ABSTRACT
Objective
To compare student perceptions and final grades of online vs face-to-face nutrition
courses using the community of inquiry (COI) framework.
Methods
Using a cross-sectional research design, students in 3 courses completed the 34-item
COI questionnaire. One-way ANOVA compared the COI and final grades.
Results
One hundred eight students participated. There were no significant differences in
the perception of teaching presence (F[2,103] = 0.214, P = .81), social presence (F[2,103] = 0.393, P = .68), cognitive presence (F[2,103] = 0.428, P = .65), and final grades (F[2,140] = 0.846, P =.43).
Conclusions and Implications
Online courses may provide similar perceptions of connection to the course content,
peers, and the instructor similar to face-to-face courses and may result in similar
grades. Instructor professional development may be warranted to ensure the use of
instructional strategies that enhance connections and facilitate higher-level learning.
Additional research is needed to replicate these findings with multiple instructors
and a larger sample size.
Key Words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessSNEB Member Login
SNEB Members, full access to the journal is a member benefit. Login via the SNEB Website to access all journal content and features.Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Nutrition Education and BehaviorAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
REFERENCES
- Learning on Demand: Online Education in the United States, 2009.Babson Survey Research Group, Needham, MA2010
Snyder TD, de Brey C, Dillow SA. Digest of Education Statistics. 52nd ed. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education; 2016. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017094.pdf. Accessed 15 April 2019.
- A distance education in the undergraduate dietetic education.J Allied Health. 2005; 34: 36-39
- Position of the American Dietetics Association: nutrition education for the health care professionals.J Am Diet Assoc. 1998; 98: 343-346
- Nutrition education in health professions programs: a survey of dental, physician assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse midwifery programs.J Am Diet Assoc. 2001; 101: 63-69
- Motivation, self-efficacy, physical activity and nutrition in college students: randomized controlled trial of an internet-based education program.Prev Med. 2008; 47: 369-377
- Engaging the Online Learner: Activities and Resources for Creative Instruction.John Wiley and Sons, Inc, San Francisco, CA2004
- Small group and individual learning with technology: a meta-analysis.Rev Educ Res. 2001; 71: 449-521
- Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education.Internet High Educ. 2000; 2: 87-105
- Role adjustment for learners in an online community of inquiry: identifying the challenges of incoming online learners.Int J Web-Based Learn Teach Technol. 2007; 2: 1-16
- E-Learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice.3rd ed. Routledge/Taylor & Francis, London2017
- Developing a community of inquiry instrument: testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample.Internet High Educ. 2008; 11: 133-136
- Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context.J Asynch Learn Net. 2001; 5: 1-17
- Web-based lecture technologies: highlighting the changing nature of teaching and learning.Australas J Educ Technol. 2010; 26: 717-728
- Web-based, virtual course units as a didactic concept for medical teaching.Med Teach. 2004; 26: 336-342
- The impact of online lecture recordings on student performance.Australas J Educ Technol. 2012; 82: 199-213
- Confirming the subdimensions of teaching, social, and cognitive presences: a construct validity study.Internet High Educ. 2018; 39: 1-12
- A systematic review of the Community of Inquiry survey.Internet High Educ. 2018; 39: 22-32
- Outcomes associated with email delivery of a general nutrition course.J Nutr Educ. 2000; 32: 169-176
- Choosing between online and face-to-face courses: community college student voices.Am J Distance Educ. 2014; 28: 27-38
- Students’ perceptions and satisfaction with a web-based human nutrition course.Am J Pharm Educ. 2008; 72: 91
- Correlations, trends and potential biases among publicly accessible web-based student evaluations of teaching: a large-scale study of RateMyProfessors.com data.Assess Eval High Educ. 2018; 43: 31-44
- The design, implementation, and evaluation of online credit nutrition courses: a systematic review.J Nutr Educ Behav. 2011; 43: 76-86
- Minds Online: Teaching Effectively With Technology.Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA2014
- Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education: a literature review.J Educ Technol Syst. 2017; 46: 4-29
- Evaluation of classroom-based, Web-enhanced, and Web-based distance learning nutrition courses for undergraduate nursing.J Nurs Educ. 2003; 42: 367-370
- Synchronous delivery of online graduate education in clinical nutrition: an inquiry into student perceptions and practices.J Allied Health. 2019; 48: 61-66
- Exploring the effect of scripted roles on cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions.Online Learn. 2016; 20: 34-54
- Measuring presence: a review of research using the Community of Inquiry.Q Rev Distance Educ. 2018; 19: 27-36
- Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences.5th ed. Routledge/Taylor & Francis, New York2009
- “Is this class hard?” Defining and analyzing academic rigor from a learner's perspective.CBE Life Sci Educ. 2018; 17 (ar53-mr1)
Article info
Publication history
Published online: October 08, 2019
Accepted:
September 10,
2019
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest Disclosure: The authors have not stated any conflicts of interest.
Identification
Copyright
© 2019 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior.
