Community of Inquiry Model

Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2000) clearly shows the Social, Cognitive and Teaching Presence in a community of Inquiry (Figure 2.1). The findings from this research have supported the presence of these elements in the emerging communities that evolved through interaction synchronously and asynchronously. Each element has evolved, starting with:-

Social Presence - Students wanted their online experience to have open communication, to have group cohesion with a social media presence for their own collaboration, discussion and reassurance, they seemed to prefer using external sites rather than using Moodle for this purpose. Their reasons for perusing an online

online programme slotted into with their life and work and for each to work to its best advantage time management was essential.

Cognitive Presence - During this research process students recalled wanting to explore, learn and achieve their goal, they liked the integration with others and they wanted to achieve a resolution to obtain a qualification. While they acknowledged that this process was solitary in nature, they felt it triggered ideas and events within themselves

Teaching Presence - Students liked the design and organisation of the online course but wanted to be able to gain more knowledge about the curriculum design, methods and how assessments should be completed. It became evident that two different communities emerged, those accessing live synchronous sessions and archived content. While they liked direct, face to face and a live presence they were also happy to have the archived sessions for time management and revision. They highlighted the fact that they preferred if feedback was direct and timely and that the quality and standard of assessment be maintained and be similar to previous years. They acknowledge that technical support was available to them but that was something not used frequently.

The results are interesting because these are possibly the same criteria required from full time students. The research also highlighted the fact that age, employment status or qualifications had little to do with the online course or its participants. Every student was indifferent to the other, each starting over regardless of past experiences, qualifications or criteria.

Finally, whilst acknowledging the opportunities for interaction and community-building, it is important to note that just over half of the student-participants overall did feel that online learning was solitary in nature. El-Seoud et al. (2014) did point to the use of strong study groups to reduce any sense of isolation. In the context of this study, it was further found that engagement and discussion around the assessment prompted interaction with peers in community forums. Moreover, it is important to acknowledge that some student-participants did not wish to engage with peers, and were resistant to being part of a community of learners, preferring to forge their own learning pathways.

digital practices and tools to avoid engendering or forcing particular ways of interacting and expression within the online context.

Yarm and Rossini (2012) assert that those undertaking a fully online course are self- motivated in terms of engagement, and this plays an important role in their progression and performance within the online course. In terms of motivation levels of participants in this study, most students reported fluctuating motivational levels throughout the duration of the study – however, overall the vast majority of participants felt that motivation levels had increased during the course with a minority reporting a decrease in motivation levels. The students were motivated by a range of personal, professional and intellectual factors to progress with the course. In terms of personal motivational factors, the majority of participants were motivated mainly by their desire to broaden their horizons and to improve their self-esteem (self-belief and confidence). In terms of professional motivational factors, the vast majority of participants were motivated by the belief that gaining the qualification would open up new opportunities for them, with a minority indicating it would fulfil the education requirements for a career. In terms of intellectual motivational factors, the majority of participants were motivated by the desire to become better educated and to develop lifelong learning skills.

Separately, students also pointed to the need to control or self-direct own learning as a driver that enabled them to persevere with learning throughout the course. The de- motivating factors for participants included issues with workload (mainly associated with assignment completion), family issues, and workplace duties. Yoo and Huang (2013) found that gender and age profile contributed to engagement, with females having stronger intrinsic motivation and those aged in their twenties and thirties having higher long term extrinsic motivation, but in the context of this study, the preliminary examination did not suggest that there likely existed a significant relationship between gender and age profile, and any of the aforementioned motivational factors.

There were issues highlighted by students in maintaining a work/life balance, and these included challenges of time/ time management, management of workload (mainly associated with assessment), challenge of returning to education after a long absence,

commented on workload issues impacting on them in terms of additional time being required to engage in online moderation and in correcting assessment within the fully online mode. The nurturing of a community online has been recognised as important in online learning (Mercer, 2000; Rovai, Wighting, and Lucking, 2004). If students are to feel part of and connected within an online learning community, then they need to work, listen and learn from one another, enabling them to cope and problem solve together (Motteram and Forrester 2005; Yuen 2003).

5.3.1.4 Perspectives on Engagement within its Fully Online Context Compared to