The Community of Inquiry makes use of cookies. By continuing, you consent to this use. More information.
COGNITIVE PRESENCE IN A CoI
D. Randy Garrison
July 31, 2017

The focus of the Community of Inquiry framework is thinking and learning collaboratively. At the heart of this shared learning experience is the cognitive presence construct which incorporates the personal and shared dynamics of reflection and discourse. The cognitive presence construct is operationalized by the Practical Inquiry model that reflects four phases of cognitive development (Triggering Event, Exploration, Integration, Resolution). However, in the first studies of cognitive presence the validity of the construct was questioned when little evidence was found that participants were reaching the resolution phase. It is to this point that I want to highlight two recent publications.

The core of the first article by Sadafa and Olesova (2017) was to study general discussion questions compared to questions within a case study that were specifically designed from the perspective of the Practical Inquiry model. The study “provided evidence that cognitive presence does nothappen automatically; rather, instructors need to pay close attention to designing discussions to contribute to higher-level learning” (Sadafa & Olesova, 2017, p. 9). When questions were designed to have students move beyond initial understanding and provide a rationale they were more likely to move the discourse to resolution. The critical point is that the Practical Inquiry (PI) model “not only provides a useful means for understanding cognitive presence in online discussions but also can serve as a guiding framework to design questions” (p.10).

This is of particular interest to me as this focuses on the critical issue directed to the cognitive presence construct from its inception; that is, moving students through to resolution. Seminal studies showed few postings associated with resolution. However, it was suggested early on that progressing to the resolution phase is demanding and requires appropriate teaching presence in terms of design and facilitation. Moreover, when “questions specifically asked students to engage in practical applications, discussions did progress to the synthesis and resolution phase” (Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007, p.162). The issue was one of teaching presence and not the validity of the PI model.

This is also supported by another recent study by Olesova, Slavin, and Lim (2016). First, they found “that the types of questions asked related to the level of cognitive presence, i.e., higher level questions can lead to higher level of cognitive presence and vice versa” (p. 34). Secondly, they concluded that scripted roles can be an effective strategy to improve cognitive presence which speaks to issues of teaching presence (specifically facilitation); which brings me to the larger point that fully understanding any one the presences requires the consideration of the other two. This is clearly illustrated with cognitive presence in that design and facilitation play crucial roles in reaching intended learning outcomes.

For those interested in the theoretical foundation of the CoI framework, in the next editorial post I will comment on the conceptual basis of the cognitive presence construct.



REFERENCES

Garrison, D.R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157-172.

Olesova, L., Slavin, M., & Lim, J. (2016). Exploring the effect of scripted roles on cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions. Online Learning, 20(4), 34-54.

Sadafa, A. & Olesova, L. (2017). Enhancing cognitive presence in online case discussions with questions based on the Practical Inquiry model. American Journal of Distance Education, Published online: 31 Jan 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2017.1267525




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

Collaborative Inquiry and Asynchronous Discourse
D. Randy Garrison
July 4, 2022
The purpose ofthis post is to explore the connection between collaborative inquiry (cognitivepresence) and asynchronous discourse. As noted in a previous post

Faculty Development and the Community of Inquiry
D. Randy Garrison
May 6, 2022
The focus of this short post is to highlight the essential role of faculty development and the role of the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework in supporting faculty moving to online and blended learning. It has become apparent during the COVID ...

Automatic Detection of Social Presence
D. Randy Garrison
March 4, 2022
Several years ago, I provided an introduction to the role of learning analytics in the context of the Community of Inquiry framework and how we might facilitate collaborative learning through the automatic monitoring of discourse and tracking the ...

CoI Instrument Validation
D. Randy Garrison
November 25, 2021
My goal here is to simply draw your attention to a study that provides a comprehensive overview of Community of Inquiry (CoI) instrument studies directed to confirmation of the original CoI three-factor structure (

CoI Questionnaire: 2.0?
D. Randy Garrison
July 13, 2021
My goal in this post is to draw attention to an important study that used advanced statistical techniques to analyze the CoI questionnaire (Abbitt & Boone, 2021). While exploring statistical anomalies may not be front of mind for most
The Community of Inquiry is a project of Athabasca University, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, and the Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, as well as researchers and members of the CoI community.