From Presence to Performance: An Empirical Study of College English Online Learning Through the CoI Lens
Keywords:
Teaching Presence, Student Engagement; Learning Performance; College English; Online EducationAbstract
The rapid advancement of information technology and the widespread adoption of online education have intensified the need to improve the quality of College English e-learning. Despite the growing prevalence of digital instruction, challenges remain in maintaining students’ engagement and achieving effective learning outcomes. To address this issue, the present study aims to examine how different aspects of teaching presence influence student engagement and, subsequently, learning performance in an online College English environment. Guided by the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework, this research develops and validates a structural model that links teaching presence → student engagement → learning performance. Using data collected from a College English massive open online course (MOOC), the study employs partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to test the hypothesized relationships among the variables. The results reveal that among the three dimensions of teaching presence—design and organization, facilitating discourse, and direct instruction—only facilitating discourse significantly enhances behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. Furthermore, student engagement serves as a key predictor of learning performance, with cognitive engagement demonstrating the strongest effect, followed by emotional and behavioral engagement. These findings emphasize that fostering interactive and dialogue-rich learning environments is crucial for improving students’ engagement and performance in online College English learning. Theoretically, this study extends the CoI framework to second-language acquisition by identifying the differential effects of teaching presence. Practically, it highlights the importance of instructors adopting the role of facilitators who cultivate meaningful online learning communities that promote both quality and equity in digital education
References
Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2). http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/jalnvol5issue2v2.Htm
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(3–4), 133–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003
Balwant, P. T., Birdi, K., Stephan, U., & Topakas, A. (2018). The dimensionality of student engagement: A critical analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 44(12), 2324–2346. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1535903
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
Boekaerts, M. (1993). Being concerned with well-being and with learning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 149–167. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_4
Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
Chang, C. T., Tu, C. S., & Hajiyev, J. (2019). Integrating academic type of social media activity with perceived academic performance: A role of task-related and non-task-related compulsive Internet use. Computers & Education, 139, 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.019
Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7
Cole, A. W., Lennon, L., & Weber, N. L. (2019). Student perceptions of online active learning practices and online learning climate predict online course engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(4), 606–616. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619593
Eddy-U, M. (2015). Motivation for participation or non-participation in group tasks: A dynamic systems model of task-situated willingness to communicate. System, 50, 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.02.002
Ellis, R. (2015). Understanding second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Fang, J., Tang, L., Yang, J., & Peng, M. (2019). Social interaction in MOOCs: The mediating effects of immersive experience and psychological needs satisfaction. Telematics and Informatics, 39, 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.01.006
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Glazier, R. A., & Harris, H. S. (2021). Instructor presence and student satisfaction across modalities: Survey data on student preferences in online and on-campus courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(3), 78–98. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i3.5375
Gómez-Rey, P., Barbera, E., & Fernández-Navarro, F. (2016). Measuring teachers and learners’ perceptions of the quality of their online learning experience. Distance Education, 37(2), 146–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2016.1184396
Gopal, R., Singh, V., & Aggarwal, A. (2021). Impact of online classes on the satisfaction and performance of students during the pandemic period of COVID-19. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 6923–6947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10523-1
Guo, J.-P., Lv, S., Wang, S.-C., Wei, S.-M., Guo, Y.-R., & Yang, L.-Y. (2023). Reciprocal modeling of university students’ perceptions of the learning environment, engagement, and learning outcome: A longitudinal study. Learning and Instruction, 83, 101692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101692
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Danks, N. P. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Hosen, M. A., Soliman, M., & Islam, A. K. M. N. (2021). Examining the impact of student engagement on academic performance in online learning: Evidence from a developing country. Interactive Learning Environments. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1969954
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2010). The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(2), 119–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00387.x
Law, K. M. Y., Geng, S., & Li, T. (2019). Student enrollment, motivation and learning performance in a blended learning environment: The mediating effects of social, teaching, and cognitive presence. Computers & Education, 136, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.03.007
Lomicka, L. (2006). Understanding the other: Intercultural exchange and CMC. In J. A. Belz & S. L. Thorne (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education (pp. 211–236). Heinle & Heinle.
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
Meeuwisse, M., Severiens, S. E., & Born, M. P. (2010). Learning environment, interaction, sense of belonging and study success in ethnically diverse student groups. Research in Higher Education, 51(6), 528–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-010-9168-1
Nkhoma, M., Cong, H. P., Au, B., Lam, T., Richardson, J., Smith, R., & El-Den, J. (2015). Facebook as a tool for learning purposes: Analysis of the determinants leading to improved students’ learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(2), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787415574180
Ong, S. Y., & Quek, C. L. (2021). The use of gamification and technology-enhanced learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 6923–6947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10563-7
Owston, R., York, D., & Murtha, S. (2013). Student perceptions and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.003
Philp, J., & Duchesne, S. (2016). Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 50–72. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190515000094
Qureshi, M. A., Khaskheli, A., Qureshi, J. A., Raza, S. A., & Yousufi, S. Q. (2023). Factors affecting students’ learning performance through collaborative learning and engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(14), 2371–2391. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1884886
Reeve, J., Cheon, S. H., & Jang, H. (2020). How and why students make academic progress: Reconceptualizing the student engagement construct to increase its explanatory power. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 62, 101899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101899
Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L.
Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700–712. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027268
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. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i4.2330
Rotar, O. (2020). Teacher support and student engagement in online learning environments. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 16(2), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135117
Shah, M., & Barkas, L. (2018). Analysing the impact of student attendance and engagement on academic performance. International Journal of Educational Management, 32(6), 1099–1112. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2017-0129
Stone, C. (2017). Opportunity through online learning: Improving student access, participation and success in higher education. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/publications/opportunity-online-learning
Sun, J. C. Y., & Rueda, R. (2012). Situational interest, computer self-efficacy and self-regulation: Their impact on student engagement in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01157.x
Sun, Y., Guo, Y., & Zhao, Y. (2020). Understanding the determinants of learner engagement in MOOCs: An adaptive structuration perspective. Computers & Education, 157, 103963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103963
Vargas-Murillo, A. R., de la Asuncion, I. N. M., & de Jesús Guevara-Soto, F. (2023). Challenges and opportunities of AI-assisted learning: A systematic literature review on the impact of ChatGPT usage in higher education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(7), 122–135. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.7.7
Wang, J., Tigelaar, D. E., Luo, J., & Admiraal, W. (2022). Teacher beliefs, classroom process quality, and student engagement in the smart classroom learning environment: A multilevel analysis. Computers & Education, 183, 104501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104501
Yu, A. Y., Tian, S. W., Vogel, D., & Kwok, R. C.-W. (2010). Can learning be virtually boosted? An investigation of online social networking impacts. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1494–1503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.015
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yu Liu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
