Introduction In an attempt to further refine and explain the importance of immediacy behaviors and the perceptions of closeness of online learning environments, Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) developed a framework called the Community of Inquiry Model (COI). This model attempts to define and conceptualize the dynamics of online learning environments through three types of presence: (1) social presence, the ability of learners to project themselves socially and emotionally, thereby representing themselves as "real people"; (2) cognitive presence, the extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse; and (3) teaching presence, the design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes (Garrison & Archer, 2000). Teaching presence one of the COI's three core component is addressed by this presenter's research. Perhaps the most relevant definition for teaching presence is the one provided from Anderson, Rourke, Garrison, and Archer (2001): … as the design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes. Teaching presence begins before the course commences as the teacher, acting as instructional designer, plans and prepares the course of studies, and it continues during the course, as the instructor facilitates the discourse and provides direct instruction when required (p. 5). Initially, Anderson et al. (2001) refer to teaching presence as being comprised of three subcategories; Instructional Design and Organization, Facilitating Discourse, and Direct Instruction. While Shea, Li, Swan, and Pickett, (2005) through their research further refined the COI's teaching presence conceptualized structure by establishing that the prior three subcategory could be reduced to Instructional Design and Organization and Directed Facilitation. In a 2007 article by Garrison, one of the principle authors of the COI, called for researchers to begin to extend the body of research conducted since the models 2000 conceptualization. Garrison challenged researchers to more deeply explore the model's three main components and interrelating interactions. As well, Arbaugh (2007) called for further quantitative oriented studies of the COI that examined multiple courses and disciplines. Each of these authors expressed a need for the COI's model to continue to grow and evolve through research evidence in order for it to continue to exhibit relevance. Through the COI’s conceptualization, online learning behaviors, activities, and interrelations between all parties of a learning community have uniquely been put forth. As the educational landscapes continue to evolve a model as useful as the COI should also demonstrate an ability to evolve. At the present students engaged in all facets of educational environments are being asked to turn toward more and more Internet or online base activities. These activities and learning resources often consist of a variety of Web 2.0 learning tools, Wikis, podcasts, YouTube videos, etc. Also, many institutions now provide (and even require that) students access course content materials through centralized Internet based course management systems (CMS). In light of these trends it is becoming increasingly important for educators, researchers, and administrators to have a means of conceptualizing, understanding, and reflecting upon these tools and the associated learning environments. Though originally conceptualized for online learning environments nearly ten years ago, this author believes the COI can still function as a framework for many mixed and hybridized learning environments of today. Purpose This paper's intent is to answer the question of whether there is a significant difference in terms of students' perceptions of the COI's teaching presence component when lecture content is delivered to online students via delayed recorded video stream online or to face-to-face students in a traditional live lecture format. Method This convenience sample study consisted of N = 561 valid respondents enrolled as either online distance education learners or face-to-face traditional learners in an undergraduate Food Science course taught by one instructor at a Midwestern university (USA), at a nearby satellite campus, and through the university's online program during the Fall, 2008 semester. Course content materials and tests were accessed by all students through a single Internet based university managed CMS. Online students received delayed video recordings of the lectures that were delivered to the face-to-face students and accessed via the Internet. These delayed recordings typically were processed and posted for online students to access within a six hour timeframe from their original delivery. Results Students did not report strong perceptions of teaching presence within their given learning environments. Independent samples t-tests were used to determine whether there was a difference in overall teaching presence instrument scores. This revealed no significant difference (t (559) = -0.47, p = 0.63); Online students (N = 410, M = 1.72, SD = 0.52); Face-to-face students (N = 151, M = 1.75, SD = 0.64). When analyzed for the teaching presence subcategory of instructional design and organization no significant difference was realized between populations (t(559) = -0.36, p = 0.71); Online students (N = 410, M = 1.73, SD = 0.59); Face-to-face students (N = 151, M = 1.75, SD = 0.66). When analyzed for the teaching presence subcategory of directed facilitation no significant difference was realized between populations (t(559) = -0.48, p = 0.66) Online students (N = 410, M = 1.72, SD = 0.53); Face-to-face students (N = 151, M = 1.75, SD = 0.67).
