Communities of Inquiry and the Case of the "Distance Education" Group during the COVID-19 Pandemic



Abstract Views
157

Downloads
173

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Dec 22, 2022
Published Dec 29, 2022
10.24018/ejeng.2022.1.CIE.2964

Abstract viewed = 157 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

According to the Community of Inquiry (CoI) Framework, successful learning experiences are supported by the presence and interaction of cognitive, social, and teaching elements. Since the CoI Framework has been widely used to examine the quality of educational interactions, its applicability to non-formal education has not been adequately explored. This research is a case study of the "Distance Education" group on Facebook. It was mainly carried out during a period of restrictions due to COVID-19, when most schools in Greece remained closed.

This study explores the process by which shared understanding and learning were fostered in a Peer-to-Peer setting of teachers. Through group exploration and interaction team members were able to provide solutions and answers while focused discussion and smooth functioning were controlled by administrators who were also educators.

The results of this research show the presence of social, cognitive, and teaching elements during the discussions. Similarly, the findings of the analysis of the discussions show that they contained content directly related to the learning activities, thus indicating the presence of the cognitive component. Off-topic discussions helped develop social relationships. Overall, when interpreted within the framework of CoI, the results reveal that all three components of an effective online learning experience were present in the context of Peer-to-Peer conversations between teachers.

The most important finding is that during the pandemic, teachers had to develop reciprocal relationships and create common plans and projects that helped them overcome difficulties and, finally, reflect dialectically on the extraordinary conditions created by the pandemic. The results of the research can be used by professionals who wish to apply the framework in a non-formal educational setting.

Keywords: Adult education, Community of Inquiry (CoI), Covid-19, Distance education.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Tondeur J, van Braak J, Valcke M. Curricula and the use of ICT in education: Two worlds apart? Br J Educ Technol [Internet]. 2007;38(6):962–76. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00680.x.
     Google Scholar
  2. Doukakis S, Sfyris P, Niari M, Alexopoulos E. Exploring educational practices in emergency remote teaching. The role of educational neuroscience. In: 2021 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). IEEE; 2021. p. 1026–34.
     Google Scholar
  3. Kavoura T, The use of facebook by museums in greece before after and during the coronavirus pandemic. 2022 volume 1-A [Internet]. Sdct-journal.com. [ cited 2022 Oct 5]. Available from: http://sdct-journal.com/index.php/2015-10-18-22-23-19/2021-volume-1-ab-2.
     Google Scholar
  4. Siemens G. Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age [Internet]. Typepad.com. 2005 [ cited 2022 Jul 13]. Available from: https://jotamac.typepad.com/jotamacs_weblog/files/Connectivism.pdf
     Google Scholar
  5. Mathiasen H. Students ' use of social software in self-organized learning environments [Internet]. Elte.hu. [ cited 2022 Jul 13]. Available from: http://matchsz.inf.elte.hu/tt/docs/MathiasenHelleChristianDalsgaard.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  6. Moore MG. The theory of transactional distance. In: Handbook of Distance Education. Fourth edition. | New York: Routledge, 2019. | Previous edition: 2013.: Routledge; 2018. p. 32–46.
     Google Scholar
  7. Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W. Critical inquiry in a text- based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education 1 [Internet]. Athabascau.ca. [ cited 2022 Jul 13]. Available from: https://auspace.athabascau.ca/bitstream/handle/2149/739/?sequence=1
     Google Scholar
  8. Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W. Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education [Internet]. 2001;15(1):7–23. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071.
     Google Scholar
  9. Rourke L, Anderson T. Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educ Technol Res Dev [Internet]. 2004 [ cited 2022 Jul 13];52(1):5–18. Available from:
     Google Scholar
  10. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/50240c32420328e877a81d0e9d9ac32527248966.
     Google Scholar
  11. Arbaugh JB, Cleveland - Innes M, Diaz SR, Garrison DR, Ice P, Richardson JC, et al. Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi -institutional sample. Internet High Educ [Internet]. 2008 [ cited 2022 Jul 13];11(3–4):133–6. Available from: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/102586/.
     Google Scholar
  12. Factorial Validity and reliability of the sense of community in online courses scale. Journal of interactive online learning [Internet]. Ncolr.org. [cited 2022 Jul 13]. Available from: https://www.ncolr.org/issues/jiol/v12/n2/2.html.
     Google Scholar
  13. Akyol Z, Garrison DR. The development of a Community of Inquiry over time in an online course: Understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence. Online learn [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2022 Jul 13];12(3):3–22. Available from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ837483.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  14. Lambert JL, Fisher JL. Community of Inquiry framework: Establishing community in an online course [Internet]. Ncolr.org. [cited 2022 Jul 14]. Available from: http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/12.1.1.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  15. Swan K, Garrison DR, Richardson JC. A constructivist approach to online learning: The Community of Inquiry framework. In: Information Technology and Constructivism in Higher Education. IGI Global? 2009. p. 43–57.
     Google Scholar
  16. Shea P, Bidjerano T. Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2010;55(4):1721–31. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131510002095.
     Google Scholar
  17. Tolu AT. Creating effective communities of inquiry in online courses. Procedia Soc Behav Sci [Internet]. 2013;70: 1049–55. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042813001584.
     Google Scholar
  18. Saadatmand M. Examining learners ' interaction in an open online course through the community of inquiry framework. Mohsen Saadatmand et al [Internet]. Eric.ed.gov. [ cited 2022 Jul 14]. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1187832.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  19. Garrison DR, Arbaugh JB. Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. Internet High Educ [Internet]. 2007;10(3):157–72. Available from: http://reinventnet.org/moodle/pluginfile.php/1196/mod_resource/content/3/COIreview.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  20. Lin V, Kang YC, Liu GZ, Lin W. Participants ' experiences and interactions on Facebook group in an EFL course in Taiwan. Asia-Pac educ res [Internet]. 2016;25(1):99–109. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40299-015-0239-0.
     Google Scholar
  21. Lin, V., Kang, Y.-C., Liu, G.-Z., & Lin, W. (2016). Participants ' experiences and interactions on Facebook group in an EFL course in Taiwan. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(1), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-015-0239-0.
     Google Scholar
  22. Sung E, Mayer RE. Five facets of social presence in online distance education. Comput Human Behav [Internet]. 2012;28(5):1738–47. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563212001185.
     Google Scholar
  23. Wei CW, Chen NS, Kinshuk. A model for social presence in online classrooms. Educ Technol Res Dev [Internet]. 2012;60(3):529–45. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9234-9.
     Google Scholar
  24. Capra T. Online education from the perspective of community college students within the community of inquiry paradigm. Community coll j res practice [Internet]. 2014;38(2–3):108–21. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2014.851949.
     Google Scholar
  25. Anderson T, Rourke L, Garrison R, Archer W. Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Online learn [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2022 Jul 14];5(2). Available from: https://olj.onlinelearningconsortium.org/index.php/olj/article/view/1875.
     Google Scholar
  26. Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W. The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. Internet High Educ [Internet]. 2010;13(1–2):5–9. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1096751609000608.
     Google Scholar
  27. Murphy KL, Collins MP. Communication Conventions in Instructional Electronic Chats. First Monday [Internet]. 1997 [cited 2022 Jul 13];2(11). Available from: https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/558.
     Google Scholar
  28. Palloff RM, Pratt K. The virtual student: A profile and guide that working with online learners. London, England: Jossey -Bass; 2003.
     Google Scholar
  29. Lapadat JC. Written interaction: A key component in online learning. J Comput Mediat Commun [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2022 Jul 13];7(4):0–0. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/7/4/JCMC742/4584264?login=true.
     Google Scholar
  30. Dykes ME, Schwier RA. Content and community redux: Instructor and student interpretations of online communication in a graduate seminar. Can J Learn Technol [Internet]. 2003 [cited 2022 Jul 13];29(2). Available from: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/43047/.
     Google Scholar
  31. Warschauer M. Comparing face- to -face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO j [Internet]. 2013 [ cited 2022 Jul 14];13(2–3):7–26. Available from: https://education.uci.edu/uploads/7/2/7/6/72769947/comparing_face-to-face_and_electronic_discussion.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  32. Chou CC. A comparative content analysis of student interaction in synchronous and asynchronous learning networks. In: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE Comput. Soc; 2003. p. 1795–803.
     Google Scholar
  33. Duemer L, Fontenot D, Gumfory K, Kallus M, Larsen J, Schafer S, et al. The use of online synchronous discussion groups that enhance community formation and professional identity development [Internet]. Ncolr.org. [cited 2022 Jul 13]. Available from: https://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/1.2.4.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  34. Donlan L. Exploring the views of students on the use of Facebook in university teaching and learning. J Furth High Educ [Internet]. 2014;38(4):572–88. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877x.2012.726973
     Google Scholar
  35. Roblyer, MD, McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, JV (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and students uses and perceptions of social networking sites. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 134e140.
     Google Scholar
  36. Keles E. Use of Facebook for the Community Services Practices course: Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2018;116: 203–24. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131517302075.
     Google Scholar
  37. Warner AG. Developing a community of inquiry in a face- to -face class: How an online learning framework can enrich traditional classroom practice. J Manag Educ [Internet]. 2016;40(4):432–52. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1052562916629515.
     Google Scholar
  38. Greenhow C, Robelia B, Hughes JE. Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educ Res [Internet]. 2009;38(4):246–59. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189x09336671.
     Google Scholar
  39. Schroeder A, Minocha S, Schneider C. The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of using social software in higher and further education teaching and learning: Implications of social software use. J Comput Assist Learn [Internet]. 2010;26(3):159–74. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00347.x
     Google Scholar
  40. Öztürk E. Facebook as a new Community of inquiry environment: An investigation in terms of academic achievement and motivation. J Balt Sci Educ [Internet]. 2015;14(1):20–33. Available from: https://www.proquest.com/docview/2344376227?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true.
     Google Scholar
  41. Mazer JP, Murphy RE, Simonds CJ. I'll see you on “Facebook”: The effects of computer -mediated teacher self-disclosure on students motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate. Commun Educ [Internet]. 2007;56(1):1–17. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520601009710.
     Google Scholar
  42. English R, Howell J. Facebook goes to College: Using social networking tools to support students undertaking teaching practicum. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching [Internet]. 2008 [ cited 2022 Oct 5];4(4):596–601. Available from: https://acuresearchbank.acu.edu.au/item/8v31x/facebook-goes-to-college-using-social-networking-tools-to-support-students-undertaking-teaching-practicum.
     Google Scholar
  43. Manousou A, Giosos, Mavroidis and Koutsoumba M. Utilization of mentoring processes, communities of practice and communities of inquiry in distance education. Case studies among members of tutors-counselors of HOU. 7th International Conference in Open & Distance Learning – November 2013, Athens, Greece – PROCEEDINGS [Internet]. 2016 [ cited 2022 Jul 14];7(1A). Available from: https://eproceedings.epublishing.ekt.gr/index.php/openedu/article/view/530.
     Google Scholar
  44. Kucuk S, Sahin I. From the perspective of Community of Inquiry Framework: An examination of Facebook uses by pre-service teachers as a learning environment. 2013 [ cited 2022 Jul 14]; Available from: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/42f780200fa1c5f932e5fbd2c16c5863a2878009.
     Google Scholar
  45. Tirado Morueta R, Maraver López P, Hernando Gómez Á, Harris VW. Exploring social and cognitive presences in communities of inquiry to perform higher cognitive tasks. Internet High Educ [Internet]. 2016;31: 122–31. Available from: http://www.uhu.es/angel.hernando/documentos/2016_Internet_and_higuer_education.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  46. Wanstreet CE, Stein DS. Presence over time in synchronous communities of inquiry. Am J Distance Educ [Internet]. 2011;25(3):162–77. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2011.590062.
     Google Scholar
  47. Rousaki F and Costas F (2016) The communities of practice as a supportive tool in the basic teachers' education. An exploratory approach that Social Software. 6th International Conference in Open & Distance Learning, November 2011, Loutraki, Greece – Proceedings [Internet]. 2016 [ cited 2022 Jul 14];6(1A). Available from: https://eproceedings.epublishing.ekt.gr/index.php/openedu/article/view/758.
     Google Scholar
  48. Paliktzoglou V, Suhonen J. Facebook as an assisted learning tool in problem- based learning: the Bahrain case. Int j soc media interact learn environment [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2022 Jul 14];2(1):85. Available from: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8bd3f27a5b9bc1522a9c8a63bef00f978b4cb575.
     Google Scholar
  49. Scott KS, Sorokti KH, Merrell JD. Learning “beyond the classroom” within an enterprise social network system. Internet High Educ [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2022 Jul 14];29:75–90. Available from: https://www.scholars.northwestern.edu/en/publications/learning-beyond-the-classroom-within-an-enterprise-social-network.
     Google Scholar
  50. Osgerby J, Rush D. An exploratory case study examining undergraduate accounting students ' perceptions of using Twitter as a learning support tool. Int J Manag Educ [Internet]. 2015;13(3):337–48. Available from: https://daneshyari.com/article/preview/357341.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  51. Dabbagh N, Kitsantas A. Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulation learning: a natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. Internet High Educ [Internet]. 2012;15(1):3–8. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1096751611000467.
     Google Scholar
  52. Ellison NB, Gibbs JL, Weber MS. The use of enterprise social network sites for knowledge sharing in distributed organizations: The role of organizational affordances. Am Behav Sci [Internet]. 2015;59(1):103–23. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764214540510.
     Google Scholar
  53. Chunngam B, Chanchalor S, Murphy E. Membership, participation and knowledge building in virtual communities for informal learning: Virtual communities for informal learning. Br J Educ Technol [Internet]. 2014;45(5):863–79. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12114.
     Google Scholar
  54. Haythornthwaite C, Kumar P, Gruzd A, Gilbert S, Esteve del Valle M, Paulin D. Learning in the wild: coding for learning and practice on Reddit. Learn Media Technol [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2022 Jul 14];43(3):219–35. Available from: https://surface.syr.edu/istpub/186/.
     Google Scholar
  55. Greenhow C, Robelia B. Old communication, new literacies: Social network sites as social learning resources. J Comput Mediat Commun [Internet]. 2009 [ cited 2022 Jul 14];14(4):1130–61. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/14/4/1130/4583570.
     Google Scholar
  56. Rosé CP, Ferschke O. Technology support for discussion based learning: From computer supported collaborative learning that the future of massive open online courses. Int J Artif Intel Educ [Internet]. 2016;26(2):660–78. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0107-y.
     Google Scholar
  57. Kumar S, Dawson K, Black EW, Cavanaugh C, Sessums CD. Applying the community of inquiry framework to an online professional practice doctoral program. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn [Internet]. 2011 [ cited 2022 Jul 14];12(6):126. Available from: https://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/978.
     Google Scholar
  58. Richardson JC, Swan K. Examining social presence in online courses about students 'perceived learning and satisfaction. Online learn [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2022 Jul 14];7(1). Available from: https://olj.onlinelearningconsortium.org/index.php/olj/article/view/1864.
     Google Scholar
  59. Caspi A, Blau I. Social presence in online discussion groups: testing three conceptions and their relations that perceived learning. Soc Psychol Educ [Internet]. 2008;11(3):323–46. Available from: https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2008-08886-008.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  60. Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative inquiry and research design [Internet]. SAGE Publications Inc. 2022 [cited 2022 Jul 14]. Available from: https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/qualitative-inquiry-and-research-design/book246896.
     Google Scholar
  61. Pimmer C, Linxen S, Gröhbiel U. Facebook as a learning tools? A case study on the appropriation of social network sites from mobile phones in developing countries: Facebook as a learning tools? Br J Educ Technol [Internet]. 2012;43(5):726–38. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01351.x.
     Google Scholar
  62. Akyol Z, Garrison DR, Ozden MY. Online and blended communities of inquiry: Exploring the developmental and perceptional differences. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn [Internet]. 2009 [ cited 2022 Oct 5];10(6):65. Available from: https://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/765.
     Google Scholar
  63. Hosler KA, Arend BD. The importance of course design, feedback, and facilitation: student perceptions of the relationship between teaching presence and cognitive presence. EMI Educ Media Int [Internet]. 2012;49(3):217–29. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2012.738014
     Google Scholar
  64. Deng L, Tavares NJ. From Moodle to Facebook: Exploring students ' motivation and experiences in online communities. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2013;68: 167–76. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036013151300122X.
     Google Scholar
  65. Hou HT, Wang SM, Lin PC, Chang KE. Exploring the learner's knowledge construction and cognitive patterns of different asynchronous platforms: comparison of an online discussion forum and Facebook. Innov Educ Teach Int [Internet]. 2015;52(6):610–20. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.847381.
     Google Scholar
  66. Wang CM. Using Facebook for cross-cultural collaboration: the experience of students from Taiwan. EMI Educ Media Int [Internet]. 2012;49(1):63–76. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2012.662625.
     Google Scholar
  67. Çoklar AN. Evaluations of students on Facebook as an educational environment. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2022 Oct 5];3(2):42–53. Available from: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tojqi/issue/21395/229370.
     Google Scholar
  68. O'Bannon BW, Beard JL, Britt VG. Using a Facebook group as an educational tool: Effects on students achievements. Comput Sch [Internet]. 2013;30(3):229–47. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2013.805972.
     Google Scholar
  69. Kirschner PA. Facebook as learning platform: Argumentation superhighway or dead -end street? Comput Human Behav [Internet]. 2015;53:621–5. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563215001971.
     Google Scholar
  70. Manca S, Ranieri M. Is it a tool suitable for learning – a critical review of the literature on Facebook as a technology-enhanced learning environment: Is Facebook a tool suitable for learning. J Comput Assist Learn [Internet]. 2013;29(6):487–504. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12007.
     Google Scholar
  71. Rap S, Blonder R. Let's face (book) it: Analyzing interactions in social network groups for chemistry learning. J Sci Educ Technol [Internet]. 2016;25(1):62–76. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9577-1.
     Google Scholar
  72. Pempek TA, Yermolayeva YA, Calvert SL. College students ' social networking experiences on Facebook. J Appl Dev Psychol [Internet]. 2009;30(3):227–38. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0193397308001408.
     Google Scholar