class presence)o Fostering of creativity and expressiono Encouraging participation o Overall availability of faculty member

• Assessmento Grading featureso Timeliness and frequency of feedback to studentso Use of statistical reports or analytics

Emergent Themes

• The Online Learning Experienceo Faculty awareness of their actionso Assumptions on the part of all partieso Clarity of expectations (both faculty and student)o Faculty assumptions/perceptions of student patterns

of behavioro Challenges and barriers for students

(e.g., deadlines, maintaining focus, motivation)

Emergent Themes

Questions Raised

• Questions raised by the preliminary research:o How do personal experiences, traits, and the attitude of the

instructor impact the instructional approaches online?

o Do the personal values of faculty differ from what is projected to students via course materials?

o How can faculty best create clarity in the organization of an online course? (assignments, grading scheme, online classroom, etc.) How is this impacted by experience as an online student?

o How can faculty be more active in seeking engagement with students, rather than passively expecting it to happen? 

o How do learning analytics inform/impact engagement?

Contact Information

Jory Hadsell Sacramento City Collegejory.hadsell@scc.losrios.edu  @joryhadsell

Tracy KentCSU Sacramentokentt@saclink.csus.edu

References

Angelino, L., Williams, F., & Natvig, D. (2007). Strategies to engage     online students and reduce attrition rates. The Journal of Educators Online, 4(2), 1-14.

Christian, G., & John, G. (2010). Interaction in Online Courses: More is NOT Always Better. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(2).  Kosalka,K. (2001, August 10). Using synchronous tools to build community in the asynchronous online classroom. Faculty Focus.  Retrieved from www.facultyfocus.com Maki, R.H. & Maki, W.S. (2007). Online Courses. In F.T. Durso (Ed.),   Handbook of applied cognition (2nd ed., pp. 527-552). New York: Wiley & Sons, Ltd.