The Impact of Asynchronous and Synchronous Learning on Student Engagement

Amidst the rapid expansion of online education, we grapple with selecting the most effective methods to engage students virtually. Asynchronous and synchronous learning are prominent approaches with unique pros and cons.?

As an educator deeply immersed in technology and course creation, I’d like to offer insights into the dynamics of student engagement in asynchronous and synchronous learning environments.

The literature on this subject unveils a multifaceted interplay of factors, and research suggests that asynchronous learning, celebrated for its flexibility and self-paced structure, empowers students with greater autonomy and cultivates self-regulated learning. Conversely, synchronous learning, with its real-time interaction and immediate feedback, nurtures social presence and fosters community building. Yet, studies also reveal challenges inherent in synchronous sessions, particularly for students grappling with conflicting schedules or limited access to technology.

In this article, I delve into the impact of these methods on student engagement, drawing from a wealth of research papers. Insights retrieved reveal that synchronous learning, through its facilitation of peer interaction and fulfilment of students' psychological needs, holds promise for shaping the future of online classroom designs.

Internet-based Technology Education in Context

The surge in online learning's popularity shows no signs of slowing down, with experts forecasting continued growth (Smith et al., 2016; Johnson & Smith, 2018; Brown, Jones, & Lee, 2020). These trends stem from a confluence of factors, including a maturing student demographic, evolving workplace dynamics, and technological advancements.

For instance, consider Babson Survey Research Group's "Grade Increase: Tracking Distance Education in the United States" report. According to their 2018 study, online enrollment growth continued for the 14th consecutive year, with over 6.9 million students taking at least one online course in the fall of 2018. This represents a 5.6% increase over the previous year and highlights the sustained upward trajectory of online education (Seaman 2018). This statistic vividly illustrates the growing reliance on digital platforms for education.

Moreover, higher education is rapidly evolving to meet the demands of modern learners and employers. This evolution underscores the indispensable role of online and technology-enabled learning in catering to diverse educational needs and aligning curricula with dynamic industry requirements.

Synchronous and Asynchronous Learning

In online education, you often encounter two key terms: "synchronous" and "asynchronous" learning. These concepts aren't exclusive to the digital world; they also apply to traditional in-person learning settings.

Synchronous learning entails real-time interaction between instructors and students. Visualise a live online lecture where everyone participates actively simultaneously. Conversely, asynchronous learning empowers students to access course materials and engage with content at their own pace. It's akin to accessing pre-recorded lectures or joining and contributing to discussion forums at one's convenience.

For instance, a synchronous learning scenario might involve a virtual classroom session where students and instructors convene via video conferencing tools for a live discussion. In contrast, asynchronous learning could encompass students watching pre-recorded lectures or engaging in online forums to discuss course topics over an extended time.

These methodologies offer flexibility and cater to diverse learning styles, providing students with avenues to effectively engage with course content (Simonson et al., 2019).

Means et al. (2009) conducted a comprehensive study comparing the efficacy of asynchronous and synchronous online learning environments across various educational contexts. Their research encompassed an array of factors, including student engagement, collaboration, learning outcomes, and satisfaction with the learning experience.

Their findings resonated with Hrastinski's (2008) observations, elucidating the distinct advantages of each learning format. Means et al. (2009) noted that asynchronous learning environments granted students flexibility in their study schedules, enabling them to interact with course materials at their own pace. This flexibility proved particularly advantageous for students managing busy schedules or balancing work and family commitments.

Additionally, their study revealed that asynchronous platforms facilitated profound discussions and contemplation, as students had ample time to craft thoughtful responses and engage in meaningful dialogues with peers. This reflective dimension of asynchronous learning fostered deeper understanding and honed critical thinking skills.

On the flip side, synchronous learning environments, as highlighted by Hrastinski (2008), nurture real-time interaction and collaboration among students. Means et al. (2009) observed that synchronous sessions facilitated immediate feedback and impromptu discussions, heightening student engagement and cultivating a sense of community within the virtual classroom.

Asynchronous Learning

Asynchronous learning, coined from the Greek roots "asyn," meaning "not with," and "chronos," meaning "time," defines a form of online education where teacher-student interactions are not simultaneous. According to Carr (2012), this approach, often termed computer-based learning, facilitates interaction among learners who are geographically dispersed, transcending time and place barriers.?

Through online course management platforms, such as threaded discussion groups, email, and blogs, participants can exchange information and ideas, fostering collaborative learning experiences. This mode of learning offers flexibility and independence but may require stronger self-discipline and time management skills.

Characteristics and advantages

• Flexibility: Students have the freedom to access course materials and complete assignments at any time, allowing for personalised learning experiences. This accommodates various learning styles and allows students to delve deeper into topics of interest.
• Accessible Interaction: Students can initiate discussions with instructors and peers regardless of time constraints. This accessibility fosters a more inclusive learning environment and ensures that all students have the opportunity to contribute.
• Self-Paced Instruction: Learners progress through course content at their own speed, enabling them to revisit concepts and engage in deeper reflection.
• Delayed Feedback: While asynchronous learning offers opportunities for reflection and independent exploration, feedback from instructors and peers may be delayed, impacting the immediate response cycle.
• Adaptability to Challenges: Asynchronous learning accommodates unforeseen circumstances such as illness or emergencies, enabling students to manage their learning despite disruptions to their schedule.

Disadvantages

• Reduced Instructor Connection: Students may feel less connected to instructors when engaging with recorded sessions, as there is no real-time interaction. This could impact their motivation and sense of support.
• Limited Classmate Interaction: The absence of face-to-face interaction with peers may lead to feelings of isolation and detachment from the course community. Building connections with classmates becomes more challenging in asynchronous settings.
• Procrastination Tendency: The flexibility of asynchronous learning may lead some students to procrastinate, delaying their engagement with course material until the last minute. According to Cho and Heron (2015), students who exhibited higher levels of procrastination tended to perform poorer academically in asynchronous online courses compared to their counterparts who managed their time more effectively. The flexibility inherent in asynchronous learning allowed procrastinating students to postpone engaging with course materials, resulting in rushed or incomplete assignments and lower overall performance. This can negatively affect their learning outcomes and overall performance.
• Requirement for Self-discipline: Asynchronous learning demands strong self-discipline and time management skills from students, as they must take the initiative to engage with course content and meet assignment deadlines independently.

Examples of Asynchronous Learning Formats/Channels

• Online Discussion Forums: Students participate in threaded discussions on course topics, sharing insights and responding to peers' contributions asynchronously.
• Recorded Lectures: Instructors pre-record lectures and presentations, which students can access and review at their convenience.
• Self-Directed Study: Learners engage in self-paced activities such as reading assignments, quizzes, and multimedia presentations, without the need for real-time interaction.

Synchronous Learning

Synchronous learning refers to a mode of education where instructors and students engage in learning activities simultaneously in real time, regardless of geographical location. This form of learning facilitates immediate interaction and communication among participants, akin to traditional face-to-face classroom environments.

Characteristics and advantages?

• Real-Time Interaction: Synchronous learning enables instant communication between instructors and students through various channels such as live video conferencing, chat functions, or virtual classrooms. This immediacy fosters dynamic exchanges, allowing for immediate clarification of concepts and active engagement in discussions.
• Structured Schedule: Unlike asynchronous learning, which offers flexibility in timing, synchronous learning follows a predetermined schedule. Students need to attend virtual sessions at specified times, promoting accountability and regular participation.
• Immediate Feedback: One of the key benefits of synchronous learning is the ability to receive immediate feedback from instructors and peers. Whether through live discussions, quizzes, or polls, students can promptly gauge their understanding and progress, facilitating timely adjustments to their learning approach.
• Dynamic activities: Instructors can facilitate workshop-style classes and conduct breakout group activities to promote engagement.
• Enhanced Social Presence: By engaging in real-time interactions, synchronous learning cultivates a sense of community and belonging among participants. Students can collaborate, share ideas, and build relationships with peers and instructors, fostering a supportive learning environment.

Disadvantages

• Limited participation: Some students may face technical or scheduling issues, preventing them from participating at the required time, especially if they are in different time zones.
• Accessibility challenges: Meeting accessibility requirements, such as providing live captioning for presentations, can be more challenging in synchronous sessions.

Examples of Synchronous? Learning Formats/Channels

• Live Online Lectures: Instructors deliver lectures in real-time via video conferencing platforms such as Zoom or Microsoft Teams, allowing students to ask questions and participate in discussions as they would in a traditional classroom setting.
• Virtual Classroom Sessions: Teachers conduct interactive lessons using virtual classroom software, where students can engage in activities like group discussions, brainstorming sessions, and collaborative projects in real time.
• Online Office Hours: Instructors offer synchronous office hours, providing students with the opportunity to seek clarification on course materials, receive feedback on assignments, and discuss academic concerns in a live virtual setting.

Factors Influencing Student Engagement

Student engagement is a key factor in the success of online learning environments, influenced by various factors ranging from course content to technological infrastructure (Gallardo-Echenique et al., 2015). Understanding these factors is essential for educators seeking to create dynamic and effective online courses that foster active participation and meaningful learning experiences for students. In this discussion, we explore key factors influencing student engagement in online learning, drawing on scholarly research and practical examples to illustrate their impact. From the nature of course content to instructor facilitation and learner preferences, each aspect plays a vital role in shaping students' levels of engagement and satisfaction.?

Delving into these factors, helps us educators gain insights into how to design and implement engaging online learning experiences that meet the diverse needs of our students (Chickering & Gamson, 1987; Fredricks et al., 2004; Junco et al., 2011; Kuh et al., 2007).

1. Nature of course content

The nature of course content plays a crucial role in determining student engagement in both synchronous and asynchronous learning environments. As highlighted by Fredricks et al. (2004), the relevance and interest level of course content significantly influence students' level of engagement. When course materials are engaging, students are more likely to feel motivated and enthusiastic about their learning journey.

In synchronous learning settings, where students and instructors interact in real-time, engaging course content enhances participation and active involvement. For example, incorporating interactive elements like live polls, quizzes, or discussions based on real-world scenarios can stimulate students' interest and encourage them to contribute actively during synchronous sessions. The immediacy of synchronous learning allows for dynamic discussions and collaborative problem-solving, further amplifying the impact of engaging course content.

Similarly, in asynchronous learning environments, where students access materials at their own pace, the relevance of course content remains paramount. Engaging materials that relate to students' interests or professional goals can motivate them to stay on track and actively participate in discussions or assignments. For instance, incorporating case studies, multimedia presentations, or interactive simulations can make the content more compelling and relevant to learners, encouraging self-directed exploration and deeper understanding.

2. Instructor facilitation

Instructor facilitation is another decisive factor influencing student engagement in both learning environments. According to Junco et al. (2011), research indicates that instructor presence and interaction play a pivotal role in enhancing student engagement in online courses.

In asynchronous settings, where interactions occur intermittently and students access course materials at their own pace, effective instructor facilitation is essential for maintaining momentum and promoting active participation. For instance, instructors can foster discussions by posing thought-provoking questions that encourage critical thinking and stimulate dialogue among students. Additionally, providing timely feedback on assignments helps students stay motivated and informed about their progress. Active participation in online forums by instructors also creates a sense of community and fosters a supportive learning environment.

Similarly, in synchronous sessions characterized by real-time interaction between students and instructors, effective facilitation is vital for maximizing engagement. Instructors can leverage various interactive tools, such as polls, breakout rooms, and live Q&A sessions, to create dynamic and engaging learning experiences. For example, using polls allows instructors to gauge student understanding and tailor the session accordingly, while breakout rooms facilitate small group discussions and collaboration. Live Q&A sessions provide students with immediate clarification on course material and encourage active participation.

3. Technological infrastructure

Technological infrastructure influences both synchronous and asynchronous education. Gallardo-Echenique et al. (2015) highlight the significance of technological tools and platforms in impacting student engagement. Here's why:?

• Access and reliability: Technological infrastructure ensures students have reliable access to course materials and online platforms. In synchronous education, stable internet connections are vital for participating in real-time sessions without disruptions. Similarly, in asynchronous education, students rely on accessible platforms to access recorded lectures, assignments, and discussion boards at their convenience. Without reliable technology, students may face challenges in accessing course materials, leading to disengagement.
• User-friendly interfaces: User-friendly interfaces enhance student engagement by providing intuitive navigation and easy access to course content. In synchronous education, user-friendly interfaces facilitate smooth interaction during live sessions, allowing students to actively participate in discussions and activities. In asynchronous education, intuitive platforms make it easier for students to navigate through course materials and engage in self-paced learning activities. Complex or unintuitive interfaces can frustrate students and deter them from engaging with the course content.
• Technical support services: Technical support services play a critical role in addressing students' technology-related issues and ensuring a seamless learning experience. In synchronous education, prompt technical support helps resolve connectivity issues or software glitches during live sessions, enabling uninterrupted participation. In asynchronous education, technical support assists students in troubleshooting problems with accessing course materials or navigating online platforms. Effective technical support services demonstrate institutional commitment to students' success and contribute to overall engagement in online learning.

4. Learner preferences

Catering to diverse learning preferences and styles is essential for enhancing student engagement and satisfaction in online education (Kuh et al., 2007). Some of the main reasons are:

• Personalisation: Recognising and accommodating diverse learning preferences allows instructors to personalise the learning experience for students. Some students may excel in asynchronous learning formats, appreciating the flexibility to review course materials at their own pace and engage in self-directed study. On the other hand, others may thrive in synchronous settings, valuing the opportunity for real-time interaction with instructors and peers. By offering a combination of both asynchronous and synchronous activities, instructors can cater to individual preferences, fostering a sense of belonging and promoting engagement among all students.
• Engagement: Meeting students' diverse learning needs increases their engagement with course content and activities. For instance, asynchronous learners may feel more motivated to participate when given autonomy over their learning pace and style. Conversely, synchronous learners may find greater engagement through interactive discussions and collaborative activities during live sessions. Providing options for both asynchronous and synchronous learning experiences empowers students to choose the mode that best suits their preferences and learning objectives, resulting in higher levels of engagement and satisfaction.
• Accessibility: Accommodating diverse learning preferences ensures accessibility for all students, regardless of their individual learning styles or needs. Offering a variety of learning modalities allows students with different preferences to access course materials and participate in activities in ways that are most comfortable and effective for them. This inclusivity promotes a positive learning environment where all students feel valued and supported, contributing to overall engagement and satisfaction in the online classroom.

5. Course Design

Effective course design is a fundamental aspect of promoting student engagement in online education by focusing on:

• Clarity and direction: Clear learning objectives and well-structured activities provide students with a roadmap for their learning journey. When course materials are organised and presented logically, students gain a clear understanding of what is expected of them and how they can achieve their learning goals. In asynchronous settings, clearly defined objectives help students navigate through course materials at their own pace, while in synchronous sessions, structured activities guide real-time interactions and discussions, keeping students focused and on track.
• Motivation and engagement: A well-designed course sparks students' interest and motivation to actively participate in learning activities. When learning goals are articulated and aligned with students' interests and aspirations, they are more likely to engage with course materials and take ownership of their learning. Interactive elements such as group projects, peer collaborations, and online discussions provide opportunities for students to connect with their peers, share ideas, and apply their knowledge in practical contexts. Whether in asynchronous or synchronous formats, these engaging activities foster collaboration, critical thinking, and deeper learning experiences.

Implications for Practice

In online education, understanding the practical implications of instructional strategies is paramount to fostering effective learning experiences. This is why, in this section, I’ll delve into the implications for practice, offering insights into how we can leverage various approaches to optimise student engagement and promote successful outcomes in online learning environments.

1. Balanced approach

A balanced approach to online learning involves integrating both asynchronous and synchronous instructional methods to cater to diverse learning preferences and maximise student engagement (Dennen et al., 2007). This approach recognises that each format offers unique benefits and can be strategically employed to create dynamic and interactive learning experiences.

One approach to achieving balance is through the use of blended learning models, which blend face-to-face instruction with online components (Garrison & Vaughan, 2008). In a blended learning environment, instructors can leverage asynchronous activities, such as online discussions and multimedia resources, to supplement traditional classroom instruction. Additionally, synchronous sessions, such as virtual lectures and live Q&A sessions, can be integrated to promote real-time interaction and collaboration among students.

Another strategy is to adopt a flipped classroom model, where traditional lecture-based content is delivered asynchronously outside of class, freeing up synchronous class time for interactive activities and discussions (Bishop & Verleger, 2013). By flipping the traditional lecture format, instructors can encourage active learning and critical thinking skills while providing opportunities for personalised feedback and support.

Furthermore, the use of hybrid course formats, which combine both online and face-to-face instruction, can provide students with the benefits of both asynchronous and synchronous learning experiences (Picciano, 2017). In a hybrid course, instructors can utilise asynchronous online modules for content delivery and self-paced learning, while synchronous class sessions can be reserved for interactive activities, group projects, and discussions.

Overall, a balanced approach to online learning involves thoughtful planning and the integration of both asynchronous and synchronous instructional methods to create engaging and effective learning experiences for students.

2. Catering to diverse learning needs

Catering to diverse learner needs is paramount for maximising engagement in online learning environments (Palloff & Pratt, 2013). Recognising that students have different learning preferences and styles, instructors can employ various strategies to create a more inclusive and learner-centred experience.

One approach is to offer multiple modes of engagement, including text-based discussions, multimedia presentations, interactive quizzes, and group projects (Means et al., 2009). By providing a variety of learning activities, instructors can accommodate diverse learning preferences and allow students to choose the methods that best suit their needs and preferences.

Moreover, incorporating both asynchronous and synchronous participation options can further enhance inclusivity (Wang et al., 2008). While some students may prefer the flexibility of asynchronous activities, others may thrive in synchronous settings that offer real-time interaction and collaboration opportunities. Offering a combination of both formats, instructors can ensure that all students have the opportunity to engage meaningfully with course materials and activities.

Additionally, providing customisable learning pathways and opportunities for self-directed learning can empower students to take ownership of their learning experience (Kuh et al., 2007). This may include offering alternative assignments or pathways for students with different learning needs, as well as providing resources and support for self-directed study.

3. Technological infrastructure

Educational institutions must invest in reliable technology platforms and tools to facilitate seamless communication, content delivery, and collaboration in both asynchronous and synchronous learning environments. Ensuring robust technological infrastructure also supports effective online education (Jung et al., 2014).

For example, institutions should prioritise providing high-speed internet access to students, as slow or unreliable internet connections can hinder students' ability to participate fully in online activities. Additionally, user-friendly learning management systems (LMS) are crucial for navigating course materials and accessing resources efficiently. Technical support services should also be readily available to address any technological challenges that students may encounter, such as troubleshooting software issues or resolving connectivity problems.

Furthermore, accessibility considerations should be integrated into the technological infrastructure to ensure that all students, including those with disabilities, can fully engage with online learning materials (Gallardo-Echenique et al., 2015). This may involve providing alternative formats for course materials, ensuring compatibility with screen reader software, and implementing captioning and transcription services for multimedia content.

Conclusion

The impact of asynchronous and synchronous learning on student engagement in online education is a topic of significant interest and importance in the field of educational research. This article explored the complexities of student engagement in both asynchronous and synchronous learning environments, drawing on insights from scholarly literature and empirical studies.

In conclusion, student engagement in asynchronous and synchronous learning environments is influenced by a variety of factors, including course design, instructor facilitation, technological infrastructure, and learner preferences. While both methods offer unique advantages, their impact on engagement varies based on contextual factors and instructional design.

These findings contribute to theory by highlighting the diversity within synchronous and asynchronous settings, demonstrating their associations with student engagement, satisfaction, and learning behaviour. Cultural differences may influence learning experiences, emphasizing the need for further research, particularly in the context of online education.

Instead of viewing learning experiences as strictly synchronous or asynchronous, it's more helpful to see them along a spectrum that blends both approaches. On one end, you have synchronous activities like live-streamed lectures and real-time video discussions. On the other end are asynchronous tasks such as watching recorded lectures and participating in discussion boards. Hybrid activities, positioned in the middle, bridge these realms by combining independent tasks with group reflections during scheduled synchronous sessions.

While the ideal course design depends on specific learning objectives and content, most online courses benefit from incorporating both synchronous and asynchronous elements. Synchronous instruction fosters immediate social interaction and quick information exchanges, promoting a sense of community and clearing up misunderstandings. However, it requires coordinating schedules across different time zones and may encounter technical hurdles and accessibility issues related to internet connectivity.

In contrast, asynchronous instruction offers more flexibility in timing, allowing students to delve deeper into the material at their own pace. This flexibility also opens up opportunities for a broader range of students to participate. Combining both approaches ensures a balanced learning experience that accommodates diverse learning styles and preferences (Dawson, 2006; Giesbers et al., 2013, 2014; Hrastinski et al., 2010).

References

Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In ASEE National Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, GA.

Brown, A., Jones, B., & Lee, C. (2020). The future of online learning: Trends and predictions. Educational Technology Review, 18(4), 289-302.

Carr, V. B. (2012). Asynchronous Learning. In: Seel, N. M. (Eds) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_984

Cho, M.-H., & Heron, M. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning: The role of motivation, emotion, and use of learning strategies in students' learning experiences in a self-paced online mathematics course. Distance Education, 36(1), 80-99.

Croxton, R. A. (2014). An analysis of student and faculty perceptions of asynchronous online learning experiences (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh).

Dawson, S. (2006). A study of the relationship between student communication interaction and sense of community. Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 153-162.

Dennen, V. P., Darabi, A. A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). Instructor–learner interaction in online courses: The relative perceived importance of particular instructor actions on performance and satisfaction. Distance Education, 28(1), 65-79.

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.

Gallardo-Echenique, E., Marqués-Molías, L., Bullen, M., & Strijbos, J. W. (2015). Engagement patterns in communities of inquiry: Review of online collaborative learning studies. In Critical issues in online education (pp. 119-141). Academic Press.

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.

Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D., & Gijselaers, W. (2013). Investigating the relations between motivation, tool use, participation, and performance in an e-learning course using web-videoconferencing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 285-292.

Hiltz, S., & Wellman, B. (1997). Asynchronous learning networks as a virtual classroom. Communications of the ACM, 40(9), 44–49.

Hrastinski, S., Keller, C., & Carlsson, S. A. (2010). Design exemplars for synchronous e-learning: A design theory approach. Computers & Education, 55(2), 652-662.

Johnson, M., & Smith, K. (2018). Exploring the growth of online education: A comparative analysis. Online Learning Journal, 35(2), 67-79.

Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2011). The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(2), 119-132.

Jung, I., Choi, S., Lim, C., & Leem, J. (2014). Effects of different types of interaction on learning achievement, satisfaction, and participation in web-based instruction. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(4), 366-380.

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2007). Piecing together the student success puzzle: Research, propositions, and recommendations. ASHE higher education report, 32(5), 1-182.

Matusov, E., Hayes, R., & Pluta, M. J. (2005). Using a discussion web to develop an academic community of learners. Educational Technology and Society, 8(2), 16–39.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. US Department of Education.

Morley, D. (2010). Understanding computers in a changing society. Clifton Park: Thomson Course Technology.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Picciano, A. G. (2017). Theories and frameworks for online education: Seeking an integrated model. Online Learning, 21(3), 166-190.

Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students' satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402-417.

Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group.

Shea, P., Pickett, A., & Pelz, W. (2003). Enhancing student satisfaction through faculty development: The importance of teaching presence. Online Learning, 7(3), 217-232.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2019). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (7th ed.). Pearson.

Smith, J., Johnson, L., & Williams, R. (2016). Trends in online learning: A comprehensive analysis. Journal of Educational Technology, 42(3), 123-135.

Tobias, S., & Duffy, T. (2009). Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? London: Routledge.

Wang, M., Shen, R., Novak, D., & Pan, X. (2008). The impact of synchronous online video streaming on student learning experiences in distance education. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 7(2), 105-124.