Nurse educators strive to construct engaging learning experiences using blended and online delivery formats. VoiceThread, a cloud-based social media tool, provides a platform for asynchronous voice, video, or text comments on embedded PowerPoints, images, or pictures, providing opportunities for open communication, active engagement, and inquiry. An undergraduate blended (five face-to-face, nine online classes) six-credit course used Pacansky-Brock's (2013)Elements for Effectively Designed VoiceThread to ensure consistent design, clear communication of expectations, tips for student use, clear grading criteria, and communication norms. Students used their voices to share their journeys and insights as nurse leaders, providing opportunities for collaboration and open engagement. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of VoiceThread in an undergraduate nursing leadership course on a community of inquiry (CoI).
BACKGROUND AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
VoiceThread is used to enhance collaborative learning through the sharing of ideas, supporting the connections and learning of students. Growing evidence of its effectiveness in higher education, including nursing courses, strengthens the intentional use of VoiceThread to foster a CoI. Delmas (2017) found the use of VoiceThread increased perceived connections (social presence) among students and faculty, contributing to academic persistence. Pacansky-Brock (2013) found collaborative responses using VoiceThread allowed students to demonstrate their knowledge while also learning from their peers.
VoiceThread provided a platform for students to hone their communication skills as they presented and defended their ideas to their peers (Kaminski, 2016), interacted with complex topics through digital storytelling (Price, Strodtman, Brough, Lonn, & Luo, 2015), and facilitated asynchronous collaboration and sharing of knowledge (Fox, 2017). Although evidential support for Voice Thread in nursing education is growing, its impact on a CoI in an undergraduate blended learning environment has not been fully established.
Roots of the CoI framework, developed by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2010), are constructed with Dewey's foundational influence of reflective inquiry within a community of learning. Social presence incorporates effective, open communication and group cohesion. Cognitive presence, or reflective inquiry, utilizes Garrison et al.'s (2010) practical inquiry model of a triggering event, exploration, integration, and resolution. Teaching presence includes the design and organization of the course, as well as the process of facilitating dialogue and direct instruction (Garrison et al., 2010). Using reflective inquiry in the design and delivery of the leadership course that utilized VoiceThread in discussions fostered a measurable CoI that included social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence.
METHOD
The Human Subjects Research Review Committee at the parent institution approved this quasi-experimental research. As students had no previous experience with VoiceThread, instructional technology support was made available to assist students with logging in, accessing presentations, and posting voice/video comments. Although the control group used a narrated PowerPoint for a team presentation with text-based discussions, the intervention group used VoiceThread for their team presentation and voice/video-based discussions. The control group viewed narrated PowerPoints for course content; the intervention group could interact with voice/video in the VoiceThread presentations for course content.
Sample/Setting
The sample included a total of 163 RN-to-BS senior nursing students enrolled in an undergraduate nursing leadership six-credit course at a small liberal arts college. Students enrolled in the program were primarily women (88 percent) with a mean age of 33.6 years. Students were conveniently enrolled in either an intervention (n = 97) or control group (n = 66); placement was determined by self-registration in specific sections of the course, all taught by the same professor.
Instruments
Arbaugh et al. (2008) developed and refined a 34-question survey to assess the CoI framework using student perceptions of teaching and social and cognitive presence on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), with a Cronbach's alpha of >.91. The IDEA Student Ratings of Instruction (SRI), an online 13-item survey, was used to collect student views of teaching effectiveness. The SRI was found to be reliable (Cronbach's alpha > .854) and valid for measuring teacher effectiveness (Benton & Li, 2015) through evaluation of learning objectives identified by faculty as most relevant to the course. Although course learning activities were required, end-of-course completion of the CoI survey and IDEA SRI were optional.
Data Collection and Analysis
The CoI survey was voluntarily completed by 68 percent of participants in the control group and 91 percent of participants in the intervention group. SPSS V19 software was used in the analysis of the data set. Comparison of the control and experimental group samples using Levine's test demonstrated equality of variances for teaching, social, and cognitive presence. An analysis of statistical means in relation to teaching, social, and cognitive presence revealed no significant differences between the two groups. Student ratings of teaching presence were slightly higher in the intervention group (4.57/5) than the control group (4.48/5).
Students in both groups (control, 52 percent; intervention, 80 percent) completed the IDEA SRI to rate the excellence of the teacher/course on a scale of 1 (hardly ever) to 5 (almost always). Although differences were not significant, the intervention group rated both the teacher and course higher (4.6/5) than the control group (4.2/5). Although CoI survey results demonstrated that both groups agreed that a CoI was present, students in the intervention group rated the instructor and course as "higher" (4.6/5) than others teaching similar courses. Control group IDEA SRI results rated the instructor and course as "similar" (4.2/5).
Qualitative feedback was used to gain depth in student perceptions of usability and satisfaction with VoiceThread at both the midpoint and end of the course. Students (46/97) provided feedback in a "Checking-in Slide" as well as open-ended questions within the IDEA SRI. Categories that emerged from the inductive content analysis, supported by the use of NVivo software, included opportunities for interaction, easy to use, and technical challenges. Students in the intervention group used VoiceThread to "help them transition between classroom and computer" using virtual interaction to share their stories. Students stated, "When I am listening to them, I am hearing their voice, feeling how it affects them. It is personable, emotional, [it] allows you to think about it at a much deeper aspect." Some students found VoiceThread easy to use, stating, "I enjoy VoiceThread for online learning weeks. It keeps me focused and interested in content." Others reported technical challenges, including "technophobia" and finding a quiet place to record. Students stated, "When first learning VoiceThread it was scary, but after using it weekly, it's actually not scary anymore."
DISCUSSION
Results of the CoI survey, VoiceThread, Checking-in Slide comments, and IDEA SRI supported the student/faculty sense of emotional commitment and teaching presence in this course. Qualitative comments supported previous findings where VoiceThread engaged students, providing an opportunity to engage in a CoI. Creating a learning environment where students feel connected leads to a greater sense of belonging and may impact academic persistence (Delmas, 2017). Similar to Price et al. (2015), the use of VoiceThread enabled students to personally embrace complex concepts through hearing their peers' voices sharing stories, contributing to the sense of community (Delmas, 2017). Consistent with Fox's (2017) findings, students in the intervention group expressed a preference for VoiceThread discussions over a written discussion. The qualitative analysis supported a CoI and use of VoiceThread to bridge on-campus/online learning, providing opportunities for interaction and engagement.
This research had several limitations. Nursing students were not familiar with the terminology in the survey and later reported they did not understand some of the questions. The sample size was from one institution and limited the generalizability of the results.
CONCLUSION
This study supported using social media to create a CoI among online learners. This study extends educator knowledge about creating a CoI in online nursing education. Social media (VoiceThread) provided tools and opportunities for the enhancement of learning through student engagement. Future research in multiple sites would be beneficial for considering the impact on learning of the use of VoiceThread.
REFERENCES