Structural Framework for Interactions Between Community of Inquiry Presences,Cognitive Load,Demographics,and Grades

Abstract

Active learning and sense of community in online classrooms have been linked to persistence, performance, and course satisfaction. A widely applied theoretical framework to describe community-building through discourse and creation of meaningful learning in a classroom is the Community of Inquiry framework, which outlines relationships between social presence, teaching presence, and cognitive presence. Speaking specifically to cognitive presence, learning demands working memory resources to process information, referred to as cognitive load. Using Structural Equation Modeling, this study proposes a structural relationship between Community of Inquiry presences, cognitive load, and learner performance in asynchronous online discussions. Data collected over nine terms with over 2,000 students validate the proposed structural model. By constructing a unifying model, instructors can estimate these mental constructs that cannot be directly quantified and can lead to improved outcomes for students. Specifically, the model can estimate the social and cognitive moves students are making in online discussions to describe the types of active learning that are or are not occurring in a discussion. Future work will include developing machine learning classification techniques to further validate the model by examining presences as they occurred in the course rather than relying on students’ perception of presences.

Keywords

community of inquiry cognitive load structural equation modeling

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alharbi

(2022). Asynchronous discussions to enhance online communities of inquiry in the Saudi higher education context. International Journal of Higher Education, 11(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v11n6p86

Armah

J. K.

Bervell

Bonsu

N. O.

(2023). Modelling the role of learner presence within the community of inquiry framework to determine online course satisfaction in distance education. Heliyon, 9(5), e15803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15803

Bentler

P. M.

Bonett

D. G.

(1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588

Berssanette

de Francisco

(2021). Active learning in the context of the teaching/learning of computer programming: A systematic review. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 20, 201–220. https://doi.org/10.28945/4767

Bolliger

D. U.

Halupa

(2018). Online student perceptions of engagement, transactional distance, and outcomes. Distance Education, 39(3), 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1476845

Braxton

J. M.

Jones

W. A.

Hirschy

A. S.

Hartley III

H. V.

(2008). The role of active learning in college student persistence. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2008(115), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.326

Burch

J. J. C.

(2018). An application of Tinto’s student integration model and Bandura’s social cognitive theory to student retention in stem disciplines [D.Ed., Tarleton State University]. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2040105928/abstract/79DDC7448A984F27PQ/1

Carlon

Bennett-Woods

Berg

Claywell

LeDuc

Marcisz

Mulhall

Noteboom

Snedden

Whalen

Zenoni

(2012). The community of inquiry instrument: Validation and results in online health care disciplines. Computers & Education, 59(2), 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.01.004

Chang

Shih

J.-L.

Chang

C.-K.

(2017). A mobile instructional pervasive game method for language learning. Universal Access in the Information Society, 16(3), 653–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-016-0496-6

10.

Chen

Lei

Cheng

(2019). What if online students take on the responsibility: Students’ cognitive presence and peer facilitation techniques. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks JALN, 23(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i1.1348

11.

Cho

M.-H.

Kim

B. J.

(2013). Students’ self-regulation for interaction with others in online learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.11.001

12.

Cole

A. W.

Lennon

Weber

N. L.

(2021). Student perceptions of online active learning practices and online learning climate predict online course engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(5), 866–880. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619593

13.

Croft

Dalton

Grant

(2010). Overcoming isolation in distance learning: Building a learning community through time and space. Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 5(1), 27–64. https://doi.org/10.11120/jebe.2010.05010027

14.

Delaney

Betts

(2022). Addressing transactional distance through teaching presence strategies in online journalism and mass communication courses. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 77(1), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958211001214

15.

deNoyelles

Zydney

Chen

(2014). Strategies for creating a community of inquiry through online asynchronous discussions. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 153.

16.

Deslauriers

McCarty

L. S.

Miller

Callaghan

Kestin

(2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 116(39), 19251–19257. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821936116

17.

Eddy

S. L.

Converse

Wenderoth

M. P.

(2015). PORTAAL: A classroom observation tool assessing evidence-based teaching practices for active learning in large science, technology, engineering, and mathematics classes. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(2), ar23. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-06-0095

18.

Ellis

(2020). Pursuing the conundrum of nontraditional student attrition and persistence: A follow-up study. College Student Journal, 53(4), 439–449.

19.

England

B. J.

Brigati

J. R.

Schussler

E. E.

(2017). Student anxiety in introductory biology classrooms: Perceptions about active learning and persistence in the major. PLOS ONE, 12(8), e0182506. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182506

20.

Faulconer

Bolch

Wood

(2022). Cognitive load in asynchronous discussions of an online undergraduate STEM course. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 16(2), 268–280. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-02-2022-0010

21.

Faulconer

Chamberlain

Wood

(2022). A case study of Commuity of Inquiry presences and cognitive load in asynchronous online STEM courses. Online Learning Journal, 26(3), 46–72.

22.

Garrison

D. R.

(2016). E-Learning in the 21st century: A community of inquiry framework for research and practice (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315667263

23.

Garrison

D. R.

Anderson

Archer

(1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

24.

Garrison

D. R.

Anderson

Archer

(2010). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1), 5–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.003

25.

Garrison

D. R.

Arbaugh

J. B.

(2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001

26.

Garrison

D. R.

Cleveland-Innes

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), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002

27.

Hamann

Pollock

P. H.

Wilson

B. M.

(2009). Learning from “listening” to peers in online political science classes. Journal of Political Science Education, 5(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512160802612011

28.

Hilliard

Kear

Donelan

Heaney

(2020). Students’ experiences of anxiety in an assessed, online, collaborative project. Computers & Education, 143, Article 103675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103675

29.

Hostetter

(2013). Community Matters: Social Presence and Learning Outcomes. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13(1), 77–86.

30.

Hoyle

R. H.

(2012). Latent variables in structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press.

31.

Ice

Gibson

A. M.

Boston

Becher

(2011). An Exploration of Differences between Community of Inquiry Indicators in Low and High Disenrollment Online Courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15(2), 44–69.

32.

Irani

Denaro

(2020, March 11–14). Incorporating active learning strategies and instructor presence into an online discrete mathematics class [Conference session]. 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Portland, United States (pp. 1186–1192). https://doi.org/10.1145/3328778.3366904

33.

Jaggars

S. S.

(2016). How do online course design features influence student performance? Computers & Education, 95, 270–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.014

34.

Park

Lee

(2017). Three interaction patterns on asynchronous online discussion behaviours: A methodological comparison. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(2), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12168

35.

Joksimović

Gašević

Kovanović

Riecke

B. E.

Hatala

(2015). Social presence in online discussions as a process predictor of academic performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(6), 638–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12107

36.

Joyner

S. A.

Fuller

M. B.

Holzweiss

P. C.

Henderson

Young

(2014). The importance of student-instructor connections in graduate level online courses. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10, 436–445.

37.

Kalyuga

(2011). Cognitive load theory: How many types of load does it really need? Educational Psychology Review, 23(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9150-7

38.

Kenny

D. A.

McCoach

D. B.

(2003). Effect of the number of variables on measures of fit in structural equation modeling. Structural equation modeling, 10(3), 333–351.

39.

Khoshlessan

Das

K. P.

(2017). Analyzing international students’ study anxiety in higher education. Journal of International Students, 7(2), 311–328. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v7i2.383

40.

Koohang

Paliszkiewicz

Klein

Horn Nord

(2016). The importance of active learning elements in the design of online courses. Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management, 4(2), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.36965/OJAKM.2016.4(2)17-28

41.

Kozan

(2015). The predictive power of the presences on cognitive load: Vol. Ph.D. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_dissertations/491

42.

Kozan

Richardson

J. C.

(2014). Interrelationships between and among social, teaching, and cognitive presence. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.007

43.

Lee

S.-M.

(2014). The relationships between higher order thinking skills, cognitive density, and social presence in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.12.002

44.

(2022). “Are you there?”: Teaching presence and interaction in large online literature classes. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 7(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00180-3

45.

MacCallum

R. C.

Browne

M. W.

Sugawara

H. M.

(1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130

46.

Maranna

Willison

Joksimovic

Parange

Costabile

(2022). Factors that influence cognitive presence: A scoping review. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7878

47.

Meshcheryakov

Igolkina

A. A.

Samsonova

M. G.

(2021). semopy 2: A Structural Equation Modeling Package with Random Effects in Python (arXiv:2106.01140). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2106.01140

48.

Mills

(2016). A mixed methods approach to investigating cognitive load and cognitive presence in an online and face-to-face college algebra course: Vol. Ph.D. [Doctoral Dissertation]. University of Kentucky. https://doi.org/10.13023/ETD.2016.069

49.

Moore

(2014). Effects of online interaction and instructor presence on students’ satisfaction and success with online undergraduate public relations courses. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 69(3), 271–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695814536398

50.

National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). National Center for Education Statistics Fast Facts: Distance Learning. Retrieved November 23, 2021, from https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=80

51.

Ozogul

Zhu

Phillips

T. M.

(2022). Perceived and actual cognitive presence: A case study of an intentionally-designed asynchronous online course. Online Learning, 26(1), 38–57. https://doi.10.24059/olj.v26i1.3051

52.

Pilkington

O. A.

(2018). Active learning for an online composition classroom: Blogging as an enhancement of online curriculum. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 47(2), 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239518788278

53.

Ratan

Ucha

Lei

Lim

Triwibowo

Yelon

Sheahan

Lamb

Deni

Chen

(2022). How do social presence and active learning in synchronous and asynchronous online classes relate to students’ perceived course gains? Computers & Education, 191, Article 104621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104621

54.

Rossi

I. V.

de Lima

J. D.

Sabatke

Nunes

M. A. F.

Ramirez

G. E.

Ramirez

M. I.

(2021). Active learning tools improve the learning outcomes, scientific attitude, and critical thinking in higher education: Experiences in an online course during the COVID-19 pandemic. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 49(6), 888–903. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21574

55.

Russell

Topham

(2012). The impact of social anxiety on student learning and well-being in higher education. Journal of Mental Health, 21(4), 375–385. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638237.2012.694505

56.

Shea

Bidjerano

(2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education. Computers & Education, 52(3), 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.007

57.

Silva

L. A.

(2018). Moderating relationships: Online learners’ cognitive presence and non-designer instructor’s teaching presence [Ph.D., Grand Canyon University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2031574013/abstract/5AC5BE3132C54869PQ/1

58.

Sinclair

(2017, April 23). A case study on the importance of peer support for e-learners [Conference session]. 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, Porto, Portugal (pp. 280–284). https://doi.org/10.5220/0006263602800284

59.

Stachel

Marghitu

Brahim

T. B.

Sims

Reynolds

Czelusniak

(2013). Managing cognitive load in introductory programming courses: A cognitive aware scaffolding tool. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 17(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.3233/jid-2013-0004

60.

Stiller

K. D.

Koster

(2016). Learner attrition in an advanced vocational online training: The role of computer attitude, computer anxiety, and online learning experience. European Journal of Open, Distance, and E-Learning, 19(2), 1–14.

61.

Swan

Shih

L. F.

(2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks JALN, 9(3), 115.

62.

Theobald

E. J.

Hill

M. J.

Tran

Agrawal

Arroyo

E. N.

Behling

Chambwe

Cintrón

D. L.

Cooper

J. D.

Dunster

Grummer

J. A.

Hennessey

Hsiao

Iranon

Jones

Jordt

Keller

Lacey

M. E.

Littlefield

C. E.

. . . Freeman

(2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 117(12), 6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117

63.

Tucker

L. R.

Lewis

(1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170

64.

Tyler-Smith

(2006). Early attrition among first time eLearners: A review of factors that contribute to drop-out, withdrawal, and non-completion rates of adult learners undertaking eLearning programmes. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 73–85.

65.

Vuopala

Hyvönen

Järvelä

(2016). Interaction forms in successful collaborative learning in virtual learning environments. Active Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787415616730

66.

Wang

Fang

(2020). Learning performance and behavioral patterns of online collaborative learning: Impact of cognitive load and affordances of different multimedia. Computers & Education, 143, Article 103683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103683

67.

Whitcomb

K. M.

Cwik

Singh

(2021). Not all disadvantages are equal: Racial/ethnic minority students have largest disadvantage among demographic groups in both STEM and non-STEM GPA. AERA Open, 7, 23328584211059823. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584211059823

68.

Huang

Wang

(2020, August 24–27). Exploring the relationships among interaction, emotional engagement and learning persistence in online learning environments [Conference session]. 2020 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET), Bangkok, Thailand (pp. 293–297). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISET49818.2020.00070

69.

Zhang

Tian

Yao

Duan

Sun

Niu

(2023). Teaching presence promotes learner affective engagement: The roles of cognitive load and need for cognition. Teaching and Teacher Education, 129, Article 104167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104167

70.

Zhu

(2018). Facilitating effective online discourse: Investigating factors influencing students’ cognitive presence in online learning [Master’s Theses]. University of Connecticut https://opencommons.uconn.edu/gs_theses/1277

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB