Strengthening Online Education Approaches in Institutions of Higher Learning

Abstract

Abstract Online, distance, and eLearning (ODeL) continue to gain recognition as a mandatory component of delivery of education in institutions of higher learning (IHL) around the world following the outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This paradigm shift is informed by the need to ensure uninterrupted, valuable, and safe learning experiences for learners during the pandemic. However, governments ordered the closure of schools and colleges following the declaration of COVID-19 as a world pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). A report by United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization revealed that there was a significant loss of schooling time following the closure of educational facilities which affected over 1.5 billion learners in 194 nations globally. This study explored the use of online approaches to intensify online learning efficacy in IHL. Data collection was conducted using qualitative methods and data analysis done using themes and sub-themes. Findings from this study indicate that students’ engagements on discussion forums are consistent with collaborative learning. Results further support the view that regular, prompt, and meaningful feedback is critical in promoting constructive learning and reflection among students. Based on the findings of this study, practical implications are discussed for stakeholders interested in establishing and strengthening effective delivery of online learning content to enhance students’ learning experiences. Keywords Online learning Learning approaches Engagement Collaborative learning Feedback Learning management system Citation Were, G.A., Okelo, K.O. and Obat, R.A. (2023), "Strengthening Online Education Approaches in Institutions of Higher Learning", Sengupta, E. (Ed.) Pandemic Pedagogy: Preparedness in Uncertain Times (Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Vol. 49), Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 33-47. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2055-364120230000049003 Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited Copyright © 2023 Emerald Publishing Limited Background Outbreak of the infectious and deadly COVID-19 caused by SARS-COV-2 virus disrupted the political, social, and economic aspects of life in the entire world (Dhawan, 2020). Immediately after the WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic in March, 2020, there was mass closure and disruption of face-to-face education systems across the globe as social distancing was identified as one of the mitigation measures (Dhawan, 2020; Elumalai & Bino, 2022). It became clear that conventional learning methods of face-to-face education were insufficient to meet the need for continued learning during the pandemic (Suprianto et al., 2020). This compelled governments and other stakeholders in the education sector to recognize online learning as an alternative platform to face-to-face education to ensure that there was continuity of learning and student engagement (Elumalai & Bino, 2022; Hermanto & Srimulyani, 2021). Online education was identified as the safest mode of education because it made it possible for educators and learners to engage without meeting physically, something that WHO and health experts strongly advised against (Dhawan, 2020). Online education is widely associated with increased accessibility, flexibility, and life-long learning (Dhawan, 2020; Nambiar, 2020). In this regard, universities and colleges are increasingly incorporating online classes as a mandatory mode of delivery following the outbreak of COVID-19 (Nambiar, 2020). Due to the increased need to incorporate online learning in university courses, subject-matter experts have made efforts to design effective interactions that enhance student learning in online environments (Wang, 2019). To achieve effective online discussions, instructors develop ground rules to regulate student behavior in online learning settings (Wang, 2019). Online learning is student-centered and bestows additional responsibility on the learner to take charge of their own learning in collaboration with the educators and their peers (Wang et al., 2021). Learning in such settings occurs due to interactions between students and other students, students and instructors, students and online content, and students and technology. This study adopts social constructivism as a theory of learning as it positions a learner as an active participant in the learning process through sharing of information and discussions (Secore, 2017). Social constructivism in online learning focuses on the following key eight factors: social negotiation and mediation, relevant content and skills, shift in teacher roles from instructors to facilitators, authentic learning environments, respect for diverse perspectives, recognition of learners’ prior knowledge, formative assessment, and student self-regulation (Agopian, 2022; Barak, 2017; Secore, 2017). Review of Literature Evidence reveals that quality and timely facilitator-student interactions, learner support, structured online modules, and reviews are critical in ensuring facilitators and student satisfaction engaged in online learning environments (Nambiar, 2020). The study indicated that 86.9% facilitators preferred the traditional classroom teaching than online teaching (11.8%). Additionally, the study found that facilitators thought that online classes were less interactive than traditional classrooms, and that it is difficult to sustain student engagement in online learning platforms (Nambiar, 2020). These findings point to a need to explore effective instructional strategies aimed at achieving learner satisfaction and engagement to enhance overall learning outcomes. Student motivation in online education is seen as a critical factor in the attainment of effective online teaching. Findings of a qualitative case study suggest that students exhibit both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as they pursue online learning (Gustiani, 2020). Other studies also reveal that students’ intrinsic motivation is born from a quest to acquire new knowledge, and desire to experience online learning as a new method of learning (Falfushynska et al., 2021; Gustiani, 2020). Extrinsic motivation of students was driven by their need to avoid punishment guided by external regulation, and existence of support facilities in terms of conducive learning environment, parental engagement, and availability of learning facilities (Gustiani, 2020). These findings are supported by quantitative results which indicate that the motivation of student engagement with asynchronous activities is related to assigning scores to those activities (Elumalai & Bino, 2022). Once student motivation is achieved, it is imperative for facilitators in online learning settings to come up with strategies to ensure students remain engaged for deep learning to occur. Findings from a descriptive survey suggest that peer feedback promotes deep learning (Filius et al., 2018). However, the study indicated that peer feedback has to trigger dialogue for deep learning to occur. Dialogue in discussion forums allows students to reflect on their own assignments and posts, especially in situations where topics and posts from their peers are consistent with their personal experiences (Aderibigbe, 2020). Constructive feedback coupled with clear feedback instructions and reflective questions are recognized as critical factors in enhancing engagement and learning in ODeL settings (Aderibigbe, 2020; Filius et al., 2018). Aderibigbe (2020), however, suggested that repeated ideas and posts that are inconsistent with students’ personal experiences inhibit student engagement and subsequently constructive learning. It is the position of this study that peer feedback instruction and guidelines play a cardinal role in creating effective online interactions, free from repeated posts and irrelevant ideas to the topic of discussion. Literature shows that there are two methods of implementing online learning systems: synchronous and asynchronous methods (Careaga-Butter et al., 2020; Offir et al., 2008). These two methods afford additional opportunities for students to interact with other students and course lecturers on online course activities like group work, discussion forums, and webinars for real-time presentations (Yamagata-Lynch, 2014). This way, synchronous and asynchronous methods provide students with greater opportunities to exercise their participatory role and support learners who feel isolated by the mere fact that students are separated from course lecturers in online learning platforms (Anderson, 2004). It is evident from the review of past studies above that interactions between teachers and students through teacher presence and student participation are key indicators in determining the efficacy of online learning (Aderibigbe, 2020; Elumalai & Bino, 2022; Filius et al., 2018). To achieve such efficacy, teacher roles need to shift from knowledge owners to co-creators and facilitators so as to promote dialogue and discussion on course topics (Bryson & Andres, 2020). This necessitates the creation of roadmaps to facilitate learning, especially around online engagement between facilitators and students. Engagement can take two forms: shallow and deep. Of the two, deep is recommended as it involves co-creation of knowledge between facilitators and students (Bryson & Andres, 2020). Facilitated collaboration and interactions between students and students, students and online teaching content, and educators and students are effective in enhancing student engagement and making available numerous meaningful learning opportunities for students (Johnson & Altowairiki, 2021). This paradigm shift is targeted at overcoming challenges associated with online learning and improving students’ online interactions and engagement through discussion forums and other online activities meant to aid the instructors in monitoring learners through learning management systems (LMSs) (Johnson & Altowairiki, 2021; Khalid & Quick, 2016; Wang et al., 2021). Facilitated discourse is one of the three elements of teaching presence which is positively associated with student satisfaction with online courses (Khalid & Quick, 2016). Results from a descriptive survey suggest that a well-developed online course should take into consideration students’ learning experiences, structured feedback mechanisms, instructional design, and application of technological tools in delivering instruction (Wang et al., 2021). Review of past studies have revealed that most of the studies on online education approaches are centered around quantitative methods of research with most of relying on descriptive statistics (Elumalai & Bino, 2022; Falfushynska et al., 2021; Filius et al., 2018; Khalid & Quick, 2016; Nambiar, 2020; Wang et al., 2021). One of the studies applied qualitative method to investigate drivers of student motivation in online learning environments (Gustiani, 2020). There is evident scantiness of studies which have employed qualitative methods to explore the use of online learning approaches with an aim to intensify efficacy in IHL. This study set out to explore the use of online approaches to intensify online learning efficacy in IHL. Methodology This study employed qualitative approach for data collection. Focus group interviews (FGIs) was used to collect data from undergraduate students taking online courses at a Public University in Kenya. The use of FGI was preferred because it is associated with generation of complex information and dynamic interaction among participants on a selected topic (Liamputtong, 2011; Vaughn et al., 1996). The study made the assumption that participants of the study had multiple views of the actual teaching and learning activities that occur in the virtual learning platform hosted on the Public University’s eLearning Portal. A random sample of 15 undergraduate students was invited to participate in the study. However, 10 undergraduate students, an equivalent of 66.7%, consented to participate in the study. Participants’ selection was aimed at attaining diverse perspectives and opinions on the efficacy of online learning approaches on student engagement and learning. Alphanumeric codes were used to identify the participants for purposes of privacy. Qualitative data collected from the FGIs were analyzed by identifying themes and sub-themes from the transcribed participant responses. According to Leighton (2017), the identification of themes helps researchers to have an enhanced understanding of the objective of a study. Results The findings of the study are reported in this section according to the themes and sub-themes that emerged during the data analysis. Student Orientation Participants identified online student orientation as effective in ensuring that students were able to navigate the LMS platform for course materials, learning activities, assessment, and gradebook. Below are some responses from the students: The online tutorial videos on the LMS took students through ground rules in an online learning platform. Ground rules basically helped students to learn about: online etiquette, importance of maintaining presence throughout the course, professionalism, and communication channels. (P2) Another respondent noted that: Once we [undergraduate students] were enrolled into the online course, the lecturer tasked students to review the ground rules in the orientation videos with the aim of suggesting modifications for use within the online course. (P4) All participants agreed on the following ground rules: Students should be open-minded as it is necessary to listen to diverse ideas and learn from varied experiences from other students. (P1–P10) Remain objective and open to constructive criticism from other students. (P1–P10) Respectfully identify areas of dissent and make suggestions backed with valid data or scholarly work to correct misconceptions that exist. (P1–P10) One participant captured the essence of having student orientation at the beginning of an online course as follows: The online student orientation was very important as we [the students who transitioned from face-to-face to eLearning] came to realize that ground rules were different from traditional classrooms, and are primarily aimed at reinventing our roles and respect for other students in order to create a conducive learning environment. (P7) Active Learning Participants discussed elements associated with active learning. The first element of active learning was social constructivism where students collaborated to construct knowledge based on shared thoughts and corrected misconceptions. Below are a sample of responses transcribed verbatim from participants on discussion forum participation. Once we enrolled into the online course, we were expected to continuously engage in discourse through the discussion forums. Since we had varied responses due to our diverse backgrounds, I ended up learning a lot from other students’ real-life experiences and perspectives from reading the assigned reading materials. (P3) It was a mandatory course requirement for a student to respond to the topic of discussion and respond to at least two posts from other students every week. Whereas this was meant for grading, it proved helpful in learning from other students as we all did not always present similar viewpoints from the same reading materials. (P8) Some students were obviously ahead and had prior knowledge and vast experience in the unit making the interactions rich and enlightening for all. (P9) The course was designed in such a way that students cannot be passive recipients of knowledge. (P10) Students also indicated that online courses had knowledge-focused and problem-based learning activities which required active engagement in completion of real-life tasks. Three responses particularly captured how knowledge-focused and problem-based learning was achieved in the online course: The course lecturer gave instructions to students to read, summarize, critique course reading materials, and post on the discussion forum to allow other students to share their standpoints: something that played a key role in the creation and application of relevant knowledge related to objectives of the course. (P1) The course learning activities largely sought to meet my expectations by helping me contextualize career-related problems, tasks, and perspectives presented in case studies. This makes me want to continue learning for personal development. (P5) It was a well-thought idea to insert questions into short video recordings of lectures at specific times to help students assess their learning as they continue learning. (P4) Flexibility Three sub-themes emerged under flexibility: time, location, and pace. Time-based Flexibility Respondents said the following in relation to flexibility due to time allocated for completion and submission of assignments: Thanks to online learning, I am able to learn at night after work. I particularly like that I can work on and submit my assignment in the middle of the night or during the weekends. (P6) Course activities and assignments in weekly modules have deadlines that expire at the end of seven days. I am able to manage my time, ensuring that there is ample time to work on my assignments and submit them before the deadline locks me out. (P7) Location-based Flexibility The first respondent (P1) attributed flexibility to location of study. The respondent said: I can study anywhere as long as I have access to a computer and reliable internet. Imagine studying while spending time with my family on Saturdays and Sundays. (P1) Pace-based Flexibility Another respondent perceived flexibility in relation to the pace on learning in asynchronous environments: I no longer worry that the lecturer is too fast or slow as I am able to read through course materials, engage my colleagues, and submit assignments at my pace as long as I am within the preset deadline. (P10) Teaching Presence Teaching presence has three elements: instructional design, facilitation of discourse, and direct instruction. Responses from the FGI were categorized as follows: Instructional Design Participants had the following to say with regard to course design: The course lecturer communicated the expected course outcomes by providing the course objectives, topics, and rubrics. Moreover, the lecturer provided clear instructions on how students could complete assignments in each module. (P2) Due dates for learning activities were communicated to help learners manage their time. (P5) Students observed netiquette in all interactions, observing the ground rules set at the beginning of the course. (P3) Facilitation of Discourse Participants had the following to say with regard to facilitation of discourse: I was able to effectively use the LMS features to communicate with the lecturer and other students and to engage in learning activities. (P9) The course lecturer often went through students’ posts to identify areas where students had consensus and dissent. We were guided and corrected any misconceptions that we previously held. (P8) Our course lecturer often acknowledged any student who contributed to topic discussions and encouraged participation in productive dialogue. (P3) There were times when I would feel isolated during the pandemic, especially when the online facilitator would go a few days without responding to my submissions. Considering that I was all alone in the house because of social distancing and advice by the Ministry of Health to avoid crowded spaces, this made me feel lonely and frustrated. (P1) Direct Instruction Participants had the following to say with regard to direct instruction: The facilitator set the climate for learning by encouraging students to explore new concepts. (P7) Online lecturers provided useful examples to make course reading materials and activities more comprehensible. (P4) It was easy to learn more about the topics because the lecturer shared useful reading materials from a variety of sources to establish areas of agreement and in doing so, enhanced our learning. (P6) Student Motivation Sudden transformation from face-to-face learning to online learning approaches during the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated this study to examine student motivation in online learning environments following the disruption of learning globally. Responses were further sorted as sub-themes: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic Motivation Participants’ intrinsic motivation were captured as follows: During the pandemic, learning new knowledge and honing my skills in data analysis for both personal and professional growth helped me cope with the uncertainties associated with COVID-19. (P5) I was in the final year of my online undergraduate program when the first case of COVID-19 was announced in Kenya. The University continued with online classes. Despite the fear that engulfed many finalist students during the pandemic, my willingness to learn helped me to take advantage of the restricted movement order by the government to finish my studies. (P2) My motivation was born from the need to interact with other students. It was almost impossible to see friends and colleagues, and sharing online spaces with other students gave me something to look forward to. (P7) For an introvert like me, the idea of studying from the comfort of my room is something I liked. It saves the pressure of waking up early to prepare to go to the University and the anxiety of meeting large groups of people. (P8) Whereas studying online has its own share of challenges, transitioning to a fully-online mode helped me to continue learning and avoid further delays caused by the pandemic. (P10) Extrinsic Motivation Student extrinsic motivation was reported as follows: My family was very supportive and they made sure I had time to study. Them taking over my house chores so that I could have time to study made me want to make them proud by getting good grades. (P9) It was very difficult to manage my learning schedules when everyone was at home because of restrictions aimed to mitigate against the spread of COVID-19. This made it impossible to work on learning activities and submit assignments. (P1) In Kenya, power disruption is a common occurrence which makes it difficult to attend all the online classes and submit assignments on time. (P6) Assessment Methods Four sub-themes emerged from the theme of online assessment methods. These included: knowledge-based, discussion forums, reflection-based, and project-based assessment methods. Knowledge-based Assessment Participants had the following to say about knowledge-based assessment: It was interesting to see lecturers use multiple-choice questions, true/false statements, and essay type assignment to test our understanding of the content presented in the online course. (P3) The online quizzes proved important in helping [the student] identify areas of the topic that [he/she] struggled to learn. (P5) Online quizzes were designed to allow one to have more than one attempt. Whenever I did not achieve the desired grade, I would go back to the course learning materials before retaking the quiz. This way, I felt this helped reinforce the knowledge I acquired in the online course. (P2) Discussion Forums Participant responses were reported as follows: Unlike discussions in face-to-face classrooms, online discussions were graded and formed part of formative assessment in the unit. Students were therefore keen to participate to avoid losing scores as this would contribute to their final grade. (P7) Online discussion forums not only promote collaboration and interaction between students and facilitators but posts and responses on the forum are also graded. (P4) Reflection-based Assessment Responses from the participants are presented below: Each week had a reflection journal activity where I shared real-life experiences of how the topic could impact my practice. (P10) I looked forward to writing reflection journals every week as it helped me to examine how much of my expectations had been met and make informed decisions to stay on course. (P1) Project-based Assessment Participants intimated the following with regard to project-based assessment: Project-based learning activities had very clear instructions and rubrics to guide the students on how their work will be scored. In preparing my assignments, therefore, I tried to make sure the final work took into account the score areas. (P8) Creating power-point slides and giving presentations online by sharing my screen for everyone to see and making suggestions on areas of improvement provided me with an opportunity to learn more on assigned project tasks. (P6) Effective Feedback Feedback is associated with assessment of student learning. Feedback had these sub-themes: course lecturer feedback, peer feedback, and computer-generated feedback. Course Lecturer Feedback Participants had the following to say about feedback received from course lecturers in the online courses: Feedback from the online facilitators were often provided in ways that helped me understand my strengths and pointed out the weak areas that I needed to improve on. (P5) Course facilitators were very specific in the way they gave feedback on discussion forums, referring to a student by name, pinpointing areas that needed reinforcement. (P7) Feedback from course lecturers was often very slow, and sometimes non-existent. Since lecturers are the subject-matter experts the feedback can set a student on course and learner better. (P8) Feedback was instant during live-streaming lecture sessions. I feel like I got a lot of clarity on topics that did not make sense because it was possible to ask questions and have the lecturer respond in real-time. (P10) Peer Feedback Participants reported the following about feedback received from their peers in the online courses: Feedback from other students was often almost immediate because most students spend a lot of time on the internet. (P2) Receiving feedback from other students on the discussion forum broadened my horizon by asking questions to comprehend the course content. (P4) However, sometimes feedback from other students was irrelevant and it was frustrating whenever the teacher was not there to provide direction. (P1) Computer-generated Feedback There were online quizzes designed to give feedback once students submitted the tests. Participants had the following to say about feedback received from online quizzes: There was instant feedback immediately when a student completed and submitted an online quiz. (P3) Computer-generated feedback only gave the grade and indicated the number of incorrect responses but lacked the personal touch that I got from the course lecturer or other students. (P9) Discussion Findings of the study indicate that online student orientation helped the undergraduate students to develop understanding of the nature of interaction in eLearning. The idea to have students undertake an online orientation before taking any online course was well-thought as it helped students understand how to interact with other students and course facilitators in a respectful manner. This helped prepare the undergraduate students to respectfully agree or disagree with other students’ ideas, hence creating a healthy and safe learning environment where students develop a sense of belonging and satisfaction with the online course. These findings are consistent with evidence which suggests that online student orientations which emphasize respect for diversity are likely to make students feel satisfied (Cho, 2012; Wang, 2019). Analysis revealed that diverse opinions presented in the discussion forums in the online course had positive perceived learning. Making the online course content relatable with real-life career situations made students develop a sense of life-long learning where they can continuously engage in acquiring and practicing skills (Driessen et al., 2020). Students were actively involved in sharing information, something that literature shows is fundamental in making sense and constructing new meanings of learning content (Bruner, 1996; Khan et al., 2017). It is the position of this chapter that deep learning occurs when course design engages students through learning objectives, course activities, dynamic assessment methods, and prompt and meaningful feedback (Fink, 2013). Findings of this study are in line with results which suggest that construction of meaning through collaborative learning is associated with higher engagement, authentic, and intentional learning (Blunden, 2014; Musunuru et al., 2021; Mystakidis et al., 2019; Sandrone et al., 2021; Wang, 2019; Yamagata-Lynch, 2014). This study found that flexibility in terms of time, location, and pace of learning is valuable to students. The onus is thus on the course lecturer to ensure that they design online courses that accommodate learners with busy schedules, learners who are geographically removed from the course instructor, and fast, medium, and slow learners. Online learning is cognizant of the flexibility needed to help adult learners balance their family and work obligations with course-related activities. There is a consensus with other studies which suggest that course instructors in asynchronous and synchronous learning settings should afford students the flexible space they need (Muilenburg & Berge, 2005; Yamagata-Lynch, 2014). Another finding to note from the study suggested that online students attach significance to teaching presence and that the absence of the course lecturer has the potential to elicit feelings of isolation and frustration for some students. The ultimate goal of keeping students eng