How often do students need to log in to participate?• How much time should they set aside weekly to spend oncoursework?• Is the course entirely asynchronous, or are theresynchronous activities? If there are synchronousactivities, are they optional or required?• Which tools in the learning management system (LMS)will be used?• Where should students look for updates and breakingnews about the course (e.g., announcements, emailmessages, discussion forums)?• How is the course structured (e.g., by week or module, byproject milestone)?• What does a typical week’s or unit’s work entail in thecourse?• Are any external tools or digital courseware required? Ifso, how should students register?• What are the major assessments in the course, andwhen during the semester do they take place? If thereare papers or long-term projects, what are the majormilestones?• Where can students find important due dates?• If there are exams, are there proctoring requirements?• Are there any unusual requirements that require advancecoordination or travel, such as group work, field trips,observations, or interviews

the rubric also requires that certifiedcourses include an introduction for learners that explainsthe purpose and structure of the course, including “how thelearning process is structured and carried out, includingcourse schedule, delivery modalities (online or blended),modes of communication, types of learning activities, andhow learning will be assessed” (p. 8).

To be successful in this class, youwill need to log in at least three times per week to accesscourse materials and to participate actively in the class.

sample syllabus communication and engagementpolicy for an asynchronous online course, whichcommunicates an expectation for participation and thefoundation of a course architecture for engagement

face-to-face course syllabus does, butit must also set communication policies and expectationsfor online engagement as well as a course schedule thatoutlines the frequent and meaningful engagement andreflection required for students.

online asynchronous class, the instructor must showstudents how to navigate, how to interact, and what isexpected.

engaging face-to-face class experience is composedof the classroom space, the scheduled meeting times, theproximity of students to the instructor and one another, andthe social norms that motivate students to participate.

In asynchronousenvironments, students can re-watch recorded lecturesas many times as they need to in order to understand thecontent and can make use of closed captions or transcriptsto improve comprehension

Collison, Elbaum, Haavind, and Tinker (2000) notethat discussion boards, in particular, can “extend reflectiontime” and offer the “opportunity to compose thoughtful,probing contributions” (p. 2)

What makes this simple strategyeffective is that students must do more than listen passivelyto the lecture. They must pay attention, comprehend theinformation being presented, and then take action withthat information – in this case, talk about a question with apartner. One study (Ruhl, Hughes & Schloss, 1987) showedthat using a series of think-pair-share activities approximatelyevery 15 minutes during a live on-campus lecture helped toimprove comprehension and retention of ne

we suggest that well-established fundamentalsof online course design and facilitation still need to reachand be accepted by a broader audience within highereducation, and that lingering perceptions about qualitydifferences between face-to-face and online educationsignify a professional development gap—one that can bebridged with training about active learning pedagogy andmodels for active learning in online asynchronous classes

Perceptions ofquality deficiencies in online classes are sometimes based inassumptions that instructors are better able to engage withstudents, and to encourage more active learning, in face-to-face environments

active learning experiences generally have two additionalcomponents: they require (1) meaningful action by thestudent on behalf of their learning and (2) that meaningfulaction be paired with reflection by the student regardingtheir learning experience. Prince

Whereas traditional lecture/exam pedagogiesare teacher-centered, with the instructor as the focal point,active learning places the student at the center of thelearning experience

This paper suggests a three-pronged approach for conceptualizing activelearning in the online asynchronous class: the creation of an architecture of engagement in theonline classroom, the use of web-based tools in addition to the learning management system, and are-imagining of discussion boards as interactive spaces.

“Today’s students are no longer the people our (U.S.) educational system was designed to teach” (Prensky, 2012, p. 68). Burkle and Cleveland-Innes (2013) agree that these students think and process material differently than any other generation. I believe it will be critical for higher education faculty to be trained in not only online teaching methods to promote presence, but also techniques to reach the increasingly tech-centric student population that is becoming the norm.

Instructor presence is required for social presence to occur, and social presence is necessary for cognitive presence (Akyol & Garrison, 2008; Garrison, et al., 2001; Shea & Bidjerano, 2009).  Furthermore, Shea & Bidjerano (2009) purport that “teaching presence predicts variance in cognitive presences directly” (p. 545). As an example, they found that when the instructor focused and participated in discussion, teaching presence correlated to higher cognitive presence.

The quadrants are cognitive presence indicators, illustrating the sequence of critical thinking: Triggering event – A question or problem; Exploration – The search for information to answer the question or solve the problem; Integration – Making sense of the knowledge found; and Resolution – Applying the idea for confirmation. Garrison et al. (2001) later refined the model and considered integration as a pivotal part of the inquiry process. They noted that it can be difficult to recognize, and must “be inferred from communication within the community of inquiry” (p. 10). In this phase, “teaching presence is essential in moving the process to more-advanced stages of critical thinking and cognitive development” (p. 10), because without it, students may remain comfortable in the exploration phase, and not move into integration or resolution.

Garrison et al. (2000) consider cognitive presence a “vital element in critical thinking a process and outcome that is frequently presented as the ostensible goal of all higher education”

One of the advantages for the instructor in an online environment is that there is a “concrete interactive trail” (Lamb & Callison, 2005, p. 30), leaving the instructor with a tool for analyzing the paths of cognitive presence throughout the course and among students. Several studies showed that students with high social presence also had increased perceptions of quality learning as well as satisfaction with their instructors

the extent to which cognitive presence is created and sustained in a community of inquiry is partly dependent on how communication is restricted or encouraged” (Garrison et al., 2000, p.93). Cognitive presence is also evident when students purposefully and collaboratively construct knowledge (Garrison, et al., 2001), resulting in deep meaning, retained knowledge, and critical thinking (Nagel & Kotzé, 2010).

Garrison et al. (2000) explain that cognitive presence “can best be understood in the context of a general model of critical thinking” (p. 98), and that “what to think…is domain-specific and context-dependent” (p.98).

Michael Graham Moore (1989), editor of the American Journal of Distance Education since 1987, identifies three distinct types of interaction: learner-to-content, learner-to-instructor, and learner-to-learner.  Learner-to-instructor interaction is described as encouraging interest and modeling, organizing information and assessing progress, maintaining individual contact with the learner, interacting frequently, and fostering the learner-to-learner interaction (Moore, 1989).  It is Moore’s (1989) contention that these connections are keys to effective distance learning.

The remaining five principles: using active learning techniques, giving prompt feedback, emphasizing time on task, communicating high expectations, and responding to diverse talents and ways of learning are consistent with the characteristics of the CoI presences.

second principle promotes peer collaboration to expand understanding

student-faculty contact in and out of classes is the most important factor in student motivation and involvement.  Faculty concern helps students get through rough times and keep on working.  Knowing a few faculty members well enhances students’ intellectual commitment and encourages them to think about their own values and future plans

Chickering and Gamson (1987) offered Seven Principles for Practice in Higher Education, which have come to be known as the dominant paradigm for developing standards of teaching and learning in higher education.

He believed their mission was to guide students to handle social influencers and to foster a continual construction of knowledge.

Despite frustration with the course I was taking for my academic program, I, and my fellow students, began to take charge and support one another as we approached the final weeks of the semester.  While some of us continued to flourish in this newfound community, others appeared lost.  The lack of feedback and direction from the instructor was frustrating with the final project deadline looming.

Directed facilitation includes whether students feel the instructor is drawing in participants, creating an accepting climate for learning, keeping students on track, diagnosing misperceptions, and finding consensus in areas of disagreement.

describe the Community of Inquiry as a “conceptual framework that identifies the elements that are crucial prerequisites for a successful higher education experience” (p. 87).  Shea and Bidjerano elaborate that CoI “focuses on the development of an online learning community with an emphasis on the processes of instructional conversations that are likely to lead to epistemic engagement” (p. 544).

The Community of Inquiry (CoI) model (Garrison et al., 2000) is the prevailing model in research involving teaching presence.   At its core, CoI is built on constructivist principles rooted in educational theories of Dewey, Vygotsky, and others.  Constructivism is a process of an individual’s construction of knowledge through his/her own experiences and develops in concert with interactions with others (Shea et al., 2005).

More importantly, transactional distance is not a static measurement, but variable with dynamics based on the interaction or gap between any one instructor and any one student—including face-to-face environments—and includes both psychological and communications space where there is potential for misunderstandings.  The space and time gap can be closed with deliberate elements of interaction by the instructor

Another perspective that supports the social nature of education comes from Vygotsky (1978), whose theory of the zone of proximal development proposes that optimal learning is achieved through both teacher’s guidance and peer interaction.  The zone of proximal development is the distance between what an individual can learn on his/her own and the potential for learning with an instructor or a community of peers

I enrolled in the four-week course and was introduced to the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model designed by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000), which described the concept of interplay between teaching presence, social presence, and cognitive presence.

At its core, instructor presence means being there for your students.

If students know that the AI has some responsibility for determining their grades, that AI will have considerably more authority in the classroom or in any interactions with students.

Confront inappropriate language. If a student makes an inappropriate comment—racist, sexist, or otherwise offensive—letting it go without intervention can seem like a tacit endorsement of those views. And whether the slight is intentional or not, the impact is the same. Letting such comments pass unchallenged can seriously harm students' trust in you and their sense of belonging in the class and the university. Have some responses ready for how you are going to address such comments, including

If the conversation gets too heated or off-topic, you may want to reach some sort of closure to the immediate discussion and defer the conversation to another class period, for which everyone can prepare.

Avoid questions that seem like there is one right answer. In some cases, it works well to ask not for their own opinions, per se, but a sharing of what opinions they have heard about that topic; such an approach allows you to get the “lay of the land” without anyone feeling too exposed from the start.

Establish some discussion guidelines. Work with students to establish a set of guidelines for class discussion; their input is important here so the rules are part of the classroom community, not just rules you impose. Some possible guidelines include: Listen respectfully, without interruptingAllow everyone the opportunity to speakCriticize ideas, not individuals or groupsAvoid inflammatory language, including name-callingAsk questions when you don’t understand; don’t assume you know others’ thinking or motivationsConnect back to course concepts whenever possibleDon’t expect any individuals to speak on behalf of their gender, ethnic group, class, status, etc. (or the groups we perceive them to be a part of).

sk students to complete an assignment in advance that helps them understand and articulate their own views, as well as others they have heard. Such pre-discussion homework can help them reflect on those views, understand potential reasons behind them, and connect them to disciplinary content in the course. Such activities let them do some more logical thinking in advance, before any emotional barriers get thrown up during a heated discussion.

In situations where you know you will be addressing a controversial topic, you can prepare for the discussion in ways that set the stage for success.

Earning Participation Points for Weekly DiscussionsOnline discussions can be one of the richest elements of your online experience.Electronic discussions offer a unique opportunity to be “heard.” You don’t needto raise your hand and wait to be called on. You can think carefully about whatyou want to say and look it over before you post it. You can consider thecontributions of your peers more thoughtfully and go back to comments againwhen a second reading offers clarification and a deeper understanding.I value your contributions to our discussions. You have a great deal to offer andto learn from one another. You may surprise yourself with your insights,creativity and wisdom about teaching and learning through these discussions.However, one of the more difficult aspects of these discussions for me isevaluating your participation. So I’m going to give you that responsibility.Here’s how it works

You can emphasize the importance of discussion board contributions byspotlighting the content of the board in an assignment. Have students draw from the discussion board as a pool ofreferences for an assignment – one that enforces skills for summary, synthesis, and analysis for instance –incorporating (and citing!) their peers’ comments

se clear, open-ended questions that tap into the higher-order thinking levelsof application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation to start conversation threads.

Online educators who use discussion boards successfully estimatethat their interaction with students can be as much as three timesthe interaction with face-to-face students, and that peer-to-peerinteraction is even many times more than that.

aculty members find that it is worthwhile taking some time to teachthe students how to listen to others, how to paraphrase, how to involveother members of the group. Students need to understand that they sharethe responsibility for making the discussion a worthwhile experience. This isa new idea for most of them

Ask morequestions than you give answers, and put the bulk of your energy into drawing out the quiet students and encouragingmore of the kind of participation you want to see.

Structure discussions in advance, and connect the discussions to your courseobjectives. Though you’ll want to leave areas of the board open forunstructured conversation, try creating sequenced threads that map to coursetopics, making it clear to students what the relationship of the discussion is tothose outcomes

you can manage your workload more effectivelyby:

It’s important tomanage the time that you and other participants spend interacting,and to make sure that the interactions on the board are enrichingand relevant

Managing online discussions of any kind can be a time-consuming endeavor, but it is the heart of a distance education course

Now, I ask questions that I am really interested in discussing. My questions are always open-ended; I make sure to provide five or six questions so that students can choose the ones they want to respond to, and I always include a general question that prompts students to react to an aspect of the readings that caught their attention.

Doodle poll a week ahead to agree on a time, and I select the most popular times. To run a live session, I require at least four students in attendance. I rotate the times so that all who wish to participate can do so at least once. Students who take part in the live session can skip the discussion board, but the expectations are the same: they must prepare responses to two questions. Live sessions are recorded and posted to the LMS. In some courses we hold a live session every week, while others have just one or two throughout the course.

For the first two weeks of a course, I leave detailed feedback in the gradebook comment section. If a student didn't meet the discussion expectations, I deduct points and refer them to the discussion guidelines.

The designer of online courses needs to consider how he or she and others teachinga course will be able to leverage design features such as built-in interactions andavenues for communication

Regularly communicate with the class in a consistent, predictable, and publicmanner, whether in the discussion forums, class e-mails, or announcements(Arbaugh & Hwang, 2006; Lowenthal & Thomas, 2010)• Occasionally send individual e-mails or messages to students (Dunlap &Lowenthal, 2010)• Provide timely and detailed feedback (Borup et al., 2015; Cox et al., 2015; Dunlap& Lowenthal, 2014; Ice et al., 2007)• Have students post assignments in discussion forums rather than in digital dropboxes (Lowenthal & Thomas, 2010)• Self-disclose and share personal stories (Lowenthal & Thomas, 2010)• Address students by name (Rourke et al., 1999

Clearly set expectations and how instructors see their role in class discussions (asDennen, 2005, found, there is not one right way to facilitate discussions) (Shea,Hayes, & Vickers, 2010)• Add humor when appropriate (e.g., post content-related comic strips) (seeGunawardena & Zittle, 1997; Rourke et al., 1999; Sung & Mayer, 2012; Wiseet al., 2004)

to design courses that reflect not only your personality but also,most importantly, your own instructional values

establishing instructor social presence in online courses is find-ing ways to establish one’s personality—or what Dennen (2007) termed persona.

The study reported thetop 10 techniques used by the instructors for establishing their instructor presence as fol-lows: using names (cohesive), using greetings (cohesive), referencing groups (cohesive),acknowledging work (interactive), clarifying for instructional purposes (direct instruc-tion), providing tips for how to succeed in the course (facilitating discourse), providinggeneral information or just-in-time information about the course (design and organiza-tion), offering praise and encouragement (interactive), using unusual punctuation orparalanguage to express nonverbal emotions (affective), and using emphasis to heightenawareness (affective)

investigated instructor social presence in accelerated onlinecourses which the instructors did not design and in which they did not have authoringaccess to the courses. In courses like these, the instructors could only share things aboutthemselves—and that they were “real” and “there”—through the course discussions andthe grade book. In this mixed-methods exploratory study that focused solely on analyzingonline course discussions, Lowenthal found that instructors spent some time establishingtheir own social presence (e.g., greetings and salutations, inclusive language, empathy)but that they quickly shifted their focus from social presence behaviors to teaching pres-ence behaviors (e.g., dealing with course logistics), most likely because of the lack of timein eight-week accelerated online courses

concept of intimacy (Argyle & Dean, 1965), which in instructional terms can be thoughtof as supporting and meeting the needs of individual learners. Although an instructor’ssocial presence, and specifically this type of immediacy and intimacy, depends largelyon teacher-to-student interaction, it also depends on the design and development deci-sions that permeate all aspects of a course, including individual projects or assignments

Likewise, research hasshown that instructor immediacy is important in face-to-face courses (Witt, Wheeless,& Allen, 2004) and online courses (Baker, 2010; Hutchins, 2003), even if it might beaccomplished in different ways.

ocial presence has also been linkedto student retention and intention to reenroll in online course rates

esearch has also shown that social presence can influ-ence students’ learning experiences, including students’ participation and motivationto participate

Online students care about getting a sense ofwho their instructors are and that they are “real” people and “there”—namely, their socialpresence

Research has shown us that students’ relationshipswith faculty have a direct and significant effect on their scholarly engagement

cognitive presence, is “the extent to which the participants in . . . acommunity of inquiry are able to construct meaning through sustained communication”

The second element, teaching pres-ence, involves instructional management, building understanding, and direct instruction

The CoI framework is a dynamic process model of onlinelearning based on the theory that effective learning requires a community based on inquiry(Garrison, 2011, 2015). At the heart of the model are the interdependent constructs ofcognitive, social, and teaching presence

Communityof Inquiry (CoI) framework, a widely used guide for planning, developing, evaluating,and researching online learning

five integrated elements:affective association, community cohesion, instructor involvement,interaction intensity, and knowledge and experience. Examining theconcept of social presence through this lens allows us to understand howthese elements relate to satisfactory online experiences

One way in which students report experiencing the social presenceof an instructor is the immediacy of response and type of feedbackreceived

who determine the five most important elements of social presenceto be social respect, social sharing, open mind, social identity, andintimacy. All these facets are areas in which video and voice can enrichonline students’ learning experience.

video chats were one of the factorsstudents reported to increase the teacher-student relationship

Social presence is increased when the class moves away frombeing purely text based and incorporates voice and video

A study by Glazier (2016) of 465 studentsover six years compared one course that used built-in rapport-buildingstrategies, such as humanized instruction features like video, extensivepersonalized feedback on assignments, and personalized emails, to anonline course with none of the above rapport-building strategies. The studyexamined rapport through course grades and an anonymous studentsurvey. Both qualitative and quantitative data show that rapport buildingby the instructor can improve student success as measured by coursegrades and retention rates (Glazier, 2016)

They use the term e-immediacy and explain that online instructors cancreate it by using humor, addressing students by name, or using emoticonsin correspondence. This helps foster a more personal relationship withstudents and ultimately allows students to feel connected to the instructorand to the classroom community.

Findings from the study indicated that emotional expression,open communication, and group cohesion were key elements in studentperceptions of teaching and learning in their online MAEd program

three distinct elements that contribute tostudent engagement: course design, instructor role, and student role

posit that without specialconsideration, the typical asynchronous discussion format of many onlinecourses aligns poorly with constructivist theory and the nature of learningcomplex course material, such as that which is found in most MAEdcourses.

when there is a high level of trustbetween the instructors and students, the learning space fulfills a certainpurpose in students’ lives and increases the likelihood of learning;

The categories were examined for purpose andsatisfaction, and the authors claim that though students value beingengaged in a variety of ways in online courses, instructors do not integratea wide variety of tools, whether due to lack of knowledge or training

only thequality of interpersonal interaction within a course relates positively andsignificantly to student grades

Their analysis revealed that social presence has asubstantial effect on learning interaction, which in turn affects learningperformance.

Studies using the FrameworkSurvey have focused on the role of social presence (Annand, 2011), theinterrelationship of presences (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 1999),students’ perceptions and satisfaction (Maddrell, Morrison, & Watson,2017), and perceived learning (Richardson & Swan, 2003)

but with social presence havingthe most significant correlation coefficient

were significantly more likely to saythat assignments were the most important factor, and they ranked course organization significantly higherthan students who chose face-to-face classes

where we see that those who chose a face-to-face class as thebest were both more likely to say the instructor was the most important factor in that selection and morelikely to rank their relationship with the instructor and the instructor’s attitude as important.

These data indicate that online classes were significantly less likely than face-to-face classes—35% to 51%—to be categorized as a best class,

They found that students were most satisfied when provided direct feedback from facultycompared to engaging in either discussion boards or peer review activities (

. Moore (2013) found thatTD was the single biggest predictor of student satisfaction in online classes, a finding confirmed by morerecent research as well (Weidlich & Bastiaens, 2018). Low online retention rates are explained, in part, bythe potentially high barrier to contact and relationship-building between faculty and students in onlinecourses.

. Studies indicate that the most common factors impacting online student retention arestudent motivation and faculty/student interaction or engagement

These findings support the need for increased faculty professionaldevelopment in online course design and facilitation focused on student experience as well as facultyexpertise.

However, students responded that instructors matter more in face-to-face courses, where they can establish personal relationships with students, whereas assignments “standin” for instructors in online classes.

While some online instructors feel theyare on call 24/7, this study corroboratesthe literature that the majority of distancelearners do not have the expectation ofan immediate response.

contend that if instructors gave studentsa time frame for responses, there would befewer repeat emails.Thus, there appears tobe strong consensus among both researchersand practitioners that promptly responding toemail communication in the distance learningenvironment is essential.

emails were helpful and prompt, it increasedstudents’ perceptions of positive relationshipswith their instructors, which led to positiveteaching evaluations at the end of the course.Leidman and Piwinsky (2009)

Whiteand Weight (1999) also contend that wheninstructors respond within 24 hours this showsstudents the instructor is involved in the class

found that facultyperceived themselves as more accessibleto students than the students did. Studentsreported that because they were paying fortheir instructors’ time, they expected timelyresponses to their emails. Additionally,Foral et al. were surprised to learn that thestudents in the campus courses expected aquicker response from an email than did theonline students

Transactional distance is “...a psychological and communications gap, aspace of potential misunderstanding betweenthe inputs of instructor and those of thelearner” (Moore, 1991, p. 2) created by thephysical distance separating online instructorsfrom their learners

who found that learners prefer asynchronoustools such as email to communicate with theirinstructors. It also coincides with the findingsof a study by Chang, Hurst, and McLean(2015) who discovered that 97% of thestudents surveyed preferred to receive coursecorrespondence from online instructors viaemail.

results of the survey indicated that the vast majority of the students (91%) consider 24 hoursan acceptably responsive return rate time, and the same majority (91%) reported they consider24 hours an acceptably responsive time for them to return emails they receive from their onlineinstructors

While mechanization and computer control in online learning environments are increasingly designed into learning and teaching pathways, the application of audio and video feedback will return the focus onto human to human interactions in these digital spaces

Computer generated or response dependent releases can be allocated for some feedback,

Feedback strategies and sequences such as those suggested to humanize online instructor feedback might move learning from external regulation by the instructor to internal self-regulation by students.

Hummel (2006) identifies the need to train instructors in feedback design principles.

reating anchor samples and pre-recorded feedback messages as part of the course design can help speed up the feedback process and relieve the pressure of time.

Leveraging the power of peers in the feedback process is one humanizing strategy

Feedback, an essential component of teaching presence in a community of inquiry in online spaces, requires time and commitment.

ntegrating text, voice, moving images and video to provide feedback is the most time consuming yet effective method for communicating feedback (Thompson & Lee, 2012; Crook, Mauchline, Maw, Lawson, Drinkwater, Lundqvist, Orsmond, Gomez & Park, 2012, p. 3). Integrating video media enhances the reflective and metacognition components of student learning. Adobe Voice, Animoto, iMovie or MovieMaker or Touchcast can be used to create,

to the screen-capture, to add personal contact from instructor to student, will depend on the relationship, timing, and student need. This form of feedback is most effective when provided with the draft version of the student’s own work, thus allowing for improvements and changes to be actionable.

Voice with image productions can enhance the clarity and specificity of the feedback message. Voki, a talking avatar, can provide a less threatening response than one in which the instructor is the talking head. Tellagami uses animation to present the selected summary, explanation, or redirection

Tools such as Audacity and Garage Band, or mobile device tools such as iTalk, can record an audio clip, embed a static image, and be presented as an mP3 file when uploaded to the LMS or another hosting site such as Soundcloud or AudioBoom.

Audio feedback is perceived to be more effective than written feedback since it enhances feelings of involvement, is linked to retention of content, and is perceived by students to originate from a caring teacher (Ice, Curtis, Phillips & Wells, 2007).

Students will see the value in feedback when they know that instructors monitor and track-back to feedback messages.

Uploading and releasing audio/video files in a batch ensures that all students receive feedback simultaneously, thus decreasing anxiety, questions, or comparisons.

Creating media based feedback involves preparing a script, setting up a recording session, checking and revising the message, then uploading and sharing the production.

Listening to audio and video feedback models best practice in faithful listening.

faithful listening “promotes fidelity to our students and their work and encourages us to read more truthfully and generously.”

This includes an open and respectful mindset, seeking to empathize and understand, acknowledging bias and differing perspectives while slowing the pace and being comfortable with reflective silence (Hoppe, 2006, p. 8-14).

The integration of multiple modes can increase the clarity of the feedback message.

eedback for one or by one person can be time-consuming in online learning environments. Instructors should harness the power of collaboration by using peer review since “producing feedback is cognitively more demanding than receiving it, as it involves higher levels of reflection and engagement” (Nicol, 2011).

Early into a course schedule, feedback can be more generic, whole-group focused, with targeted individual feedback to students experiencing difficulty getting acclimatized to course content or processes.

Selecting two or three key points (e.g. two stars and a wish; stars & stairs) or connecting to important learning goals will minimize a rambling feedback message or a missed ‘teachable moment.’

specificity relies on the ‘Goldilocks principle’ – a scale from too narrow, too broad or just right (Brookhart, 2008, p. 33). Apply sufficient detail and focus without doing the work for the student. Show rather than tell.

Effective feedback compares and contrasts student work against a set of established criterion, goals, or learning targets.

Preparing a collection of feedback comments for learning tasks in advance, using a rubric or standard set of criteria, can streamline comment creation.

Mechanized and automated feedback, frequently built into online learning environments, can de-humanize online learning

Effective feedback includes the following attributes: building trust, clearly communicated, user-friendly, specific, focused, differentiated, timely, invites follow-up, and is actionable (Tomlinson & Moon, 2013 p. 62-63).

Feedback is used as a means to improve performance. The process or system of learning and teaching within an online course can be modified or controlled using feedback.

Garrison, Anderson & Archer (2001) define teaching presence as “the design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes.”

Humanizing elements in feedback incorporate the content, strategies, sequence, and tools. Content elements include the focus, function, valence, clarity, and specificity. Feedback strategies incorporate timing, amount, audience, and mode. Considering the sequence for feedback – listening, summarize-explain-redirect-resubmit (SE2R), connecting, creating, and tracking will assist instructors to humanize their actions. A survey of available technologies and tools to create feedback messages with text, graphic, audio, image, and video, and integrated multimodal production technologies is presented. A

can express frustration and dismay at having to “teach themselves.”

we aren’t just trying to replicate some of the humanizing interactions in face-to-face courses (such as: eye contact, nodding, and casual banter). We’re also talking about intentionally creating moments of exchange, feedback, and personal framing for the learning that our students experience.

“[instructor presence is]  the instructor’s interaction and communication style and the frequency of the instructor’s input into the class discussions and communications

You can’t make a student do the work or be successful in your course, but you can let them know you’re there if they need it!

(Flipgrid can help with this!).

Respond within a given time frame. Let students know when they can expect a response from you via email or in the LMS and stick to it. Students should know that they’ll be able to get answers or assistance in a set amount of time.

Even if your course is largely asynchronous, giving students the chance to interact with you and other students in a live format can help them get to know you better and may help many feel more comfortable asking questions. Attendance in these kinds of interactions can be low, despite them being highly beneficial to students, so it’s a smart idea to require that students attend a set number throughout the term.

Some practices that promote instructor presence can include: Sending out welcome letters Posting announcements30 highlighting connections between course content, activities, and assignments Facilitating in-depth thinking through online discussions Providing detailed specific feedback Reaching out to struggling students Making connections to real world applications and providing clarification when needed.

Community of Inquiry framework (Simunich, 2014) can lead to purposeful choices that can facilitate increased teacher-student interaction, promoting increased instructor presence in online courses. In the CoI framework, Teaching Presence includes instructional management, building understanding, and direct instruction.

survey that provides you with microdata about their individualized needs

A Liquid Syllabus (Pacansky-Brock, 2014, 2017; Pacansky-Brock et al., 2020) eases pre-course anxieties with warm, nonverbal cues and hopeful language that demystifies what students need to know

Humanizing intentionally creates a learning environment in which everyone is welcomed, supported, and recognized as capable of achieving their full  potential.

In humanized online courses, positive instructor-student relationships are prioritized and serve “as the connective tissue between students, engagement, and rigor” (Pacansky-Brock et al., 2020, p. 2). In any learning modality, human connection is the antidote for the emotional disruption that prevents many students from performing to their full potential and in online courses, creating that connection is even more important

Humanizing leverages learning science and culturally responsive teaching to create an inclusive, equitable online class climate for today’s diverse students.

By definition, instructor presence is “the design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive and social process for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes.”

The online teacher uses digital pedagogical tools that support communication, productivity, collaboration, analysis, presentation, research, content delivery, and interaction.

. If online courses continue to be part of the long-termstrategic plan for academic institutions, we need to consider howto teach students the skills they will need to become self-regulatedlearners. The ultimate goal is to create learning environments inwhich students are effective learners

with higher levels of social presence in discussion postshad statistically significantly higher ratings on written assessmentmeasures. Both of the studies demonstrate that increased socialpresence gives students a stronger sense of community and is ef-fective for improving student learning

Instructors in online classes must take extra measures toestablish a social presence for themselves and for their students.These efforts not only increase student satisfaction with onlinecourses, but result in increased learning outcomes. Picciano (2002)found that students with higher levels of social presence performedbetter on written assignments compared to students with lowersocial presence

Teaching students to be self-directed learners is an on-going goal for many educators (Fink, 2013). However, until morestudents have these skills, online educators might consider struc-turing courses in ways that teach these skills in addition to coursecontent

Through interaction with the instructor via the lecture, the in-structor’s tone and verbal emphasis on certain content signified tostudents what material they should pay special attention to whenstudying for exams. Alternatively, students may be using these cuesto determine what material they must read and what portions ofthe text they can skim or skip.

it could also indicate a reliance on verbalcues to eliminate the need to keep a calendar.

Self-regulated learn-ers generally take responsibility for their own learning (Loyens,Magda, & Rikers, 2008) by employing meta-cognitive techniques inwhich they actively monitor their progress in their learning and theachievement of their goals. They are able to follow assigned tasks,assess their level of comprehension via reflection and attemptto avoid behaviors that would jeopardize their academic success

robust theme in the reasons given for preferringface-to-face delivery formats is the perceived lack of interactionwith an instructor in online courses.This was evident in statementsthat suggested that students believe they would have to “teachthemselves”, or that they would prefer a course taught by a “hu-man” or a “real teacher”.

Thus, being in the physical presence ofothers might give the illusion of interaction in face-to-face classeswhich presents a challenge for online learning. It is possible thatthe interaction to which students are referring involves mostlythe physical aspect of human interaction. Electronic interaction, nomatter how frequent, may not be filling that aspect of the students’needs for social interaction

This suggests that students do not view onlinediscussion forums as equivalent to in-class interactions.

Because students are physically separated from the instructorin an online class, communication and timely responses becomeincreasingly important for students and therefore this physical sep-aration also affects student perceptions of the online learning envi-ronment (Delaney et al., 2010

udent perceptions may be based on old typologiesof distance education akin to correspondence courses, regardless of actual experience with onlinecourses, and 2) course preferences are related to issues involving teaching presence and self-regulated

There is a lot of modeling that goes on especially at the beginning. Meaning that, I respond a lot inopening discussions and the reason is because it sets the tone. The students take over after that. Ifyou sit back in those first two discussions, that also sets the tone,

Instructors’ Perceptions of Instructor Presence in OnlineLearning Environments

However, this tendency to favor descriptive norms has been harnessed by the “peer learning” approach, which encourages learners to interact with and teach each other

BOX 8-3 Mayer’s Principles to Guide Multimedia Learning

Canvas Content Delivery

One helpful supplement for this approach is the use of “Events” in the course calendar. Events show in thesyllabus and can enforce non-assignment materials (such as readings or topics)

Best practice is to have two-to-three questions per standard being assessed for mastery.

definition of ad

You can change the list of popular tags to show tags you’ve used, or tags used in groups, by first searching for your username or group name.

f learning makes new connections, then remembering that learning will strengthen those connections. As our brains create these structural changes, our thoughts produce neurotransmitters, a mixture of neurochemicals that create emotions.