www.rsisinternational.org

Page 125

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

The Influence of Teaching Presence in Online Classes

Tai Yu Jing

, Lee Chi Heng

, Leona Kiu King Chieh

, Chan Jie Yan

, Ng Bung Chen

, Noor Hanim

Rahmat

1,2,3,4,6

Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia

Institute of Chinese Studies, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Sungai Long Campus, Malaysia

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.924ILEIID0015

Received: 23 September 2025; Accepted: 30 September 2025; Published: 29 October 2025

ABSTRACT

This study presents a quantitative examination of online presence within Mandarin as a Foreign Language

(MFL) class, focusing on the impact of teaching presence on both social and cognitive presence in addressing

learner needs. The findings underscore the interrelated roles of teaching presence (TP), social presence (SP),

and cognitive presence (CP) as foundational components for fostering effective and meaningful learning

experiences in online language education. This quantitative study is conducted to explore types of presence in

online learning. A convenient sample of 381 participants responded to the survey. The instrument used is a 5

Likert-scale survey. Overall, the findings of these studies support the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework,

highlighting the importance of balancing cognitive, social, and teaching presences to create engaging and

successful online learning environments. By leveraging the interconnectedness of TP, SP, and CP, instructors

can significantly enhance student engagement and potentially reduce dropout rates.

Keywords: Online Presence, Mandarin As A Foreign Language, Teaching Presence, Social Presence,

Cognitive Presence

INTRODUCTION

The advancement of digital technology has significantly transformed pedagogical practices, particularly in the

teaching and learning of foreign languages. The widespread adoption of online platforms has enabled learners

from diverse geographical and cultural backgrounds to access language education, thereby broadening

opportunities for developing both linguistic and intercultural competence. According to Liu (2022), Mandarin

programs in the United States have shifted their courses online, thereby expanding their recruitment scope to

include students from other regions and even other countries.

Within the context of online learning, one of the most influential frameworks guiding research on teaching and

learning processes is the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model, developed by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer

(2000) and later refined by Garrison and Arbaugh (2007). The CoI framework identifies three interdependent

elements—teaching presence (TP), cognitive presence (CP), and social presence (SP)—as critical components

shaping the quality of the online educational experience. Among these, TP—defined as “the design, facilitation,

and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and

educationally worthwhile learning outcomes” (Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007)—serves as the foundation that

supports and sustains the other two presences.

TP is particularly important in language learning contexts, where learners often face challenges in

comprehension, interaction, and engagement due to the linguistic and cultural complexities of the target

language. Prior research has shown that effective instructional design and facilitation by the instructor fosters

learner confidence and motivation, which in turn enhances active participation and achievement (Rahmat et al.,

2021). Furthermore, TP plays a mediating role in shaping learners’ CP, which refers to their ability to construct

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 126

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

meaning through reflection and discourse, as well as SP, which involves developing interpersonal connections

and a sense of community in the online classroom.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Community of Inquiry (CoI)

Garrison and Arbaugh (2007) have provided a comprehensive review of research related to the CoI framework

in online learning. They discussed the framework's three core components—SP, CP, and TP—and how they

interact in online education. The article also highlighted challenges and issues in studying the CoI and

suggested future research to improve the model for understanding effective online learning.

Rahmat et al. (2024) studied how social support, expectancy, and value motivate students learning online.

They surveyed 156 Malaysian public university students and found that instructor support and feedback are

crucial for student engagement. Learners also tend to have high expectations for their instructors and feel

confident in their abilities. Social support strongly relates to both expectancy and value, suggesting that good

social connections help online language learning.

Teaching, Cognitive and Social Presences

Past researches collectively underscore the multifaceted dynamics of online learning, emphasizing the

interplay among cognitive, social, and teaching presences within the CoI framework. Central concepts include

TP, which encompasses instructional design, facilitation, and direct guidance to foster engagement and

knowledge construction (Faulconer et al., 2022; Li, 2022; Li & Wang, 2024); SP, acting as a mediator to

enhance relational bonds, emotional support, and community-building, thereby mitigating isolation in virtual

environments (Mutezo & Maré, 2023; Yoon & Leem, 2021; Sudarnoto et al., 2025); and CP, involving critical

thinking, exploration, and resolution of ideas, often influenced by self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation,

and co-regulation (Lasekan et al., 2024). Additional pivotal ideas emerge around learning motivation and

engagement, categorized into cognitive (e.g., perceived value and expectancy), emotional (e.g., wellbeing and

psychological capital), and behavioural dimensions (e.g., persistence and interaction), with factors like

intrinsic/extrinsic orientations, task value, and environmental support (e.g., family, technology, and course

design) playing critical roles (Li, 2024). Lee et al. (2022) further emphasize that higher levels of cognitive

presence are closely associated with deeper cognitive engagement and improved learning outcomes in online

environments. Their findings highlight that students who demonstrate stronger cognitive presence exhibit

enhanced analytical thinking and knowledge construction, underscoring the importance of fostering cognitive

engagement in digital learning contexts. Moreover, wellbeing is portrayed as a holistic outcome influenced by

motivation, interpersonal relationships, and attitudes toward online learning, though direct links to platform

attitudes remain tenuous (Sudarnoto et al., 2025). CP within the CoI framework, which includes Triggering

Event, Exploration, Integration, and Resolution always ideally follows a logical sequence, however CP

categories may not always unfold ideally, highlighting their role in guiding the inquiry process. (Shea & Rice,

2023). Sustainable online education highlights barriers such as technological infrastructure and student

demographics, advocating for interactive designs and rapid feedback to sustain engagement (Lasekan et al.,

2024). Predictive models like SEM-ANN reveal non-linear relationships, where TP and online interactions

forecast learning presence, especially in foreign language contexts (Li & Lau, 2025). Finally, connectivism

integrates these elements by viewing knowledge as networked, urging adaptive strategies in digital ecosystems

(Wang et al., 2025). These concepts collectively advocate for balanced presences to optimize online learning

efficacy, retention, and psychological health.

This study, therefore, seeks to investigate the role of TP in Mandarin as a Foreign Language (MFL) online

class, particularly its relationship with cognitive and social presence. This study is conducted to explore types

of presence in online learning. Specifically, this study is done to answer the following research questions:

RQ1 How does teaching presence influence online learning?

RQ2 How does social presence influence online learning?

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 127

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

RQ3 How does cognitive presence influence online learning?

RQ4 Is there a relationship between teaching presence and all types of presence in online learning?

By situating the research within the CoI framework, this study extends the work of Garrison and Arbaugh

(2007) and provides empirical insights into how TP can be optimized to improve learning outcomes in online

Mandarin language education.

METHODOLOGY

This study is replicated from the study by Garrison & Arbaugh (2007) who presented three main types of

presence in online class. The first type of presence is TP. This refers to the teacher/instructor’s planning of the

flow of the lessons. This planning determines the success or failure of the class. The next type of presence is

CP. This type of presence refers to the educational setting that the learners are in during the online session.

This session should allow learners to learn actively and construct meaning. The last type is SP. This type of

presence refers to the feeling of connectedness among the learners. The learners need to feel the presence of

their peers even in online classes. Additionally, this study also explores if there is a relationship between TP

and CP. This study also investigates if there is a relationship between TP and SP.

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework of the Study:

The Influence of TP on all types of Presence

This quantitative study is conducted to explore types of presence in MFL online learning. A convenient sample

of 381 participants responded to the survey. The instrument used is a 5 Likert-scale survey. Table 1 below

shows the categories used for the Likert scale; 1 is for Never, 2 is for Rarely, 3 is for Sometimes, 4 is for Very

Often, and 5 is for Always.

Table 1 Likert Scale Use

Table 2 shows the distribution of items in the survey. This study is replicated from Garrison & Arbaugh (2007)

to reveal the variables in table 3 below. Section A has 12 items on TP, and Section B has 9 items on SP,

meanwhile Section C has 12 items on CP.

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 128

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

Table 2 Distribution of Items in the Survey

Table 2 also shows the reliability of the survey. The analysis shows a Cronbach alpha of .955 for TP, .929 for

SP and .953 for CP. The overall Cronbach Alpha for all 33 items is .968; thus, revealing a good reliability of

the instrument chosen (Jackson, 2015). Further analysis using SPSS is done to present findings to answer the

research questions for this study.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Findings for Teaching Presence (TP)

Figure 2 Mean for Design and Organization

Figure 2 displays the mean scores for the design and organization dimension. All four items—TPQ1 through

TPQ4—achieved the highest possible average in this set (M = 4.7), with a consistent standard deviation (SD =

0.5). This uniformity reflects a strong consensus among students that the instructor communicated course

topics, goals, participation requirements, and deadlines with exceptional clarity.

Figure 3 Mean for Facilitation

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 129

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

Figure 3 presents the mean scores for the facilitation dimension. The highest ratings (M = 4.7, SD = 0.5) were

assigned to TPQ5 and TPQ6. These results indicate that students valued the instructor’s role in promoting

conceptual clarity and sustaining interactive participation in the online MFL classroom. TPQ7 and TPQ8

followed closely with high mean scores (M = 4.6, SD = 0.6 and SD = 0.5 respectively), reflecting strong

perceptions of the instructor’s ability to maintain focus while fostering intellectual curiosity. The lowest mean

score, TPQ9 was slightly lower at M = 4.6, SD = 0.6. While still high, this score suggests a small opportunity

to further enhance community-building within the online learning environment—an aspect particularly

relevant to second-language learning, where social interaction and peer connection are vital for language

acquisition and confidence-building.

Figure 4 Mean for Direct Instruction

Figure 4 presents the mean scores for the direct instruction. TPQ10 to TPQ12 demonstrates mean values of 4.5

to 4.6, with standard deviations of 0.6, suggesting that instructors were effective in focusing discussions,

providing feedback, and doing so promptly.

The findings from the Teaching Presence Questionnaire reveal consistently high mean scores across all items,

indicating a strong perception of TP among the respondents.

Findings for Social Presence (SP)

Figure 5 Mean for Affective Expression

From Figure 5, considering the items related to affective expression, the mean scores range from 4.2 to 4.3,

with standard deviations between 0.7 and 0.8. Affective expression items reveal high mean scores, with values

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 130

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

ranging from 4.2 to 4.3 and standard deviations between 0.7 and 0.8. These findings suggest that participants

perceive the online learning platform as a positive environment conducive to collaborative learning.

Figure 6 Mean for Open Communication

Figure 6 presents the mean scores for the open communication. The mean scores are consistently around 4.3,

with standard deviations ranging from 0.7 to 0.8. These findings suggest that respondents generally found the

online platform to be a comfortable and accessible medium for communication and discussion. The data

indicate positive perceptions of open communication, with mean scores ranging from 4.2 to 4.3 and standard

deviations from 0.7 to 0.8.

Figure 7 Mean for Group Cohesion

Figure 7 presents the mean scores for the group cohesion dimension of SP indicating consistently high ratings

across all three items (M = 4.0–4.3, SD = 0.8–0.9). Participants reported feeling comfortable expressing

disagreement while maintaining trust (M = 4.0), acknowledged by peers (M = 4.2), and that online discussions

fostered collaboration (M = 4.3). These findings suggest that the course effectively promoted a sense of

community and collaborative engagement, though opportunities remain to further encourage open expression

of differing views.

From Figure 4, 5, and 6, it is evident that students generally feel comfortable expressing themselves,

communicating openly, and forming connections with their peers, which are all vital for an effective online

learning environment.

The responses to the Social Presence Questionnaire indicate moderately high levels of SP among course

participants. Open communication within the online environment fosters a sense of comfort and accessibility

(Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007). Instructors who offer strong support can significantly boost students' motivation

to learn and their satisfaction with the learning experience (Fowler, 2018).

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 131

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

Findings for Cognitive Presence (CP)

Figure 8 Mean for Triggering Event

Figure 8 presents the mean scores for the triggering event dimension of CP indicating high levels of learner

engagement across all three items (M = 4.0–4.3, SD = 0.7–0.8). Participants agreed that problems posed during

the course increased their interest in course issues (M = 4.0), that course activities stimulated their curiosity (M

= 4.2), and that they felt motivated to explore content-related questions (M = 4.3). These findings suggest that

the course design effectively initiated the inquiry process by capturing learners’ attention and fostering

intrinsic motivation to engage with the content.

Figure 8 indicates that the triggering event phase, which involves stimulating curiosity and interest in course

issues, receives mean scores between 4.0 and 4.3, with standard deviations ranging from 0.7 to 0.8.

Figure 9 Mean for Exploration

Figure 9 presents the mean scores for the exploration, which entails utilizing diverse information sources and

engaging in brainstorming to address content-related questions, yields mean scores between 4.2 and 4.3, with

standard deviations of 0.7.

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 132

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

Figure 10 Mean for Integration

Figure 10 presents the mean scores for the integration, which involves combining new information and

constructing explanations or solutions, exhibiting mean scores of 4.3, with standard deviations of 0.6.

Figure 11 Mean for Resolution

Figure 11 presents the mean scores for the resolution, which involves applying the knowledge created in the

course to practical situations, demonstrating mean scores of 4.2, with standard deviations of 0.7.

For CP, the means for Triggering Event (4.0-4.3), Exploration (4.2-4.3), Integration (4.3), and Resolution (4.2)

are consistently high, with low standard deviations (0.6-0.8), indicating a strong cognitive engagement among

course participants.

The data suggest that students were consistently engaged in exploring course content, integrating new

information, and developing solutions applicable in practice. The mean values for each item in the Cognitive

Presence Questionnaire are consistently high, ranging from 4.0 to 4.3, indicating that students generally find

the course activities engaging and helpful in constructing knowledge. The relatively high mean score for

Instructor Support suggests that instructors effectively adapted to provide support in the online classroom,

potentially influencing student motivation positively (Fowler, 2018).

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 133

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

Findings for relationship between TP and all types of presence in online learning

Table 3 Correlation between Teaching and Cognitive Presence

**Correlation is significant at the level 0.01(2-tailed)

Table 3 shows there is an association between TP and CP. Correlation analysis shows that there is a high

significant association between TP and CP (r=.600**) and (p=.000). According to Jackson (2015), coefficient

is significant at the .05 level and positive correlation is measured on a 0.1 to 1.0 scale. Weak positive

correlation would be in the range of 0.1 to 0.3, moderate positive correlation from 0.3 to 0.5, and strong

positive correlation from 0.5 to 1.0. This means that there is also a strong positive relationship between TP and

CP.

Table 4 Correlation between Cognitive and Social Presence

**Correlation is significant at the level 0.01(2-tailed)

Table 4 shows there is an association between CP and SP. Correlation analysis shows that there is a high

significant association between CP and SP (r=.741**) and (p=.000). According to Jackson (2015), coefficient

is significant at the .05 level and positive correlation is measured on a 0.1 to 1.0 scale. Weak positive

correlation would be in the range of 0.1 to 0.3, moderate positive correlation from 0.3 to 0.5, and strong

positive correlation from 0.5 to 1.0. This means that there is also a strong positive relationship between CP and

SP.

Table 5 Correlation between Social and Teaching Presence

**Correlation is significant at the level 0.01(2-tailed)

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 134

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

Table 5 shows there is an association between SP and TP. Correlation analysis shows that there is a high

significant association between SP and TP (r=.607**) and (p=.000). According to Jackson (2015), coefficient

is significant at the .05 level and positive correlation is measured on a 0.1 to 1.0 scale. Weak positive

correlation would be in the range of 0.1 to 0.3, moderate positive correlation from 0.3 to 0.5, and strong

positive correlation from 0.5 to 1.0. This means that there is also a strong positive relationship between SP and

TP.

CONCLUSION

Based on the above findings, it can be concluded that the instructor demonstrated a very high level of TP in the

online learning environment. The instructor’s clear communication of course topics, objectives, and deadlines,

together with effective guidance, timely feedback, and the ability to foster engagement, community, and

focused discussion, indicate that students perceived the instructor as highly organized, supportive, and

responsive. Overall, these results suggest that teaching presence exerted a strong positive influence on the

quality of online learning, enhancing students’ understanding, participation, and sense of connection within the

virtual classroom. This finding is consistent with the results of Mutiga and Alhazani (2024) and provides a

direct answer to RQ1.

The findings also reveal that students experienced a high level of SP in the online learning environment. The

positive responses across all indicators suggest that students felt a strong sense of belonging, comfort, and

mutual respect when interacting with their peers. They were able to communicate effectively, express differing

opinions constructively, and engage in collaborative discussions that fostered meaningful social connections.

Overall, the findings demonstrate that SP positively influenced students’ online learning experiences by

strengthening interaction, collaboration, and a sense of community. This outcome aligns with Yoon and Leem

(2021), who found that SP significantly enhances group cohesion and efficacy in virtual learning environments.

Similarly, the present findings suggest that when learners perceive a strong sense of SP, it fosters trust,

collaboration, and mutual support, thereby improving both the social and academic outcomes of online

learning. This conclusion provides a direct response to RQ2.

In terms of CP, the findings indicate that students exhibited a high level of cognitive engagement in the online

learning environment. The strong agreement across all indicators suggests that students were intellectually

stimulated by the course content and activities, actively explored and applied new knowledge, and engaged in

reflection and problem-solving processes that deepened their understanding of course concepts. The results

further demonstrate that students were able to integrate and apply newly acquired knowledge to real-world

contexts, reflecting the development of higher-order thinking skills. Overall, these findings indicate that CP

positively influenced students’ learning outcomes by promoting critical thinking, problem-solving, and

knowledge construction. This conclusion aligns with the findings of Lee et al. (2022), who demonstrated that

higher levels of CP are strongly associated with improved learning performance and deeper cognitive

engagement in online learning environments. Consistent with their study, the present results underscore the

importance of fostering CP to enhance students’ analytical thinking, reflective learning, and overall academic

achievement, thereby effectively addressing RQ3.

Moreover, the results revealed a strong positive relationship among all three presences within the CoI

framework, specifically between TP and CP, CP and SP, and SP and TP. These findings suggest that an

instructor’s teaching presence plays a pivotal role in cultivating both cognitive engagement and social

interaction, thereby creating a more cohesive and dynamic online learning environment. This result is

consistent with Singh et al. (2022), who emphasized that the CoI framework, when supported by technology-

enabled tools, facilitates the development of social, cognitive, and teaching presence, fostering critical thinking,

inquiry, and meaningful discourse between students and instructors. Similarly, Qing and Diamantidaki (2021)

highlighted the significance of teacher–student interaction and the sense of presence in enhancing the quality

and meaningfulness of online language learning experiences, particularly in remote and virtual classroom

contexts. Furthermore, the ceiling effects observed in certain aspects of the CoI dimensions underscore the

need for continued exploration into advanced pedagogical approaches that can further differentiate and enrich

student experiences in already highly engaged learning settings. This finding aligns with Shea and Rice (2023),

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 135

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

who noted that teaching presence significantly influences both social and cognitive presence, collectively

shaping the overall effectiveness of the online learning environment. Overall, these findings affirm that the

interrelationship among teaching, social, and cognitive presence is crucial in fostering meaningful, interactive,

and high-quality online learning experiences, thereby addressing RQ4.

The findings of these studies also support the CoI framework, highlighting the importance of balancing

cognitive, social, and teaching presences to create engaging and successful online learning environments. In

blended learning settings, research indicates that both TP and CP have evolved to incorporate social elements

(Armellini & Stefani, 2015; Lasekan et al., 2024).

The outcomes of this study offer significant pedagogical insights for instructors and curriculum developers

engaged in online MFL learning settings. For instance, instructors ought to prioritize embedding interactive

components within their online MFL courses, transitioning from didactic lectures to more dynamic and

participatory approaches to boost student engagement (Lasekan et al., 2024).

The research findings also offer a thorough examination of the CoI framework within the domain of online

MFL learning, highlighting the interconnectedness of TP, SP, and CP. From a pedagogical perspective, these

insights are particularly relevant in the post-pandemic landscape, where blended learning approaches

necessitate adaptable strategies to sustain linguistic proficiency (Jelińska & Paradowski, 2021). The emphasis

on TP as the orchestrator of course structure, facilitation, and direct instruction indicates that instructors should

prioritize structured support, such as timely feedback and scaffolded activities, to address issues like linguistic

and cultural barriers and a lack of engagement in asynchronous settings (Li, 2022; Oh et al., 2018). This

perspective aligns with connectivism, which advocates for networked interactions to bridge individual

understanding with collaborative digital tools, thereby enhancing communicative skills among MFL learners.

Future investigations should delve deeper into how the specific technological capabilities of online platforms

interact with the development of cognitive, social, and teaching presences across different foreign language

learning scenarios. Additionally, it is imperative to identify and refine optimal strategies for balancing these

presences to maximize the greatest possible learning outcomes, given that the complex and nuanced interplay

among the three presences in online learning settings demands further exploration to pinpoint effective

pedagogical approaches (Mutiga & Alhazani, 2024).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research is self-funded.

REFERENCES

1. Ahn, S., Lee, N., & Jang, H. (2018). Patient Safety Teaching Competency of Nursing Faculty. Journal of

Korean Academy of Nursing, 48(6), 720. https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2018.48.6.720

2. Armellini, A., & De Stefani, M. (2016). Social presence in the 21st century: An adjustment to the

Community of Inquiry framework. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(6), 1202-1216.

https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12302

3. Barberà, E., Virgili, M. E. T., & Guasch, T. (2011). Cognitive attainment in online learning environments:

matching cognitive and technological presence. Interactive Learning Environments, 20(5), 467.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2010.531026

4. Downes, S. (2005). An introduction to connective knowledge. Stephen’s Web. http://www.downes.ca/cgi-

bin/page.cgi?post=33034

5. Faulconer, E., Chamberlain, D., & Wood, B. (2022). A Case Study of Community of Inquiry Presences

and Cognitive Load in Asynchronous Online STEM Courses. Online Learning, 26(3).

https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i3.3386

6. Fowler, K. S. (2018). The motivation to learn online questionnaire.

https://athenaeum.libs.uga.edu/handle/10724/38268

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 136

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

7. Garrison, D.R. & Arbaugh, J.B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues,

and future directions. Internet and Higher Education, 10, 157–172.

8. 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, 87-105.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

9. Goldie, J. G. S. (2016). Connectivism: A knowledge learning theory for the digital age? Medical teacher,

38(10), 1064-1069.

10. Gonzalez, C., (2004). The Role of Blended Learning in the World of Technology. Retrieved December 10,

2004 from http://www.unt.edu/benchmarks/archives/2004/september04/eis.htm.

11. Huang, K. (2019). Design and investigation of cooperative, scaffolded wiki learning activities in an online

graduate-level course. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0141-6

12. Jackson, S.L. (2015). Research methods and Statistics-A Critical Thinking Approach (5th Edition) Boston,

USA: Cengage Learning.

13. Jelińska, M., & Paradowski, M. B. (2021). Teachers’ Perception of Student Coping With Emergency

Remote Instruction During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Relative Impact of Educator Demographics and

Professional Adaptation and Adjustment. Frontiers in Psychology, 12.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.648443

14. Lee, J., Soleimani, F., Hosmer IV, J., Soylu, M. Y., Finkelberg, R., & Chatterjee, S. (2022). Predicting

Cognitive Presence in At-Scale Online Learning: MOOC and For-Credit Online Course Environments.

Online Learning, 26(1), 58-79.

15. Li, F. (2022). “Are you there?”: Teaching presence and interaction in large online literature classes. Asian-

Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 7:45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-

00180-3

16. Li, J.Y. (2024). A Review on the Influencing Factors of College Students’ Online Learning Engagement

[Review of A Review on the Influencing Factors of College Students’ Online Learning Engagement].

Advances in Education, 14(6), 313. https://doi.org/10.12677/ae.2024.146936

17. Liu, S. (2022). Online Chinese Teaching and Learning in 2020. National Foreign Language Resource

Center.

18. Li, W., & Wang, W. (2024). The impact of teaching presence on students’ online learning experience:

Evidence from 334 Chinese universities during the pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1291341.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1291341

19. Mutezo, A. T., & Maré, S. (2023). Teaching and cognitive presences: The mediating effect of social

presence in a developing world context. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2171176.

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/2331186X.2023.2171176

20. Mutiga, A. N., & Alhazani, H. (2024). Exploring the Interrelationships of Social, Cognitive, and Teaching

Presences in Online Learning. International Journal on E-Learning (pp. 183-212).

21. Oh, E., Huang, W. D., Mehdiabadi, A., & Ju, B. (2018). Facilitating critical thinking in asynchronous

online discussion: comparison between peer- and instructor-redirection. Journal of Computing in Higher

Education, 30(3), 489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9180-6

22. Qing, L., & Diamantidaki, F. (2021). Evaluating Mandarin language students' online experience during

Covid-19: A case study from London. Journal of Education, Innovation and Communication, 2(2), 56-79.

23. Rahmat, N. H., Sukimin, I. S., Sim, M. S., Anuar, M., & Mohandas, E. S. (2021). Online Learning

Motivation and Satisfaction: A Case Study of Undergraduates vs Postgraduates. International Journal of

Asian Social Science, 11(2), 88–97. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.1.2021.112.88.97

24. Sudarnoto, L. F., Handoko, M. T., Riyanto, A., & Arini, D. P. (2025). The impact of online learning,

learning motivation, and interpersonal relationships on students’ wellbeing. Social Sciences & Humanities

Open, 11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101485

25. Rahmat, N. H., Mok, S. S., & Teh, H. S. (2024). Learning Mandarin Online: Is There A Relationship

between Social Support with Expectancy and Value? International Journal of Academic Research in

Business and Social Sciences, 14(1), 1167. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v14-i1/20288

26. Wang, T., Wu, T., Liu, H., Brown, C., & Chen, Y. (2025). Generative Co-Learners: Enhancing Cognitive

and Social Presence of Students in Asynchronous Learning with Generative AI. Proceedings of the ACM

on Human-Computer Interaction, 9(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1145/3701198

www.rsisinternational.org

Page 137

ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)

ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS

Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025

27. Wise, A. F., Chang, J., Duffy, T. M., & Valle, R. del R. do. (2004). The Effects of Teacher Social

Presence on Student Satisfaction, Engagement, and Learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research,

31(3), 247. https://doi.org/10.2190/v0lb-1m37-rnr8-y2u1

28. Shea, P., & Rice, M. (2023). OLJ September 2023 27(3). Online Learning, 27(3).

https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i3.4152

29. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of

Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1). http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm

30. Siemens, G. (2006). Connectivism: Learning theory or pastime for the self-amused?

http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism_self-amused.htm

31. Singh, J., Singh, L., & Matthees, B. (2022). Establishing social, cognitive, and teaching presence in online

learning—A panacea in COVID-19 pandemic, post vaccine and post pandemic times. Journal of

Educational Technology Systems, 51(1), 28-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395221095169

32. Turk, M., Müftüoğlu, A.C., Toraman, S., (2021). Teaching presence in online courses: Similar perceptions

but different experiences from multiple instructor perspectives. Online Learning Journal, 25(4), 156-177.

DOI:10.24059/olj.v25i4.2885

33. Yoon, P., & Leem, J. (2021). The influence of social presence in online classes using virtual conferencing:

Relationships between group cohesion, group efficacy, and academic performance. Sustainability, 13(4),

1988. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041988