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.
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.
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)
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: 10.1080/01587919.2015.1019963
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:10.1037/1040-3522.214.171.1244
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
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.ch052
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.
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.2009.10.002
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.2019.103712
16. Hostetter, C. (2013). Community matters: Social presence and learning outcomes. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13(1), 77-86.
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),
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.2014.03.001
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/10.1080/10447318.2018.1471574
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/10.1080/08923647.2018.1412738
27. Rourke, L., & Kanuka, H. (2009). Learning in communities of inquiry: A review of the literature. Journal of Distance Education, 23(1), 19–48.
28. Saldaña, J. (2013). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Limited.
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.v13i4.1339
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: 10.1080/10494820.2011.584320
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.
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.
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.
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.
37. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
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.
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.
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
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-Y2U1
42. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.