Date of Award

5-12-2024

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Department

Instructional Design, Development and Evaluation

Advisor(s)

Tiffany Koszalka

Keywords

Face-to-Face Instruction;Higher Education;Instructional Quality;Learner Interaction;Observation Study;Online Instruction

Abstract

Instruction, designed to impact learning, accentuates the quantity and quality of learner interactions. Theoretically, the higher the level or quantity of learner interaction within instruction, the higher the quality of instruction. Learner interactions are fostered through learner-to-learner (L2L), learner-to-instructor (L2I), and learner-to-content (L2C) experiences. Higher education graduate programs have advanced over the last few decades to enhance learner interactions by providing quality instructional experiences using technologies in multiple delivery options, ranging from traditional face-to-face (F2F) or residency options to various newer formats in a variety of online (OL) versions. Today, learners are often faced with the choice to enroll in a F2F or OL course, expecting to achieve desired learning outcomes regardless of the delivery format. Too often, learners have come to realize that enrolling in one format over the other impacts their involvement in learning and, thus, may affect the quality of their expected learning experiences. The expectations for achieving quality learning experiences in different delivery formats raise the question of 'which format is better?' Scholarship has sought to answer this question by comparing the quality of instruction in these different instructional formats. This effort has been criticized for using learner achievement, satisfaction and persistence data to represent actual instructional and learning experiences. Many studies employing this effort do not capture learner interaction data during instruction – thus limiting the validity of results used to compare quality of instruction between traditional face-to-face (F2F) and online delivery formats. Therefore, this study explored actual learner interaction behaviors during instruction with the purpose to determine the quality of instruction in the two different formats of the same course taught by the same instructor. Frequency of learner interaction was used to determine the quality of instruction within and between both formats. A comparative case study research design with a mixed method data collection and analysis approach was used to explore learner interaction behaviors across two equivalent formats of the same course: one format delivered F2F (n=11), and one delivered fully OL (n=15). Data were collected during 5 instructional F2F sections and 5 OL instructional sections. Learner interaction frequency (quantitative) and fieldnotes (qualitative) data were recorded through an unobstructive observational method using a modified Behavioral Observational Checklist (BOC). Results show that the frequency of learner interactions between both formats had similar pattern for each type of interaction. L2L and L2I interactions were similar within and between both formats; on the other hand, L2C interaction was similar in each format but different between both. Further analysis showed the differences were a result of lower quality of interaction frequency in specific observed sessions. The observed instructional and learning behaviors recorded in the fieldnotes showed that these differences in frequency was a result of most OL learners' consistent demonstration of high-quality engagement and interaction during small groups and open class discussions, while a few F2F learners participated or interacted during small groups and open class discussions. The differences in frequency did not statistically impact the level of learner interaction with other learners, the instructor, or the content. Comparatively, this dissertation study suggests that the course delivered similar quality of instruction across both F2F and OL formats. It highlights lower quality of L2L interaction in both F2F and OL observed sessions 2, 4 and 5. There was also a lower quality of interaction for L2C in F2F and OL observation sessions 2. These findings point to types of interaction that need to be enhanced to assure similar learning experiences in both F2F and OL delivery formats.

Access

Open Access

Download

Share

COinS