This article was downloaded by: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] On: 14 October 2010 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 783016864] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Interactive Learning Environments
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t716100701
The impact of course duration on the development of a community of inquiry
Zehra Akyola; Norm Vaughanb; D. Randy Garrisonc a Computer Education and Instructional Technology Department, Faculty of Education, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey b Department of Education and Schooling, Faculty of Teaching and Learning, Mount Royal College, Calgary, Alberta, Canada c Learning Commons, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada First published on: 26 April 2009
To cite this Article Akyol, Zehra , Vaughan, Norm and Garrison, D. Randy(2009) 'The impact of course duration on the
development of a community of inquiry', Interactive Learning Environments,, First published on: 26 April 2009 (iFirst) To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/10494820902809147 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10494820902809147
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Interactive Learning Environments 2009, 1–16, iFirst article
The impact of course duration on the development of a community of inquiry
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
Zehra Akyola*, Norm Vaughanb and D. Randy Garrisonc a Computer Education and Instructional Technology Department, Faculty of Education, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey; bDepartment of Education and Schooling, Faculty of Teaching and Learning, Mount Royal College, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; cLearning Commons, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
(Received 20 November 2008; final version received 1 February 2009) This study investigated the effect of time on the development of a community of inquiry by examining an online course offered over two different time periods. The study was guided by the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, The Internet and Higher Education 2000; 2(2–3): 87–105). The focus was on a graduate level education course, the topic of which was blended learning. The course was given by the same instructor in a 13-week fall semester and a 6-week spring term. Transcript analysis of weekly online discussions and the CoI Survey were used to explore the differences between the short-term and long-term versions of this course in terms of each measure of CoI presence (social, teaching and cognitive presence). The findings showed differences between the short-term and long-term versions of this course in terms of the development of each presence and students’ perceptions. Keywords: community of inquiry; online learning; time effect; presence
Introduction The increased emphasis on collaborative–constructivist approaches to learning has generated a growing interest in community building in online learning environments. It has been argued that creating and sustaining a community for online learning is valuable as it enhances student satisfaction and learning through community involvement (Palloff & Pratt, 2005). Empirical research also confirms the relationship between sense of community and students’ satisfaction and learning (e.g. Ertmer & Stepich, 2004; Rovai, 2002; Shea, 2006; Shea, Li, & Pickett, 2006). In today’s world, the educational ideal is a community of learners who are fully engaged in critical inquiry for constructing and confirming knowledge (Garrison & Kanuka, 2008). With the emphasis on collaboration, there are several models and guidelines offered by scholars for the creation of effective online learning communities, e.g. (Murphy, 2004; Palloff & Pratt, 2005; Redmond & Lock, 2006; van Aalst, 2006). However, in recent years there is one model that has generated considerable
*Corresponding author. Email:
[email protected] ISSN 1049-4820 print/ISSN 1744-5191 online Ó 2009 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/10494820902809147 http://www.informaworld.com
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
2
Z. Akyol et al.
interest and has been widely adopted and studied by researchers (Arbaugh, 2008). That model is the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework developed by Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2000). The CoI framework, with its emphasis on critical thinking and collaboration, provides a well-structured model and set of guidelines to create effective learning communities in an online learning environment. A recent study has also confirmed that epistemic engagement in collaborative knowledge building is well articulated and extended through the CoI framework (Shea & Bidjerano, in press). The CoI framework is comprised of three overlapping elements: social presence, cognitive presence and teaching presence. In a community of inquiry, deep learning occurs through the interaction of these three presences. Social presence has been defined recently by Garrison (in press) as ‘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.’ Social presence is an important antecedent to collaboration and critical discourse by supporting cognitive objectives through its ability to instigate, sustain, and support critical thinking in a community of learners (Garrison & Anderson, 2003). There are three categories of social presence: affective expression, open communication and group cohesion. Affective responses are the expression of emotions, feelings, humor and self-disclosure. Open communication occurs through recognizing, encouraging reflective participation, and interaction. Cohesive responses include addressing participants by name, using salutations, and using inclusive pronouns such as ‘we’ and ‘our’ (Garrison & Anderson, 2003). Garrison, Anderson, & Archer (2001) describe cognitive presence as ‘the extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community of inquiry’ (p. 11). Cognitive presence is operationally defined through the Practical Inquiry model that consists of four phases: triggering event, exploration, integration, and resolution. The first phase is the initiation of the inquiry process through a problem or dilemma. Exploration phase is the process of understanding the nature of a problem and then searching for relevant information and possible explanations. The integration phase is a more focused and structured phase of constructing meaning. The final phase is the resolution of a problem by constructing a meaningful framework or discovering specific solutions. Teaching presence is defined as ‘the design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes’ (Anderson, Rourke, Garrison & Archer, 2001, p. 5). Design and organization is the macro-level structure of the learning experience. Facilitating discourse is the second category of teaching presence and is described as enabling and encouraging the construction of personal meaning as well as shaping and confirming mutual understanding. The third category, direct instruction, is associated with more specific content issues such as diagnosing misconceptions, injecting knowledge from diverse sources, or summarizing the discussion (Garrison & Anderson, 2003). By using the term ‘teaching’ instead of ‘teacher’, the possibility of distributing the responsibilities and roles of a teacher among participants is emphasized. This study aimed to investigate the impact of course duration on the development of a community of inquiry by examining an online graduate course on the topic of blended learning offered in a shorten time period and a regular semester length.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
Interactive Learning Environments
3
A review of the literature did not reveal any studies that specifically studied ‘time’ in relation to a community of inquiry or its elements. However, some studies reported time as an important factor on some aspects of an online community of inquiry, although time was not the main focus. For example, time was found to be needed for adjustment to engage in online learning and discourse (Garrison, Cleveland-Innes, & Fung, 2004); and time was found to be an important factor influencing the level of critical thinking (Garrison et al., 2001; Meyer, 2003). There are also studies indicating changes on the elements of a community of inquiry over time. Swan (2002) found changes in the categories of social presence in her examination of immediacy and social presence responses for online discussions. Stein et al. (2007) studied cognitive presence over time by comparing the differences between two chat postings. Recently, a more comprehensive study expanding the scope by focusing on all three elements of the CoI framework over time has been conducted by Akyol and Garrison (2008). This study aims to broaden our understanding of the impact of time from the perspective of course duration. This study focuses on how the length of the course influences the development of each presence and its categories. Understanding the role of time may help designers to develop strategies and techniques to overcome time constraints and use time more efficiently and effectively. Method The context of this study was a graduate education course on the topic of blended learning. The instructor was the same for both versions of the course. The course was delivered online using asynchronous and synchronous technologies (i.e. Blackboard and Elluminate) in the fall of 2007 and in the spring of 2008. The CoI framework was the basis for the design and development of the course. That is, learning activities, strategies and assessment techniques were all developed to reflect social, cognitive and teaching presence. The major assignments were an article critique with a peer review, student moderation with a summary of weekly online discussions, and a prototype course redesign project. In the first online discussion, the instructor modeled how to facilitate the discussion in an effective way. To distribute teaching presence among students and teacher, students were responsible for facilitating, directing and summarizing the online discussions in each of the remaining weeks. Apart from the first discussion facilitated by the instructor in both course versions, there were 8 weeks of discussion in the fall semester and 4 weeks of discussion in the spring semester. The discussion topics were the same in both versions of the course. The only difference between the two versions of the course was the length of the semester; the fall term was 13 weeks and the spring term was 6 weeks. It was hypothesized that time might influence the development of a community of inquiry as assessed through the dynamics of the three presences. Therefore, the aim was to explore how a community of inquiry develops in a long-term and short-term course. Participants There were 16 (7 males and 9 females) students enrolled in the 13-week (fall term) course and 20 (5 males and 15 females) students enrolled in the 6-week (spring term) course. Table 1 shows the summary of demographic information obtained through the CoI Survey (Swan et al., 2008). One student from the fall term and five students
4
Z. Akyol et al.
Table 1.
Demographic information of participants.
Demographics Gender Age
Computer skills
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
Previous online experience
Fall term (13 weeks)
Spring term (6 weeks)
Male: 6 Female: 9 20–29: 0 30–39: 8 40–49: 6 50 or above: 1 Novice: 0 Intermediate: 6 Advanced: 9 Yes: 12 No: 3
Male: 4 Female: 11 20–29: 2 30–39: 4 40–49: 4 50 or above: 5 Novice: 0 Intermediate: 10 Advanced: 5 Yes: 11 No: 4
from the spring term did not respond to the survey. As the course was delivered online, most of the students in both course versions were from different cities or provinces. The majority of the students in both courses were females; however, in the spring term, 75% of the students were females. With regard to previous experience in online learning environments, most of the students indicated that they had previously enrolled in online courses. Data collection and analysis The two main sources of data used to explore the impact of time on the development of a community of inquiry were transcript analysis and the CoI Survey. Transcript analysis was applied in order to code and explore posting patterns of social presence, teaching presence and cognitive presence based on category indicators defined in the CoI framework (Garrison & Anderson, 2003). The first author with a research assistant conducted the transcript analysis of the 13-week fall term course by applying a negotiated coding approach (Garrison, Cleveland-Innes, Koole, & Kappelman, 2006). Before starting coding process the researchers had training from experts and an experienced coder. The inter-rater reliability of the first training session for coding the transcripts was 0.75. This provided an estimate of reliability between the coders, notwithstanding the adoption and advantage of a negotiated coding approach. In the negotiated approach, the researchers coded transcripts separately and then actively discussed coding differences in order to arrive at a final assessment of the code. Negotiation provided a means of on-going training, coding scheme refinement, and controls for simple errors; thereby increasing reliability. After gaining experience with the discussions in the fall course, the discussions in the spring course were analyzed by the first author. In total, 8 weeks of discussions in the fall course and 4 weeks of discussions in the spring course were analyzed. The other data source was the CoI Survey administered at the end of each course to assess students’ perceptions of each constituting element (presences) of the CoI framework. The survey was developed and validated by Swan et al. (2008). Cronbach’s alpha was 0.94 for teaching presence, 0.91 for social presence, and 0.95 for cognitive presence. The survey includes teaching presence perceptions (13 items), social presence perceptions (9 items), and cognitive presence perceptions (12 items).
Interactive Learning Environments
5
Fifteen students (out of 16) in fall course and 15 students (out of 20) in spring course completed the survey. There were also two items for perceived learning and perceived satisfaction in the survey. To get detailed information about the role of each presence and other perceptions, four open ended items were added at the end of survey (see Appendix for survey). A constant comparative analysis method (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) was applied for the analysis of these qualitative data.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
Results Development of community of inquiry on the discussion board Social presence Social presence was analyzed in the transcripts by coding for affective expression, open communication and group cohesion. Table 2 illustrates the coding results for these categories of social presence in the two versions of the course. The majority of the messages in both courses were open communication. However, the courses differed in terms of affective communication and group cohesion. The indicators for group cohesion were more frequent in the short-term spring course compared with the long-term fall course. On the other hand, affective communication was found to be more frequent in the long-term fall course. Further statistical analysis was conducted to see whether the differences were statistically significant. Independent samples t-test revealed statistically significant differences between the short and long-term courses on affective communication (t(34) ¼ 5.074, p ¼ 0.000) and group cohesion (t(34) ¼ –4.554, p ¼ 0.000). The results did not indicate a significant difference for open communication between the courses (p ¼ 0.416). Figure 1 shows each category of social presence in the short and long versions of the course. Cognitive presence Cognitive presence was analyzed in the discussions using the indicators of the four phases of the Practical Inquiry Model: triggering event, exploration, integration, and resolution. Table 3 illustrates the distribution of percentages for each category of cognitive presence. As seen in Table 3, the percentages of integration and resolution phases in the long version of the course are higher than in the short version. In the short-term course, the percentages of the exploration and integration phases were almost equal whereas in long-term course, the integration phase was the most Table 2.
Coding results for social presence in short- and long-term courses. Spring course (4 weeks)
Affective expression Open communication Group cohesion No category detected Total
Fall course (8 weeks)
Total number of messages
Percentage
Total number of messages
Percentage
105 338 265 73 781
13.4 43.3 33.9 9.3 100
169 232 80 30 511
33.1 45.4 15.7 5.9 100
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
6
Z. Akyol et al.
Figure 1.
Table 3.
Plot of social presence in short and long-term courses.
Coding results for cognitive presence in short- and long-term courses. Spring course (4 weeks)
Triggering event Exploration Integration Resolution No category detected Total
Fall course (8 weeks)
Total number of messages
Percentage
Total number of messages
Percentage
56 270 278 16 161 781
7.2 34.6 35.6 2.0 20.6 100
48 131 242 40 50 511
9.4 25.6 47.4 7.8 9.8 100
frequently coded category of messages posted by the students. Moreover, the number of messages that did not include any cognitive presence indicator was found higher in the short-term course compared with the long-term course. Independent samples t-test was conducted for further analysis of the differences. The t-test yielded significant differences for exploration (t(34) ¼ – 2.505, p ¼ 0.017), integration (t(34) ¼ 2.095, p ¼ 0.044), and resolution (t(34) ¼ 2.276, p ¼ 0.029) phases. In other words, the students in the short-term course did not reach the highest level of cognitive presence (i.e. integration) on the discussion board compared with the students in the long-term course. Figure 2 shows the students’ level on each phase of cognitive presence in both courses. Teaching presence Teaching presence was coded for design and organization, facilitating discourse, and direct instruction. Table 4 illustrates the coding results for teaching presence in both
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
Interactive Learning Environments
Figure 2. Table 4.
7
Plot of cognitive presence in short- and long-term courses. Coding results for teaching presence in short- and long-term courses. Spring course (4 weeks)
Design and organization Facilitating discourse Direct instruction No category detected Total
Fall course (8 weeks)
Total number of messages
Percentage
Total number of messages
Percentage
4 254 162 361 781
0.5 32.5 20.7 46.2 100
3 128 161 219 511
0.6 25.0 31.5 42.9 100
courses. In both the short and long versions of the course, the least coded category was design and organization. However, there were differences between the shortterm and long-term courses in terms of the categories of facilitating discourse and direct instruction. In the short-term course, the percentage of the messages coded for facilitating discourse was higher than the percentage in the long-term course; whereas, the number of messages that reflected the direct instruction category was found to be higher in the long-term course. Independent samples t-test was conducted to see whether there were any statistically significant differences for the categories of teaching presence between the short- and long-term courses. The analysis did not yield a significant difference between the two courses for the design and organization (p ¼ 0.822) and the facilitating discourse categories (p ¼ 0.067), but there was a significant difference for the direct instruction category (t(34) ¼ 2.445, p ¼ 0.020). The scatter plot of teaching presence (see Figure 3) shows the difference between the two courses.
8
Z. Akyol et al.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
COI survey results In both course versions, 15 students completed the CoI Survey. The purpose of administering this instrument was to explore students’ perceptions of the CoI and its elements as well as their perceived learning and satisfaction. The descriptive analysis of the CoI Survey showed that students’ perceptions of each presence were high in both courses, indicating that students could sense each element of the CoI (see Table 5). In both courses, students’ perception of teaching presence was relatively high compared with the other two presences. Also, the mean values of perceived learning and satisfaction were high in both courses. The interpretation is that students agreed that they could learn a lot in the course and they were satisfied with the course. However, as seen in Table 5, the perceptions of each presence, perceived learning, and satisfaction were found to be higher in the short-term course compared with the long-term course.
Figure 3.
Plot of teaching presence in short- and long-term courses.
Table 5. Students’ perceptions of each presence and learning and satisfaction in short- and long-term courses.
Fall term course (13 weeks) Spring term course (6 weeks) Significance
Social presence
Teaching presence
Cognitive presence
Perceived learning
Satisfaction
3.94 4.06 p ¼ 0.506
4.15 4.63 p ¼ 0.004
4.07 4.24 p ¼ 0.322
4.2 4.67 p ¼ 0.058
4.47 4.87 p ¼ 0.043
Interactive Learning Environments
9
Independent samples t-test was conducted to see whether these differences were statistically significant. The analysis yielded significant differences for teaching presence (t(28) ¼ –3.092, p ¼ 0.004) and satisfaction (t(28) ¼ –2.121, p ¼ 0.043). Students in the short-term course perceived greater teaching presence and they were more satisfied.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
Discussion This study examined a graduate online course offered over two different time frames with the purpose of exploring the impact of time on the development of a community of inquiry. This provided an opportunity to extend our knowledge of temporal factors affecting the development of a community of inquiry as viewed through its presences and respective categories. The findings yielded interesting differences between short-term and long-term course durations in terms of each of the three CoI presences. First and foremost, it is important to note that the course design was successful in enabling the development of each presence in both versions of the course. The CoI framework was used to design each course to reflect social, teaching and cognitive presence. In a study about students’ sense of learning community, Shea (2006) did not find evidence that courses of a longer duration resulted in a better sense of community. The crucial finding of his study was that when students reported effective instructional design and organization and directed facilitation of discourse (i.e. teaching presence), they were more likely to report higher levels of learning community. This finding is in line with the results of our study and strongly supports the importance of intentionally designing a course to create a community of inquiry. However, we found that there were developmental differences in terms of each presence and respective categories between short-term and long-term versions of the course. The CoI framework would suggest that more time was needed to develop the group cohesion category of social presence. Surprisingly, the findings indicated that student messages posted in the short-term course included more group cohesion indicators compared with the students in the long-term course. Another significant difference was that affective communication was significantly higher in the longterm course. Although the students in the short-term course perceived themselves as being more part of the community, the students in the long-term course were more at the stage of trying to know each other through personal expressions of emotion, feelings, beliefs and values. One possible explanation for this difference might be that because the students had less time, but were responsible for the same assignments, they had to build a cohesive community sooner. As there were not long intervals between learning activities, perhaps students did not lose a sense of the community. Another reason might be the gender split. There were more female students in the short-term course compared with the long-term course. There might also be other group features influencing social presence indicators. For example, Lomicka and Lord (2007) compared three different groups using different techniques and technological tools (traditional, email dialogue, and online group discussion) to build social presence. In their study, although the group cohesion category was found the least in all groups, the results indicated that different group dynamics and interaction media impacted the development of social presence. The researchers found that interaction in groups using more interactive devices peaked
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
10
Z. Akyol et al.
early in the semester, followed by a drop thereafter. Contrary to our results, Swan (2002) found a decline on cohesive indicators as courses progress in her detailed examination of social presence behaviors of students participating in online discussions. However, it is suggested here that this may be due to differences in tasks and activities. Cognitive presence is the core element necessary for higher learning (Kanuka & Garrison, 2004). The differences in cognitive presence between the two courses reflect the impact of time on learning. Contrary to previous studies which found exploration to be the most frequently coded practical inquiry phase (Kanuka, Rourke, & Laflamme, 2007; McKlin, Harmon, Evans & Jone, 2002; Meyer, 2003; Pawan, Paulus, Yalcin & Chang, 2003; Stein et al., 2007; Vaughan & Garrison, 2005), transcript analysis of this study found that integration was the most frequently coded phase in both courses. However, the integration phase was significantly higher in the long-term course compared with the short-term course. Even the resolution phase was significantly higher in the long-term course compared with short-term course, although fewer messages were coded as resolution in this study. This is similar to previous studies (Kanuka et al., 2007; McKlin et al., 2002; Meyer, 2003, 2004; Pawan et al., 2003; Vaughan & Garrison, 2005, Stein et al., 2007). It might be argued that limited time in the short-term course impeded students’ ability to reach higher levels of critical inquiry. In previous studies, the need for more time has been used to explain the low level of integration and resolution (Garrison et al., 2001; Meyer, 2003; Vaughan & Garrison, 2005). In addition to the time factor, the nature of task and the structure of questions have been put forward by researchers to explain this finding (Kanuka et al. 2007; Meyer, 2004). In this study, the tasks and learning activities were exactly the same but the triggering questions varied as different groups of students were responsible for initiating and facilitating discussions each week. Therefore, the structure of initiating questions may play a role in students’ critical thinking as well as time. With regard to teaching presence, the analysis indicated a significant difference between the two courses on the direct instruction category. Higher levels of direct instruction are associated with higher levels of integration in the long-term course. One possibility is that as students move to the integration phase, they also start to share knowledge from new sources. This is an explanation for higher direct instruction in the long-term course. On the other hand, although not statistically significant, the facilitating discourse category was the most frequently coded category of teaching presence in the short-term course. Based on the fact that there was more group cohesion in the short-term course, it might be considered that the supportive aspect of facilitating discourse and group cohesion enhance each other. It may be that direct intervention may shift the focus from the group to the teacher? Overall, these findings confirm the influence of the integrative and regulatory role of teaching presence. Teaching presence is the catalyst that creates a community of inquiry that brings together cognitive and social presence for particular purposes (Garrison & Anderson, 2003). Finally, the survey analysis yielded interesting differences between the two courses. Although perceptions of each presence and perceived learning and satisfaction were high in both courses, the students in the short-term course had surprisingly higher perceptions of each presence as well as learning and satisfaction. This finding again underlines the importance of course design. Regardless of time
Interactive Learning Environments
11
duration differences, the students in both courses could perceive each element of the CoI framework. However, for teaching presence and satisfaction, the students’ perceptions in the short-term course were significantly higher than the longer-term course. One possible explanation for perception differences might be that the duration of the short-term spring course was long enough for students to focus on task and cohere as a group.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
Conclusion This study has focused on the duration of a course as a significant factor in the development of a community of inquiry. The study demonstrated differences between short- and long-term courses with regard to the three presences of the CoI framework. The main impact of time could be seen on the development of cognitive presence. Consistent with the hypotheses of previous studies, time was found to influence students’ critical thinking (practical inquiry). However, the study yielded interesting results such as higher group cohesion in the short-term course. This may not be best explained by the effect of course duration. Although course duration appeared to have an influence, it is argued that each course has its own dynamic. Students’ characteristics, their experience in online learning environments, and their approach to learning might influence the differential development of teaching, social and cognitive in a community of inquiry. The results of this study reveal to us the importance of a reliable and coherent course design. Regardless of time duration, each course in the study did develop a community of inquiry, but in unique ways. Therefore, it is concluded that the CoI framework can be used as a lens for guiding research and effective instructional design (Shea & Bidjerano, in press). Notes on contributors Zehra Akyol is a PhD Candidate in the field of Instructional Technology at Middle East Technical University. She has been a visiting student at the University of Calgary where she did her doctoral research. Her research interests are teaching and learning in online and blended communities of inquiry. Norm Vaughan is an instructor in the Department of Education, Faculty of Teaching and Learning at Mount Royal College in Calgary, Alberta. His research interests are in blended learning, faculty development and K to 12 schooling. D. Randy Garrison is the Director of the Teaching & Learning Centre and a Professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of Calgary. Dr. Garrison has published extensively on teaching and learning in higher, adult and distance education contexts. His most recent books are: E-Learning in the 21st Century (2003) and Blended Learning in Higher Education (2008).
References Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D.R. (2008). The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: Understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3–4), 3–22. Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1–17.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
12
Z. Akyol et al.
Arbaugh, J.B. (2008). Does the community of inquiry framework predict outcomes in online MBA courses? The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(2). Retrieved 9 September, 2008, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/ 490/1045 Ertmer, P.A., & Stepich, D.A. (2004). Examining the relationship between higher-order learning and students’ perceived sense of community in an online learning environment. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 10th Australian World Wide Web Conference, Gold Coast, Australia. Garrison, D.R. (in press). Communities of inquiry in online learning: Social, teaching and cognitive presence. In C. Howard, et al. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distance and online learning. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Garrison, D.R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-Learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. London: Routledge/Falmer. 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(2–3), 87–105. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23. Garrison, D.R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. (2004). Student role adjustment in online communities of inquiry. Model and instrument validation. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 8(2), 61–74. Garrison, D.R., Cleveland-Innes, M., Koole, M., & Kappelman, J. (2006). Revisiting methodological issues in the analysis of transcripts: Negotiated coding and reliability. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 1–8. Garrison, D.R., & Kanuka, H. (2008). Changing distance education and changing organizational issues. In W.J. Bramble & S. Panda (Eds.), Economics of distance and online learning: Theory, practice and research (pp. 13–25). London: Routledge. Kanuka, H., & Garrison, D.R. (2004). Cognitive presence in online learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(2), 30–49. Kanuka, H., Rourke, L., & Laflamme, E. (2007). The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 260–271. Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2007). Social presence in virtual communities of foreign language (FL) teachers. System, 35(2), 208–228. McKlin, T., Harmon, S.W., Evans, W., & Jones, M.G. (2002). Cognitive presence in webbased learning: A content analysis of students’ online discussions. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23. Meyer, K. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 55–65. Meyer, K. (2004). Evaluating online discussions: Four difference frames of analysis. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 101–114. Murphy, E. (2004). Recognising and promoting collaboration in an online asynchronous discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 421–431. Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pawan, F., Paulus, T.M., Yalcin, S., & Chang, C.F. (2003). Online learning: Patterns of engagement and interaction among in-service teachers. Language Learning and Technology, 7(3), 119–140. Redmond, P., & Lock, J.V. (2006). A flexible framework for online collaborative learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(4), 267–276. Rovai, A.P. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(4), 319–332. Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster ‘epistemic engagement’ and ‘cognitive presence’ in online education. Computers & Education, 52(3), 543–553. Shea, P., Li, C.S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175–190.
Interactive Learning Environments
13
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
Shea, P.J. (2006). A study of students’ sense of community in online learning environments. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 10(1), 35–44. Stein, D.S., Wanstreet, C.E., Glazer, H.R., Engle, C.L., Harris, R.T., Johnston, S.M., Simons, M.R., & Trinko, L.A. (2007). Creating shared understanding through chats in a community of inquiry. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(2), 103–115. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research – Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage. Swan, K., Shea, P., Richardson, J., Ice, P., Garrison, D.R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Arbaugh, J.B. (2008). Validating a measurement tool of presence in online communities of inquiry. E-Mentor, 2(24), 1–12. van Aalst, J. (2006). Rethinking the nature of online work in asynchronous learning networks. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 279–288. Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D.R. (2005). Creating cognitive presence in a blended faculty development community. Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 1–12.
14
Z. Akyol et al.
Appendix.
CoI Questionnaire.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly agree
Teaching Presence The instructor clearly communicated important course topics The instructor clearly communicated important course goals The instructor clearly communicated important course topics The instructor clearly communicated important due dates/time frames for learning activities The instructor was helpful in identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on course topics that helped me to learn The instructor was helpful in guiding the class towards understanding course topics in a way that helped me clarify my thinking The instructor helped to keep course participants engaged and participating in productive dialogue The instructor helped keep the course participants on task in a way that helped me to learn The instructor encouraged course participants to explore new concepts in this course Instructor actions reinforced the development of a sense of community among course participants The instructor helped to focus discussion on relevant issues in a way that helped me to learn The instructor provided feedback that helped me understand my strengths and weaknesses The instructor provided feedback in a timely fashion Social Presence Getting to know other course participants gave me a sense of belonging in the course I was able to form distinct impressions of some course participants Online or web-based communication is an excellent medium for social interaction I felt comfortable conversing through the online medium (continued)
Interactive Learning Environments Appendix.
(Continued). Strongly disagree
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
15
I felt comfortable participating in the course discussions I felt comfortable interacting with other course participants I felt comfortable disagreeing with other course participants while still maintaining a sense of trust I felt that my point of view was acknowledged by other course participants Online discussions help me to develop a sense of collaboration Cognitive Presence Problems posed increased my interest in course issues Course activities piqued my curiosity I felt motivated to explore content related questions I utilized a variety of information sources to explore problems posed in this course Brainstorming and finding relevant information helped me resolve content related questions Online discussions were valuable in helping me appreciate different perspectives Combining new information helped me answer questions raised in course activities Learning activities helped me construct explanations/solutions Reflection on course content and discussions helped me understand fundamental concepts in this class I can describe ways to test and apply the knowledge created in this course I have developed solutions to course problems that can be applied in practice I can apply the knowledge created in this course to my work or other non-class related activities Satisfaction Overall, I was satisfied with this course Learning I learned much in this course
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly agree
16
Z. Akyol et al.
Please answer the following questions below.
Downloaded By: [Canadian Research Knowledge Network] At: 16:02 14 October 2010
(1) How has teaching, social and cognitive presence positively affected you in terms of satisfaction and learning? (2) Which aspects of teaching, social and cognitive presence has negatively affected your satisfaction and learning? (3) How has your sense of community positively or negatively affected your satisfaction and learning in this course? (4) Any other insights do you have in terms of the effectiveness of this course?
