Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Making an Impact in Online Learning: Google Chat as a Mechanism to Facilitate the COI Framework

  • Original research
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research shows that utilizing Google Chat aids in positive student experiences (Saadatmand et al., European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning 20:61–79, 2017), promotes learner interaction (Kobayashi, Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 16:28–39, 2015), and has a higher level of satisfaction over traditional communication tools such as email (He and Huang, Journal of Research on Technology in Education 49:149–160, 2017). To understand how these tools impact learning, we explore the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework (Garrison et al., The Internet and Higher Education 2:87–105, 2000a). It positions that learning occurs through the interaction and intersection of three connected presences: social, teaching, and cognitive. Pairing these with the CoI framework might be one way to aid instructors in promoting student-instructor communication. The results of this research represent the interplay of all three CoI constructs. Moreover, interestingly did not significantly result in one presence area over the other but instead positively impacted students' overall learning experience. Qualitative results indicated how students were utilizing Google Chat and for what purpose, barriers to use, and how they envision using this tool within their own teaching. Instructional recommendations are provided for implementing synchronous tools to support formal online instructional methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Data Availability Statement

This manuscript has no associated data or the data will not be deposited.

References

  • Aragon, S. R. (2003). Creating social presence in online environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2003(100), 57–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3), 133–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auxier, B., & Anderson, M. (2020). As schools close due to the coronavirus, some U.S. students face a digital 'homework gap'. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/03/16/as-schools-close-due-to-the-coronavirus-some-u-s-students-face-a-digital-homework-gap/.

  • Baker, C. (2010). The impact of instructor immediacy and presence for online student affective learning, cognition, and motivation. Journal of Educators Online. https://doi.org/10.9743/JEO.2010.1.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besser, E. D., & Newby, T. J. (2019). Exploring the role of feedback and its impact within a digital badge system from student perspectives. TechTrends, 63, 485–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besser, E. D., & Newby, T. J. (2020). Feedback in a digital badge learning experience: Considering the instructor’s perspective. TechTrends, 64(3), 484–497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bower, M. (2008). Affordance analysis—Matching learning tasks with learning technologies. Educational Media International, 45(1), 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, J., & Bates, A. J. (2015). Creating a constructivist online instructional environment. TechTrends, 59(2), 17–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caspi, A., & Blau, I. (2008). Social presence in online discussion groups: Testing three conceptions and their relations to perceived learning. Social Psychology of Education, 11(3), 323–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1989). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. Biochemical Education, 17(3), 140–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, L., Green, T. D., Besser, E., & Gonzalez, E. (2021). The whole is greater than the sum of the parts: A self-study of equity and inclusion in online teacher education. Studying Teacher Education, 17(1), 57–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.2307/30221096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers and Education, 59(2), 423–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang, M. L., Canham, S. L., Battersby, L., Sixsmith, J., Wada, M., & Sixsmith, A. (2019). Exploring privilege in the digital divide: Implications for theory, policy, and practice. The Gerontologist, 59(1), e1–e15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fiock, H. (2020). Designing a community of inquiry in online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 135–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H. (2012). Internal validity. How to design and evaluate research in education (pp. 166–183). McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, T. M., Anderman, L. H., & Jensen, J. M. (2007). Sense of belonging in college freshmen at the classroom and campus levels. The Journal of Experimental Education, 75(3), 203–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R. (2003). Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: The role of reflective inquiry, self-direction, and metacognition. Elements of Quality Online Education: Practice and Direction, 4, 47–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-Learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R. (2015). Thinking collaboratively: Learning in a community of inquiry. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2013). Toward the development of a metacognition construct for communities of inquiry. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 84–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000a). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000b). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harper, R., Watson, R., & Licoppe, C. (2017). Interpersonal video communication as a site of human sociality. Pragmatics, 27(3), 301–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartson, R., & Pyla, P. S. (2012). The UX Book: Process and guidelines for ensuring a quality user experience. Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, A., Barbour, M. K., & Graham, C. R. (2012). “Everybody is their own island”: Teacher disconnection in a virtual school. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(2), 123–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • He, J., & Huang, X. (2017). Collaborative online teamwork: Exploring students’ satisfaction and attitudes with google hangouts as a supplementary communication tool. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 49(3–4), 149–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, X., Chandra, A., DePaolo, C. A., & Simmons, L. L. (2016). Understanding transactional distance in web-based learning environments: An empirical study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(4), 734–747. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kates, F. R., Samuels, S. K., Case, J. B., & Dujowich, M. (2020). Lessons Learned from a pilot study implementing a team-based messaging application (Slack) to improve communication and teamwork in Veterinary Medical Education. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 47(1), 18–26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ke, F. (2010). Examining online teaching, cognitive, and social presence for adult students. Computers and Education, 55(2), 808–820.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, M. (2015). Students’evaluation of Google hangouts through a cross-cultural group discussion activity. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 28–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozan, K., & Richardson, J. C. (2014). Interrelationships between and among social, teaching, and cognitive presence. Internet and Higher Education, 21, 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenthal, D. A., & Lowenthal, P. R. (2010). A mixed methods examination of instructor social presence in accelerated online courses.

  • Lowenthal, P. (2015). Did video kill the asynchronous post? Exploring students' perceptions of asynchronous online video and social presence. In Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association Conference

  • Lowenthal, P. R. (2009). The evolution and influence of social presence theory on online learning. In T. T. Kidd (Ed.), Online education and adult learning: New frontiers for teaching practices (pp. 124–139). IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenthal, P. R., & Dunlap, J. C. (2018). Investigating students’ perceptions of instructional strategies to establish social presence. Distance Education, 39(3), 281–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E., & Conlon, S. (2020, April 4). Coronavirus for kids without internet: Quarantined worksheets, learning in parking lots. USA TODAY. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2020/04/01/coronavirus-internet-speed-broadband-online-learning-school-closures/5091051002/.

  • Mehrotra, P. (2019). 10 Best Google Chat Alternatives You Should Try. Beebom. https://beebom.com/best-GoogleChat-alternatives/.

  • Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nykvist, S., & Mukherjee, M. (2016). Who am I? Developing preservice teacher identity in a digital world. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 851–857.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oyarzun, B., Stefaniak, J., Bol, L., & Morrison, G. R. (2018). Effects of learner-to-learner interactions on social presence, achievement, and satisfaction. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(1), 154–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redmond, P. (2014). Reflection as an indicator of cognitive presence. E-Learning and Digital Media, 11(1), 46–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyes, M., Kaeppel, K., & Bjorngard-Basayne, E. (2018). Memes and GIFs as powerful classroom tools. Faculty Focus.

  • Richardson, J. C., Besser, E., Koehler, A., Lim, J., & Strait, M. (2016). Instructors’ perceptions of instructor presence in online learning environments. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4), 82–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. C., Koehler, A. A., Besser, E. D., Caskurlu, S., Lim, J., & Mueller, C. M. (2015). Conceptualizing and investigating instructor presence in online learning environments. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3), 256–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rickes, P. C. (2016). Generations in flux: How Gen Z will continue to transform higher education space. Planning for Higher Education, 44(4), 21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., Wendt, J., Whighting, M., & Nisbet, D. (2016). The predictive relationship among the community of inquiry framework, perceived learning and online, and graduate students’ course grades in online synchronous and asynchronous courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3), 18–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, P., & Lea, M. (2005). Social presence in distributed group environments: The role of social identity [Article]. Behaviour and Information Technology, 24(2), 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290410001723472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 50–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A. P. (2000). Building and sustaining community in asynchronous learning networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 3(4), 285–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saadatmand, M., Uhlin, L., Hedberg, M., Åbjörnsson, L., & Kvarnström, M. (2017). Examining learners’ interaction in an open online course through the community of inquiry framework. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 20(1), 61–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwieger, D., & Ladwig, C. (2018). Reaching and retaining the next generation: Adapting to the expectations of Gen Z in the classroom. Information Systems Education Journal, 16(3), 45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, P., Li, C. S., Swan, K., & Pickett, A. (2005). Developing learning community in online asynchronous college courses: The role of teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(4), 59–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, R. (2011). Enhancing learner-learner interaction using video communications in higher education: Implications from theorizing about a new model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(1), 113–127.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Stray, V., Moe, N. B., & Noroozi, M. (2019). Slack me if you can! Using enterprise social networking tools in virtual agile teams. In 2019 ACM/IEEE 14th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE).

  • Swan, K., Garrison, D., & Richardson, J. C. (2009). A constructivist approach to online learning: the Community of Inquiry framework. Information technology and constructivism in higher education: Progressive learning frameworks. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 43–57.

  • Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, 22(2), 306–331.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Swan, K., Shea, P., Richardson, J., Ice, P., Garrison, D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Arbaugh, J. (2008). Validating a measurement tool of presence in online communities of inquiry. E-Mentor, 2(24), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, K., & Shih, L. F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Towner, E. B., & Klemz, B. R. (2016). Social media in business and professional communication courses: A survey of student preferences. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 79(3), 331–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Deursen, A. J., & Van Dijk, J. A. (2019). The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media and Society, 21(2), 354–375.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, F. F., Bishop, M. C., & Ferdinand-James, D. (2017). Instructional strategies to help online students learn: Feedback from online students. TechTrends, 61(5), 420–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, H., Liu, W., & Bhairma, J. (2018). Analysis of synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments. In 2018 3rd Joint International Information Technology, Mechanical and Electronic Engineering Conference (JIMEC 2018).

  • Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, C. (2013). The integration of technology in the 21st-century classroom: Teachers’ attitudes and pedagogical beliefs toward emerging technologies. Journal of Technology Integration in the Classroom, 5(1), 5–11.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Yuen, L. (2019, February 21). Why Google Chat is a Useful Tool in the Distance Education World. BOLT Multi-Authored Blog. http://bolt.athabascau.ca/index.php/2019/02/21/why-google-GoogleChat-is-a-useful-tool-in-the-distance-education-world/

  • Zawawi, B. F., Al Abri, M. H., & Dabbagh, N. (2017). Affordance analysis of Google+ applications. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 26(4), 425–443.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. California State University, Fullerton, Fullerton, CA, USA

    Erin D. Besser

Authors
  1. Erin D. Besser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erin D. Besser.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Besser, E.D. Making an Impact in Online Learning: Google Chat as a Mechanism to Facilitate the COI Framework. Tech Know Learn 29, 413–432 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09673-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09673-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy