Educational Experience and Instructional Design Effectiveness Within the Community of Inquiry Framework
Keywords:community of inquiry (CoI) framework, instructional design outcomes, elearning, assessment and evaluation
Within its 20 years of development, the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework has become the most widely used theoretical framework in e-learning. It is considered in much of the distance education literature to be a robust collaborative-constructivist process model that uses three essential elements to interpret educational experience: cognitive presence, teaching presence, and social presence. Widespread use of the CoI framework has resulted in several criticisms, such as having no guidelines for implementation, no incorporation of assessment and evaluation metrics, and no widespread consensus on the current model’s ability to represent all the contributing factors that promote a positive educational experience. However, there is an opportunity to overcome these shortcomings, some of which may exist, and to use the CoI’s extraordinary strength in creating a positive education experience, by adding instructional design effectiveness. The purpose of this combination of a literature review and opinion is to present the CoI framework and its major controversies to shine a light on its importance as one approach to designing critical parts of e-learning. Additionally, given the CoI’s purpose of creating a positive educational experience, this paper argues to make explicit to instructional designers and instructors the need to address using the CoI framework within an effective overall design.
Agnew, S., Kerr, J., & Watt, R. (2021). The effect on student behaviour and achievement of removing incentives to complete online formative assessments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(4), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6203
Alsaedi, R. (2021, April). Innovative ideas to make your teaching methods more effective. Global Scientific Journals, 9(4), 1101–1126. https://www.globalscientificjournal.com/researchpaper/Innovative_ideas_make_your_teaching_more_effective.pdf
Berge, Z. L. (2021). Secret of instructional design revisited. Frontiers in Education Technology, 4(4), 26–36. https://doi.org/10.22158/fet.v4n4p26
Bin Mubayrik, H. F. (2020). New trends in formative-summative evaluations for adult education. SAGE Open, 10(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2158244020941006
Caskurlu, S., Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., & Kozan, K. (2021). The qualitative evidence behind the factors impacting online learning experiences as informed by the community of inquiry framework: A thematic synthesis. Computers & Education, 165, Article 104111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104111
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
Child, F., Frank, M., Lef, M., & Sarakatsannis, J. (2021, October 18). Setting a new bar for online higher education. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/education/our-insights/setting-a-new-bar-for-online-higher-education
Cleveland-Innes, M. (2019). The community of inquiry theoretical framework: Designing collaborative online and blended learning. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Principles and Practices of Design (3rd ed., pp. 43–60). Routledge.
Cooper, T., & Scriven, R. (2017). Communities of inquiry in curriculum approach to online learning: Strengths and limitations in context. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3026
Day, I. N. Z., van Blankenstein, F. M., Westernberg, M., & Admiraal, W. (2018) A review of the characteristics of intermediate assessment and their relationship with student grades. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(6), 908–929. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1417974
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. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i1.1419
Fiock, H. (2020). Designing a community of inquiry in online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 135–153. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.3985
Fiock, H., Maeda, Y., & Richardson, J. (2021). Instructor impact on differences in teaching presence scores in online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(3), 55–76. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i3.5456
Garrison, D. R. (2017, October 24). Other presences? The Community of Inquiry. https://www.thecommunityofinquiry.org/editorial7
Garrison, D. R. (2022). Motivation and the CoI framework. The Community of Inquiry. https://www.thecommunityofinquiry.org/editorial37
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87–105.
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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001
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://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103712
Kebritchi, M., Lipschuetz, A., & Santiague, L. (2017). Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(1), 4–29. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0047239516661713
Kozan, K., & Caskurlu, S. (2018). On the Nth presence for the community of inquiry framework. Computers & Education, 122, 104–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.010
Martin, F., Bollinger, D. U., & Flowers, C. (2021). Design matters: Development and validation of the online course design elements (OCDE) instrument. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(2), 46–71. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i2.5187
Martin, F., Ritzhaupt, A., Kumar, S., & Budhrani, K. (2019). Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Course design, assessment and evaluation, and facilitation. The Internet and Higher Education, 42, 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.04.001
Martin, F., Wang, C., & Sadaf, A. (2020). Facilitation matters: Instructor perception of helpfulness of facilitation strategies in online courses. Online Learning, 24(1), 28–49. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i1.1980
Martin, F., Wu, T., Wan, L., & Xie, K. (2022). A meta-analysis on the community of inquiry presences and learning outcomes in online and blended learning environments. Online Learning, 26(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.2604
Mekonen, Y. K., & Fitiavana, R. A. (2021). Assessment of learning outcomes in higher education: Review of literature. International Journal of Research Publications.71(1), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.47119/IJRP100711220211766
Olpak, Y. Z. (2022). Community of inquiry framework: Research trends between 2000-2020. Online Learning, 26(1), 350–368. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i2.2737
Park, H., & Shea, P. (2020). A ten-year review of online learning research through co-citation analysis. Online Learning, 24(2), 225–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i2.2001
Sadaf, A., Wu, T., & Martin, F. (2021). Cognitive presence in online learning: A systematic review of empirical research from 2000 to 2019. Computers and Education Open, 2, 100050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100050
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
Stinnette, J. D., & Luxbacher, K. (2021, June). An innovative methodology for the assessment and maintenance of e-learning courses using the Community of Inquiry model. In P. Tukkaraja (Ed.), Mine Ventilation: Proceedings of the 18th North American Mine Ventilation Symposium, 12-17 June, 2021, Rapid City, South Dakota, USA. CRC Press. https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/109210/10.1201_9781003188476-39_chapterpdf.pdf?sequence=2
The Community of Inquiry. (n.d.). About the framework: An introduction to the community of inquiry. http://www.thecommunityofinquiry.org/coi
Valverde-Berrocoso, J., Garrido-Arroyo, M. D. C., Burgos-Videla, C., & Morales-Cevallos, M. B. (2020). Trends in educational research about e-learning: A systematic literature review (2009–2018). Sustainability, 12(12), 5153. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125153
Wertz, R. E. H. (2022) Learning presence within the Community of Inquiry framework: An alternative measurement for a four-factor model. The Internet and Higher Education, 52, 100832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100832
Yan, Z. (2020). Self-assessment in the process of self-regulated learning and its relationship with academic achievement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 224–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1629390
Yang, A. C. M., Chen, I. Y. L., Flanagan, B., & Ogata, H. (2022). How students’ self-assessment behavior affects their online learning performance. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100058
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
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.