The Community of Inquiry makes use of cookies. By continuing, you consent to this use. More information.
CoI DESIGN PRINCIPLES REVISITED
D. Randy Garrison
February 13, 2020

My focus in this post is an article by Holly Fiock exploring instructional design principles and strategies associated with the Community of Inquiry framework. This is an important and challenging topic. Fiock “describes a practical approach for implementing instructional strategies in order to build a Community of Inquiry (CoI) into an online course” (p. 134). The article begins by reviewing each of the presences from the perspective of instructional design. This is consistent with previously published work (Garrison, 2017, p.112). From here the author reviews peer-reviewed journals for empirical research that confirm instructional strategies regarding student learning or perception of online learning communities. Strategies from this review were organized based on Sorensen and Baylen’s principles that were adapted from Chickering and Gamson’s seven principles of best practice. Using these principles Fiock created “a working document of CoI instructional strategies” (p. 140). For each of the principles, a significant number of instructional activities were identified associated with the three presences of the CoI framework.

This review is significant to the field of online instructional design and in particular to the CoI framework as it identifies evidence-based strategies and conceptualizes them into a working design document. To be clear I support this kind of research and agree with the premise of the article that the “CoI framework does not provide specific instructional guidelines for implementation” (p. 139). Furthermore, I agree with the conclusion of this paper that the review “identifies evidence-based strategies and conceptualizes them into a working design document” (p. 148). However, notwithstanding the value of this research, I have to note that the article incorrectly suggests that there are no instructional design principles and approaches derived from the CoI theoretical framework. Some time ago we offered a set of principles grounded in the CoI framework (Garrison & Vaughan, 2008). While we have not produced a comprehensive list of instructional strategies that correspond with these principles, I have discussed their instructional implications from the perspective of the core presences (Garrison, 2017). Therefore, I do not fully agree with Fiock’s that “there is a void of how to implement instructional strategies aligned with the CoI for practitioners” (p. 148).

Design in terms of the CoI framework (a collaborative constructive learning environment) is associated with shaping and directing the inquiry process understood in a meaningful theoretical structure that can be systematically applied by designers. As I have stated previously (Garrison, 2017), the CoI principles reflect a deep approach to learning that will guide the creation of a supportive and critical community of inquiry. In this regard, the CoI design principles are organized around the dimensions of teaching presence (design, facilitation and direction). In turn, each of the teaching presence dimensions incorporate issues of social and cognitive presence. For ease of reference the seven principles are:

  1. Plan for the creation of open communication and trust
  2. Plan for critical reflection and discourse
  3. Establish community and cohesion
  4. Establish inquiry dynamics (purposeful inquiry)
  5. Sustain respect and responsibility
  6. Sustain inquiry that moves to resolution
  7. Ensure assessment is congruent with intended processes and outcomes
(Garrison, 2017, p. 112)

At this point I must emphasize that these principles are derived from a theoretical framework while the principles that shaped Fiock’s results were ultimately based on a survey by Chickering and Gamson that lacks the coherence, comprehensiveness or guidance of a theoretical framework. That said, consistent with the position of Fiock, we do need the guidance of specific methods and techniques. In this regard I have addressed the challenge and called for more work in this area of developing instructional strategies consistent with a community of inquiry (Editorial 18). That said, the question I am left with is how Fiock’s instructional strategies might align with or be transcribed onto the structure of the CoI principles? Hopefully somebody will take up this challenge.

In conclusion, I want to add one more thought. Notwithstanding the need for specific instructional strategies and techniques, design must also include activities that focus on awareness of the inquiry process and the importance of taking collaborative responsibility and control of the discourse. We have explored this through the construct of shared metacognition. From this perspective, design must keep in mind the need to develop sustainable shared metacognitive awareness of the collaborative inquiry process that is the core of a community of inquiry (Editorial 2).


REFERENCES

Fiock, H. S. (2020). Designing a Community of Inquiry in Online Courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 134-152.

Garrison, D. R. (2017). E-Learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice (3rd Edition). London: Routledge/Taylor and Francis.

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. (2008). Blended learning in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.




CONTRIBUTE A RESPONDING EDITORIAL


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

D. Randy Garrison
Professor Emeritus, University of Calgary
D. Randy Garrison is professor emeritus at the University of Calgary.Dr. Garrison has published extensively on teaching and learning in adult, higher and distance education contexts. He has authored, co-authored or edited fifteen books; 94 articles; 68 book chapters; 40 conference proceedings; and more than 100 academic presentations. His major books are: Garrison, D. R. (2017). E-Learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice (3rd Edition); Garrison, D. R. (2016). Thinking Collaboratively: Learning in a Community of Inquiry; Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles and guidelines; Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2000). A transactional perspective on teaching-learning: A framework for adult and higher education. Curriculum vitae


EDITORIAL KEYWORDS



RECENT EDITORIALS

Shared Metacognition and the Emergence of AI
D. Randy Garrison
November 1, 2023
Artificial intelligence brings increasing attention to critical thinking and discourse. From an educational perspective, my rationale is that the community of inquiry framework, whose

Social Presence Reconsidered
D. Randy Garrison
October 3, 2023
My previous editorial addressed the generic nature of the CoI framework. Given the relevance and validity of the CoI framework in face-to-face settings, this editorial considers the

CoI Framework in Face-to-Face Environments
D. Randy Garrison
August 1, 2023
I think it is safe to say that the general perception of the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework is that it is specific to an online or at best blended learning environment. The reality

Online Learning and AI
D. Randy Garrison
May 19, 2023
Artificial intelligence (AI) has become a hot topic within many professions in terms of considering the transformational implications for practice. Interest in AI has grown dramatically

CoI Effectiveness and Future Development
D. Randy Garrison
April 18, 2023
In previous posts specific to the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework I offered evidence of its general confirmation, theoretical updates, questionnaire validation, and use in
The Community of Inquiry is a project of Athabasca University, Mount Royal University, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, and the Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, as well as researchers and members of the CoI community.