LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: Wiley
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: LB1705, LB2395.7
The Community of Inquiry framework, originally proposed by Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2000) identifies teaching, social and cognitive presences as central to a successful online educational experience.\ud \ud This article presents the findings of a study conducted in Uruguay between 2007 and 2010. The research aimed to establish the role of cognitive, social and teaching presences in the professional development of 40 English language teachers on Continuous Professional Development (CPD) programmes delivered in blended learning settings. \ud \ud The findings suggest that teaching presence and cognitive presence have themselves 'become social'. The research points to social presence as a major lever for engagement, sense-making and peer support. Based on the patterns identified in the study, this article puts forward an adjustment to the Community of Inquiry framework, which shows social presence as more prominent within the teaching and cognitive constructs than the original version of the framework suggests.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 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, 3-22.
    • Akyol, Z. & Garrison, D. R. (2010). Understanding cognitive presence in an online and blended community of inquiry: assessing outcomes and processes for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42, 2, 233-250.
    • Akyol, Z. & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Assessing metacognition in an online Community of Inquiry. The Internet and Higher Education, 14, 3, 183-190.
    • Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5, 2, 1-17.
    • Annand, D. (2011). Social presence within the Community of Inquiry framework. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning (IRRODL), 12, 5. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/ article/view/924/1855.
    • Bloom, B., Engelhart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W. & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook1: cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
    • Britt Postholm, M. (2008). Teachers developing practice: reflection as a key activity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1717-1728. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2008.02.024.
    • Bull, G., Park, J., Searson, M., Thompson, A., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J. & Knezek, G. (2007). Editorial: Developing technology policies for effective classroom practice. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7, 3, 129-139.
    • Davis, N. E. & Roblyer, M. D. (2005). Preparing teachers for the “schools that technology built”: evaluation of a program to train teachers for virtual schooling. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37, 4, 399-409.
    • De Stefani, M. (2012). Exploring the possible: empowering language teachers in provincial Uruguay through blended learning. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Manchester: University of Manchester.
    • Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: the theory of inquiry. In J. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey, the later works, 1925-1953 Vol. 12 (pp. 1-5). Carbondale, IL: SIU Press.
    • Donnelly, R. (2006). Blended problem-based learning for teacher education: lessons learnt. Learning, Media and Technology, 31, 2, 93-116.
    • Fereday, J. & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5, 1, 1-11.
    • Garrison, D. R. (2009). Communities of inquiry in online learning. In P. Rogers, G. Berg, J. Boettcher, C. Howard, L. Justice & K. Schenk (Eds.). Encyclopedia of distance learning, Second edition (pp. 352-355). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. doi:10.4018/978-1-60566-198-8.ch052
    • Garrison, D. R. & Akyol, Z. (2013). Toward the development of a metacognition construct for communities of inquiry. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 84-89.
    • Garrison, D. R. & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century. New York: Taylor & Francis.
    • Garrison, D. R. & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10, 3, 157-172.
    • Garrison, D. R. & Vaughan, N. (2008). Blended learning in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
    • 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, 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. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: student perceptions of the Community of Inquiry framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 31-36.
    • Grunberg, J. & Armellini, A. (2004). Teacher collegiality and electronic communication: a study of the collaborative uses of email by secondary school teachers in Uruguay. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35, 5, 597-606.
    • Hughes, G. (2007). Using blended learning to increase learner support and improve retention. Teaching in Higher Education, 12, 3, 349-363.
    • Kanuka, H., Liam, R. & Laflamme, E. (2007). The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 2, 260-271.
    • Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of bloom's taxonomy: an overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 4, 212-218.
    • Kreijns, K., Van Acker, F., Vermeulen, M. & van Buuren, H. (2014). Community of Inquiry: social presence revisited. E-Learning and Digital Media, 11, 1, 5-18.
    • Kupczynski, L., Ice, P., Wiesenmayer, R. & McCluskey, F. (2010). Student perceptions of the relationship between indicators of teaching presence and success in online courses. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9, 1, 23-43.
    • Lipman, M. (1991). Thinking in education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    • Mason, R. (1991). Moderating educational computer conferencing. [Online]. DEOSNEWS, 1, 19. (Archived as DEOSNEWS 91-00011 on LISTSERV@PSUVM).
    • Matzat, U. (2013). Do blended virtual learning communities enhance teachers' professional development more than virtual ones? A large scale empirical comparison. Computers & Education, 60, 1, 40-51.
    • Moon, J. A. (1999). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning. London: Routledge.
    • Motschnig-Pitrik, R. & Standl, B. (2013). Person-centered technology enhanced learning: dimensions of added value. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2, 401-409.
    • Motteram, G. (2006). 'Blended' education and the transformation of teachers: a long-term case study in postgraduate UK Higher Education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, 17-30.
    • Muijs, D. (2004). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. London: SAGE.
    • Paulsen, M. (1995). Moderating educational computer conferences. In Z. Berge & M. Collins (Eds), Computermediated communication and the on-line classroom in distance education (pp. 81-104). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
    • Rourke, L. & Anderson, T. (2002). Using peer teams to lead online discussion. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1. ISSN:1365-893X. DOI: 10.5334/2002-1. http://jime.open.ac.uk/articles/10.5334/ 2002-1/
    • Rourke, L. & Kanuka, H. (2009). Learning in Communities of Inquiry: a review of the literature. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 23, 1, 19-48.
    • Rovai, A. & Jordan, H. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: a comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5, 1-13.
    • Salmon, G. (2011). E-moderating. The key to teaching and learning online (3rd ed.). Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
    • Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities. The key to active online learning. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
    • Salmon, G., Jones, S. & Armellini, A. (2008). Building institutional capability in e-learning design. ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology, 16, 2, 95-109.
    • Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    • 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., Hayes, S. & Vickers, J. (2010). Online instructional effort measured through the lens of teaching presence in the Community of Inquiry framework: a re-examination of measures and approach. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11, 3, 127-154.
    • Shea, P., Hayes, S., Uzuner-Smith, S., Gozza-Cohen, M., Vickers, J. & Bidjerano, T. (2014). Reconceptualizing the Community of Inquiry framework: an exploratory analysis. The Internet and Higher Education, 23, 9-17.
    • Stodel, E. J., Thompson, T. L. & MacDonald, C. J. (2006). 'Learners' perspectives on what is missing from online learning: interpretations through the Community of Inquiry framework. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning (IRRODL), 7, 3. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/ view/325/743.
    • Swan, K. & Shih, L. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9, 3, 115-136.
    • Swan, K., Shea, P., Richardson, J., Ice, P., Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M. et al (2008). Validating a measurement tool of presence in online communities of inquiry. E-Mentor, 2, 24, 1-12.
    • Thornton, K. & Yoong, P. (2011). Mixing face-to-face and online interactions in a leadership development programme: a blended action learning approach. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 22(3), 401-420.
    • Vaughan, N. (2004). Investigating how a blended learning approach can support an inquiry process within a faculty learning community (PhD thesis, University of Calgary).
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article