Coding a Community of Inquiry

I've been continuing my reading of papers concerning the coding of transcripts in online discussion forums, focusing for the moment on the Community of Inquiry framework (Garrison et al, 2000).

In a review of the use of the theoretical framework, Garrison (2007) raises a number of issues that I feel I should take into account when carrying out my coding of the Learning Event (LE):

• Social presence is necessary but not sufficient for critical thinking and the successful development of a community in an online environment. 'social presence must move beyond simply establishing socio-emotional presence and personal relationships.  Cohesion requires intellectual focus (i.e., open and purposeful communication) and respect.' (2007, p.63). In analysing the social presence, we should look beyond the quantity of interactions to their quality in terms of establishing a climate of open communication, of collaboration and of community cohesion.
• It is interesting to see how social communication changes over time as the participants become more confident and comfortable with the community. Hence, I should also code the date of the messages
• Some studies have suggested that gender may effect the nature of communication, especially if there is a lack of a balance in the group (as in our LE), so I should also code the gender associated with the messages.
• The impact of the instructor/teacher/tutor is emphasised in several studies, so I should be particularly attentive to interventions from the two tutors, to the description of the activities and to the instructions given in the forums. That said, I do not necessarily agree with the emphasis placed on the role of the tutor, but prefer to be more open to the teaching presence being reinforced through the messages of the participants themselves (initiating solutions, guiding their peers, etc)
• There is suggestion that critical thinking may be encouraged by the tutor being quite transparent in linking the activities explicitly to the stages of critical thinking. There is even the suggestion that the tutors and the participants should self-code their messages as they post them. Whereas this might serve as an interesting research activity, I feel that it would be focusing the attention of the participants too much on the process that they are following rather than the end goal of learning and trying to achieve a useful, practical outcome. That said, it may be useful to reflect on this for the final activity (Reflection) due in three weeks' time.
• The question is raised as to whether the coding scheme should remain at the category level or go down to individual indicators (see the table that I presented in an earlier posting, showing the various categories for the three presences and the possible indicators). I need to do more reading before deciding the level to adopt, however I like the idea of keeping it simple and practicable by remaining at the category level if this is feasible.

Brian
-----

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2000) 'Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education'. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2-3), pp.87-105

Garrison, D. (2007) 'Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues'. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11 (1), pp.61-72

Analysing dialogue in an online forum

In an earlier posting I looked at coding schemes that could be useful for analysing the dialogue within the online forums of the Learning Event (LE) that I am following. I concluded that the choice of scheme would be both challenging and crucial to my research. I am now looking in more detail at possible schemes, starting with the one that is perhaps the most obvious , given that I am basing my work on the Community of Inquiry model put forward by Garrison et al (2000).

Garrison et al (2000, p.89)

This coding scheme aims to give a balanced view of an online community from the perspective of all three presences; cognitive, social and teaching. There would distinct advantages in my maintaining such an holistic view - we have introduced changes to the LE that could effect all three presences, I wish to keep an open mind about the impact of this action research and '... few  studies  explore  all  three  presences  and,  more  importantly,  interactions among  them' according to Swan et al (2008, p.2). I also wish to apply a relatively simple coding scheme as I am on my own and there is a lot of data to analyse. But perhaps more importantly, I am using a qualitative data approach meaning that I am looking out for meaningful examples in the narrative rather than trying to undertake a complete statistical analysis.

Garrison et al's coding scheme provides some examples of the indicators I should be looking for when I analyse the text. In related papers, that I have yet to study, they expand upon this so I should have sufficient guidance on how to apply their scheme effectively and consistently (Rouke et al, 1999; Garrison et al, 2001; Anderson et al, 2001;

Here is an extract of a discussion of the type I shall be analysing in the staff room:

'What do pupils need to learn to be prepared for the 21st century?'

Participant X:  

In e-learn magazine I found these skills: 

search and 'find' skills for finding the right information when it's needed
critical thinking skills to extract meaning and significance
creative thinking skills to generate new ideas
analytical skills for solving problems and making decisions
networking skills to identify and build relationships with others who are potential sources of knowledge and expertise, within and outside the organization
people skills to build trust and productive relationships that are mutually beneficial for information sharing
reason and argument to extract meaning and significance
the ability to validate data and the underlying assumptions on which information and knowledge is based.

Participant Y:


I agree with it, X, but the problem with my students, at the moment, is : how to make them understand they need to think. It' s hard work. They are bombed and attracted by the surrounding media and in most cases their attention is only given to appearance. I think that our job as educators has become much more essential and aimed at teaching them they are the true and creative protagonists of their knowledge 

Tutor Z:

What an interesting thread, now we are really getting down to the interesting part

What is our role as educators in a learning world full of technology? I've heard different views: facilitators ('guide on the side') or orchestrators (taking a more active role, a bit like a conductor leading an orchestra). 

Participant Y:

I think as I've already affirmed in another thread that technology helps and facilitates a lot of processes but it's wrong to think it's a solution to the school problems. I have to admit that, as to my experience, in some cases and for some students it means wasting time and having fun. So, in my opinion, our task is that of trying to teach them the positive and negative effects of ICT involving them in projects which help them know better some of the tools they can use for didactic purpose. When aware of the opportunities, they are very skilful and able in producing material and in helping the teachers, too

Participant X:

I think we have to manage both roles: Too much control and you loose knowledge, because the pupils don't get the chance to explore (believe me: They find a lot of tools and information). Too much of the guide role and the students get lost, not having a frame to develop in...

Within this short extract, we find examples of Cognitive presence: information exchange, connecting and applying ideas; Social presence: emotions and self-disclosure, recognition; and Teaching presence: identifying agreement, injecting content from outside of the community, etc (and the latter not just from the tutor). This highlights the richness of the dialogue taking place and the challenge for coding.

Brian
-----


Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. & Archer, W. (2001) 'Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context'. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5 (2), pp.1-17

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2000) 'Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education'. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2-3), pp.87-105

Garrison, D., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2001) 'Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education'. American Journal of Distance Education, 15 (1), pp.7-23

Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. & Archer, W. (1999) 'Assessing Social Presence in Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing'. Journal of Distance Education, 14 (2), pp.50-71

Swan, K., Richardson, J., Ice, P., Garrison, D., Cleveland-Innes, M. & Arbaugh, J. (2008) 'Validating a measurement tool of presence in online communities of inquiry', eMentor, 2 (24), p.88. (ONLINE - http://www.e-mentor.edu.pl/_xml/wydania/24/543.pdf - accessed 06.03.2010)

So far so good

Finally held 9 interviews using Skype on Sunday and received 46 contributions by email. A wonderful response and a lot of data to process, so I will not start until the end of the  first intensive period of the Learning Event (LE).

The LE itself has started in earnest and the staff room is buzzing with activity. In addition to the usual hellos and welcome messages, I am already seeing evidence of reflection and critical thinking. People are posing questions, replying with possible answers and relating it to their own experience. Wonderful.

My role is to facilitate and act as a catalyst in these forums. It is a delicate balance between stimulating and encouraging with challenging questions/comments, and allowing the community to develop naturally. I am currently following the approach advocated by Salmon (2000) that moderators should be active at the beginning of an activity and gradually step back as the collaboration takes off. But I also have Dillenbourg whispering in my ear that I should be orchestrating learning, rather than simply being a 'guide on the side'. I hope I have the balance right.

My concern is that the flurry of postings in the staff room represents a temporary interest and that as participants settle down to the cognitive activities, they will forget to visit the staff room. As in the physical world, one has to decide how best to use one's time and going for a chat with colleagues is something that sometimes has to come second place to marking homework, etc. I only hope that people see the value of the social contact and of the meta-cognitive discussions, and make an effort to keep this aspect going.

Tiina and I are sharing our thoughts as we go along and I realise that this will be very important data for my subsequent research analysis.

Brian
-----

Dillenbourg, P. (2008) 'Integrating technologies into educational ecosystems'. Distance Education, 29 (2), pp.127 - 140
Salmon, G. (2000) E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online, Kogan Page.

Great expectations

We have now registered 210 participants from 19 different countries for the Learning Event (LE) that starts tomorrow. Yesterday I contacted by email those who had indicated in the registration process their willingness to be interviewed - in reality I also contacted several who had said No, due to a mix-up with my email lists. Oohps, but they were very supportive in their replies.

I had intended to interview just a few, but as so many replied positively, I have finally arranged for 12 interviews today by Skype or telephone. Plus 45 participants have offered to email me a reply to my questions.

Having started the process, I can see that I get more in-depth answers through a conversation than I do by email. Mainly because with the former I can test my understanding and prompt the person to continue with their thoughts, whereas by email people have a tendency to be brief. On the other hand, the advantage of getting replies by email is that it is already written-up.

Learning English is emerging as a main motivation for participants. This may be a challenge, a catch twenty-two,  as one needs to be capable of participating in the discussions in order to share and learn.  Indeed, a desire to share and learn from others is also emerging as a common expectation. People seem to recognise the importance of social contact and are looking forward to meeting new friends. On the other hand, few have yet to come to terms with the implications of the community as a whole and how it may evolve.

Several people have expressed concerns about their availability and ability to contribute to the LE, as they have busy schedules. Hopefully as the LE progresses they will see the advantage of asynchronous online collaboration precisely for its flexibility in terms of time and place.

We shall see. It's all very exciting.

Brian
-----

Report on teachers' vision of the future of learning

An interesting report had just been published on the views of teachers on the future of learning

The Future of Learning: European Teachers’ Visions. Report on a foresight consultation at the 2010 eTwinning Conference, Sevilla, 5-7 February 2010

    * Authors: Kirsti Ala-Mutka, Christine Redecker, Yves Punie, Anusca Ferrari, Romina Cachia, Clara Centeno

    * EUR Number: Technical Note JRC59775, Publication date: 10/2010

http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=3679

Presentation of research

On Monday I had the pleasure of presenting my research to a group of teachers and academics, via Skype, at a workshop at Lancaster University. I've not had the feedback from my Supervisor yet, but certainly from my perspective it went well. There were some interesting and relevant questions at the end, which at least suggested that people were listening.

I must say I was somewhat less confident the evening before. Having done I dry run of the presentation, I felt it was too much like an academic paper - rather dry and not terribly engaging. So I reworked it with more of the spoken voice in mind, and it was a lot better. Phew.

There is nothing like having to present your ideas to focus your mind and test your own understanding. I realised as a result of this exercise that I need to be more familiar with, for example, the Community of Inquiry framework - how it is used by others and its main criticisms.

So overall a rewarding experience which has helped me to be well prepared for my presentation at Online Educa in Berlin in December.

Brian
------

The staff room is born

After months of reflection and preparation, the virtual staff room emerges ready for the start of the Learning Event on 25 October. Tiina and I have been working together to decide how best to integrate this social space into the learning environment and the cognitive activities. I think we have achieved a nice balance between keeping it informal as possible, whilst giving sufficient guidance and explanation that participants will understand what we are trying to achieve and what we expect from them.

The round tables are in place within a discussion forum and registration opens 19 October. Soon afterwards we should have access to information which will allow us to allocate the ~200 teachers for the welcome session.

Exciting times ahead!

Brian
-----