Teaching Presence

Anderson,  Rourke,  Garrison,  & Archer. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Retrieved from http://74.125.155.132/scholar?q=cache:boERC7ArbbEJ:scholar.google.com/+Assessing+Teaching+Presence+in+a+Computer+Conferencing+Context&hl=en&as_sdt=100000000&as_vis=1

           This paper has an in-depth description of how to conduct an online class using the idea of teaching presence.  This is broken into the three elements of cognitive presence, social presence and teaching presence.  The concept is further broken down into design, facilitating, and direct instruction.  There are several “Tables” with very good illustrations of how to handle different situations.

Dennen, V., & Wieland, K. (2007). From interaction to intersubjectivity: Facilitating online group discourse processes. Distance Education, 28(3), 281-297. doi:10.1080/01587910701611328 

           The researchers looked at two discussion threads in order to identify how instructors may better facilitate the discussion arena.  Two classes in similar universities were chosen to participate in this study.  Both were similar in grade, class size and structure, but were different courses.  The instructor’s comments asked probing questions, gave more information and shared personal experiences.  The second instructor did not use the same consistency in when he posted questions or comments.  His overall teaching style was more teacher-centric than the first instructor.  The first class had discussions which showed more interdependence and co-construction of knowledge than the second class.  The second class posted fewer messages and were more likely to leave the original topic.  The first class made more use of the shared artifact that was from class whereas the second class introduced many new artifacts that were not shared and may not relate well to the topic.

Dennen, V. P., Darabi, A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). Instructor-learner interaction in online   courses: The relative perceived importance of particular instructor actions on performance and satisfaction. Distance Education, 28(1), 65-79. doi:10.1080/01587910701305319   

  

           This study compares what instructors feel is important in an online class with what students feel is important. Instructor actions from guidelines for online classes were rated by both the students and faculty in a large public university and a private online university.  Findings showed that instructors felt that items concerning the content of class were what was most necessary while students were more concerned in having their communication and interpersonal needs met.

Dzakiria, H. (2008). Students' accounts of the need for continuous support in a distance learning programme. Open Learning, 23(2), 103-111. doi:10.1080/02680510802051913    

          The professors at a university in Malaysia asked their students what they felt about their online classes in a small study.  Their discussions revealed that the students felt that learning support was their largest issue.  Researchers found that students missed the interaction with their instructors to a greater degree than the researchers had previously realized.

 Friend Wise, A., Padmanabhan, P., & Duffy, T. M. (2009). Connecting online learners with diverse local practices: The design of effective common reference points for conversation.  Distance Education, 30(3), 317-338.  doi:10.1080/01587910903236320     

           This study looks at the idea of creating digital objects to help online learners obtain a greater level of intimacy when participating in online discussions.  The researchers felt there were low-level interactions instead of higher-level ones due to the lack of shared context and shared reference points.  In particular, they found that new teachers who were attempting to learn from experienced teachers may use the same words yet their ideas may mean different things as they will be basing their interpretations on different experiences.  The study examines whether providing common reference points would solve the problem. 

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. Retrieved from http://auspace.athabascau.ca:8080/dspace/bitstream/2149/739/1/critical_inquiry_in_a_text.pdf    

           This study hopes to provide a sense of order and a tool for the use of computer-mediated communication and computer conferencing.  Using the Community of Inquiry model, a method is produced to help researchers analyze transcripts and for educators to reach their optimal use of computer conferencing when facilitating their classes.

Hiltz, S.R., & Turoff, M. (2002). What makes learning networks effective?. Communications of the ACM, 45(4), 56-59. 

 

           Some of the factors that go into making your online course effective are identified and explained in this article. doi:10.1145/505248.505273

Hull, D. M., & Saxon, T. F. (2009). Negotiation of meaning and co-construction of knowledge: An experimental analysis of asynchronous online instruction. Computers & Education, 52(3), 624-639. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.005

           The authors compare student social interaction in two sections of the same asynchronous course where the frequency of instruction and questioning are different. They looked at how much students need a facilitator to help define meaning and construct knowledge.

Marzelli, S., & Dicker, L. (2006). Overcoming facelessness in the online classroom. Distance Education Report, 10(3), 4-7. Retrieved from http://web1.uct.usm.maine.edu/~stebbins/Overcoming%20Facelessness%20in%20the%20Online%20Classroom.pdf

    

           Professors at a community college asked their students to describe the advantages and disadvantages of online learning.  Students missed the social aspects of being with other students but mainly complained about missing the instructor.  This article also tells some of the techniques the professors use in their own classes.

 

Pickett, A. (Producer). (2007). Understanding online teaching presence.  Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/alexandrapickett/teaching-presence

           A slideshow that covers the definitions of teaching presence and class community.  A nice overview of the subject of teaching presence online.

Schutt, M., Allen, B. S., & Laumakis, M. A. (2009). The effects of instructor immediacy behaviors in online learning environments. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(2), 135-148. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ864049&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ864049

           This study builds on the idea that instructor social presence has a significant impact on learning outcomes and student satisfaction.  They address the idea that how quickly the instructor responds during an online class will affect how students perceive the instructor’s social presence.  Four taped versions of the class were created using the same instructor, same script and manipulating the level of verbal and nonverbal immediacy behaviors.  Although the use of audio can appear to give immediacy behavior, the classes that used video versions of the lesson had a significantly higher level of immediacy perception.  

Vlachopoulos, P., & Cowan, J. (2010). Reconceptualising moderation in asynchronous online discussions using grounded theory. Distance Education, 31(1), 23-36. doi:10.1080/01587911003724611                 

           Studies how and when instructors in higher education moderate during online asynchronous discussions.  It discusses Salmon’s model of e-moderating along with, Garrison and Anderson’s Community of Inquiry.  This study examines what the roles of an e-moderator are, what are the expectations of their roles, what they base their approach on, and what do they see as pitfalls in e-moderating.