Learning in Communities of Inquiry: A Review of the Literature

The purpose of this study was to investigate learning in communities of inquiry (CoI) as the terms are defined in Garrison, Anderson, and Archer's (2000) framework. We identified 252 reports from 2000—2008 that referenced the framework, and we reviewed them using Ogawan and Malen's (1991) strategy for synthesizing multi-vocal bodies of literature. Of the 252 reports, 48 collected and analyzed data on one or more aspects of the CoI framework; only five included a measure of student learning. Predominantly, learning was defined as perceived learning and assessed with a single item on a closed-form survey. Concerns about the soundness of such measures pervade the educational measure m e n t community; in addition, we question the validity of the particular items employed in the CoI literature. Bracketing these concerns, the review indicates that it is unlikely that deep and meaningful learning arises in CoI. Students associate the surface learning that does occur with independent activities or didactic instruction; not sustained communication in critical CoI. We encourage researchers to conduct more, substantial investigations into the central construct of the popular framework for e-learning and theorists to respond to the mounting body of disconfirming evidence.

[1]  Rodney T. Ogawa,et al.  Towards Rigor in Reviews of Multivocal Literatures: Applying the Exploratory Case Study Method , 1991 .

[2]  Sarah Schrire,et al.  Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[3]  A. Hwang,et al.  Does "teaching presence" exist in online MBA courses? , 2006, Internet High. Educ..

[4]  J. Arbaugh How Much Does “Subject Matter” Matter? A Study of Disciplinary Effects in On-Line MBA Courses , 2005 .

[5]  D. Ausubel,et al.  IN DEFENSE OF VERBAL LEARNING , 1961 .

[6]  G. Boulton‐Lewis Teaching for quality learning at university , 2008 .

[7]  Maria Araceli Ruiz-Primo,et al.  On the Use Of Concept Maps As An Assessment Tool in Science: What We Have Learned so Far 1 El uso de mapas conceptuales como instrumento de evaluación del aprovechamiento en ciencias: lo que sabemos hasta ahora , 2000 .

[8]  John T. E. Richardson,et al.  Students' perceptions of academic quality and approaches to studying in distance education , 2005 .

[9]  J. Arbaugh Learning to learn online: A study of perceptual changes between multiple online course experiences , 2004, Internet High. Educ..

[10]  Kevin F. Collis,et al.  Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy , 1977 .

[11]  D. Garrison,et al.  Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: Interaction Is Not Enough , 2005 .

[12]  Paul Ramsden,et al.  Improving teaching and learning in higher education: The case for a relational perspective , 1987 .

[13]  P. Twining Oversold and underused: computers in the classroom , 2002 .

[14]  Beverley Jackling,et al.  Perceptions of the learning context and learning approaches: Implications for quality learning outcomes in accounting , 2005 .

[15]  Karen Swan,et al.  Community of Inquiry Framework: Validation and instrument development , 2008 .

[16]  J. B. Arbaugh,et al.  Is There an Optimal Design for On-Line MBA Courses? , 2005 .

[17]  Larry Cuban Teachers and machines : the classroom use of technology since 1920 , 1986 .

[18]  Heather Kanuka,et al.  The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion , 2006, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[19]  N. Vaughan Technology in Support of Faculty Learning Communities , 2004 .

[20]  D. Randy Garrison,et al.  Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education , 1999, Internet High. Educ..

[21]  D. Hay Using concept maps to measure deep, surface and non‐learning outcomes , 2007 .

[22]  Nada Dabbagh,et al.  How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: a case study , 2005, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[23]  D. Garrison,et al.  Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions , 2007, Internet High. Educ..

[24]  Raquel Benbunan-Fich,et al.  Separating the effects of knowledge construction and group collaboration in learning outcomes of web-based courses , 2006, Inf. Manag..

[25]  Louise Cooke,et al.  Exploring the attitudes, experiences and dynamics of interaction in online groups , 2006, Internet High. Educ..

[26]  Joseph D. Novak,et al.  Learning creating and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools , 1998 .

[27]  David Kember,et al.  Action Learning, Action Research: Improving the Quality of Teaching and Learning , 2000 .

[28]  John Williams,et al.  Action Learning and Action Research: Improving the Quality of Teaching and Learning , 2001 .

[29]  P. Shea,et al.  A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses , 2006, Internet High. Educ..

[30]  Patrick J. Fahy Assessing Critical Thinking Processes in a Computer Conference. , 2007 .

[31]  D. Garrison,et al.  Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education , 2001 .

[32]  Gudrun Oberprieler,et al.  Encouraging equitable online participation through curriculum articulation , 2004, Comput. Educ..

[33]  Martha Cleveland-Innes,et al.  Revisiting methodological issues in transcript analysis: Negotiated coding and reliability , 2006, Internet High. Educ..

[34]  Lara Lomicka,et al.  Social presence in virtual communities of foreign language (FL) teachers , 2007 .

[35]  N. Entwistle,et al.  Understanding Student Learning , 1983 .

[36]  Meredith D. Gall,et al.  Educational Research: An Introduction , 1965 .

[37]  J. Biggs Student Approaches to Learning and Studying , 1987 .

[38]  D. Garrison,et al.  Assessing Social Presence In Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing , 1999 .

[39]  David S. Stein,et al.  Role Of Social Presence, Choice Of Online Or Face-To-Face Group Format, And Satisfaction With Perceived Knowledge Gained In A Distance Learning Environment , 2003 .

[40]  Robert M. Gonyea Self‐reported data in institutional research: Review and recommendations , 2005 .

[41]  P Evans,et al.  Can we influence medical students’ approaches to learning? , 2005, Medical teacher.

[42]  F. Marton,et al.  On qualitative differences in learning , 2013 .

[43]  Tom McKlin,et al.  Cognitive Presence in Web-Based Learning: A Content Analysis of Students' Online Discussions. , 2001 .

[44]  Elizabeth Murphy,et al.  Social Presence in the Web-Based Synchronous Secondary Classroom. , 2007 .

[45]  Gail Raymond,et al.  Questioning the media , 1987 .

[46]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  A comparative content analysis of face-to-face vs. asynchronous group decision making , 2003, Decis. Support Syst..

[47]  D. Garrison,et al.  Methodological Issues in the Content Analysis of Computer Conference Transcripts , 2007 .

[48]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

[49]  D. Randy Garrison,et al.  Creating cognitive presence in a blended faculty development community , 2005, Internet High. Educ..

[50]  Neil Postman,et al.  Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology , 1993 .

[51]  F. Marton,et al.  ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING: I—OUTCOME AND PROCESS* , 1976 .