Extending The Community of Inquiry Framework: Development and Validation of Technology Sub-Dimensions

Keywords: Community of Inquiry framework, extending the CoI framework, technology sub-dimensions, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis

Abstract

Since the mandatory switch to online education due to the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020, technology has gained more importance for online teaching and learning environments. The Community of Inquiry (CoI) is one of the validated frameworks widely used to examine online learning. In this paper, we offer an extension to the CoI framework and survey, arguing that meaningful and appropriate use of technologies has become a requirement in today’s pandemic and post-pandemic educational contexts. With this goal, we propose adding three technology-related sub-dimensions that would fall under each main presence of the CoI framework: (a) technology for teaching, (b) technology for interaction, and (c) technology for learning. Based on exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, we added 5 items for technology for teaching sub-dimension, 4 items for technology for interaction sub-dimension, and 5 items for technology for learning sub-dimension in the original CoI survey. Further research and practice implications are also discussed in this paper.

References

Anderson, T. (2016, January 4). A fourth presence for the Community of Inquiry model? Virtual Canuck. https://virtualcanuck.ca/2016/01/04/a-fourth-presence-for-the-community-of-inquiry-model/

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. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 137–162). Sage.

Caskurlu, S. (2018). Confirming the subdimensions of teaching, social, and cognitive presences: A construct validity study. The Internet and Higher Education, 39, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.05.002

Castellanos-Reyes, D. (2020). 20 years of the Community of Inquiry framework. TechTrends, 64, 557–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00491-7

Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., Ho, H. N. J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2012). Examining preservice teachers’ perceived knowledge of TPACK and cyberwellness through structural equation modeling. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(6), 1000–1019. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.807

Choo, J., Bakir, N., Scagnoli, N. I., Ju, B., & Tong, X. (2020). Using the Community of Inquiry framework to understand students’ learning experience in online undergraduate business courses. TechTrends, 64(1), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00444-9

Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2017). Validating the technology proficiency self-assessment questionnaire for 21st-century learning (TPSA C-21). Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(1), 20–31.

Cleveland-Innes, M., Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. (2018). The Community of Inquiry theoretical framework: Implications for distance education and beyond. In M.G. Moore & W.C. Diehl (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (4th ed., pp. 67–78). Routledge.

Dempsey, P. R., & Zhang, J. (2019). Re-examining the construct validity and causal relationships of teaching, cognitive, and social presence in Community of Inquiry framework. Online Learning, 23(1), 62–79. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i1.1419

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.

Garrison, D. (2017). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice (3rd ed.). Routledge.

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference: 11.0 update (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

Graham, R. C., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., St. Clair, L., & Harris, R. (2009). Measuring the TPACK confidence of inservice science teachers. TechTrends, 53(5), 70–79. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11528-009-0328-0.pdf

Hanshaw, G. (2021). Use technology to engage students and create a stronger instructor presence. In C. L. Jennings (Ed.), Ensuring adult and non-traditional learners’ success with technology, design, and structure (pp. 97–110). IGI Global. https://www.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-6762-3.ch006

Heilporn, G., & Lakhal, S. (2020). Investigating the reliability and validity of the Community of Inquiry framework: An analysis of categories within each presence. Computers & Education, 145, Article 103712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103712

Horzum, M. B. (2015). Online learning students’ perceptions of the community of inquiry based on learning outcomes and demographic variables. Croatian Journal of Education, 17(2), 535–567. https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v17i2.607

Hu, L.-T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

Ibrahim, R., Wahid, F. N., Norman, H., Nordin, N., Baharudin, H., & Tumiran, M. A. (2021). Students’ technology competency levels for online learning using MOOCs during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Advanced Research in Education and Society, 3(4), 137–145. https://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/ijares/article/view/16670

International Society for Technology in Education [ISTE]. (2016). ISTE standards: Students. https://www.iste.org/standards/for-students

Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.

Kozan, K. (2016). A comparative structural equation modeling investigation of the relationships among teaching, cognitive, and social presence. Online Learning, 20(3), 210–227. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i3.654

Kozan, K., & Caskurlu, S. (2018). On the Nth presence for the Community of Inquiry framework. Computers and Education, 122, 104–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.010

Kozan, K., & Richardson, J. C. (2014). Interrelationships between and among social, teaching, and cognitive presence. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.007

Kumar, S., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2014). Adapting the Community of Inquiry survey for an online graduate program: Implications for online programs. E-learning and Digital Media, 11(1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2014.11.1.59

Ma, Z., Wang, J., Wang, Q., Kong, L., Wu, Y., & Yang, H. (2017). Verifying causal relationships among the presences of the Community of Inquiry framework in the Chinese context. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(6), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i6.3197

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/10.1080/01587919.2017.1322062

Mayer, R. E. (2019). Thirty years of research on online learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(2), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3482

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://www.tcrecord.org/content.asp?contentid=12516

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2013). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Muthén and Muthén.

Ng, Y. Y., & Przybyłek, A. (2021). Instructor presence in video lectures: Preliminary findings from an online experiment. IEEE Access, 9, 36485–36499. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3058735

Ní Shé, C., Farrell, O., Brunton, J., Costello, E., Donlon, E., Trevaskis, S., & Eccles, S. (2019). Teaching online is different: Critical perspectives from the literature. Dublin City University. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3479402

Pool, J., Reitsma, G., & van den Berg, D. (2017). Revised Community of Inquiry framework: Examining learning presence in a blended mode of delivery. Online Learning, 21(3), 153– 165. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v%vi%i.866

Richardson, J. C., Koehler, A. A., Besser, E. D., Caskurlu, S., Lim, J., & Mueller, C. M. (2015). Conceptualizing and investigating instructor presence in online learning environments. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2123

Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.017

Stenbom, S. (2018). A systematic review of the Community of Inquiry survey. The Internet and Higher Education, 39, 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.06.001

Stone, C., & Springer, M. (2019). Interactivity, connectedness and “teacher-presence”: Engaging and retaining students online. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 59(2), 146–169. https://search.informit.org/doi/pdf/10.3316/aeipt.224048?download=true

Şen-Akbulut, M. & Oner, D. (2021). Developing pre-service teachers’ technology competencies: A project-based learning experience. Cukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 50 (1), 247-275. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/cuefd/issue/59484/753044

Şen-Akbulut, M., Umutlu, D., Oner, D. & Arıkan, S. (2022). Exploring university students’ learning experiences in the Covid-19 semester through the Community of Inquiry framework. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 23 (1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1050334

Thompson, P., Vogler, J. S., & Xiu, Y. (2017). Strategic tooling: Technology for constructing a community of inquiry. Journal of Educators Online, 14(2). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1150675.pdf

Tondeur, J., Aesaert, K., Pynoo, B., Braak, J., Fraeyman, N., & Erstad, O. (2017). Developing a validated instrument to measure preservice teachers’ ICT competencies: Meeting the demands of the 21st-century. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 462– 472. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12380

Wei, L., Hu, Y., Zuo, M., & Luo, H. (2020). Extending the CoI framework to K-12 education: Development and validation of a learning experience questionnaire. In S. Cheung, R. Li, K. Phusavat, N. Paoprasert, & L. Kwok (Eds.), Blended learning: Education in a smart learning environment. ICBL 2020 (pp. 315–325). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51968-1_26

Published
2022-09-01
How to Cite
Şen-Akbulut, M., Umutlu, D., & Arıkan, S. (2022). Extending The Community of Inquiry Framework: Development and Validation of Technology Sub-Dimensions. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 23(3), 61-81. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v23i2.6022
Section
Research Articles