A network-based analytic approach to uncovering the relationship between social and cognitive presences in communities of inquiry
Introduction
Asynchronous online discussions are fundamental to facilitate social interaction within fully online and blended courses in higher education (Anderson & Dron, 2010). They play an essential role in educational experience of students encouraging them to increase their course participation by answering questions, sharing resources, and solving problems, for instance (Hew & Cheung, 2008). Researchers have shown several benefits of online interactions (critical thinking, creativity, and argumentation) rising the need to better understand how asynchronous online discussions can be used to promote learning and knowledge (co-)construction in a group of students (Garrison, Cleveland-Innes, & Fung, 2010; Dawson, Tan, & McWilliam, 2011).
The social constructivist model called Community of Inquiry (CoI) is a well-known framework that aims to outline how asynchronous online communication shapes student learning and their cognitive development (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 1999). The CoI model defines three dimensions that mold the learning experience (i.e., social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence) and assumes an overlapping relationship among the three presences that enhance the students on-line learning capability (Kozan & Richardson, 2014). Over the years, many studies have shown the practical value and benefits of the CoI model, such as the influence on the engagement of students and learning outcomes (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2010), applications in computer-supported collaborative scenarios (Joksimović, Gašević, Kovanović, Adesope, & Hatala, 2014), and the relationships between use of educational technology by the learners and the dimensions of the CoI model (Kovanović, Gašević, Joksimović, Hatala, & Adesope, 2015).
This paper proposes the adoption of a network analytic approach to advance insights into the relationship between social and cognitive presences in asynchronous online discussions. Unlike most of studies that focused on this relation with self-report instruments, the current study uses coded transcripts of asynchronous online discussions. The methodological contribution of this study is the use of Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA) (Shaffer et al., 2009) to study the association between the social and cognitive presences. ENA allowed for better understanding of the association between the four phases of cognitive presence and the indicators of social presence. The proposed network analytic approach was further applied to assess the effects of an intervention aimed to foster higher levels of cognitive presence in a fully-online graduate-level course in software engineering over six offerings. Finally, the way how the relationship between social and cognitive presences changes over time was also investigated with ENA. The study presented here has practical implications both in terms of the use of the proposed network-based analysis and the results of the application of the methodology of analysis.
Section snippets
The community of inquiry model
According to (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2010), the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model is the most widely-used and researched theoretical framework that outlines the important facets of social interactions in online and blended education. CoI explains behaviors of students and instructors with the purpose of describing how educational experience can be more effective by providing three indicators of their relationships, known as presences (Garrison et al., 1999):
- •
Social presence measures the
Research questions
Section 2.2 stressed the importance of analyzing the relationship between social and cognitive presences. As presented, several studies have addressed this relationship, in general, using correlation analysis between self-reported measures. However, there has been much less research on that association with the use of content analysis. Moreover, the existing research offers little insight into how phases and indicators of cognitive and social presences are related to each other. Thus, the first
The data and course design
The data used in the present study consisted of six offerings (Winter 2008, Fall 2008, Summer 2009, Fall 2009, Winter 2010, Winter 2011) of a master level research-intensive course in software engineering offered entirely online, through the Moodle LMS, at a Canadian public university between 2008 and 2011. In those six offerings, a total of 81 students posted 1747 messages. The course encompassed six modules that covered 14 different topics related to software engineering. The students were
Research question 1
Fig. 1 shows the group-average graph for all students with the relationships between social and cognitive presences. The visualization was done using svd1 and svd2, which accounted for 19.2 and 12% of variability of the epistemic networks created by the students, respectively. The results obtained indicate that the Y-axis (i.e., svd2) primarily distinguishes between students focusing more on the early phases (triggering event and exploration) or the later phases (integration and resolution) of
Research question 1
The results of the current study unveiled that the codes representing indicators of social presence were distributed over the X-Axis, Fig. 1. Interactive indicators were located more on the right-hand side of the graph, especially the Asking_Question indicator. The Cohesive indicators were in the middle and the Affective on the left-hand side. This can be explained by the fact that the Interactive category of social presence is generally associated with the Triggering Event phase of cognitive
Conclusions and lines for further work
The primary contribution of the present study is a novel network analytic method for the assessment of the relationship between social and cognitive presences. Through a graph-based analysis, called Epistemic Network Analysis, in-depth insights into the connections among the social presence indicators and the cognitive presence phases were uncovered. Moreover, by examining these two presences at the student level instead of at the message level, a much richer understanding of the development of
References (45)
- et al.
Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample
The Internet and Higher Education
(2008) - et al.
Student ratings of the importance of survey items, multiplicative factor analysis, and the validity of the community of inquiry survey
The Internet and Higher Education
(2010) - et al.
Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education
The Internet and Higher Education
(1999) - et al.
The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective
The Internet and Higher Education
(2010) - et al.
Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions
The Internet and Higher Education
(2007) - et al.
Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework
The Internet and Higher Education
(2010) - et al.
Externally-facilitated regulation scaffolding and role assignment to develop cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions
The Internet and Higher Education
(2015) - et al.
Deconvolutions based on singular value decomposition and the pseudoinverse: A guide for beginners
Journal of Biochemical and Biophysical Methods
(1994) - et al.
Attracting student participation in asynchronous online discussions: A case study of peer facilitation
Computers & Education
(2008) - et al.
Psychological characteristics in cognitive presence of communities of inquiry: A linguistic analysis of online discussions
The Internet and Higher Education
(2014)
Analytics of communities of inquiry: Effects of learning technology use on cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions
The Internet and Higher Education
Interrelationships between and among social, teaching, and cognitive presence
The Internet and Higher Education
The relationships between higher order thinking skills, cognitive density, and social presence in online learning
The Internet and Higher Education
Social presence in relation to students' satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis
Computers in Human Behavior
Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis
Computers & Education
Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education
Computers & Education
Examining reliability and validity of a korean version of the community of inquiry instrument using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis
The Internet and Higher Education
The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: Understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks
Three generations of distance education pedagogy
The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning
Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks
Network analysis of knowledge construction in asynchronous learning networks
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks
Epistemic network analysis and topic modeling for chat data from collaborative learning environment
Cited by (56)
Exploration of a group assessment model to foster student teachers’ critical thinking
2023, Thinking Skills and CreativityCritical thinking in the community of inquiry framework: An analysis of the theoretical model and cognitive presence coding schemes
2023, Computers and EducationCitation Excerpt :In recent years, coding schemes have also been used in automated content analyses for the purpose of learning analytics dashboard development2 (Farrow et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2022; Neto et al., 2018; O'Riordan et al., 2021; Rolim et al., 2019). Most relevant to our study, numerous empirical studies (cf. Appendix A) that refer to the practical implementation of the theoretical framework claim to investigate students' critical thinking (e.g., Chen et al., 2019; DuBois et al., 2019; Guo et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2022; Rolim et al., 2019). However, what critical thinking means in the CoI framework is insufficiently addressed in these studies.