\nOzyegin University
\n<asli.saglam
![\"atmark\"](\"http:\/\/www.tesl-ej.org\/atmark.png\")
ozyegin.edu.tr><\/p>\nKenan Dikilita\u015f<\/strong> This study examines how an online training into teacher research has been evaluated in relation to the three main elements of the community of inquiry framework (CoI): teaching, social, and cognitive presences. We held the online training as a part of TESOL\u2019s Electronic Village Online (EVO) and offered a course on how teacher research can be conducted. A survey was administered to elicit the perceptions of 27 volunteering teacher researchers regarding how social, cognitive and teaching presences within the framework of CoI support professional development of teachers, and to examine how CoI presences correlate with overall satisfaction in this research-based professional development online course. In addition to quantitative measures including means, modes and standard deviations, we analysed the data through the Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient on SPSS to explore the correlation between the degree to which each of the three presences supported these teachers in their professional development. Findings imply that participants held highly positive perceptions towards cognitive, social and teaching presences of CoI and that these different aspects of the framework correlate positively with the overall course satisfaction. Moreover, there are important implications for instructional design of online professional development programs using the CoI framework and maintaining effective online research mentoring practices.<\/p>\n Keywords<\/strong>: Online Learning, Community of Inquiry, Social Presence, Cognitive Presence, Teaching Presence, CoI survey, Perceived Learning, EVO, classroom-based research training<\/p><\/blockquote>\n With the enhanced use of educational technology in online environments, web-based teacher development programs and online professional learning communities (OPLCs) have been accentuated as powerful professional development contexts. Numerous research studies have suggested that web-based teacher development programs have great potential for meaningful professional development since these can bring together motivated and experienced teachers and provide opportunities for collaborative learning, reflection, feedback, and construction of learning communities (Kao, Tsai & Shih, 2014; Zhang, Liu & Wang, 2016).<\/p>\n As an online teacher development program designed within the scope of TESOL\u2019s Electronic Village Online (EVO), Classroom-based Research for Professional Development has aimed to construct an OPLC to facilitate the professional development of teachers. Teacher research (TR) is considered as an empowering form of continuous professional development (CPD) since it helps teachers to attain deeper professional knowledge (Atay 2008; Dikilita\u015f & Mumford, 2016; Gao, Barkhuizen, & Chow 2011), promote collaboration with their colleagues and learners (Atay, 2008; Wyatt 2011), and improve their teaching practice. In an attempt to support teachers in TR, this online program provided teachers from different educational contexts with the opportunity to learn together online, share resources, solve classroom-based problems, and develop research strategies in order to improve their performance through reflection and feedback. The aim of this study is to elicit participants\u2019 course evaluation by using the community of inquiry (CoI) model which offers a tool to study online teaching and learning (Garrison, 2006; Garrison & Akyol, 2013; Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2010a). The CoI framework consists of three overlapping constructs comprising social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence. CoI is used to sustain the quality of online education and this model presumes that there are overlapping relationships between the presences which facilitate \u201cdeep and meaningful educational experience\u201d (Arbaugh et al., 2008, p. 134). Thus, focusing on the impact CoI presences may have on one another, the present study examines the correlation between these various presences and learning satisfaction.<\/p>\n Online teaching and learning have been a growing mode of course delivery which involves students and teachers present in diverse locations with access to the same online platform where teaching and learning takes place. Online platforms are seen to nurture communities, where social dynamics, interaction and collaboration interact and support joint knowledge construction and where inquiry occurs through intellectual academic interaction (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2009). One of the models that frame the learning and teaching process in such a context is the community of inquiry model which offers a means to study online teaching and learning (Garrison, 2006). The model involves three fundamental elements of inquiry which characterise how learning and teaching are facilitated online with participants\u2019 presences reflecting engagement and investment in the community. Among these, social presence refers to how learners are socially connected to one another on a personal level (Wicks, Craft, Mason, Gritter, & Bolding, 2015), while cognitive presence refers to how learners process and construct meaning through collaborative inquiry in such a community (Garrison et al., 1999). Entailing the presence of a teacher with the roles of scaffolding, modelling and\/or coaching, teaching presence refers to how social and cognitive presences are holistically supported through a pedagogical process involving constructive, collaborative and sustained engagement (Tirado-Morueta et al., 2016).<\/p>\n These triangulated views of inquiry are based on a collaborative constructivist learning experience (Garrison, 2006), which argue for \u201cthe integration of reflective and collaborative practice through which meaning is socially constructed and deeper understanding with higher-order learning outcomes is achieved\u201d (Garrison & Vaughan, 2008, p.29). The framework has been embedded in instructional design in both online and blended courses in order to facilitate learning through interdependent components that are elemental for efficient learning: social presence, cognitive presence and teaching presence (Garrison et al., 1999). The model focuses on learning processes from a collaborative, constructivist, and practical inquiry point of view based on multiple presences that support deep and meaningful online learning (Tirado-Morueta et al. 2016).<\/p>\n In this study we investigate how these three elements of inquiry-based online teacher learning are facilitated drawing on a model seen as effective in both pre-service and in-service teacher education (Garrison, 2011). Each presence interacts mutually in a complex way. Social presence, characterised by affection, interaction, and cohesion, supports \u201ca community of learners to minimize feelings of isolation students may feel when learning online\u201d (Wicks et al., 2015, p.54) as long as effective expression, open communication, and group cohesion are achieved. In a community of practice, social presence is an integral part of collaborative online learning in that it reflects a supportive context and meets the socio-emotional aspects of learning as a community (Tirado-Morueta et al., 2016). Research also shows the positive influence of strong social presence on learner motivation and participation (Swan & Shih, 2005), on actual and perceived learning (Joksimovi\u0107, Ga\u0161evi\u0107, Kovanovi\u0107, Riecke & Hatala, 2015; Hostetter & Busch, 2006; Kang & Im, 2013), on course and instructor satisfaction (Akyol & Garrison, 2008; Swan & Shih, 2005; Cobb, 2009), and on retention in online courses (Boston et al., 2009; Liu, Gomez, & Yen, 2009; Reio & Crim, 2013).<\/p>\n Once social presence is established in a community, cognitive presence is also facilitated and learners \u201cconstruct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse\u201d (Wicks et al., 2015, p.11). Such presence is operationalized through four sub-phases including (a) a triggering event<\/i> (defining and understanding the problem) (b) exploration<\/i> (exploring the issue through discussion and critical reflection), (c) integration<\/i> (constructing meaning from ideas developed through exploration) and (d) resolution<\/i> (applying new knowledge into a real-world context). These pedagogical elements require attentiveness to students\u2019 needs through developing curriculum that caters for the students\u2019 profile, maintaining efficient delivery of content, facilitating learning activities that foster successful learning, providing opportunities for reflection, and collaborative learning (Tirado-Morueta et al., 2016).<\/p>\n Associations between the three components of CoI and their impact on the learning process have been well documented in recent literature. A number of studies (e.g., Akyol & Garrison, 2008; Boston et. al., 2009; Garrison, Cleveland-Innes & Fung, 2010b; Shea & Bidjerano, 2009; Siemens & Conole, 2011) investigated how the three presences interacted and correlated with each other through the use of CoI survey instruments. Akyol and Garrison (2008) suggest that student satisfaction with the online learning experience was significantly influenced by the three presences but that successful learning only correlated with teaching and cognitive presences, excluding social presence. Shea and Bidjerano (2009) validated the direct influence of the teaching presence and indirect social presence on cognitive presence. According to Garrison (2011), teaching presence impacts both cognitive and social presence. Similarly, Garrison et al. (2010b) argued that teaching and social presences affect cognitive presence. Furthermore, certain aspects of teaching presence including instructional design and direct instruction were found to have significant effect on learning outcomes (Kupczynski, Ice, Wiesenmayer & McCluskey, 2010).<\/p>\n The CoI framework has been widely studied in online learning environments with respect to online Communities of Practice (CoPs). Hou (2015) commented that as an online venue providing its participants with opportunities to discuss their practice, eliminate doubts, and seek support from each other, a COP may motivate and engage online participants more effectively in their professional growth. Similarly, recent research studies affirm that active participation in online CoPs can<\/p>\n While the literature has focused on teacher learning in CoI-driven online platforms, there is a dearth of studies exploring the communities of inquiry designed to offer online teacher research courses to language teachers across the world. The online teacher research program that is the focus of this study is well suited to the underlying principles of CoI since the teachers engaged in learning in order to conduct research, drawing on the inquiry driven process and content of the course. To this end, we explore the following research questions:<\/p>\n The topic of the Classroom-Based Research for Professional Development EVO session was teacher research and the course took participants through different stages of teacher-research, gradually building confidence among participants in how to conduct a classroom-based research study in a practical and realistic way. The course was delivered fully online through the use of asynchronous and synchronous platforms gathering together the geographically dispersed teachers who were interested in this kind of research. All elements contained within the online course itself, website materials, forums, online mentoring, peer-mentoring, and webinars aided the participants to identify a research focus and develop research questions. Participants then considered possible sources of evidence for answering questions and started to design appropriate ways of gathering information. Mentors suggested a variety of ways to analyse and interpret different kinds of evidence that the participants collected in response to their research questions. Consequently, the participants were guided to share their findings in the webinars held in the professional learning community as well as through other forms of innovative means such as online posters and infographics.<\/p>\n We held this session as a part of TESOL\u2019s Electronic Village Online (EVO), which was established in 2000 as a special project of TESOL’s CALL Interest Section. The EVO offers five weeks of free professional development sessions in a collaborative online learning environment for educators around the world. and we offered a course on how teacher research can be conducted to 232 participants from different geographical regions including North America, Latin America (Argentina, Brazil, Peru) Africa (Nigeria), Europe (Croatia, Italy, Ukraine), Middle East (Qatar, Saudi Arabia) and Asia-Pasific (Macau, Japan, India). The participants in this study included 27 teachers who voluntarily enrolled in our online professional development course into teachers\u2019 research engagement, which was offered as one of the EVO sessions in 2016.<\/p>\n The participants enrolling in our course were mainly full-time teachers with teaching experience ranging from less than 5 years (17%), to 10 years (21%), and more than 10 years (62%). However, many participants (64%) in the pre-course survey reported that they lacked experience in conducting classroom-based research. In addition, the majority of the participants (70%) pointed out that this would be their first online learning experience whereas 30% indicated that they had previously participated in an EVO session or other similar online courses.<\/p>\n Although various models have been proposed for the analysis of online learning, the current study adopts the CoI framework (Garrison et al., 1999) since it provides a dynamic model which fosters the development of community, the pursuit of practical inquiry, higher-order learning (Garrison, 2007; Swan, Garrison & Richardson, 2009), collaborative constructivism, critical reflection, and knowledge construction (Garrison, 2000). The structure of the CoI survey, which we used in this study, has been validated through factor analysis in prior studies (Garrison et al. (2010b); Arbaugh & Hwang, 2006).<\/p>\n To assess participant perceptions of CoI elements that informed our course design, we adopted the CoI survey instrument which was developed by Arbaugh et al. (2008). In addition, based on Akyol and Garrison (2008), the present study integrated a learner satisfaction item (item 35; see Appendix) to the CoI survey. Our CoI survey entailed 13 items for teaching presence perception, 9 items for social presence perception, 12 items for cognitive presence perception and one item for perceived satisfaction.<\/p>\n The 35-item CoI survey instrument, with a 5-point scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree (1 to 5 on the scale), was administered to EVO participants in our session at the end of the course to explore their perceptions of each CoI presence as well as their perceived satisfaction with the online course.<\/p>\n Although the CoI survey was posted on the course website, in an attempt to evaluate the course throughout the CoI framework, the data were collected upon the completion of the course work.<\/p>\n Overall 232 teachers had originally enrolled for the online course. However, only about 30 participants remained throughout the 5 weeks and completed all the tasks. Among these 30 participants, 27 volunteered to respond to the survey.<\/p>\n The Likert scale items were analysed by descriptive statistics using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Means of items, modes and standard deviations were analysed and reported. In order to examine the associations between different components of the CoI framework, we used the Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient in SPSS. The reliability of the questionnaire was calculated using Cronbach\u2019s alpha which yielded an alpha level of 0.98 (\u03b1 = .98). Since a score of over 0.7 refers to high internal consistency, the results of the analysis of the questionnaire can be considered as reliable.<\/p>\n The first research question in this study aimed at exploring whether participants considered the CoI-based online training into teacher research to be an effective means for their professional development.<\/p>\n Data analysis of participant response on the 5-point Likert-scale (ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree) yielded mean responses for the 34 items ranging from 3.4 for Item 7 (I felt comfortable disagreeing with other course participants while still maintaining a sense of trust<\/i>) to 4.5 for Item 30 (The moderators encouraged the participants to explore new concepts in this course<\/i>). Standard deviations were highest for Item 26 (S.D.= 1.38) (The moderators were helpful in identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on course topics that helped me to learn<\/i>), indicating a higher level of differences in their perceptions between participant response, and lowest for Item 16 (S.D.= 0.70) (Combining new information helped me answer questions raised in course activities<\/i>), indicating a lower level difference between participant responses.<\/p>\n When considering all respondents\u2019 ratings, Social Presence<\/i> items collectively yielded a mean score of 3.79 (SD=1.01). Cognitive Presence<\/i> items collectively yielded a mean score of 3.79 (SD=1.19). Teaching Presence<\/i> items collectively yielded a mean score of 4.09 (SD=1.31). Prior research has concluded that the CoI survey items which rated less than 3.75, or slightly less than agree (4) on average, would not sufficiently be accepted as an effective learning community (Matthews, Bogle, Boles, Day & Swan, 2013). Keeping in mind that standard deviation shows whether response is clustered around a value or response is scattered showing a higher level of differences in participant responses, the fact that the mean scores of cognitive, teaching, and social presence in this study were above 3.75 indicates positive trends. Consequently, these findings imply that participants reported positive perceptions and remarked that there was an effective learning community in the present study.<\/p>\n Table 1. Summary of Participant Perceptions towards CoI Presences<\/b><\/p>\n
\nUniversity of Stavanger
\n<kenan.dikilitasuis.no><\/p>\n\n
Abstract<\/h3>\n
<\/h3>\n
Online Professional Development and the Community of Inquiry (CoI) Model<\/h3>\n
Literature Review<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
Methodology<\/h3>\n
Research Setting<\/h4>\n
Participants<\/h4>\n
Data Collection<\/h4>\n
Data Analysis<\/h4>\n
Findings and Discussion<\/h3>\n