[
1. Anderson, T. (2018 February 1). How Communities of Inquiry drive teaching and learning in the digital age. TeachOnline.ca [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://teachonline.ca/tools-trends/how-communities-inquiry-drive-teaching-and-learning-digital-age
]Search in Google Scholar
[
2. Bissessar, C., Black, D., & Boolaky, M. (2019). An analysis of intercultural students’ self-determination in graduate online programs: Implications for praxis. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 22(1), 36-52. https://www.eurodl.org/?p=archives&year=2019&halfyear=1&article=79510.2478/eurodl-2019-0003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
3. Bissessar, C., Black, D., & Boolaky, M. (2020). The H.E.R.O.s of Online Education: What makes students succeed despite the odds? Accepted for publication in Journal of Educators Online in January 2021.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
4. Cavanaugh, C. (2002). Distance education quality: Success factors for resources, practices and results. In R. Discenza, C. Howard, & K. Schenk (Eds.), The Design and Management of Effective Distance Learning Programs (pp. 184-190). University of North Florida, US: Idea Group Inc. (IGI)10.4018/978-1-930708-20-4.ch011
]Search in Google Scholar
[
5. Cho, M., & Heron, M. (2015). Self-regulated learning: The role of motivation, emotion, and use of learning strategies in students’ learning experiences in a self-paced online Mathematics course. Distance Education, 36(1), 80-99. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2015.101996310.1080/01587919.2015.1019963
]Search in Google Scholar
[
6. Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284–290. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.28410.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284
]Search in Google Scholar
[
7. Cooper, T., & Scriven, R. (2017). Communities of Inquiry in Curriculum Approach to Online Learning: Strengths and Limitations in Context. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 22–37. doi: http://dx.doi.org.liverpool.idm.oclc.org/10.14742/ajet.3026
]Search in Google Scholar
[
8. Creswell, J. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, conducting and evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
9. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Buffalo: NY: Prometheus Books.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
10. Duffin, E. (2020, February 6). E-learning and digital education-Statistics and Facts. Statista [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/topics/3115/e-learning-and-digital-education/
]Search in Google Scholar
[
11. Duncan, L. L. (2018). The Community of Inquiry Framework and Academic Advising: Online Student Perceptions. Doctoral Dissertations. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED587262
]Search in Google Scholar
[
12. Garrison, D. R. (2009). Communities of Inquiry in Online Learning: Social Teaching and Cognitive Presence. In C. Howard et al. (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of distance and online learning. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-198-8.ch05210.4018/978-1-60566-198-8.ch052
]Search in Google Scholar
[
13. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
14. Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 31–36. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.00210.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002
]Search in Google Scholar
[
15. Heilporn, G., & Lakhal, S. (2019). Investigating the reliability and validity of the community of inquiry framework: An analysis of categories within each presence. Computers and Education, 145, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.10371210.1016/j.compedu.2019.103712
]Search in Google Scholar
[
16. Hostetter, C. (2013). Community matters: Social presence and learning outcomes. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13(1), 77-86.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
17. Jézègou, A. (2010). Community of Inquiry in e-Learning: A Critical Analysis of the Garrison and Anderson Model. Journal of Distance Education, 24(3),
]Search in Google Scholar
[
18. Joksimovic, S., Gasevic, D., Kovanovic, V., Adesope, O., & Hatala, M. (2014). Psychological characteristics in cognitive presence of communities of inquiry: A linguistic analysis of online discussions. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.03.00110.1016/j.iheduc.2014.03.001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
19. Kazanidis, I., Pellas, N., Fotaris, P., & Tsinakosa, A. (2018). Facebook and Moodle Integration into Instructional Media Design Courses: A Comparative Analysis of Students’ Learning Experiences using the Community of Inquiry (CoI) Model. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 34(10), 932–942. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.147157410.1080/10447318.2018.1471574
]Search in Google Scholar
[
20. Kovanovic, V., Gasevic, D., Hatala, M., & Siemens, G. (2017). A model of cognitive assessment using automated analytics assessment. SRI Education Analytics4Learning report series. Retrieved from https://vitomir.kovanovic.info/pubs/a-novel-model-of-cognitive-presence-assessment-using-automated-learning-analytics-methods/
]Search in Google Scholar
[
21. Lederman, D. (2019, December 11). Online enrollments grow, but pace slows. Inside Higher Ed [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2019/12/11/more-students-study-online-rate-growth-slowed-2018
]Search in Google Scholar
[
22. Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511840272
]Search in Google Scholar
[
23. Maddrell, J. A., Morrison, G. R., & Watson, G. S. (2017). Presence and learning in a community of inquiry. Distance Education, 38(2), 245-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2017.132206210.1080/01587919.2017.1322062
]Search in Google Scholar
[
24. Majeski, R. A., Stover, M., & Valais, T. (2018). The Community of Inquiry and Emotional Presence. Adult Learning, 29(2), 53–61. doi: https://doiorg.liverpool.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/104515951875869610.1177/1045159518758696
]Search in Google Scholar
[
25. Park, S., & Yun, H. (2018). The Influence of Motivational Regulation Strategies on Online Students’ Behavioral, Emotional, and Cognitive Engagement. American Journal of Distance Education, 32(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2018.141273810.1080/08923647.2018.1412738
]Search in Google Scholar
[
26. Pentaraki, A. D., & Burkholder, G. J. (2017). Emerging Evidence Regarding the Roles of Emotional, Behavioral, and Cognitive Aspects of Student Engagement in the Online Classroom. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 20(1), 1-21. Retrieved from https://www.eurodl.org/?p=archives&year=2017&halfyear=1&article=73610.1515/eurodl-2017-0001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
27. Rourke, L., & Kanuka, H. (2009). Learning in communities of inquiry: A review of the literature. Journal of Distance Education, 23(1), 19–48.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
28. Saldaña, J. (2013). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Limited.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
29. Shackelford, J. L., & Maxwell, M. (2012). Sense of Community in Graduate Online Education: Contribution of Learner-to-Learner Interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), 228-249. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i4.133910.19173/irrodl.v13i4.1339
]Search in Google Scholar
[
30. Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2011). Understanding distinctions in learning in hybrid, and online environments: An empirical investigation of the community of inquiry framework. Journal of Interactive Learning Environments, 21, 1–16. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2011.58432010.1080/10494820.2011.584320
]Search in Google Scholar
[
31. Shea, P., Li, C.S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. Internet and Higher Education, 9, 175-190.10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.06.005
]Search in Google Scholar
[
32. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intra-class correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420–8. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420. PMID 18839484.10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420
]Search in Google Scholar
[
33. Stone, C., & Springer, M. (2019). Interactivity, connectedness and ‘teacher presence’: Engaging and retaining students online. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 59(2), 146-169.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
34. Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online Education and Its Effective Practice: A Research Review. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 157-190. Retrieved from http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/350210.28945/3502
]Search in Google Scholar
[
35. Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.10.3102/00346543076001093
]Search in Google Scholar
[
36. Tran, T. (2011). An Examination of Cognitive Presence and Learning Outcome in an Asynchronous Discussion Forum. (Doctoral Dissertation) Retrieved from https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/msit_diss/87
]Search in Google Scholar
[
37. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
38. Wallace, R. (2003). Online learning in higher education: A review of research on interactions among teachers and students. Education, Communication & Information, 3(2), 241-280.10.1080/14636310303143
]Search in Google Scholar
[
39. Wendt, J., & Courduff, J. (2018). The Relationship between Teaching Presence and Student Course Outcomes in an Online International Population. International Journal on E-Learning, 17(1), 111-129.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
40. Wheaton, K. (2017). Social, Cognitive, and Teaching Presence: Impact on Hybrid and Online Graduate-Level Educational Experience and Retention. Doctor of Education (EdD). 94. http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/edd/94
]Search in Google Scholar
[
41. Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & Del Valle, R. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 247-271. Retrieved from: https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.2190/V0LB-1M37-RNR8-Y2U110.2190/V0LB-1M37-RNR8-Y2U1
]Search in Google Scholar
[
42. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
]Search in Google Scholar
