Moderation Effect of Gender on Relationship between Community of Inquiry and Perceived Learning in Blended Learning Environments

Abstract

It is conceivably important that demographic variables such as gender may have an impact on community of inquiry (CoI) and perceived learning. This study is in response with Garrison et al. (2010) who suggest that there is a need to determine moderation effects of gender on the relationship between CoI elements and perceived learning. A total of 348 undergraduate students were drawn from blended programs in three public universities in Malaysia to be the sample of the study. As research instrumentation, participation in online and face to face session, the community of inquiry questionnaire, and a perceived learning scale were distributed among the respondents. All the questionnaires were validated by a panel of experts, reliability of the instrument was tested in a pilot study and assumptions of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) were checked before analyzing the data. The findings of the study have shown that although differences between the two groups of undergraduate students (male and female) were statistically significant, the amount of differences were not enough to moderate the relationship between CoI components and perceived learning in undergraduate blended learning environments. However, the findings indicate that differences between the two groups of undergraduate students (male and female) were statistically significant

Keywords

• Community of Inquiry, Blended Learning Environment, Perceived Learning, Gender, Higher Education

References

1. Abbot, G., Bienvenue, L., Damarin, S., Kramarae, C., Jepkemboi, G., & Strawn, C. (2007). Gender equity in the use of educational technology. In S. Klein (Ed.), Handbook for achieving gender equity through education (pp. 191–214). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2. Akyol, Z. & Garrison, D. (2011). Understanding cognitive presence in an online and blended community of inquiry: Assessing outcomes and processes for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 233-250.
3. Akyol, Z., Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. (2011). The impact of course duration on the development of a community of inquiry. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(3), 231- 246.
4. Alavi, M., Marakas, G., & Yoo, Y. (2002). A comparative study of technologies for distance learning. Information Systems Research, 13(4), 404-415
5. Arbaugh, J., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S., Garrison, D., Ice, P., Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-instructional sample. Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 133-136
6. Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). An empirical verification of the community of inquiry framework. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 73-75
7. Astleitner, H., & Steinberg, R. (2005). Are there gender differences in web-based learning? An integrated model and related effect sizes. AACE Journal, 13 (1), 47-63
8. Bentz, D. (2009). Online and face-to-face classes: A comparative analysis of teaching presence and instructor satisfaction (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).

9. Carlon, S., Bennett-Woods, D., Berg, B., Claywell, L., LeDuc, K., Marcisz, N., Mulhall, M., Noteboom,T., Snedden, T., Whalen, K., & Zenon, L. (2012). The community of inquiry instrument: Validation and results in online health care disciplines. Computers & Education, 59, 215 –221.
10. Chin, W. (1998). The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In G. A.
11. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295-336). Mahwah, NJ:
12. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Corrallo, S. (1994). The progress of a study identifying the speaking and communication skills of graduate student. 1994 NCA summer conference proceedings and prepared remarks: Assessing college students’ competency in speech communication. Armadale, VA.
14. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.
15. Garrison, D., & Arbaugh, J. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157-172.
16. Garrison, D. & Vaughan, N. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
17. Garrison, D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 31-36.
18. Garrison, D. R. & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. London: Routledge.
19. Garrison, D. R,. Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
20. Garrison, D. R. (2003). Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: The role of reflective inquiry, self-direction and metacognition. In J. Bourne & J. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Practice and direction (Vol. 4). Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium.
21. Garrison, D. R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61-72
22. Gibson, A., Ice, P., Mitchell, R., & Kupczynski, L. (2012). An inquiry into relationships between demographic factors and teaching, social, and cognitive presence. Internet Learning, 1(1), 7-17.
23. Gunn, C., McSporran, M., Macleod, H., & French, S. (2003). Dominant or different? Gender issues in computer supported learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 14-30
24. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
25. Hannafin, M. J., Hill, J., Oliver, K. M., Glazer, E. M., & Sharma, P. (2003). Cognitive and learning factors in Web-based distance learning environments. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 245-260). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
26. Karami, R. (2011). Factor infusing achievement motivation in leadership role of extension agents in Iran (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia.
27. Kim, J. (2011). Developing an instrument to measure social presence in distance higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(5), 763-777
28. Krish, P., Maros, M., & Stapa, S. (2012). Sociocultural factors and social presence in an online learning environment: GEMA Online.™ Journal of Language Studies, 12(1), 201-213
29. Lewis, J. (2011). The computer ate my classroom: Assessing student interactions, perceived learning, and satisfaction in online community college career technical education courses. ProQuest LLC (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Southern Mississippi.
30. Lord, G. & Lomicka, L. (2008). Blended learning in teacher education: An investigation of classroom community across media. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2), 158-174.
31. Lu, J., Yu, C. S., & Liu, C. (2003). Learning style, learning patterns and learning performance in a WebCT-based MIS course. Information & Management, 40, 497-507
32. Maddrell, D. (2011). Community of inquiry framework and learning outcomes (Unpublished
33. doctoral dissertation). Old Dominion University. Norfolk, Virginia, United States.
34. Ong, C. H. & Lai, J. Y. (2006). Gender differences in perceptions and relationships among dominants of e-learning acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(5), 816-829
35. Ozturk, E. (2012). An adaptation of the community of inquiry index: The study of validity and
36. reliability, Elementary Education Online, 11(2), 408-422.
37. Patrizi, A. (2010). The impact of online faculty characteristics on student satisfaction via the community of inquiry framework. ProQuest LLC (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). TUI University.
38. Price, L. (2006). Gender differences and similarities in online courses: Challenging stereotypical views of women. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 349–359
39. Rovai, A, Wighting, M, & Lucking, R. (2004). The classroom and school community inventory: Development, refinement, and validation of a self-report measure for educational research. Internet and Higher Education, 7(4), 263 - 280
40. Rovai, A, Wighting, M., Baker, J., & Grooms, L. (2009). Development of an instrument to measure perceived cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning in traditional and virtual classroom higher education settings. Internet and Higher Education, 12, 7-13
41. Rovai, A. & Baker, J. (2005). Gender differences in online learning: Sense of community, perceived learning, and interpersonal interactions. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6(1), 31-44.
42. Ruhlandt, R. (2010). Differences in retention, social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence in fully online and blended courses. ProQuest LLC (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Regents University.
43. Shea, P., Sau-Li, C., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175-190
44. Shea, P. (2006). A study of students’ sense of learning community in online environments. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(1), 35-44
45. Shea, P. & Bidjerano, T. (2009b). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education. Computers and Education, 52(3), 543-553.
46. Sullivan, P. (2001). Gender differences and the online classroom: Male and female college students evaluate their experiences. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 25(6), 805-818.
47. Swan, K. & Ice, P. (2010). The Community of Inquiry framework ten years later: Introduction to the special issue. Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 1-4.
48. Taplin, M. & Jegede, O. (2001). Gender differences in factors influencing achievement of distance education students. Open Learning, 16(2), 133-154
49. Tu, C. (2002). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment. International Journal on E-learning, 1(2), 34-45
50. Vaughan, N. (2010). Designing for a blended community of inquiry. In T. Joutsenvirta & L. Myyry (Eds.) Blended Learning in Finland. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
51. Yukselturk, E. & Bulut, S. (2007). Predictors for student success in an online course. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 71-83
52. Yukselturk, E. & Bulut, S. (2009). Gender differences in self-regulated online learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 12-22.
53. Correspondence: Rouhollah Khodabandelou, Doctoral Student, Department of Educational
54. Technology, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia.