Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
The Community of
Inquiry Framework
For Literature and Practice Discussion14th
September 2015
Professor Barney Dalgarno
Co-...
•  Introductory presentation/comments from chair
including contextual background to the choice of
articles and overview of...
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a
text-based environment: Computer conferencing in...
The Community of Inquiry Framework
The Community of Inquiry Framework
Revised Community of Inquiry Framework
Cognitive presence
The extent to which the participants in any particular configuration of a community
of inquiry are able ...
•  The framework has received a great deal of
attention in the distance education and online
learning field over the past 1...
•  Further work towards the identification of valid and reliable
indicators of the elements of the model for use in coding ...
•  As a lens for analysing online discussion
frameworks
•  As a measure of the effectiveness of strategies to
improve onlin...
•  Note the origins of the framework in asynchronous
text-based communication and so questions about
it’s applicability in...
Garrison et al. (2000):
•  The individual elements, definitions, ambiguities, comments
•  Relative importance and interrela...
Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J., et al.
(2008). Developing a commu...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Exploring the community of inquiry framework

409 views

Published on

Introductory slides from the first 'Literature and Practice' Session of the uImagine Scholarship in Online Learning Group held on Monday 14th September

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Exploring the community of inquiry framework

  1. 1. The Community of Inquiry Framework For Literature and Practice Discussion14th September 2015 Professor Barney Dalgarno Co-Director Institutional Engagement
  2. 2. •  Introductory presentation/comments from chair including contextual background to the choice of articles and overview of some key points •  Round table to draw out a) key conceptual ideas and b) opinions and/or questions about the ideas and/or methods and/or quality of articles •  Round table discussion about the implications for teaching and educational design/support practice at CSU •  Sessions to be recorded and the recordings and presentations placed on the uImagine website Structure for these discussions
  3. 3. 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,  http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/science/article/ pii/S1096751600000166  Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1721-1731,  http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/science/article/ pii/S0360131510002095  Articles for discussion
  4. 4. The Community of Inquiry Framework
  5. 5. The Community of Inquiry Framework
  6. 6. Revised Community of Inquiry Framework
  7. 7. Cognitive presence The extent to which the participants in any particular configuration of a community of inquiry are able to construct meaning through sustained communication (p. 89) Social presence The ability of participants in the Community of Inquiry to project their personal characteristics into the community, thereby presenting themselves to the other participants as “real people” (p. 89). Teaching presence consists of two general functions … the design of the educational experience (a teacher or instructor typically performs this function) … [and] ... facilitation (a responsibility that may be shared among the teacher and some or all of the other participants or students) (p. 90). Definitions from Garrison et al. (2000)
  8. 8. •  The framework has received a great deal of attention in the distance education and online learning field over the past 15 years •  2879 Google Scholar citations •  The framework has been drawn upon in many different ways in follow up research by the authors and other researchers as well as being applied in practical contexts •  Quantitative scrutiny of the framework and proposed extensions have also received a great deal of attention in the literature Why important
  9. 9. •  Further work towards the identification of valid and reliable indicators of the elements of the model for use in coding of online discussion transcripts (e.g. Rourke et al., 2001) •  Development of questionnaire instruments to measure students’ perceptions about cognitive, teaching and social presence (e.g. Arbaugh et al., 2008) •  Quantitative analysis to model the ways in which the elements are interrelated (e.g. Shea & Bidjerano, 2008) and determine the degree to which each of the elements are important for effective online learning (e.g. Shea et al, 2005) Examples of follow up research
  10. 10. •  As a lens for analysing online discussion frameworks •  As a measure of the effectiveness of strategies to improve online learning processes •  As a lens for analysing the impact on learning community of new technologies (e.g. Twitter) •  As a framework to inform training on effective online teaching •  As a framework to inform the design of online courses Applications of the framework
  11. 11. •  Note the origins of the framework in asynchronous text-based communication and so questions about it’s applicability in contemporary ‘polysynchronous learning’ contexts (see Dalgarno, 2014) •  Note the relationship (but not equivalence) of “teaching presence” to “teacher presence” within the Online Learning Model Some pointers to CSU implications
  12. 12. Garrison et al. (2000): •  The individual elements, definitions, ambiguities, comments •  Relative importance and interrelationships •  Categories of events/actions and indicators •  Overall thoughts Shea and Bidjerano (2010) •  Ideas emerging from the literature review w.r.t. COI model •  Key outcomes of article w.r.t. COI model •  Methods Implications for CSU practice •  Applicability •  What we might do differently Discussion points
  13. 13. Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J., et al. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. Internet and Higher Education, 11, 133–136. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, R., & Archer, W. (2001). Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education,12(1), 8−22. Shea, P., Li, C., Swan, K., & Pickett, A. (2005). Developing learning community in online asynchronous college courses: the role of teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(4), 59–82. Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2008). Measures of quality in online education: an investigation of the community of inquiry model and the net generation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 39(4), 339–361. References

×