International Online Graduate Students’ Perceptions of CoI

Abstract

With the current issue of student retention and attrition as a major aspect of online education, this interpretivist qualitative case study sought to determine whether online facilitators and online student-to-student relationships affect online graduate students’ ability to complete their modules and achieve student learning objectives and outcomes (LOO). This study encompassed CoI (Community of Inquiry) and surveyed 54 participants who indicated that the three interdependent presences that form part of CoI (cognitive, social, and teaching) were instrumental in helping them to complete their modules and to achieve student learning objectives and outcomes (LOO). Students’ feedback on online facilitators exemplified their cognitive presence in the form of statements linked to triggering events and exploring of ideas. However, there were few statements connected to integration and none linked to resolution. Overall, most of the data collected connected to subsets of teaching and social presences rather than cognitive presence. Additionally, students’ feedback on their peers suggests that social presence that fosters group cohesion is the most critical factor to assist in completion of the modules and achieving student LOO. Open communication was also indicated and, to a lesser degree, personal/affective subsets of social presence were evident. The findings of this study suggest that more research is needed on the components of the three presences and their relationship to students’ ability to complete the module and achieve student LOO.

Fostering Cognitive Presence in Online Courses: A Systematic Review (2008-2020)

“…A few notable themes related to methods of analysis emerged as the data was reviewed (Figure 4). Most studies used a quantitative approach, while Bissessar et al (2020) utilized a qualitative case study approach. The CoI instrument was the most frequently used, either in its original form (Akyol et al, 2011;Cho & Tobias, 2016;Ice et al, 2011;Kucuk & Richardson, 2019;Leader-Janssen et al, 2016;Patwardhan et al, 2020;Sağlam & Dikilitaş, 2020;Shea & Bidjerano, 2008 or adapted (Joo et al, 2011;Kumar et al, 2011;Saadatmand et al, 2017).…”

“…A large portion of the literature (Bissessar et al, 2020;Choo et al, 2020;Ice et al, 2011;Joo et al, 2011;Kucuk & Richardson, 2019;Leader-Janssen et al, 2016;Morueta et al, 2016;Patwardhan et al, 2020;Pillai & Sivathanu, 2020;Poluekhtova et al, 2020;Saadatmand et al, 2017;Sağlam & Dikilitaş, 2020;Shea et al, 2010;Shea & Bidjerano, 2008 looked at CoI in a holistic fashion, utilizing the CoI survey (and variations thereof) to measure cognitive presence in courses. While some studies viewed how students experienced and perceived CoI (Bissessar et al, 2020;Leader-Janssen et al, 2016;Poluekhtova et al, 2020;Saadatmand et al, 2017;Shea & Bidjerano, 2008;), other studies sought to determine the interplay between other various factors.…”

“…A large portion of the literature (Bissessar et al, 2020;Choo et al, 2020;Ice et al, 2011;Joo et al, 2011;Kucuk & Richardson, 2019;Leader-Janssen et al, 2016;Morueta et al, 2016;Patwardhan et al, 2020;Pillai & Sivathanu, 2020;Poluekhtova et al, 2020;Saadatmand et al, 2017;Sağlam & Dikilitaş, 2020;Shea et al, 2010;Shea & Bidjerano, 2008 looked at CoI in a holistic fashion, utilizing the CoI survey (and variations thereof) to measure cognitive presence in courses. While some studies viewed how students experienced and perceived CoI (Bissessar et al, 2020;Leader-Janssen et al, 2016;Poluekhtova et al, 2020;Saadatmand et al, 2017;Shea & Bidjerano, 2008;), other studies sought to determine the interplay between other various factors. Overarching themes included the study of CoI and course satisfaction (Choo et al, 2020;Ice et al, 2011;Kucuk & Richardson, 2019;Patwardhan et al, 2020;Sağlam & Dikilitaş, 2020), CoI and enrollment (Ice et al, 2011), the different presences within CoI (Joo et al, 2011;Kucuk & Richardson, 2019;Pillai & Sivathanu, 2020;Shea et al, 2010;Shea & Bidjerano, 2009), CoI and engagement (Kucuk & Richardson, 2019), CoI and course design (Patwardhan et al, 2020), and cognitive and social presence within higher cognitive tasks (Morueta et al, 2016).…”

“…Specifically, cognitive presence and teaching presence were linked to student learning and satisfaction (Akyol & Garrison, 2008), and cognitive presence was found to be a predictor of student satisfaction (Joo et al, 2011). Bissessar et al (2020) examined the relationship between the three presences and learner outcomes, and Sağlam and Dikilitaş (2020) looked at the three presences and learner satisfaction.…”

“…As previously mentioned, cognitive presence is operationalized through four sub-phases including (a) a triggering event (defining and understanding the problem), (b) exploration (exploring the issue through discussion and critical reflection), (c) integration (constructing meaning from ideas developed through exploration), and (d) resolution (applying new knowledge in a real-world context) (Akyol et al, 2011;Bissessar et al, 2020;Hsu et al, 2019;Sadaf & Olesova, 2017;Sağlam & Dikilitaş, 2020).…”