I have attached my peer review.

Overall

This article with some clarifications is aligned with the focus of JIR and should be published.

Abstract

1.         Typo:  “they expects”

Purpose

1.         The capture of student perceptions add value to the literature.  The point is clearly argued, and the passage is well written.

2.         The purpose is clear:  to understand student perceptions to improve online presence by faculty.  This is a meaningful problem, and there are deficiencies in the knowledge about the problem.  There are audiences who can benefit from the missing knowledge such as faculty, instructional designers, and program administrators.

3.         The topic is interesting.

4.         The research question(s) are implied and delineated.

Literature Review

1.         The reference to Wang (2013) uses “prompt” response.  The definition of prompt would be helpful.

2.         The review includes the relevant literature.

3.         The review is appropriately documented.

4.         The review examines sources that are recent and of high quality (excepted as noted below in #2 references.

5.         The literature is thoughtfully synthesized but not critically examined.

Methods

1.         It is not clear whether the sample is purposive or of convenience.  The sample size appears appropriate.

            a.   It is not clear whether there were any in-person or electronic follow-ups obtained.

2.         The research design is described, appears appropriate and is justified (compared to other   choices, but see #5).

3.         More demographics on the participants are suggested.  Age and class status would be beneficial.

4.         It is a descriptive study, but more clarity is needed to determine why it is called qualitative vs quantitative, for example, the usage of open ended questions.   

5.         No literature is cited to justify the method of design.

6.         There is no mention of IRB or similar approval.

Results

1.         It is unclear whether there were 90 students in one class or the sample came from multiple classes.

2.         A ratio of expected posts may add more meaning than a raw number.

            a.         Such a ratio might include how many posts were expected of the student.

3.         The findings include appropriate themes about the central phenomenon and how they relate to each other.

4.         The major results are identified and summarized.  

Discussion

1.         More discussion might ensure upon the expectation that students expected a one-day response. No faculty wants to be on call 24/7. Many syllabi may denote a 24 hour response, excluding weekends and holidays.  Did the students expect weekend response?

2.         The results are thoughtfully examined in relation to the literature and personal reflections.

3.         Thoughtful critiques of the study’s limitations are provided and appropriate for the research approach.

4.         More discussion is warranted for the implications for future research.

Conclusion

1.         What does “overwhelming” manner mean? This could be further clarified.

References

1.         There is a substantial number and variety of references from strong journals.

2.         The Mazzolini & Maddison (2007) article is becoming dated.  There may be more recent research.

Thank you, Misty and Mark. Both of you offered some great feedback that will help us enhance what we were trying to convey with the paper. In reading your comments, we agree with the opportunity for clarification when it comes to the intent and purpose of our study, as well as the participants that we had.

Mark, you pointed out the missed opportunity for some follow-up with the participants. The reason we did not do this was the survey was administered in the final week of the course, and was anonymous. These factors would not have enabled us to follow-up on the feedback that we received in the survey. 

Again, thank you both for some great feedback. Have a great day!

As an online instructor, I found it extremely helpful to get some insight into students' perspectives of the classroom environment. I found the tables especially interesting. Thank you!

Although the literature review is quite interesting, I am afraid the most glaring issue I see with this paper is that the methodology is ambiguously presented.  There is certain not enough information present to enable another researcher to replicate the study. Therefore, the other information presented in the paper is moot.  I would suggest presenting more specific information as to the methodology so that the remaining information can be assessed for reliability and validity.  Otherwise, the paper does seem like a good start at an interesting study.  

I found the report to be interesting from the standpoint of  student expectations.  The author indicates technology helps the students feel more involved with the instructor. I would agree. If the professor introduces himself/herself in a live video introduction the students feel a closer sense of personal relationship with the professor. 

The comments regarding the student wanting to have a sense of community is difficult for me to understand as students in my classes are from all over the world and USA. Occasionally students who may have been in other online classes with each other will send a note to the student but I find that rare. Comments in the discussion forums may be in response to another students post indicating they agree with the students post but I discourage that as that as that does not generate learning. It is just a lazy way of participating in the discussion forums. 

The article did not delve into the difference between students who take online courses when they are on campus v students who take online classes all over the state or country. I find ground students taking online courses to be very lax in the participation forums. They are used to a classroom lecture and minimum participation and carry that over to the online classroom. They only increase their participation when grading indicates they are losing enough points to put them in jeopardy of failing the class. Older students who are coming back to school to finish the degree process have a tendency to participate in better depth than the 19 and 20 somethings. That difference was not covered in the article. 

The author mentions housekeeping issues as not being conducive to increasing involvement. Unfortunately one of the biggest problems I run into is students do not read the housekeeping information and then are upset when they are instructed that posts they make and assignments they complete are done incorrectly. Older students do follow housekeeping rules much more closely than the 29 to 20 somethings. 

I do agree with the author that personalizing posts when possible does help a student be more responsive particularly if the response relates to their work environment . 

The article in general covered the situations involved in on line teaching from a general perspective. As I noted above I would have liked t see a better breakdown of students based on age and reason for taking the course on line. 

First of all, thank you for sharing your work and inviting others to give you constructive feedback! This is an opportunity to continue to learn for all of us:) 

-The “Running head: THE NEED FOR INSTRUCTOR” seems too general to me. A title, like a good name, plays a great role in capturing readers’ attention and worth reviewing it. For example, I’m thinking of adding the word “PRESENCE” at the end. 

-Meaningful instructor presence in an online class environment is essential for student engagement and success! I believe this study is timely and it positively contributes to the body of knowledge. 

-The abstract highlights the fine balance between faculty engagement and an opportunity for student interaction as a community of learners, which is great. Question remains about whether the study reveals or discusses the instructor's role in supporting online class in a structured way to build community or if this is not the goal/focus of this study.

A typo, page 21, “These findings are can help…”

Wondering if there are questions remain about the topic of study at hand, and thus, the researcher invites others for further investigation.

On top, this is a timely study investigating instructor presence online that facilitates or hinders student success and that can promote community in an ongoing and structured way.

Thanks for sharing!

The literature reviews are quite extensive but they do not seem to be all well linked with the points that this researching paper is trying to convey. The content of this paper seems to be worthy sharing since it is a new finding.

The manuscript needs major revising in terms of the grammar improvements needed, and my review inputs below are all focusing on the aspects of syntax, word/phrases, sentence structures, etc.

In page 2 (Abstract page), line 1, "endeavors, however;" should be "endeavor; however,".

In page 2, line 3, the word "solve" likely needs to be replaced by "handle with, avoid, or the like, since the "miscommunication" is something one likes to avoid, not a problem to solve. Miscommunication issue is something that can be solved.

In page 2, line 9, the word "questions" may need to be changed to "issues, aspects, or the like" since the three items followed are just issues and only one is a question.

In page 2, line 11, the phrase "as well as" likely needs to be replaced by a simple word "and" here. The phrase "as well as" is used in too many places in this paper and it is definitely not properly used; I suggest that the author examines one web reference (http://site.uit.no/english/grammar/aswellas/) if having a preference using this phrase, because it is very easy to misuse it. This phrase maybe needs to be avoided. It is used in the following places: p4 line 5; p7 line 21; p8 lines 6, 7,and 11; p9 line 13; p10 line 3; p16 lines 11 and 23; and p19 last line.

In page 3, line 12, the word "facilitate" should be replaced by "facilitating" since it's a parallel structure being used in the sentence.

In page 3, line 15, the verb "disconnect" should be "disconnects".

In page 4, line 20, the word "vernacular" needs to be "vernaculars".

In page 5, line 12, the words ", and not simply share" may be replaced by "instead of" and it may be better to insert the word "that" at the beginning of line 12 for clarity purpose when the sentence gets long and have multiple structures used.

In page 5, line 15, the words "developing social connections" may be replaced by "social connection developments" in order to ensure the parallel structure in the sentence.

In page 7, line 4, there should be a comma "," between the words "progress thus".

In page 7, line 8, "motivational-oriented" should be "motivation-oriented" and there are a few other locations (page 7, line 4) having the same issue of this type.

In page 8, line 17, "communication" should be the verb "communicate".

In page 8, line 23, "decrease" should be "decreased".

In page 9, line 2, "believe" should be "believed".

In page 9, line 8, "actively learning" should be "active learning", and "to exhibited" should be "to exhibit".

In page 9, line 16, "students developing" should be "students' developing".

In page 10, line 6, "aspect" should be "aspects", and actually the part "online student" in the same line seems to miss another word since the meaning is not clear there.

In page 10, line 13, (and many places in the following pages), there is an issue of verb tense disagreement between past and present tenses. For example, "pointed out" is past tense, but "are" is present tense. One can change "pointed out" to the present "points out" or present perfect tense "has pointed out" to solve this disagreement issue. As one good example is shown in the paper in page 15 line 16 as "have revealed that there is". The other locations have this same issue are: page 11 line 23; page 13 lines 5, 7 and 11; page 15 line 8; page 16 line 11; page 15 lines 4 and 12; page 19 lines 3 and 5; page 17 line 7; page 21 lines 11 and 20.

In page 10, line 13, "the instructor and student" should be "the instructor and students".

In page 11,  line 11, "research" should be "research finding".

In page 13, line 13, the word "if" needs to be removed.

In page 13, line 17, "their" should be "his or her" since the word "someone" is singular.  Similar issue for the word "their" in line 20.

In page 13, line 18, "questions: introduce" should be "questions and introduces" and "their" should be "the".

In page 14, line 17, the words "student motivation" can be changed to "students' motivation" to keep the agreement with the word "their courses".

In page 14, lines 20, the words "might help" can be changed to "may".

In page 16, line 2, "ill" should be "will".

In page 16, line 3, "behand" should be "behind".

In page 16, lines 3 to 5, the sentence is confusing since it is not clear that the subject is just "the reason" or "the reason...and the intension...".  If it is the latter, the verb "was" should be "were".  If it is the former, somehow the comparison should be just the "choosing a qualitative method and phenomenological design over other methods and designs". Then "and the intention of the research" should not share the same verb "was".

In page 16, line 18, "means" should be "meant'.

In page 19, lines 9 and 10, need to insert "percent" after the numbers 11.11 and 18.89. As a matter of fact, it may be better using % instead of percent for all the percentage values written in the paper.

In page 21, line 1, "part of a community, gain a sense" should be "be a part of community, and gain a sense".

In page 21, line 6, "there are" should be "the".

In page 21, line 8, "might" should be "may" to keep the same tense.

In page 21, line 10, "classes, thus" should be "classes, and thus".

In page 21, line 11, "the study is that" should be "the study was that".

In page 21, line 13, the "may have" should be "might have".

In page 21, line 17, the words "what is" should be deleted.

In page 21, line 20, "desire" should be "desired".

In page 21, line 21, "will be" can change to "need be".

In page 21, line 23, "These findings are can help" should be "These findings can help".

RE: "The Need for Instructor Engagement..."

My first suggestion would be to be consistent in the use of the APA style of writing.  Some of the subtitles were aligned left, while others were centered.

The title page needs to be revised, the title should be capitalized and should include the university name, author and year. 

When citing works, there should be quotation marks around the text being referenced and the citation should include the page number of the source.

The content was good.  I agree that there needs to be instructor interaction within the course to guide, prompt and to keep the focus going in the appropriate direction.

Thank you for sharing your work with us!! This is a very important topic to guide instructors in the online modality.

In the abstract it would have been great to share what type of study the author did to investigate the research question to give the reader an overview of the paper. 

The abstract lists “the critical questions that this study sought to investigate include student expectations of the frequency of communication with instructors, the amount of communication they expect, as well as how rapidly students expect instructors to respond to their posts.” In the findings section the author states “the study was looking at “student expectations concerning instructor participation within the discussion forum of an online classroom involving the amount of participation, the frequency of participation, the amount of personal interaction within individual students, and the response time to student posts.” Keep the same questions in all areas of the paper to avoid confusion-simply restate the question the abstract, the body of the paper, and the conclusion. 

In your literature search and your research questions it would be indicated to define terms such as perceptions and expectations. What do these concepts mean to the researcher? 

In the results section, what was the sample size? Under the tables the totals varied 89-90. Were the students able to give qualitative feedback to augment the numerical values and give the data richness? 

There were a few typos, but it is evident you did research and critical thinking on this topic! Thank you for allowing us to read your work! 

“The need for instructor engagement in an online discussion forum: a study of student perceptions,” sounds like an interesting topic given that it is inclusive study of student voices. Having the title in mind, I would think of instructor engagement in terms of taking active role in welcoming students to the course, setting up systems and students for success and active and meaningful presence throughout the course facilitating discussions, answering or redirecting student questions to appropriate sources and giving constructive feedback, while also engaging “difficult” students in developmentally appropriate conversations and referring them to support groups like counselors, etc.

The abstract discusses about communication. I think the abstract could have been off to a great start with my feedback above:) I am open for thoughts and alternative ideas.

Thank you for your time!