1. bookVolume 23 (2020): Edition 1 (July 2020)
Détails du magazine
License
Format
Magazine
eISSN
1027-5207
Première parution
11 Dec 2014
Périodicité
2 fois par an
Langues
Anglais
access type Accès libre

International Online Graduate Students’ Perceptions of CoI

Publié en ligne: 13 Sep 2020
Volume & Edition: Volume 23 (2020) - Edition 1 (July 2020)
Pages: 61 - 83
Détails du magazine
License
Format
Magazine
eISSN
1027-5207
Première parution
11 Dec 2014
Périodicité
2 fois par an
Langues
Anglais
Abstract

With the current issue of student retention and attrition as a major aspect of online education, this interpretivist qualitative case study sought to determine whether online facilitators and online student-to-student relationships affect online graduate students’ ability to complete their modules and achieve student learning objectives and outcomes (LOO). This study encompassed CoI (Community of Inquiry) and surveyed 54 participants who indicated that the three interdependent presences that form part of CoI (cognitive, social, and teaching) were instrumental in helping them to complete their modules and to achieve student learning objectives and outcomes (LOO). Students’ feedback on online facilitators exemplified their cognitive presence in the form of statements linked to triggering events and exploring of ideas. However, there were few statements connected to integration and none linked to resolution. Overall, most of the data collected connected to subsets of teaching and social presences rather than cognitive presence. Additionally, students’ feedback on their peers suggests that social presence that fosters group cohesion is the most critical factor to assist in completion of the modules and achieving student LOO. Open communication was also indicated and, to a lesser degree, personal/affective subsets of social presence were evident. The findings of this study suggest that more research is needed on the components of the three presences and their relationship to students’ ability to complete the module and achieve student LOO.

Keywords

1. Anderson, T. (2018 February 1). How Communities of Inquiry drive teaching and learning in the digital age. TeachOnline.ca [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://teachonline.ca/tools-trends/how-communities-inquiry-drive-teaching-and-learning-digital-ageSearch in Google Scholar

2. Bissessar, C., Black, D., & Boolaky, M. (2019). An analysis of intercultural students’ self-determination in graduate online programs: Implications for praxis. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 22(1), 36-52. https://www.eurodl.org/?p=archives&year=2019&halfyear=1&article=79510.2478/eurodl-2019-0003Search in Google Scholar

3. Bissessar, C., Black, D., & Boolaky, M. (2020). The H.E.R.O.s of Online Education: What makes students succeed despite the odds? Accepted for publication in Journal of Educators Online in January 2021.Search in Google Scholar

4. Cavanaugh, C. (2002). Distance education quality: Success factors for resources, practices and results. In R. Discenza, C. Howard, & K. Schenk (Eds.), The Design and Management of Effective Distance Learning Programs (pp. 184-190). University of North Florida, US: Idea Group Inc. (IGI)10.4018/978-1-930708-20-4.ch011Search in Google Scholar

5. Cho, M., & Heron, M. (2015). Self-regulated learning: The role of motivation, emotion, and use of learning strategies in students’ learning experiences in a self-paced online Mathematics course. Distance Education, 36(1), 80-99. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2015.101996310.1080/01587919.2015.1019963Search in Google Scholar

6. Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284–290. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.28410.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284Search in Google Scholar

7. Cooper, T., & Scriven, R. (2017). Communities of Inquiry in Curriculum Approach to Online Learning: Strengths and Limitations in Context. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 22–37. doi: http://dx.doi.org.liverpool.idm.oclc.org/10.14742/ajet.3026Search in Google Scholar

8. Creswell, J. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, conducting and evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.Search in Google Scholar

9. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Buffalo: NY: Prometheus Books.Search in Google Scholar

10. Duffin, E. (2020, February 6). E-learning and digital education-Statistics and Facts. Statista [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/topics/3115/e-learning-and-digital-education/Search in Google Scholar

11. Duncan, L. L. (2018). The Community of Inquiry Framework and Academic Advising: Online Student Perceptions. Doctoral Dissertations. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED587262Search in Google Scholar

12. Garrison, D. R. (2009). Communities of Inquiry in Online Learning: Social Teaching and Cognitive Presence. In C. Howard et al. (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of distance and online learning. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-198-8.ch05210.4018/978-1-60566-198-8.ch052Search in Google Scholar

13. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.Search in Google Scholar

14. Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 31–36. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.00210.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002Search in Google Scholar

15. Heilporn, G., & Lakhal, S. (2019). Investigating the reliability and validity of the community of inquiry framework: An analysis of categories within each presence. Computers and Education, 145, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.10371210.1016/j.compedu.2019.103712Search in Google Scholar

16. Hostetter, C. (2013). Community matters: Social presence and learning outcomes. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13(1), 77-86.Search in Google Scholar

17. Jézègou, A. (2010). Community of Inquiry in e-Learning: A Critical Analysis of the Garrison and Anderson Model. Journal of Distance Education, 24(3),Search in Google Scholar

18. Joksimovic, S., Gasevic, D., Kovanovic, V., Adesope, O., & Hatala, M. (2014). Psychological characteristics in cognitive presence of communities of inquiry: A linguistic analysis of online discussions. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.03.00110.1016/j.iheduc.2014.03.001Search in Google Scholar

19. Kazanidis, I., Pellas, N., Fotaris, P., & Tsinakosa, A. (2018). Facebook and Moodle Integration into Instructional Media Design Courses: A Comparative Analysis of Students’ Learning Experiences using the Community of Inquiry (CoI) Model. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 34(10), 932–942. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.147157410.1080/10447318.2018.1471574Search in Google Scholar

20. Kovanovic, V., Gasevic, D., Hatala, M., & Siemens, G. (2017). A model of cognitive assessment using automated analytics assessment. SRI Education Analytics4Learning report series. Retrieved from https://vitomir.kovanovic.info/pubs/a-novel-model-of-cognitive-presence-assessment-using-automated-learning-analytics-methods/Search in Google Scholar

21. Lederman, D. (2019, December 11). Online enrollments grow, but pace slows. Inside Higher Ed [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2019/12/11/more-students-study-online-rate-growth-slowed-2018Search in Google Scholar

22. Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511840272Search in Google Scholar

23. Maddrell, J. A., Morrison, G. R., & Watson, G. S. (2017). Presence and learning in a community of inquiry. Distance Education, 38(2), 245-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2017.132206210.1080/01587919.2017.1322062Search in Google Scholar

24. Majeski, R. A., Stover, M., & Valais, T. (2018). The Community of Inquiry and Emotional Presence. Adult Learning, 29(2), 53–61. doi: https://doiorg.liverpool.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/104515951875869610.1177/1045159518758696Search in Google Scholar

25. Park, S., & Yun, H. (2018). The Influence of Motivational Regulation Strategies on Online Students’ Behavioral, Emotional, and Cognitive Engagement. American Journal of Distance Education, 32(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2018.141273810.1080/08923647.2018.1412738Search in Google Scholar

26. Pentaraki, A. D., & Burkholder, G. J. (2017). Emerging Evidence Regarding the Roles of Emotional, Behavioral, and Cognitive Aspects of Student Engagement in the Online Classroom. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 20(1), 1-21. Retrieved from https://www.eurodl.org/?p=archives&year=2017&halfyear=1&article=73610.1515/eurodl-2017-0001Search in Google Scholar

27. Rourke, L., & Kanuka, H. (2009). Learning in communities of inquiry: A review of the literature. Journal of Distance Education, 23(1), 19–48.Search in Google Scholar

28. Saldaña, J. (2013). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Limited.Search in Google Scholar

29. Shackelford, J. L., & Maxwell, M. (2012). Sense of Community in Graduate Online Education: Contribution of Learner-to-Learner Interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), 228-249. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i4.133910.19173/irrodl.v13i4.1339Search in Google Scholar

30. Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2011). Understanding distinctions in learning in hybrid, and online environments: An empirical investigation of the community of inquiry framework. Journal of Interactive Learning Environments, 21, 1–16. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2011.58432010.1080/10494820.2011.584320Search in Google Scholar

31. 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. Internet and Higher Education, 9, 175-190.10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.06.005Search in Google Scholar

32. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intra-class correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420–8. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420. PMID 18839484.10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420Search in Google Scholar

33. Stone, C., & Springer, M. (2019). Interactivity, connectedness and ‘teacher presence’: Engaging and retaining students online. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 59(2), 146-169.Search in Google Scholar

34. Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online Education and Its Effective Practice: A Research Review. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 157-190. Retrieved from http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/350210.28945/3502Search in Google Scholar

35. Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.10.3102/00346543076001093Search in Google Scholar

36. Tran, T. (2011). An Examination of Cognitive Presence and Learning Outcome in an Asynchronous Discussion Forum. (Doctoral Dissertation) Retrieved from https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/msit_diss/87Search in Google Scholar

37. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

38. Wallace, R. (2003). Online learning in higher education: A review of research on interactions among teachers and students. Education, Communication & Information, 3(2), 241-280.10.1080/14636310303143Search in Google Scholar

39. Wendt, J., & Courduff, J. (2018). The Relationship between Teaching Presence and Student Course Outcomes in an Online International Population. International Journal on E-Learning, 17(1), 111-129.Search in Google Scholar

40. Wheaton, K. (2017). Social, Cognitive, and Teaching Presence: Impact on Hybrid and Online Graduate-Level Educational Experience and Retention. Doctor of Education (EdD). 94. http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/edd/94Search in Google Scholar

41. Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & Del Valle, R. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 247-271. Retrieved from: https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.2190/V0LB-1M37-RNR8-Y2U110.2190/V0LB-1M37-RNR8-Y2U1Search in Google Scholar

42. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Articles recommandés par Trend MD

Planifiez votre conférence à distance avec Sciendo