You are here:

Applying the community of inquiry framework to an online professional practice doctoral program
ARTICLE

, University of Florida ; , , ,

IRRODL Volume 12, Number 6, ISSN 1492-3831 Publisher: Athabasca University Press

Full Text

Abstract

The community of inquiry (CoI) framework has commonly been used to study teaching and learning in online courses (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer 2000). This paper describes the implementation of the CoI framework in a cohort-based online EdD program, where teaching presence and cognitive presence were easier to foster than social presence. Based on the results of an initial evaluation, suggestions are made to expand the components of the CoI framework when using it at a program level. Lessons learned from the implementation are also shared to assist others wishing to apply the CoI framework to online graduate programs.

Citation

Kumar, S., Dawson, K., Black, E., Cavanaugh, C. & Sessums, C. (2011). Applying the community of inquiry framework to an online professional practice doctoral program. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(6), 126-142. Athabasca University Press. Retrieved August 9, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Ainsworth, S., & Loizou, A.T. (2003). The effects of self-explaining when learning with texts or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27, 669–681.
  2. Allen, I., & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on demand: Online education in the United States. Babson Park, MA: Babson College Survey Research Group. Retrieved from http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/learningondemand.pdf Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2). Retrieved from http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v5n2/v5n2_
  3. Arbaugh, J.B., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2006). An investigation of epistemological and social dimensions of teaching in online learning environments. Academy of Management Learning& Education, 5, 435−447.
  4. Arbaugh, J.B., & Hwang, A. (2006). Does “teaching presence” exist in online MBA courses? The Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 9−21.
  5. Arbaugh, J.B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S.R., Garrison, D.R., Ice, P., Richardson, J.C. & Swan, K.P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3/4), 133–136.
  6. Arnold, N., & Ducate, L. (2006). Future foreign language teachers’ social and cognitive collaboration in an online environment. Language Learning& Technology, 10(1), 42−66. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol10num1/pdf/arnoldducate.pdf Benbunan-Fich, R., Hiltz, S.R., & Harasim, L. (2005). The online interaction learning model: An integrated theoretical framework for learning networks. In S.R. Hiltz& R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 19−37). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  7. Blignaut, A.S., & Trollip, S.R. (2003). Measuring faculty participation in asynchronous discussion forums. Journal of Education for Business, 78(6), 347−353.
  8. Celani, M.A.A., & Collins, H. (2005). Critical thinking in reflective sessions and in online interactions. AILA Review, 18, 41−57.
  9. Celentin, P. (2007). Online training: Analysis of interaction and knowledge-building patterns among foreign language teachers. Journal of Distance Education, 21(3), 39−58.
  10. Cepeda, N.J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J.T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354–380.
  11. Costa, A.L., & Kallick, B. (2008). Learning and leading with habits of mind: 16 essential characteristics for success. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
  12. 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.
  13. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking and computer conferencing: A model and tool to assess cognitive presence. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7−23.
  14. Garrison, D.R. (2003). Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: The role of reflective inquiry, self-direction and metacognition. In J. Bourne & J.C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Practice and direction, the Sloan C Series (Vol. 4, pp. 29−38). Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium.
  15. Garrison, D.R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133−148.
  16. Gunawardena, C., & Zittle, F. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8−26.
  17. Hughes, M., Ventura, S., & Dando, M. (2007). Assessing social presence in online discussion groups: A replication study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(1), 17–29.
  18. Iriberri, A., & Leroy, G. (2009). A lifecycle perspective on online community success. ACM Computing Surveys, 41(2). Retrieved from http://web.cgu.edu/faculty/leroy/content/Publications.html
  19. 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.
  20. Lim, C.P., & Barnes, S. (2002). “Those who can, teach”—The pivotal role of the teacher in the information and communication technologies (ICT) learning environment. Journal of Educational Media, 27(1–2), 19−40.
  21. Luebeck, J.L., & Bice, L.R. (2005). Online discussion as a mechanism of conceptual change among mathematics and science teachers. Journal of Distance Education, 20(2), 21−39.
  22. McTighe, J., & O’Connor, K. (2005). Seven practices for effective learning. Educational Leadership, 63, 10–17.
  23. Meyer, K.A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higherorder thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 55−65.
  24. Meyer, K.A. (2004). Evaluating online discussions: Four different frames of analysis. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 101−114.
  25. Molinari, D.L. (2004). The role of social comments in problem-solving groups in an online class. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 89−101.
  26. Moreno, R., & Valdez, A. (2005). Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 35–45.
  27. Murphy, E. (2004). Recognizing and promoting collaboration in an online asynchronous discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 421−431.
  28. Perry, J.A., & Imig, D.G. (2008). A stewardship of practice in education. Change: The Magazine of High Learning, 40(6), 42–49.
  29. Richardson, J.C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68−88.
  30. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14. Retrieved from http://auspace.athabascau.ca:8080/dspace/handle/2149/732 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.
  31. Shea, P.J., Fredericksen, E.E., Pickett, A.M., & Pelz, W.E. (2003). A preliminary investigation of teaching presence in the SUNY learning network. In J. Bourne & J.C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Practice and direction, the Sloan C Series (Vol. 4, pp. 279–312.) Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.
  32. Shea, P.J., Pickett, A.M., & Pelz, W.E. (2004). Enhancing student satisfaction through faculty development: The importance of teaching presence. In J. Bourne & J.C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Into the mainstream, the Sloan C Series (Vol. 5, pp. 39−59). Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.
  33. Shea, P., Hayes, S., & Vickers, J. (2010). Online instructional effort measured through the lens of teaching presence in the community of inquiry framework: Are-examination of measures and approach. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/ Irrodl/article/view/915
  34. Shulman, L., Golde, C.M., Bueschel, A.C., & Garabedian, K.J. (2006). Reclaiming education’s doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 25–32.
  35. So, H.J., & Brush, T.A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence, and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers& Education, 51(1), 318–336.
  36. Swan, K. (2003). Developing social presence in online discussions. In S. Naidu (Ed.), Learning and teaching with technology: Principles and practices (pp. 147−164).
  37. Swan, K., & Shih, L.F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115−136.
  38. Wu, D., & Hiltz, S.R. (2004). Predicting learning from asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 139−152.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Links

Also Read

Related Collections

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts