How good is  good ? A successful transition from face-to-face to online raises questions around human connectedness

Tania von der Heidt; Mieke Witsel

This study relates to a transnational program with Tianjin University of Science and Technology (TUST). Each year around 110 selected Chinese full-time undergraduate students enrol in the one-year program, studying on-campus in Tianjin following completion of an English preparatory course. Students undertake 12 units sequentially in a three-week intensive mode (IM). Normally, each unit is delivered face-to-face (F2F) by a School of Business and Tourism (SBAT) academic, who stays in China for the duration. In March 2020, academics in the program were asked to switch from F2F to wholly online delivery. Simultaneously, the students were isolated, unable to access the campus. We studied (a) how IM teaching adapted from F2F to online in the program; (b) the impact on student performance and satisfaction in Session 1 2020, compared with F2F delivery in Session 1 2019. Initial data shows that, despite unexpected constraints (e.g. students having limited access to (SCU) databases), academics successfully adapted delivery. The standard key performance indicators (KPIs) - student success rate (SSR), GPA and student satisfaction (SS) - for 2019 (F2F) vs 2020 (online) show that the program has remained successful, with consistently higher than School and SCU averages. The results, taken from the University’s Office of Planning Quality and Review MIS student performance cube, and averaged across the six subjects at TUST in S1 2019 / S1 2020 are: SSR: 98.5% / 98.7%; GPA: 5.1 / 5.2; SS: 4.6 / 4.6. So far so good, one might say. Despite the major change in learning environment, the students performed as well as always in terms of SCU’s key KPIs. It is not clear whether this is because we sufficiently adapted our units to the new environment, or because the students are so self-motivated and disciplined that they succeeded regardless. In any case, the students’ learning experience was different. We attribute this mainly to the different sense of connectedness between students and teachers. In 2019 connectedness was high during daily face-to-face interactions in class, where attendance rates were high. In 2020, where live classes online were not always offered and, even when they were, attendance and participation rates were low, connectedness was lower. Taking a constructivist approach, and holding that knowledge is socially constructed, rather than received or discovered, we question whether our KPI metrics adequately capture the quality of the learning experience and whether the nature of student learning experience matters to the metrics. We ask the audience, what role should ‘connectivity’ (Senior, 2010) or ‘connectedness’ (Starr-Glass, 2013), community of inquiry (Garrison et al., 2010) and related constructivist concepts play in fostering improved learning experiences within our learning environments, and what learning design and technology (LDT) principles should guide us (Warr et al., 2020). Garrison, D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2010). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 5-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.003 Senior, R. (2010). Connectivity: A framework for understanding effective language teaching in face-to-face and online learning communities. RELC Journal, 41(2), 137-147. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688210375775 Starr-Glass, D. (2013). From connectivity to connected learners: Transactional distance and social presence. In C. Wankel & P. Blessinger (Eds.), Increasing student engagement and retention in e-learning environments: Web 2.0 and blended learning technologies (Cutting-edge technologies in higher education, 6, 113-143. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/s2044-9968(2013)000006g007 Warr, M., Mishra, P., & Scragg, B. (2020). Designing theory. Education Technology Research Development, 68(2), 601-632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09746-9

How good is good ? A successful transition from face-to-face to online raises questions around human connectedness

Files and links (2)

Metrics

Abstract

Details

How good is good ? A successful transition from face-to-face to online raises questions around human connectedness

Files and links (2)

Metrics

Abstract

Details

Southern Cross University Social media