The Community of Inquiry Framework: A Review of Research & Practice

1. The Community of Inquiry Framework: A Review of Research & Practice D. Randy Garrison Phil Ice ZehraAkyol HICE Conference Hawaii

2. Overview • Background • Community of Inquiry Framework • Update on Recent Research • CoI Dynamics • CoI Survey Instrument • Discussion

3. Background • Studies have emphasized the importance of community as a key factor in successful online/blended learning(Conrad, 2005; Haythornthwaite & Kazmer, 2004; Rovai, 2002). • Sense of community is found to be significantly associated with perceived learning (Shea, 2006; Shea, Li, & Pickett, 2006). • Community of Inquiry Framework provides a well structured guideline to create an effective and sustained learning community(Arbaugh, 2008).

4. Value of a Framework A theoretical framework takes us beyond craft know how and recipes. Theoretical frameworks provide order and allow us to understand complex situations in greater depth. This increases adaptability to new contexts and environments.

5. Community Of Inquiry • The importance of a community of inquiry is that, while the objective of critical reflection is intellectual autonomy, in reality, critical reflection is “thoroughly social and communal”. Lipman, 1991

6. Community of Inquiry Framework Social Presence The ability of participants to identify with the community (e.g., course of study), communicate purposefully in a trusting environment, and develop inter-personal relationships by way of projecting their individual personalities. Cognitive Presence The extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community of inquiry. Teaching Presence The design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes.

7. CoI Categories/Indicators

8. SOCIAL PRESENCE (Garrison, in press) The ability of participants to identify with the community (e.g., course of study), communicate purposefully in a trusting environment, and develop inter-personal relationships.

9. Rogers and Lea (2005) • If the intended result of social presence is to confer on the group greater capacity to communicate and collaborate, then the group will work more productively to the extent that group members identify with the group [emphasis added], … [p. 153]

10. SP Research Findings When students feel comfortable participating in online asynchronous dialogue they also report higher levels of cognitive presence (Shea, 2008).

11. COGNITIVE PRESENCE What are the challenges of observing and assessing what is essentially a latent or hidden process? The following model is how we addressed this enormous challenge.

13. Moving Beyond Exploration • Early research revealed an apparent difficulty moving inquiry through to resolution. • However, there is evidence that this pervasive finding may have more to do with aspects of teaching presence than to the other possible factors. • Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007

14. Nature of Task Where learners specifically were tasked to formulate and resolve a problem, “participants engaged more in problem resolution than in problem formulation”(Murphy, 2003) When questions specifically asked students to engage in practical applications, discussions did progress to the synthesis and resolution phase (Arnold & Ducate, 2006)

15. Emerging CP Research In two small samples (n = 18) students reached exploration and integration in discussion postings, then after personal reflection on discussions, used knowledge to reach resolution in personal work products Interview data indicates that students need time to fully evaluate discussion postings before reaching the resolution stage (Ice, in progress)

16. CP and TP • Others have concluded that the reason discussions do not reach the highest levels of inquiry is related to the role of the instructor (Celetin, 2007; Luebeck & Bice, 2005 ).

17. Blended and Online Learning Akjol & Garrison, unpublished BL course had higher levels of all presences as well as perceived learning and satisfaction compared to fully online course. "these differences suggest that the blended course format may have provided better conditions for higher-order thinking”

18. TEACHING PRESENCE The body of evidence is growing rapidly attesting to the importance of teaching presence for successful online learning …

19. TP Research The consensus is that teaching presence is a significant determinate of student satisfaction, perceived learning, and sense of community. (Akyol & Garrison, 2008; Arbaugh, 2008; Shea et al. 2004, 2005) TP is needed to establish CP and SP; lowest CP scores were reported by students who rated TP as weak (Shea & Bidjerano, in press)

20. TP Research Various factor analyses have produced an unexpected 4 factor solution in which instructional design and organization load separately from facilitation of discourse and direct instruction Mixed methods analysis reveals that students may be able to detect the instructor’s “voice” / students can differentiate whether or not an instructor authored the course content (Ice, in progress)

21. CoI DYNAMICS

22. Role of Time • Why time? “Community grows; it is not made or given” (Conrad, 2005) Time is an important variable to understand how a community of inquiry develops and progresses (Garrison & Cleveland-Innes, 2004)

23. Dynamics of Presences • The dynamics among the three presences have not been explored until recently.

24. PLOT OF ELEMENTS OF CoI OVER TIME (Akyol & Garrison, in press)

25. CP TP SP

26. Categories of Presences • The sub-elements (ie, categories) of the presences also develop differentially over time and have practical implications. (Akyol & Garrison, 2008)

27. COGNITIVEPRESENCE Beginning of Course SupportingDiscourse SOCIALPRESENCE EDUCATIONALEXPERIENCE SettingClimate ConfirmingMeaning TEACHING PRESENCE

28. TEACHING PRESENCE Middle of Course SupportingDiscourse SOCIALPRESENCE COGNITIVEPRESENCE EDUCATIONALEXPERIENCE SettingClimate ConfirmingMeaning

29. SOCIALPRESENCE TEACHING PRESENCE End of Course SupportingDiscourse COGNITIVEPRESENCE EDUCATIONALEXPERIENCE SettingClimate ConfirmingMeaning

30. Structural Equation Model Using the CoI survey instrument, two studies have explored causal relationships among the presences in the CoI framework (Garrison, Cleveland-Innes & Fung; Shea & Bidjerano, in press) The results confirm the theoretical predictions of the framework.

32. Summary • Much more work needs to be done. • Creating and sustaining a collaborative community of inquiry will require an understanding of the dynamics among and within the presences.

33. CoI Survey To investigate disciplinary effects thoroughly and to establish generalizable predictors of on-line course effectiveness, greater emphasis on multi-course, multidisciplinary, and multi-institutional studies must become a priority in on-line course research. Arbaugh, 2005, p. 70

34. CoI Instrument Development Dec 2006 – review of CoI research; agreement upon survey items Spring 2007 – beta testing; items revised Fall 2007 – data collected (n=287) across spectrum of courses at four institutions in USA and Canada; factor analysis conducted Two subsequent studies have confirmed these findings (Garrison, Cleveland-Innes & Fung; unpublished; Shea, in press)

38. The CoI, Age & Level Recently completed study (n = 4397) revealed that age and program level may have an impact on the loading of teaching and cognitive presence on separate factors Come to Sea Perl 4 at 1:15 on Tuesday to find out more

39. Conclusion ???? Website http://communitiesofinquiry.com/