A sense of belonging to enhance participation, success and retention in online programs

Abstract

Online learning presents an opportunity to expand access to higher education to traditionally underrepresented students. However the challenges for these students may persist even when study is undertaken off campus. Fostering a sense of belonging and personal connection to learning may present a way to improve the learning experience and retention of these students, especially in the first year. In a qualitative study of university students from non-traditional backgrounds and academics, sense of belonging was found as a characteristic highly valued in online courses. How sense of belonging was understood and experienced by students, and the strategies used by academics to foster belonging in online learning are discussed.

Full text



The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education
ISSN: 1838-2959
Volume 5, Issue 2, pp. 69-80
August 2014
The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014 | 69
A sense of belonging to enhance participation,
success and retention in online programs

LisaThomas,JamesHerbertandMarkoTeras
UniversityofWollongong,Wollongong,Australia
Abstract
Onlinelearningpresentsanopportunitytoexpandaccesstohighereducationtotraditionally
underrepresentedstudents.Howeverthechallengesforthesestudentsmaypersistevenwhen
studyisundertakenoffcampus.Fosteringasenseofbelongingandpersonalconnectionto
learningmaypresentawaytoimprovethelearningexperienceandretentionofthese
students,especiallyinthefirstyear.Inaqualitativestudyofuniversitystudentsfromnon‐
traditionalbackgroundsandacademics,senseofbelongingwasfoundasacharacteristic
highlyvaluedinonlinecourses.Howsenseofbelongingwasunderstoodandexperiencedby
students,andthestrategiesusedbyacademicstofosterbelonginginonlinelearningare
discussed.
Pleasecitethisarticleas:
Thomas,L., Herbert,J.&Teras,M. (2014).Asenseofbelongingtoenhanceparticipation,successand
retentioninonlineprograms.TheInternationalJournaloftheFirstYearinHigherEducation,5(2),69‐80.
doi:10.5204/intjfyhe.v5i2.233
Thisarticlehasbeenpeerreviewedandacceptedforpublicationin IntJFYHE.PleaseseetheEditorial
Policiesunderthe‘About’sectionoftheJournalwebsiteforfurtherinformation.
© Copyright of articles is retained by author/s. As an open access journal, articles are free to use, with
properattribution,ineducationalandothernon‐commercialsettings.ISSN:1838‐2959

A sense of belonging to enhance participation, success and retention in online programs

70 | The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014
Introduction
Theimplementation oftheBradleyReview
(Bradley, Noonan, Nugent & Scales, 2008)
has brought about a demographic shift in
higher education, both in terms of the
numberofAustraliansattendinguniversity,
and also the diversity of the social and
economicbackgroundofstudents.Thisshift
hastakenplacealongsidetheexpansionof
online learning as an alternative or
complement to on‐campus offerings (e.g.
Palmer & Holt, 2009). This research takes
placeinacontextwheretheunderstanding
oftheinteractionsofthesetwotrendsin
highereducationislimited.
Onlinelearningpresentsan opportunityto
make higher education accessible for
students from equity groups (e.g.
remote/regional, mature age, primary
caregivers, low socioeconomic status).
However,despitetheaffordancesof
technology to support needs of diverse
learners,it isstill commontosee“onesize
fits all” approaches to online curriculum
design(Oliver,2006). Forvariousreasons,
retentionratesfor online learningarelow
compared to students on campus (Carr,
2000). Research suggests that factors
similar to face‐to‐face learning (i.e. class,
educational background, occupation) tend
to predict engagement in online learning
(Gorard & Selwyn, 2005). Added to the
tendencyofstudentsfromequitygroupsto
withdrawt heirenrolmentatahigherratein
the first year of study (Krause, 2005),
studentsfromequitygroupsstudyingtheir
firstyearonlinemaybeparticularlyatrisk
ofabandoningtheirstudies.
Strategies that aim to foster a sense of
belonging and inclusion in the online
context appear promising in improving
retention in online learning. McConnell
(2006) emphasises learning as a social
processthatiscarriedoutincommunities,
suggestingthatknowledgeisdevelopedand
negotiatedbetweenmembers.Thecreation
andinterpretationofknowledgeisthought
tobeintertwinedwithpersonalandwithin
group identity. Similarly, Koole and
Parchoma (2013) describe belonging in
onlinelearningcommunitiesasaniterative
processofdialogueandexchangewith
othermembers,andthatindividualsactto
achieve a level of “cognitive resonance in
which they integrate experiences and
beliefs of the external world into their
personalnarratives”(p.14).Hughes(2007)
describes inclusion in terms of the
congruence between the identities of the
learners and the identities implicitly
supportedbytheinteractionsoftheonline
learning community. The challenge is for
educatorstocreatealearningenvironment
that supports the diverse identities and
experiences of students and foster
constructive and respectful dialogue and
exchange. While students withdraw from
highereducationforadiversesetofreasons
(Krause, 2005), fostering belonging and
inclusion can play a role in improving
retention by motivating students to
continuestudying.
Thispaperreportsonsomepreliminary
findings from a study that is examining
socially inclusive teaching and the online
learning context. From an analysis of the
data,astrongthemearoundsenseof
belonging emerged and was explored in
detail.Thepurposeofthispaperisreporton
the findings of the research related to the
senseof belongingthemeanddemonstrate
howacademicteacherscansupportthisin
theonlinelearningcontext.
Methodology
This study used a qualitative approach,
appropriatetotheexploratorynatureofthe
investigation. The research was guided by
theover‐archingquestions(a)what

Thomas, Herbert & Teras

The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014 | 71
challenges exist for students from non‐
traditionalbackgroundsengaginginonline
learning and, (b) what strategies support
learning for students from non‐traditional
backgrounds in the online learning
environment? The investigators sought to
address these questions with data from
boththestudentandacademicteacher
perspective. Students were recruited
through a strategy of general
advertisements to the student body of
variousuniversitiesaskingforparticipants
who identified themselves as being a non‐
traditional student and were studying, or
hadstudiedinanonlineorblendedformat.
Academicswererecruited through contact
with Associate Deans of Teaching and
Learning(orequivalent)fromparticipating
universitieswhowereaskedtoidentifyand
forward an invite to teaching staff who
demonstratedsociallyinclusiveonline
teaching practices. Efforts were made to
ensure that participants represented a
range of discipline areas and regions
throughout Australia to ensure the
relevance of the research to the broader
nationalhighereducationcontext.
In total, 50 semi‐structured individual
interviews and six focus groups were
conducted.Theinterviewer posed aseries
of questions to facilitate discussion about
online teaching and learning experiences
andstrategiesthatenableparticipationand
successforadiverserangeofstudents.
Participants included students from non‐
traditional backgrounds who have studied
onlineorinablendedlearningcontext
(n=21) and, academic teaching staff from
Australian universities who teach in
courseswithan onlinecomponent(n=46).
Studentparticipantsrepresentedarangeof
backgroundsincludingthosewhoidentified
as low socioeconomic background, first in

1Theacronymsforeachstateareusedlaterinreportingthedata.Forexample“Staff4SA”refersto
anacademicstaffmembercodedasnumber4andfromSouthAustralia.
familytoattenduniversity,withadisability,
livinginaremoteorregionalarea,
Indigenous, international, English as a
second language, carer, worker etc.  All
participants were drawn from around
Australia including representatives from
New South Wales (NSW), Queensland
(QLD),SouthAustralia(SA),Western
Australia(WA)andTasmania(Tas)1.Where
a face‐to‐face meeting was not possible,
individual interviews occurred via a
telephone call or Skype meeting. All focus
groups were facilitated in a face‐to‐face
formatan dweregroupedineither ast udent
oracademicteachingstaffconfiguration.
Theinterviewsandfocusgroupdiscussions
were audio‐recorded and transcribed
verbatim.Interferenceandaudioissues
created some difficulties in transcription
andatotal of 45interviewsand five focus
group discussions were successfully
transcribed and imported into NVivo
softwareforqualitativeanalysis.Toensure
data reliability, one researcher listened to
each recording while following the
transcript to check for errors in
transcription(Gibbs,2007).Datawascoded
followingTesch’s(1990) eight stepcoding
processallowingcodestoemergefromthe
information collected in interviews and
focusgroupdiscussions.Threemembersof
the research team were involved in the
codingprocess.Aqualitativecodebookwas
establishedwithinthesoftwaretoprovide
codingdefinitionsandmaximisecoherence
between coders (Guest, MacQueen &
Namey,2012).Oncecodeswereestablished
and agreed upon, two interviews were
chosen and coded by each member of the
team.Theteamthenmettocross‐checkthe
codes to reach inter‐coder agreement
(Creswell, 2014). Throughout the coding
process, regular meetings were held to

A sense of belonging to enhance participation, success and retention in online programs

72 | The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014
continually cross‐check coding. This
enabled a cohesive understanding of the
coding system among team members to
ensurethereliabilityofthedataanalysis.
Thepurposeofthispaperistodemonstrate
thefindingsoftheresearchwithregardto
sense of belonging in the online learning
context.Thustheresultspresentedhere
report on what students and teachers say
about sense of belonging in the online
context.
Results
Participants were asked to describe their
experiences with online teaching and
learningandalsotodiscuss strategiesthat
enhanced participation and success for a
diverse range of online students. Through
the analysis of interview and focus group
data, the theme of “sense of belonging”
emerged.Amongthedata,therewere
referencesfrombothstudentandacademic
teaching staff with regard to sense of
belonging. In total, seven students and 17
academics discussed issues pertaining to
sense of belonging in the online learning
context.Theircommentswereidentifiedas
beingrelatedtotheexperienceofasenseof
belonging in online learning or strategies
that foster a sense of belonging in online
learning.
The experience of a sense of
belonging in online learning
Itwasoftenreportedthatasenseof
belongingtoacommunitywasadesirable
aspect within an online learning context.
Oneacademic teacherspoke ofanoptional
face‐to‐facecomponentinanonlinecourse
andstated:
Becauseit’snotcompulsory,it’supto
them whether they want to come in so
themerefactthey’rewantingtocomein
sortoftellsyouthattheywantsomesort
ofcommunity.(Staff4SA)
Some students spoke of positive
experiences of sense of belonging in an
online learning context. For one student,
their online experience had been more
conducive to communitybuildingandthe
development of a sense of belonging than
the face‐to‐face contexts in which they’d
studied.Theysaidthat:
[In my] course there was a week of
workshops we had to attend in person.
You felt like you’d already met most of
thestudents becauseyou’dbeentalking
tothemonline.Therewas….Eventhough
everybody was online doing it, it was
muchmoreofagroupcamaraderie
feeling that I don’t get on campus.
(StudentFocusgroup2WA)
Another student set outto take the online
relationshipsfurtherandarrangedtomeet
with other students in person as they
reported:
Wehadtohaveourownlittlediscussion
group and we had to participate within
that discussion group at least twice a
week. As a result of that, a few of the
studentswholivelocallyreallywanted
to get together and meet up externally
andgoandhaveacoffee,justtosay
“hello” and put a face to the name and
stufflikethat.(Student10WA)
For other students though, their online
learning experience was not as positive
withrespecttodevelopingasenseof
belonging.Onestudentcommentedthat:
Isortoffeelabitisolatedsometimes
doingit online….Ijustfeellikewiththe
on‐campusstudentsthere seemstobea
lotofdiscussionwhichIdon’thave,you
know, obviously doing it externally.
(Student6WA)

Thomas, Herbert & Teras

The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014 | 73
Theabsenceoftheexperienceofasenseof
belonging in some online learning courses
wasreportedtoimpact onsomestudents’
desire to continue with learning in the
onlinecontext.Thisstudentsaid:
I prefer social interaction with other
peopletohelpme,Idon’tknow,
consolidate ideas and build on
informationthat I’velearnedinlectures
soformepersonally,Ifound doingboth
units externally quite difficult. I would
reallyhavelikedtodomoreunits
externally but because of the troubles I
felt with doing external learning I
wouldn’t do anymore I don’t think.
(Student14WA)
Academic teachers also discussed their
observations of student isolation in the
onlinelearningcontext.Onesaid:
I think some students feel quite
disengagedand lonelyandIthinkthat’s
particularly true for students who are
reallyactiveinpostingonthediscussion
board.Therearealwayssomestudents
whoare really,reallykeenandthen the
response kind of dies off sort of Week
FourorWeekFiveandIthinkthat’squite
isolat ingfors tudentswhoarel ookingf or
conversationanddiscussionand
engagement and that kind of kills that
motivation and buzz for them. (Staff 4
Tas)
Whenacademicteachersexplicitlyadapted
their online program to enhance sense of
belonging, they noticed changes with
student satisfaction. One academic stated:
“They’re (students) saying they feel like
there’s more online sense of community,
we’re finding less anxiety, we’re finding
moreretention,lessattrition.”(Staff4SA).
Anotherreported:
This semester you know, the feedback
from the students has been things like
“The first time I felt I’ve been in a real
classroom” so the change in the …
especially just the last strategies we’ve
been using, you know, we’ve noticed a
reallybig changein justtheperspective
ofthestudentsabouttheirfeelings(Staff
1QLD)
Strategies that foster a sense of
belonging in online learning
Academicteachersandstudents discussed
thedevelopment ofa senseofbelongingin
online learning contexts during the
interviewsandfocusgroupdiscussions.
Thiswasoftendescribedasapriorityfor
teaching in the online context. One
academic stated “that’s the maint hing for
meistomakeafeelingofaclassandagroup
of people” (Staff 7 NSW). However, it was
alsorecognisedthatfosteringasenseof
belongingonlinewasachallengingtask.
Thisacademiccommentedonthechallenge:
Totryandencouragestudentstoform
an online learning community, to feel
engagedand tofeel likeyou’repartof
something,butIthinkit’sreallyhardto
achieve.(Staff4WA)
Oneacademicexploredthisalittlefurther
astheysaid“They(students)arehappy to
replytome orrespondto aquestionI put
onlinebutintermsofrespondingto
someone else, they find that challenging”
(Staff3QLD).Thissameacademicoffereda
solutionsuggesting“there’saneedthereto
assiststudentstoparticipateinthoseonline
discussions with people they haven’t met”
(Staff3QLD).
Icebreakers were a strategy reported to
promotecollaborationbetweenstudentsas
a prelude to establishing a sense of
belongingtoacommunityoflearners.One
academic teacher suggests that such
activitiesshouldbeafeatureintheearly
stagesofanonlinesubject:

A sense of belonging to enhance participation, success and retention in online programs

74 | The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014
Spending some quality time front‐
ending it and doing the ice‐breaking
andgettingtoknowpeople…allthose
sortsofthingsthatweprobablyinvest
in more when we’ve got the students
oncampus. It’scomehometome that
thisneedstobefront‐endedalotmore.
(Staff3QLD)
One academic used icebreakers to
demonstrate geographical variety of
students,sharing:
IgetthemtopostGooglemaplinksto
wheretheylive…thetownorsuburb…
sothattheyhaveagetasenseofwhere
everyoneis,as enseofplaceandIthink
that’sreallyimportant.(Staff7NSW).
Another academic added professional
purposetotheicebreakerandalso
developed it as a low‐stakes assessment
taskastheyreported:
Ihavean assessment componentthat
requires them to share something
onlineandItrytodothatatthe
beginning of the subject.  We all start
off with a kind of low stakes
assessment…thatrequiresthemtodo
somethingscholarlybutoftenisbased
ontheirownprofessionalexperience
and reflection so they can share
something about themselves…  it’s a
nicewayofgettingtoknowtheother
studentsonsortofa,youknow,more
ofakindofprofessionalbasis…So,
startwithsomethinglikethatandwhat
I’ve found is that that tends to build
collegiality that then progresses later
oninthesubjectsothosestudentswho
want to engage with each other do.
(Staff5NSW)
Embedding collaboration into assessment
was viewed by some as essential and
positive in promoting social interactions
and sense of belonging. One academic
advised:
Make sure that communicating with
eachotherinclassispartofyour
assessmentsothattheyhavetodothat
becauseifyoudon’tmakethem,it’stoo
easyjusttolurkornotengage.(Staff7
NSW).
The outcomes for students when
collaborating in online assessment tasks
wasillustratedinthisstudent’scomment:
Iactuallymadefriendswith…wehad
agroupprojectinoneofmyunitswere
wehadtointeract–therehadtobefive
ofusgetintoagroup…Andsowegot
to know one another within our little
group(Student5WA)
Not all student‐to‐student collaboration
occurredwithinstructuredactivities.Some
academic teachers spoke of discussion
forum spaces that they called “student
lounge”or“caféspace”whichtheysetupto
enablestudentstohaveunmonitored
discussions.Oneacademicteacherpointed
outthattherewasnotaneedtosetupsuch
a space for students, but instead,
encouraged students to do this for
themselves “You can use Skype, Facebook,
whatever and you’re free to set those up,
usethemasyoulikebutwewon’tinteract
inthose”(Staff2SA).Thereasoningbehind
thisbeing“Thatgivesthemafreedomthere
thattheydon’thaveknowingthatwemight
beoverlookingwhatthey’redoing”(Staff2
SA).Inasimilarsituation,anotheracademic
reported student satisfaction with this
approach,saying“I’vehadnothingtodo
with their Facebook site at all but the
feedback they’ve given me, it seems to be
workingokay”(Staff1QLD).
Real‐time interactions were used in some
online courses to promote a sense of
belonging.Virtualclassrooms,using
technologies such as Adobe Connect
enabledstudentsand staffto interactwith
eachotherfromvariouslocations.Tomeet

Thomas, Herbert & Teras

The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014 | 75
the diverse needs of the students, one
academic offered the sessions more than
onceaweek“I’vegotacoupleoftutors
therebecausewerunfourduringtheweek
andwerangethemacrossdifferenttimesto
suitourdifferenttypesofstudents”(Staff1
SA).Thisacademicreportedonthevalueof
thisapproachstating“That’sworkingreally
wellandalotof studentsare reallysaying
how wonderful that is just to be able to
touch base with somebody once a week”
(Staff1SA). Virtualclassroominteractions
canalsoberecordedandmadeavailableto
studentswhocannotattendthelivesession.
Thisacademicteachercommented:
Even if they don’t attend the live
sessions,(students) havewritteninand
sai ditr eallymak esthemfeelmoreapart
ofittobeabletolistentowhat’sgoing
on.(Staff3SA).
Theabilitytowatchreal‐timeclassroom
interactionviavideowasalsodiscussedby
studentswhowerestudyingexternallyina
mixed‐mode course. While many of the
studentsinthesamecourse werestudying
in a face‐to‐face format, these students
accessed learning material in an online
format. This student commented on the
availabilityoflecturerecordingssaying:
Thelectureisrecorded–it’spresentation
andaudio soyou canseeexactlywhat’s
goingoninthelectureandyoucanalso
hearsomeofthediscussioninthe
lectur e…youmi ghtnotbeabletohearall
oftheaudioanddiscussionbut,you
know,it’sverygoodingivingyouasense
ofbeingthere.(Student11WA)
Another student shared what “good
teachers”dotointhissituationstating:
Somelecturersareverygoodinthisand
they also even suggest to remind them
“Can you say it again for the external
students” so that we can hear the
questionsthatareaskedandtheanswers
that the lecturer gives. I find that very
helpfulandIfeelmoreconnectedtoitas
well.(Student13WA)
Forexternalstudentsinamixed‐mode
course,accesstothesamelearning
resources as the face‐to‐facestudents was
notalwaysequal.Onestudentreported:
They’ve got different presentations with
industryspecialistsand…obviouslyit’s
notanoptionforus.Imean,IcouldgoifI
really,reallywantedtobutitwouldtakea
lotof workandI wouldhavetobesure it
wasdefinitelyonthemoneyformetodo
that(Student2WA)
Another student pointed to how this
impactedonsenseofbelongingbystating:
The lecturer referred to a DVD that they
would be watching in tutorial and I was
like“Well, hangon,I wanttoseetheDVD
too. Is it made available online?” “No, it’s
not,”sothenIwentintothisbigrigmarole
ofgettingacopyoftheDVD,gettingitsent
downtothecampusnearmyhouseand
thentryingtogoandpickitup.Sothatwas
alittle bitdifficult beingleftout.(Student
11WA)
Academic teachers and students
commented on teacher/student
relationships and the teacher presence in
onlinelearningthatcontributedtoasense
of belonging. Such relationships and
presence were seen as important in
sustaining an engaging learning
environment as reported by this academic
“having that personal engagement with
them,usingtechnologiesinawaythathelps
to personalise and foster engagement
between them but also between them and
you” (Staff 7 NSW). One academic
introduced the teaching team to students
early on in the online course as they
described:

A sense of belonging to enhance participation, success and retention in online programs

76 | The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014
Iac tual lyopeneditupatthebeginningof
thestudyperiodwith aphotoofmyself
and then I put the photos of all of my
tutorsuptheresostudentswould know
whotheywere.(Staff1SA)
Thiscasualapproachwasalsosupportedby
another academic who stated “working
withthem,someofthemthrough
encouragement and by casualising the
languagerequired,alotofthemwillgain
confidence and engage” (Staff 5SA). From
the learner perspective, this student
commented on the impact of teacher
presenceintheonlinecontext:
Ithinkthethingthatmadethedifference
astowhether youfeltyouwereactually
part of a class and there was any
interaction was how involved the
lecturer was as in, in the forums, there
weresomelectu rerswho wouldsa yafter
everyone had sort of introduced
themselves,notreallyhaveanymoreto
do with us so there’d be discussion
betweenstudentsabouttopicsbutsome
lecturers would just not be involved
whereas others would check it
frequently,havetheirinput…she(tutor)
wassointeractive onthe forumsthat it
reallygotalotofpeopleinvolvedthatI
don’t think would have normally
bothered.(Student7WA)
Thissectionhaspresentedarangeof
strategiestofoster asenseof belongingas
discussed by the participants. Two
academics discussed the importance of
allowingtheindividualtodecideupontheir
level of interaction within the online
context. One academic stated “It’s really
about giving them the option about their
levelofengagementandsupportingthemin
that” (Staff 5 NSW). Another academic
supportedthisstatementbysaying:
Buildthat intoa community–itdoesn’t
havetobeallforcedbyusandIknow
there’sFacebookandotherthingsbut
somewhere that needs to be facilitated
that they know they’ll actually still
connectwithpeopleIthink(Staff1QLD)
Discussion
Fromabroadexplorationofthe
experiences of students from non‐
traditionalbackgroundsengaginginonline
learning,senseofbelongingemergedasan
important part of the educational
experience.Wenger (1999)arguesthatthe
value of education, whether it be face‐to‐
face or online, is in the learners’ social
interactions and involvement in learning
communities. Of the students who
discussed this in their interview or focus
group,mostreportedadesiretofeelasense
of connection with fellow students and
teachers.Bothstaffandstudentsexpressed
greatersatisfactionwithonlinecoursesthat
successfully fostered a sense of belonging
among students. Palloff and Pratt (2005)
suggestthattheformationofonline
learningcommunitiesiswhatdistinguishes
online learning from simple
correspondence courses, and leads to
enhanced student outcomes and
satisfaction.Studentsreportedthatgreater
engagement and collaboration with peers
fostered a sense of camaraderie that
diffused some of the isolation often
associatedwithoff‐campusstudy.Thiswas
in part about personal/professional
connections,butalsoreducedanxietyabout
someaspectsofstudyingwhichareoften
associated with the first‐year experience.
Having other students available and
activelyengagedindiscussing the work,
helpedstudentstoconsolidateandbuildon
ideas.Thisdiscussionandexchangereflects
Koole and Parchoma’s (2013) model of
learning in online communities, in
particular the role of connecting personal
identityandexperiencestolearning.
Feelings of isolation were reported when
communities were not fostered within the

Thomas, Herbert & Teras

The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014 | 77
online learning context, leading to
dissatisfaction with the learning
experience.Thevalueofsocial interactions
can easily be overlooked when content
deliveryandteachingbecome the primary
focus,pushingasideopportunityfor
networking and friendship (Stuart, 2006).
Somestudentscommentedontheimpactof
thisontheircommitmentto continuewith
online learning. For students who studied
onlinealongsideon‐campusstudentsinthe
same course, feelings of isolation were
furtherexacerbated,astheywereoftennot
includedin learningexperiences offeredto
their on‐campus peers. Online students
wereoftenfrustratedwhenstudentswere
talking about content or resources that
werenotavailabletothem.Someteachers
also identified that participation in the
onlineforumsbyon‐campusstudentsoften
ebbed over the course of the semester,
leaving students that relied on online
communication to discuss and exchange
withfellowstudentsfeelingquite“leftout”.
Alloftheseaforementionedonlinelearning
phenomena—workload, isolation, sense of
community and scaffolding to reduce
anxiety—have been discussed by various
authors(e.g.Haavind&Carter,2011;Palloff
&Pratt, 1999)throughout thehistoryofe‐
learning. There are various effective
facilitationstrategiesfortheneedsofonline
learningto“motivatestudentstogodeeper
and further with the material” (Palloff &
Pratt, 1999, p. 75) but also, just as
importantly,tostimulate and openfurther
discussion in the learning community; a
community that starts to build through
theseinteractions.Suchfacilitationneedsto
beprompt,and connectedwith theoverall
course design, otherwise the instructor
feelsonlinelearningis“alotofwork”,and
the students sense the inconsistency and
isolation.Forthepurposesofstudent
engagement and retention, this is a
necessaryfeatureintheearlystagesofall
courses,andparticularlyimportantinthose
cateringtofirst‐yearstudents.Thisrequires
online teachers to consider how to best
fosterthedevelopmentofcommunityand
senseofbelonginginonlinecoursesforthe
purpose of high quality learning
experiences.
Becoming an online teacher requires
academics to reconsider aspects of their
teaching practice. Whilst essentially many
of the same principles of good teaching
apply to both the face‐to‐face and online
contexts, there is an added layer of
complexityinvolvedinmaintainingstudent
motivation, interaction and engagement
online (Bennett & Lockyer, 2004). In this
research, academics talked in detail about
some of the strategies they employed to
develop the students’ personal investment
intheirlearning.Theimportanceplacedon
belonginginonline learningreinforcesthe
socialnatureoflearningandthenegotiation
and co‐creation of knowledge (McConnell,
2006).Studentswantedtobeprovidedwith
a framework with which to dialogue with
otherstudentsabouttheirunderstanding,
the importance and relevance of course
contenttotheircontext,andtheirpersonal
experienceofengaginginlearning(Koole&
Parchoma, 2013). Having online learning
communities that were accepting of the
myriadofidentitieswasalsoapriorityfor
teachers (Hughes, 2007) who made active
efforts to facilitate an inclusive
environment.
IntheWeb2.0context,onlinelearning
environments offer endless opportunities
forinteraction.Rovai(2001)suggestedtwo
typesofonlineinteractionsforthepurpose
of building online community: task‐driven
interactionsforthegoaloflearningand,
socioemotional interactions to facilitate
social‐wellbeing and friendships. The
balance of task‐driven and socioemotional
interactionsareofequalimportancein the

A sense of belonging to enhance participation, success and retention in online programs

78 | The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014
development of community (Liu, Magjuka,
Bonk & Lee, 2007). In this study,
participantsdiscussedarangeofstrategies
thatcontributedtocommunitybuildingand
sense of belonging, many of which
necessitatedgettingstudentstogobeyond
the basic requirements of interaction to
actually be personally invested and
connected to their learning. Examples of
how the academics went about this
included front‐ending activities with ice‐
breakersandlowstakes assessments that
required collaboration. This was often
enoughtobuildabasiclevelofengagement
for students interested in actively
participating in online learning. Following
on from icebreaking activities, building
ongoingcollaborationintoassessmentswas
important. Frequently, online group work
provided an incentive for students to not
justdotherequiredinteractionwithfellow
students, but to contribute to group
discussions. Lectures through video‐
conferencing were also thought to helpto
facilitate belonging, partly due to their
regularity. Even when students were not
abletodirectly participate,theywere able
toaccesstheselivelecturesandvicariously
participate through watching student
discussions. Having the questions and
discussionofthematerialfromthelectures
available in particular was thought to be
valuable.
More than opportunities for interaction,
teacherpresencecontributedgreatlytothe
sense of belonging in the online context.
Thiswas lessaboutbeingactuallypresent,
butmoreasensethattheywereavailableif
needed, and that discussions remained on
trackandrelevantthroughteachers’subtle
intervention. Students often appreciate
regular contact with teachers, even when
students do not have any particular
problems. Some students and academics
talkedabouthowevenasimplephonecall
couldchangethewaystudentsviewedtheir
connection to the class. Goodyear etal.
(2001) propose a model identifying eight
rolesassociatedwithonlineteaching.These
include: content facilitator, technologist,
designer, manager/administrator, process
facilitator,adviser/counselor,assessor,and
researcher.Withineachoftheserolesa
theme of teacher presence is
communicated, ensuring that students’
needsarewellconsideredfromavarietyof
angles.
Inaframeworkthatfostersasenseof
belonging, there is a need for flexibility.
With an ever‐diversifying student body,
higher education must cater to students
with multiple identities and barriers to
participating in traditional forms of
education (Morgan, 2013). In the online
context, teachers must be able to
accommodate students that prefer to be
self‐sufficient or do not have the time to
participate in a learning community, and
still provide a high‐quality learning
experience.Thisresearchpresenteda
varietyofstrategiesthatofferopportunities
for interaction. Some of these were built
intothecurriculum,withorwithoutan
assessable component, others were
opportunities to socialise beyond the
learning context. Through the offer and
supportof multipleopportunities, learners
were able to select a path that best suited
their learning needs, thus providing a
differentiatedpathwayforvariouslearners.
Conclusion
The research suggests that students and
academics highly value efforts to create a
sense of belonging across the students
undertaking an online course. Where
academics were able to foster a sense of
community, collaboration, and personal
engagementinlearning,studentstendedto
enjoytheirlearningexperiencemore,feelas
though they learned more, and were less

Thomas, Herbert & Teras

The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014 | 79
inclinedtowithdrawfromlearning.Beyond
merely improving the satisfaction of
students,successfullydevelopingasenseof
belonginginatcoursehadrealpedagogical
benefits, consistent with much of the
literature describing learning as a process
of a group interpreting and negotiating
knowledge (e.g. McConnell, 2006). Online
courses that offered multiple and varied
opportunitiestointeractprovideda means
ofallowingadiverserangeofstudentsto
selectopportunitiestoengage thatbestfit
within their own unique learning needs.
Fosteringasenseofbelongingpresentsasa
broad and inclusive strategy to improve
retention of students in online learning,
especiallyinthefirstyearwhereattritionis
high for non‐traditional students (Krause,
2005).
Themainpurposeofthispaperhasbeento
analyseathemeofsenseofbelongingthat
emergedfromthefindingsofabroader
study investigating the practices and
principles of socially inclusive online
teaching.Throughtheanalysisofdatafrom
bothacademicteachersandonlinestudents
from non‐traditional backgrounds the
researchers were able to explore the
experiencesofbelonginginonline learning
contextsandthestrategiesusedbyteachers
tofosterasenseofbelongingamongsttheir
students.
Inconclusion,thispaperdemonstratesthat
manystudentsandteachersseektoachieve
a feeling of community in the online
learning context, to varying levels of
success. Where a learning environment
providesmultiplelayersforengagement
and participation, learners are offered
opportunities to participate in a manner
mostsuitabletotheirneeds.Thisanalysis
highlightstheimportanceofembeddinga
rangeofcommunity‐buildingstrategiesfor
a truly inclusive online course to cater for
the diversifying student body in higher
education.
References
Bennett,S.,&Lockyer,L.(2004).Becomingan online
teacher:Adaptingtoachangedenvironmentfor
teaching and learning in higher education.
EducationalMediaInternational,41(3),  231‐
248.doi:10.1080/09523980410001680842
Bradley,D.,Noonan,P.,Nugent,H.,&Scales,B.(2008).
ReviewofAustralianhighereducation.Final
Report. Canberra, Australia. Commonwealth of
Australia.
Carr,S.(2000).Asdistanceeducationcomesofage,the
challenge is keeping the students. Chronicleof
HigherEducation,46(23),39‐41.Retrievedfrom
http://www.chronicle.com/article/As‐
Distance‐Education‐Comes‐of/14334
Creswell, J. (2014). Researchdesign:Qualitative,
quantitative,andmixedmethodsapproaches.
ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.
Gibbs,G.(2007).Analyzingqualitativedata.InU.Flick
(Ed.),TheSagequalitativeresearchkit.Thousand
Oaks,CA:Sage.
Goodyear, P., Salmon, G., Spector, M., Steeples, C., &
Tickner, S. (2001) Competencies of online
teaching: a special report, Educational
TechnologyResearchandDevelopment,49(1),
65‐72
Gorard, S., & Selwyn, N. (2005). Towards a learning
society?Theimpactoftechnologyonpatternsof
participationinlifelonglearning.BritishJournal
ofSociologyofEducation,26(1), 71‐89. doi:
10.1080/0142569042000292725
Guest, G., MacQueen, K., & Namey, E. (2012). Applied
thematicanalysis.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
Haavind,S.,&Carter,R.(2011).Fourstepstofostering
collaborative presence in online discussion
forums.InProceedingsofWorldConferenceonE‐
LearninginCorporate,Government,Healthcare,
andHigherEducation2011 (pp. 1245‐1253).
Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from
http://www.editlib.org/p/38886
Hughes,G.(2007).Diversity,identityandbelongingin
e‐learning communities: Sometheoriesand
paradoxes.TeachinginHigherEducation,12(5‐
6), 709‐720.doi:
10.1080/13562510701596315
Koole,M.,&Parchoma,G.(2013).Thewebofidentity:
A model of digital identity formation in
networked learning environments. In S.
Warburton, & S. Hatzipanagos (Eds.), Digital

A sense of belonging to enhance participation, success and retention in online programs

80 | The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2) August, 2014
identityandsocialmedia(pp.14‐28).Hershey,
PA: Information Science Reference. doi:
10.4018/978‐1‐4666‐1915‐9.ch002
Krause,K‐L.(2005).Seriousthoughtsaboutdropping
out in first year: Trends, patterns and
implications for higher education. Studiesin
Learning,EvaluationInnovationand
Development,2(3), 55‐68. Retrieved from
http://sleid.cqu.edu.au/viewarticle.php?id=84
Liu,X.,Magjuka,R.,Bonk, C.,& Lee,S. (2007).Does a
senseof communitymatter? Anexamination of
participants' perceptions of building learning
communities in online course. TheQuarterly
ReviewofDistanceEducation,8(1),9‐24.
McConnell, D. (2006). E‐LearningGroupsand
Communities:ImaginingLearningintheAgeof
theInternet. Buckingham, UK: Open University
Press.
Morgan, M. (2013). Student diversity in higher
education. In M. Morgan (Ed.), Supporting
studentdiversityinhighereducation:Apractical
guide(pp.10‐23).NewYork,NY:Routledge.
Oliver, R. (2006). Exploring a technology‐facilitated
solutionto caterforadvancedstudentsin large
undergraduate classes. JournalofComputer
AssistedLearning,22(1), 1‐12. doi:
10.1111/j.1365‐2729.2006.00155.x
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Buildinglearning
communitiesincyberspace:Effectivestrategies
fortheonlineclassroom. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey‐Bass.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2005). Online learning
communities revisited. 21stAnnualConference
onDistanceTeachingandLearning. Retrieved
from
http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference/reso
urce_library/proceedings/05_1801.pdf
Palmer, S., & Holt. (2009). Staff and student
perceptionsof anonlinelearningenvironment:
Difference and development. Australasian
JournalofEducationalTechnology,25(3), 366‐
381.
Rovai, A. (2001). Building classroom community at a
distance: A case study. EducationalTechnology
ResearchandDevelopment.49(4),33‐48.
Stuart,M.(2006).“Myfriendsmadeallthedifference”:
Gettingintoandsucceedingatuniversityforfirst
generationstudents.JournalofAccessPolicyand
Practice,3(2), 162‐184. Retrieved from
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/niac
e/japp/2006/00000003/00000002/art00005
Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitativeresearch:Analysistypes
andsoftwaretools.NewYork,NY:Falmer.
Wenger,E. (1999).Communitiesofpractice:Learning,
meaning,andidentity. Cambridge, UK:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
