|
Introduction
Online learning is an option which allows students
greater flexibility in building a course schedule
that caters to their lifestyles. This is especially
beneficial to those adult community college students
trying to successfully integrate educational
pursuits into lives already busy with work and
family responsibilities. Although online learning
can provide an attractive option for these adult
learners hoping to pursue higher education, it is
not necessarily a panacea for every challenge
confronting these learners. Despite astronomical
growth in the past decade, distance education
programs see many casualties when large numbers of
students register for online courses with no concept
of what the experience will entail (Bathe, 2001;
Hill & Raven, 2000; Moore, Bartkovich, Fetzner, &
Ison, 2002; O'Brien & Renner, 2002, Stover, 2005).
Various studies which examined student retention in
distance education programs (Dahl, 2004; Nesler,
1999; Valasek, 2001) agree that student attrition is
a huge issue in online learning, and each study
offers proactive measures from learning communities
to technology awareness as methods to increase
retention in online courses.
Online learning can resemble a virtual "field of
dreams" where officials believe that "if you build,
it they will come." Institutions take an aggressive
stance toward building online programs by making
available a large number of online courses to
attract students into the college. Of the large
numbers of students who register for online courses,
many end up withdrawing from the course formally, or
informally through lack of participation, or they
may continue and receive less than desired results.
As such, a huge investment is made in technology,
but little in comparison is made in the human stock
when lack of attention to traditional course
management issues such as learning styles,
individual differences of students, selection of
appropriate course activities and materials, and
proper training for online faculty and students
(Bass & Ritting, n. d.; Bates & Poole, 2003; Conrad
& Donaldson, 2004; Franklin, 2001; O'Brien & Renner,
2002) fails to consider online pedagogy and the
students who are to benefit. Retention rates,
however, directly relate to how well the courses and
facilitators meet the needs of the learners enrolled
in these courses. Palloff and Pratt (2003) contend
that online programs which are designed around the
learner tend to offer more quality which, in turn,
increases learner satisfaction. If learners are
satisfied with the results of their online
experience, they are more likely to stay in the
course.
Online learning presents unique challenges for not
only the learners but the faculty and administrators
as well. Those responsible for making decisions
regarding, designing, facilitating, and even
learning in these cyber-environments must stretch
themselves to think beyond the limitations of the
traditional classroom. The purpose of this study
was to determine what factors community college
administrators, faculty, and students perceive as
important in influencing student persistence in
community college online learning programs. The
study was a descriptive one which compared the
perceptions through these different lenses to reveal
which perceptions are held in common among the
stakeholder groups and where those perceptions
diverge.
Review of the Literature
Persistence in a college or an individual course
requires commitment on the part of the student; the
student’s level of commitment is directly influenced
by a person-environment fit. Tinto’s (1993) Student
Integration Model describes student attrition as a
result of the lack of social and academic
integration into the college or university
community. This idea reasonably suggests that when
students feel comfortable within the social and
academic milieus of the college, they are more
likely to stay. Community colleges fall victim to
overall student attrition at a higher rate than
4-year institutions (Tinto, 1993), and distance
education courses see a larger number of students
who fail to persist than traditional courses (Bathe,
2001; Moore et al., 2002; Stover, 2005). Online
dropout rates have traditionally ranged from 30 to
50 percent (Hill & Raven, 2000; Moore et al., 2002;
O'Brien & Renner, 2002). Reasons for this attrition
coincide with those of traditional students who cite
“personal problems, financial problems, changes in
work schedule, and teacher-related concerns” (Moore
et al., 2002, p. 6). Studies also indicate that a
lack of personal interaction and support are major
reasons for online student attrition (Moore &
Kearsley, 1996; Moore et al., 2002). In addition,
many students enroll in online courses with the
misconception that these courses are less
challenging than traditional courses or with other
mistaken expectations such as the idea that working
at one's own pace means due dates and deadlines are
nonexistent (Burnett, 2001; Moore et al., 2002; Tait,
2004). The realities of virtual learning often
overwhelm many of these students who ultimately
become attrition statistics.
Online Learning Communities
Building community online is a crucial
characteristic for influencing presistence. Palloff
and Pratt (1999) characterize an online community as
one which contains active interaction involving
content and personal communication between students
and the instructor. Students and faculty share
ideas, information, and resources while at the same
time they offer support and encouragement along with
constructive critical evaluations of each other's
work. Online learning communities can also provide a
student-centered learning environment, develop
critical thinking skills, and provide expanded
connections to specialists, faculty, and students
around the world, thus extending phenomenally the
boundaries of the traditional classroom (Alexander,
1999; Milheim, 2001). Likewise, in the absence of a
physical connection to an institution, virtual
learning communities allow students an opportunity
to make connections with the institution, other
learners, and course content in a supportive
environment. Persistence rates are higher for
students who are involved in learning communities
than for those who are not a part of such an
environment (Santovec, 2004).
Access to an electronic learning environment,
however, does not guarantee community. A learning
community develops when the participants recognize
their shared goals and responsibilities and commit
to working toward realization of those goals (Palloff
& Pratt, 1999). Facilitators in online courses
(just as in the traditional face-to-face course)
must use a variety of methods and techniques to
foster this sense of shared community in an
environment in which the primary mode of
communication is text-based. Lock (2003) asserts
that establishing online learning communities
encompasses more than the selection and use of
technology:
Attention ought to be directed to ways in which
online learning environments accommodate the social
and psychological needs of people who come together
virtually to learn. Nurturing the creation of a
learning community is not only about changing
practices and routines; it is about changing how we
empower learners within an online community. (p.1)
Therefore, educators need to re-examine learning
styles theories and methods of assessments which
will move the focus from teaching to the
facilitation of learning (Hart, 2001). A shift in
focus from the “technical to [the] social aspect”
(Chen, 2004, Introduction) of online learning is
also necessary as interaction is touted as a
mainstay of meaningful learning.
A New Paradigm
A most important issue in online teaching and
learning is shifting the paradigm from the
traditional teacher-centered approaches which have
dominated instructional practices of the past.
Although the instructor is still the content expert
in a virtual environment, students in an online
community must assume responsibility for managing
their own learning experiences (Bathe, 2001; Conrad
& Donaldson, 2004). Many faculty, however, are
reluctant to give up their control in the courses
they teach, and many learners are reluctant to take
a more independent role in their learning.
Role of the instructor
For maximum effectiveness, the one-size-fits all
approach should not reflect the online learning
experience. Thus, online facilitators are faced
with challenges unique to the online learning
environment. Like the face-to-face instructors,
they must establish relationships with their
students, determine their needs, and develop a
teaching style which fits those needs; however, they
must do so without any face-to-face contact (Bass &
Ritting, n. d.). In addition, online facilitators
must be aware that their students are adult learners
who bring with them a number of other issues
requiring their time and attention. Recognition of
and attention to these factors contributes to
increased student satisfaction which, in turn,
yields higher persistence rates.
Designing a course and implementing a program of
study conducive to the online environment while
providing meaningful learning experiences is a
special challenge for the online instructor.
Technical considerations, including skills of the
instructor and the learner, availability and
accessibility of technology, and the level of
technical support available are issues which combine
with content presentation, classroom interaction,
and the time required to develop and facilitate such
a course are all aspects which require attention.
Conrad and Donaldson (2004) posit that designing an
online course is much like designing a face-to-face
one in that the main objective is to fulfill the
learning outcome: “an activity that does not
contribute to a learning outcome only adds confusion
to the course and risks learner dissatisfaction at
having to do an unnecessary activity” (p. 17).
Posting of extensive lecture notes which mirror the
textbook presentations, PowerPoint outlines used for
classroom presentations, and "busy work" are all
ill-advised techniques for retaining students in an
online learning environment (O'Brien & Renner,
2002). Faculty in an online learning program must
learn how to be effective instructors in this
medium, and administrators must make available the
necessary provisions to help these faculty (Inman,
Kerwin, & Mayes, 1999).
Role of the learner
Engaged learning is a prerequisite for an effective
learning community. Engaged learning includes
students establishing their own learning goals,
working together in groups, and exploring
appropriate resources to answer meaningful
questions; tasks that are multidisciplinary and
authentic, with connections to the real world;
assessment that is ongoing and performance-based;
and products that are shared with an audience beyond
the classroom (Jones, Valdez, Nowakowski, &
Rasmussen, 1994). Students are also expected to
share in decision making and assessment and
evaluation of themselves, the instructor, and the
course. “When a student is engaged on an individual
level and his/her ideas are validated before the
group, the student is made to feel like a part of a
community where his/her opinion is sought or valued”
(Franklin, 2001, Designing Successful Communities
section, para. 5). This method of engaged learning
equips students to achieve a level of comfort in the
online environment and ultimately to step out of
their traditional passive roles and become active
co-learners with fellow students and the
facilitator.
Social Constructivism
Many instructors adopt a learning-centered
pedagogy using a social constructivist approach in
which students learn new knowledge by assimilating
information, relating it to existing knowledge, and
reflecting on it. For constructivists, reflection
and discussion are key activities through which
knowledge is gained. The asynchronous nature of
online classes allows for and encourages such
reflection. The inherent anonymity and safety of
the online learning platform combined with the
ability to take time to ponder ideas and reflect
before posting enables many online learners to
contribute more readily than in the traditional
learning environment (Chen, 2004; Howard, 2003).
Critical Reflection and Transformative Learning
Critical reflection can be defined as a process by
which an individual carefully and objectively
examines his or her behaviors in a given situation.
Palloff and Pratt (1999) point out that the very
nature of online learning presents disorienting
dilemmas and psychic distortions which cause the
participants to examine their pre-existing beliefs
and behaviors. Although unaware of their
transformation, they are approaching learning
through a new medium which is very different from
the traditional venue of classroom instruction.
Becoming accustomed to new technology as a dominant
means of communication and instruction presents
another nontraditional aspect of their learning
environment. Perhaps the most transforming component
of their experience is the reliance upon self and
other learners as opposed to the traditional view of
the instructor as the authority or expert. Learners
who are unable to reconcile themselves to this new
medium become casualties of virtual learning
environments; in contrast, those who are able to
find an appropriate fit with their educational
objectives and abilities persist.
Climate of the Online Learning Community
Learners are better able to form online communities
when they feel comfortable within the learning
environment. This comfort can result from a number
of activities and sources including comfort with the
technology, clear expectations established from the
beginning, and an opportunity to share ideas in a
non-threatening environment where every voice is
important.
Students must feel free to take risks and challenge
assumptions. Without this level of comfort . . .
they will be reticent to dispute ideas and stretch
their thinking. They will also find the learning
experience very isolating and many will retreat to
the comforts of a classroom setting or be lost to
continuing education entirely. (O'Brien & Renner,
2002, para. 2)
Faculty who are sensitive to their online students
can detect cues, such as “decreased activity level,
diminished quality, and delayed responses” (O’Brien
& Renner, 2002, Course Design section), which may
indicate frustrations with the learning environment
and other issues related to this type of learning.
At this point, faculty should communicate with the
student to determine a reason for the change in
behavior and try to arrive at a resolution which may
involve a behavior modification on the part of the
student, the instructor, or both.
Students who become overwhelmed because of mounting
issues which are unresolved tend to drop out of
their online courses (Gaide, 2004). This is
frequently the result of students entering the
online learning environment without an accurate
assessment of what the venture entails. Online
students need clear expectations about course
objectives, requirements, and policies communicated
from the start (Gaide, 2004; Lorenzetti, 2005a;
Lorenzetti, 2005b). Therefore, feedback from the
instructor is an important retention factor by
helping to develop a connection between the faculty
and the student. Such feedback is automatically
delayed in an asynchronous environment, but the
instructor should make every effort to respond in a
timely manner and in a tone which demonstrates
warmth and caring (O’Brien & Renner, 2002).
Effective online learning communities can be
characterized by four critical components:
interaction, communication, participation, and
collaboration.
Interaction
Isolation or lack of connectedness has been cited
(Bathe, 2001; Stark & Warren, 1999) as a major
threat to student persistence in online courses.
Students report feelings of not being a part of an
institution or an attitude of “out-of-sight
out-of-mind” which leads them to direct their
attentions to more immediate and tangible concerns
(Stark & Warren, 1999). The online instructor can
even fall victim to the latter when attentions are
constantly divided among a variety of
responsibilities: “a name without a face is easier
to not get involved with” (Stark & Warren,
1999, p. 395). However, an ideal online learning
environment is highly interactive with all
participants consistently involved with content, the
facilitator, and each other. Online facilitators
who consider the students’ need for the human touch
and the importance of an interactive course create
learning environments which promote connectedness
and meaningful learning thereby leading to higher
student persistence rates.
Communication
Effective online communication is that in which
faculty and students recognize that they are each a
vital part of a learning community in which
interaction is not only appropriate but necessary
for the attainment of individual and shared goals.
“Communication is the brick and mortar of virtual
communities, and communities only exist as long as
communication is available to participants” (Schweir,
2000, Whither Virtual section, para. 6). Effective
communication includes thoughtful discussion and
feedback among learners and the
instructor/facilitator.
Participation
In order to promote interactivity and participation,
it is important that the instructor is clear about
how much time the course will require of both
students and faculty in order to eliminate potential
misunderstandings about course demands. The
instructor also needs to teach students about online
learning, be a good model of good participation by
logging on often and contributing to the discussion
and community formation, be willing to step in and
set limits if participation wanes or if the
conversation is headed in the wrong direction, and
remember that there are people attached to the words
on the screen (Palloff & Pratt, 2003). Palloff and
Pratt further assert that facilitators should
establish minimum posting requirements and monitor
those for compliance, grade on participation, post
grading rubrics that establish guidelines for
acceptable participation and posting, and use
collaborative assignments and evaluate them
collaboratively.
Collaboration
Collaboration in an online course involves anything
from threaded discussions, chat sessions, and paired
activities to small group activities. Collaboration
allows students to become more involved in the
learning process, and this involvement leads to
greater subject matter comprehension. Not only does
this type of environment and activity mimic the type
of group processes which will be found in the
workplace, it also promotes desirable interpersonal
skills and allows students to connect with each
other (Burnett, 2001).
Barriers to Persistence
Many factors ranging from academic aptitude,
pedagogy, and curriculum to financial factors,
grade-point average, and family backgrounds
influence student persistence in online courses
(Stover, 2005). Clearly, students who opt to take
online courses have issues beyond the actual
learning environment which need attention. These
include access to student support services such as
advising, registration, counseling, financial aid,
and bookstore and library services (Bathe, 2001;
Dahl, 2004; Milheim, 2001). All these and other
factors can be categorized into one of four major
barriers to student persistence:
1. Situational barriers are those which occur as
the result of changes in the social, economic, or
personal life of the student. They include such
issues as transportation, age, time constraints,
family support, or family responsibilities over
which the institution has no control (Cross, 1981;
Lorenzetti, 2004).
2. Conversely, institutional barriers result from
difficulties with college programs, policies, and
procedures; these include issues with admissions,
registration, class schedules, financial aid, and
other support services over which the institution
does have some control (Cross, 1981; Lorenzetti,
2004). Institutional barriers emphasize the need
for an institutional support system that can be
accessed online (Dahl, 2004).
3. Dispositional barriers result from an
individual’s personal background, and which include
issues such as attitude, motivation, learning
styles, and self-confidence (Cross, 1981; Lorenzetti,
2004).
4. Epistemological barriers result from problems
with academic or institutional matters such as
course content, prerequisite knowledge, and
expectations (Lorenzetti, 2004; Moore, et al, 2002).
Many of these barriers can be overcome by training
for all persons involved. Faculty and
administrators should be trained in effective design
and implementation of online courses, and students
should be trained in the concepts and ideology
underlying online learning (Lorenzetti, 2004).
Student Motivation
Motivation is an extremely important characteristic
for any student but particularly the online learner.
These students must utilize a different level of
initiative and self-discipline that students in
traditional classes may not possess. Without this,
many of them would be destined for failure because
the impetus to log into the course, read, and submit
assignments may not be forthcoming without that
little nudge from the “authority” figure.
Since many community college learners are working
adults who have families and who may not have
attended college for many years, they may present
with what Brookfield (1995) calls “imposter
syndrome.” They feel inadequate to do what is
required of them, and they think that everyone else
(but them) knows what they are supposed to be doing.
These students want to avoid failure, and they need
reassurance that they still can learn. “Adults are
much less open to trial-and-error approaches than
children are. Many adult learners will resist
trying something new if it involves the risk of
making an error and feeling foolish as a result” (Stilborne
& Williams, 1996, Dispositional Barrier section).
In an online environment, the syllabus and course
outline should be supplemented with a detailed
description of every task that must be completed. It
is also important to make first assignments such
that every student can be successful. Timely
feedback on first assignment submissions is an
essential retention tool. Such feedback gives
students a glimpse of what to expect in future
assessments and an opportunity to decide whether to
persist or not (Tait, 2004).
This study examined the perceptions of online
persistence factors as seen by the three major
stakeholders in community college distance education
programs. The purpose of the study was to determine
which factors are most important among the three
groups and where those perceptions converge since
lack of convergence could be a factor resulting in
high attrition rates of some online courses.
Consensus of these indicators calls attention to
those areas which should be emphasized in online
teaching and learning. Likewise, a lack of
convergence on major issues related to online
learning reveals possible reasons for high attrition
rates in distance education courses and provides
significant insight into improving the quality of
online learning and increasing retention rates among
online learners.
Methodology
The research methodology was a modification of the
Delphi technique, which is a consensus-reaching
process designed for non-interacting expert groups
whose geographical locations, status differences, or
opposing viewpoints of the members make it difficult
for the members to physically assemble (Andranovich,
1995). The modified Delphi used three separate
groups of participants who represented the various
levels of stakeholders in online learning to compose
the panel. Although participants could respond to
information originating within their respective
groups, all participants remained anonymous to each
other.
Potential panelists who met the criteria for
participation volunteered for the study by
completing an online questionnaire. Thirty-nine
volunteers from 10 community colleges in Alabama met
eligibility requirements to participate as a member
of the administrator, faculty, or student Delphi
group. All of the faculty and student panelists had
completed at least one semester of instruction or
learning, respectively, in an online course, and
administrator panelists had at least one semester’s
experience of oversight in some aspect of online
learning as self-reported on the Preliminary
Questionnaire.
Design of the Study
The study was conducted over a 6-8 week period from
July 2006 through September 2006 through a series of
questionnaires communicated via an online survey
website. The study included three rounds of data
collection and a resolution round in which panelists
were provided the results of the Round 3 responses.
Panelists were notified by e-mail of the
availability of each round’s questionnaire. Each
questionnaire was available for 10 days during which
panelists had an opportunity to reflect, to evaluate
their ideas and those of fellow panelists, formulate
any new ideas, and share their views.
Results
The initial question was an open-ended one in which
panelists were asked to list factors which they
perceived to support student persistence in a
community college online course. They were not asked
to rank those items during Round 1. At the end of
the 10-day period, the researcher compiled a
comprehensive list for each group of all factors
submitted by the panelists in that group.
Round 1 Results
Administrators generated 49 factors and statements
pertaining to online student retention. Those 49
statements were reviewed, coded, and summarized into
20 themes. Faculty panelists generated 72 factors
and statements which were summarized into 25 themes,
and student panelists generated 44 factors and
statements which were summarized into 16 themes. All
themes generated during Round 1 are shown in Table
1. In order to establish consistency, when possible,
themes from each group were matched as closely as
possible to emerging themes developed from the
administrators' responses. This was done only if no
risk of compromising the integrity of the responses
existed. These themes were then used to develop the
Round 2 survey instrument. Although Table 1 shows
the frequency with which each factor was mentioned
during the Round 1 data collection, factors were
presented in random order in Round 2.
Table 1. Themes Emerging from Round 1
Questionnaire
|
Administrators |
Faculty |
Students |
|
|
|
|
|
Convenience/Flexibility (8) |
Student-teacher interaction/ Prompt feedback
(15) |
Convenience/Flexibility (12) |
|
Responsiveness of Instructor/ Prompt Feedback
(7) |
User-friendly format (7) |
Independent learning/ Responsibility (5) |
|
Self-motivation (5) |
Clearly-stated requirements (6) |
Course design (4) |
|
User-friendly format (4) |
Discussion (6) |
Discussion/Interaction (3) |
|
Course design (3) |
Self-motivation (4) |
Time management (3) |
|
Collaboration (3) |
Course design (4) |
Personal contact (3) |
|
Time management (3) |
Computer access (4) |
User-friendly format (2) |
|
Computer access (2) |
Computer skills (3) |
Clearly-stated requirements (2) |
|
Self-discipline (2) |
Discipline (3) |
Technical support (2) |
|
Instructors (2) |
Subject-matter knowledge (2) |
Personal issues (2) |
|
Availability of courses (1) |
Instructor (2) |
Less class interaction (1) |
|
Dedication (1) |
Lack of personal contact (1) |
Computer skills (1) |
|
Basic computer skills (1) |
Cheat-ability (1) |
Accessibility (1) |
|
Organization (1) |
Textbook (1) |
Less difficult coursework (1) |
|
Clearly-stated requirements (1) |
IQ (1) |
Efficiency (1) |
|
Value (1) |
Perception of course difficulty level (1) |
|
|
Communication/
Writing skills (1) |
Flexibility (1) |
|
|
Computer support tools (1) |
Alternative means of contact (1) |
|
|
Difficulty level (1) |
Reliable server and
support network (1) |
|
|
|
Outside assistance (1) |
|
|
|
Control (1) |
|
|
|
Value (1) |
|
|
|
Time (1) |
|
Round 2 Results
During the second round, panelists were asked to
rate those factors that they perceived most
important in supporting persistence in a community
college online course by using a five-point
Likert-type scale: 1—Not Important, 2—Somewhat
Important, 3—Important, 4—Very Important, 5—Neutral.
Those factors were identified by calculating the
frequency with which each panelist rated a factor as
Very Important, Important, and Somewhat
Important. Administrators identified 11 of the
20 factors produced during Round 1 as important;
faculty identified 10 of their 25, and students
identified 10 of their 16 factors (see Table 2).
Table 2. Round 2 Most Important Retention
Factors
|
Administrators |
Faculty |
Students |
|
|
|
|
|
Responsiveness of Instructor |
Motivation |
Convenience/Flexibility |
|
Self-discipline |
Student-teacher interaction/
Prompt feedback |
Clearly-stated requirements |
|
Time management |
Clearly-stated requirements |
Technical support |
|
Clearly-stated requirements |
User-friendly |
Course design |
|
Convenience/
Flexibility |
Outside assistance |
Independent learning/Responsibility |
|
Self-motivation |
Time |
User-friendly format |
|
Basic computer skills |
| |