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
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.
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
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. The copyright of all content published in IRRODL is retained by the authors.
This copyright agreement and use license ensures, among other things, that an article will be as widely distributed as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific and/or scholarly archive.
You are free to
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms below:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.