Diminishing Distance: Fostering belonging by mature HE students as Communities of Inquiry
Bina Radia-Bond
Key words: Communities of Inquiry; Higher Education; belonging; online learning; TEL; mature students.
The initiative of the ‘university of the air’ in England over fifty years ago was pivotal in the advancement of social mobility through opening access to education by all learners. Since the early radio and television broadcasts, the advent of the World Wide Web and exponential progress in digital technologies have widened access by dissolving geographical distance; temporal constraints and socioeconomic barriers. The flexibility to study anytime anywhere enables millions of mature students to incorporate studies alongside work and caring responsibilities to accomplish educational ambitions that may otherwise remain unfulfilled. Yet, rates of attrition are higher in online learning courses compared with studying on campus.
While students withdraw for a variety of reasons, a sense of belonging and inclusion could motivate persistence with studies. More than access and flexibility, the human need to belong to a community is prioritised by HE students as the most important feature in their study experience (Thomas, Herbert and Teras, 2014; Barber et al, 2021 ). This study focuses on belonging by mature HE students in online distance learning by exploring the potential of the Community of Inquiry framework (CoI) (Garrison, Anderson and Archer, 1999) to galvanise online learners as a community. A budding body of literature recognises correspondence between the ‘collaborative constructionist’ principle that underpins CoI, and a sense of belonging that develops through participation in critical inquiry with a peer group. This research contributes insights from lesser-known experiences of mature HE students.
Asynchronous text-based forums are the most common mode of communication in technology-enhanced learning. CoI theorises overlapping cognitive, social, tutor, and emotional presences in forum discussions, providing necessary conceptual and analytic tools. Research methods include thematic analysis of secondary data in the form of transcripts of a collaborative discussion forum to identify interactions that represent different presences. This will be related to results from a CoI survey, which enumerates the presences, to interpret meaning of the numerical data. Posts in ‘social presence’ will be expanded for focussed discursive analysis to identify prevailing sociocultural discourses that are implicit in forum interactions. Interviews will also be offered to understand students’ subjective experience of forum participation and perception of (non)belonging. The option of online face-to-face, or email interviews, will ensure widest inclusion of student voices.
It is anticipated that results from the mixed methods approach will provide a multi-perspective view of learners as social actors, whose participation in discussion forums is shaped by their particular social experiences. These inform the perspectives that they contribute to the joint inquiry. Expressions of affect will highlight emotionality, overlooked in the emphasis on rational thinking. The mediating role of the tutor will also be apparent. Content of the overlapping presences, together with students’ own stories, will illuminate cognitive processes, social identities and discourses that shaped inclusion and exclusion in the particular Community of Inquiry. The ability to target specific elements for reinforcement or review will demonstrate the effectiveness of CoI as an appropriate framework towards fostering a greater sense of belonging by all students.
The study will be of interest to all HE educators as most universities now offer online learning options, following the pivot to remote learning during the Covid-19 pandemic. Understanding pedagogic processes that (dis) engage students in the community that evolves in online learning environments can inform both design and delivery of technology-enhanced learning. Findings will be disseminated through a dedicated forum; scholarship sharing events, and communities of practice within the university; open journals and conferences. Future research will seek to understand student perspectives on non-participation in collaborative discussions forums.
References
Barber, M., Bird, L., Fleming, J., Titterington-Giles, E., Edwards, E. and Leyland, C. (2021) Gravity assist: Propelling higher education towards a brighter future: Report of the digital teaching and learning review [Barber review]: Office for Students Publication. Available at: https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/publications/gravity-assist-propelling-higher-education-towards-a-brighter-future/ (Accessed: March 2025).
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. and Archer, W. (1999) ‘Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education’, The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), pp. 87-105.
Thomas, L., Herbert, J. and Teras, M. (2014) ‘A sense of belonging to enhance participation, success and retention in online programs’, The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2), pp., 69-80.
9 responses to “Diminishing Distance: Fostering belonging by mature HE students as Communities of Inquiry”
I’m looking forward to learning more about your study at the conference. After reading the abstract, I have a couple of questions.
1. Is there an official definition of a mature student? Is there a specific age when a student becomes classed as mature?
2. Will your study focus on first year undergrad students or more experienced students?
Hi Bina, I am excited to hear about your study at the conference as your topic interests me. A question for you is: As you mention ‘mature HE students’, do you feel that this attribute affects their social presence behaviour in an online setting?
Hi Kirsty:
Mature students are undergraduates who are over 21 at the start of their studies.
(Defined by HESA and adopted by Office for Students).
My study is with Level 3 students, most in the final year of their degree.
Good question, Tracy:
Yes, I would say social presence would most certainly be influenced by mature students’ diverse life experiences.
You may have seen that a factor in Garrison et al’s design of the CoI was to enable critical inquiry among adult [mature] learners.
Sorry that I won’t be able to see the final presentation but I hope I’ll be able to catch up. Its an interesting area to research and has definitely been a huge part of my practice over the past five years.
You mention face to face and email interviews, I just wonder what your personal preference is and what you see as the pros and cons of these?
Hi Bina, this is fascinating research.
I’ve noticed that not many students participate in forums (guilty!). How can you ensure you will get enough data?
Hi Maria:
Thank you for a great question.
I find that why students do/don’t participate depends on the purpose of forum and the level of study. Kirsty made a good point about different needs for community by undergraduates and postgraduates.
On my module (3rd year UGs) participation is compulsory as part of an assessment.(Some enjoy this; many don’t due to anxiety and time-constraints, but most do complete it).
My participants will be students who have just completed the module, talking to them about their lived experience, as well as analysing discussions they have already posted in the forum.
Out of interest, may I ask why you don’t participate in forums? 🙂
Bina
This looks fascinating… a topic very close to my continuing pedagogic interests: how to keep online students interested and engaged.
Back in the day as they say, we had a rough rule of thumb that said, with any group of students in an online forum, roughly a third would actively take part, roughly a third would just read the forum, and roughly a third would take no part at all. The challenge was always to get the ‘just readers’ to be more active and to get the ‘do nothing’ students to at least read the stuff!
I always thought that assessment and reward was a good way to go, i.e. pose a question and reward the student for their contribution to the discussion around the question. That sort of thing.
I’m looking forward to hearing what you have to say.
(Simon – MAODE 2000)
Hello Simon:
Most reassuring to see corresponding interest in keeping students engaged. Thank you.
Your rule of thumb sounds about right.
As participation in a collaborative activity is compulsory on my module, I usually email the ‘just readers’ individually to gently persuade them by exploring their concerns and offering simple tips to encourage posting. It is eye-opening just how many students who articulate persuasive essays seemingly easily are panic-stricken by having to post in the forum, especially as they haven’t had to before.
I wonder if the assessment=reward amplifies this. I try to instil an intrinsic value to start with, so that they enjoy participating in a non-threatening way, and also point out the extrinsic reward relating to marks. I think we need both in tandem. Would you agree?
Bina
Bina