Transcript Audio - Athabasca University

The online community of
inquiry model - what's next ?
Panel presentation
Cleveland-Innes, M.
Garrison, D.R.
Ice, P.
Shea, P.
Swan, K.
Agenda
• Brief introduction of CoI framework
M. Cleveland-Innes
• Issues and next steps with the development of the CoI
framework
D.R. Garrison
• The place of emotional presence
M. Cleveland-Innes
• Learner characteristics and perceptions of social presence
K. Swan
• Socially rich technologies and the CoI
P. Ice
• New research directions: An investigation of the CoI
framework and the "Net Generation“
P. Shea
Community of Inquiry
• Questioning • Deliberating
• Reasoning • Challenging
• Connecting
• Problem Solving
The model is thoroughly social and communal
….. …. a method for integrating emotive
experience, mental acts , thinking skills, and
informal fallacies into a concerted approach to
the improvement of reasoning and judgment.
Lipman, 2003
Canadians
Garrison, Anderson &
Archer, 2000
Community of Inquiry Framework
Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2000)
Social Presence
Cognitive Presence
The ability of participants
The extent to which
in a community of inquiry
learners are able to
to project themselves
construct and confirm
socially and emotionally
meaning through
as ‘real’ people
sustained reflection
(i.e., their full personality),
and discourse in a
through the medium of
critical community
communication being
of inquiry.
used.
Teaching Presence
The design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose
of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes.
Ongoing research ad development
http://www.communitiesofinquiry.com
/
Issues:
Community of Inquiry Framework
Dr. Randy Garrison
Community Of Inquiry
• The importance of a community
of inquiry is that, while the
objective of critical reflection is
intellectual autonomy, in reality,
critical reflection is “thoroughly
social and communal”.
» Lipman, 1991
Community of Inquiry Framework
Social Presence
The ability of participants
in a community of inquiry
to project themselves
socially and emotionally
as ‘real’ people
(i.e., their full personality),
through the medium of
communication being
used.
Cognitive Presence
The extent to which
learners are able to
construct and confirm
meaning through
sustained reflection
and discourse in a
critical community
of inquiry.
Teaching Presence
The design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose
of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes.
CoI Categories/Indicators
ELEMENTS
CATEGORIES
INDICATORS
(examples only)
Social Presence
Open Communication
Group Cohesion
Personal/Affective
Learning climate/risk-free expression
Group identity/collaboration
Self projection/expressing emotions
Cognitive Presence
Triggering Event
Exploration
Integration
Resolution
Sense of puzzlement
Information exchange
Connecting ideas
Appling new ideas
Teaching Presence
Design & Organization
Facilitating Discourse
Direct Instruction
Setting curriculum & methods
Shaping constructive exchange
Focusing and resolving issues
Social Presence
• Social presence is defined as the ability
of participants in a community of
inquiry to project themselves socially
and emotionally, as “real’ people (i.e.,
their full personality), through the
medium of communication being used.
(Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000)
– Effect of medium not most salient factor
(contrary to Short, et al., 1976)
SP Categories
• Open Communication
• Group Cohesion
• Affective Expression
Social Presence
• The ability of participants to identify
with the community (e.g., course of
study), communicate purposefully in
a trusting environment, and develop
inter-personal relationships by way
of projecting their individual
personalities.
Questions
• Have we placed too much
emphasis on social presence (SP)
in supporting online and blended
communities of inquiry??
• Is SP a required precursor to
cognitive presence?
SP & Group Identity
• Purpose can be the basis of shared social
identity (SP?).
• If the purpose of SP is to communicate
and collaborate, salient group identity will
increase group cohesion.
• A “salient personal identity could in fact
undermine the shared group identity” (p.
153)
Rogers & Lea, 2005
Nature of a CoI?
• Learning space or social space?
• “Their use of the medium was
functional, organized, time-driven,
and carefully evaluated.” (Conrad,
2002)
• Manage “pathological politeness”
(expectations & activities)
• Build community “judiciously”
(takes time)
Cognitive Presence
Extent to which participants
critically reflect, (re)construct
meaning, and engage in discourse
for the purpose of sharing meaning
and confirming understanding.
Practical Inquiry Model
(Adapted from Garrison & Archer, 2000)
Questions
• How do we move inquiry beyond
the exploration phase?
• Does metacognitive awareness
enhance the rate of progression and
quality of the inquiry process?
CP & Progression
• Greatest need for research.
• Cognitive presence is dependent
upon purpose, collaboration and
leadership.
• Progressing through the phases of
inquiry can be greatly facilitated by
an understanding of the expectations
and the inquiry cycle.
Teaching Presence
The design, facilitation, and
direction of cognitive and social
processes for the purpose of
realizing personally meaningful
and educationally worthwhile
learning outcomes.
TP Categories
• Design & Organization
• Facilitation
• Direct Instruction
Teaching Presence
• What is the role of teaching
presence?
• How essential is TP?
How Essential?
• The body of evidence is growing
rapidly attesting to the importance of
teaching presence for successful
online learning …
• The consensus is that teaching
presence is a significant determinate
of student satisfaction, perceived
learning, and sense of community.
Contact Information
Dr. D. Randy Garrison
Director
Teaching & Learning Centre
University of Calgary
BioSciences Building
2500 University Drive NW
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
T2N 1N4
Ph: 403-220-6764
FAX: 403-282-0730
[email protected]
The place of emotional
presence
Dr. Martha. Cleveland-Innes
Community of Inquiry
• Questioning
• Deliberating
• Reasoning• Challenging
• Connecting
• Problem Solving
The model is thoroughly social and communal
….. …. a method for integrating emotive
experience, mental acts , thinking skills, and
informal fallacies into a concerted approach to
the improvement of reasoning and judgment.
Lipman, 2003
Social Presence ….
….. is defined as "the ability of participants in a
community of inquiry to project themselves socially
and emotionally, as ‘real’ people (i.e. their full
personality), through the medium of communication
being used”
Cohesive Behaviours
Vocatives
Addresses or refers to the group using
inclusive pronouns
Phatics, salutations
Interactive Behaviours
Continuing a thread
Quoting from others’ messages.
Referring explicitly to others’ messages.
Asking questions
Complimenting, expressing appreciation
Expressing agreement
Affective Behaviours
Expression of emotions
Use of humor
Self-disclosure
How emotional is the social ?
7/15 social expressions corresponded significantly to more
positive ratings of the social environment.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
addressing others by name
complimenting
expressing appreciation
using the reply feature to post messages
expressing emotions
using humor
salutations.
Rourke & Anderson, 2000
“social-emotional literacy appears to be the most
complicated of all types of digital literacy”
Eshet, 2004
“We argue that cognitive presence …is more
easily sustained when a significant degree of
social presence has been established”
Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000
Social or emotional presence?
…. COI model does allude to some aspects of
instructor humanness, especially in the social
presence component, perhaps there is room in
this model for a more specific emphasis on the
emotional presence. How can one have a true
community without some aspect of emotional
attachment or involvement in the lives of those
who share that communal space?
Perry & Edwards, 2005
Emotions and Learning
“From brain research we know now that when we get
emotional about a task we are involved in learning. Brain
research has confirmed that emotions are linked to learning
by assisting us in recall of memories that are stored in our
central nervous system. “
“Practically speaking, this means as designers and educators
need to create places that are not only safe to learn, but also
spark some emotional interest through celebrations and
rituals.”
Fielding, 2006
Data points
1. Exploratory study of the impact of a concurrent
participatory online workshop about emotion
2. Re-examined pre-post questionnaires and CMC
transcripts
3. Extensive multi-disciplinary literature review
4. Student/instructor interviews regarding emotion
online
5. Evaluation of EP items crossed referenced to initial
elements
Definitions
Affect: influence or action in relationship to
feelings and emotions.
Emotions: unconscious states that arise
spontaneously.
Feelings: the conscious expression of emotion.
Noticeable emotions online
Delight
Emphasis
Excitement
Yearning
Passion
Desire / hope
Unhappiness
Humor
Pride
Enjoyment
Like
Dislike
Thankfulness
Appreciation
Preference
Irony / sarcasm
DELIGHT/HAPPINESS
I have absolutely no complaints and really only praise!
EXCITEMENT
I love the medium! For a non-verbal processor who needs time to
think before replying this is an absolutely perfect way to learn.
Being hostage in a classroom of folks who think out loud is painful
for me, so this particular format is lovely.
YEARNING/WISHING
In the face-to-face environment my favorite words are "what do
you mean by that? Please explain." I miss that in on-line discussion
(my question seems unimportant).
UNHAPPINESS
I think that I was sometimes confused by interactions with others
and even offended at times when people expressed ideas and
opinions that were dismissive of others or even blatantly
discriminatory in nature. Had I been a less driven individual, such
experiences may have caused me to quit the program.
Emotional
Presence
Indicators of emotional presence
• Emotion was expressed when connecting with other
students. (EP in SP)
• The instructor acknowledged emotion expressed online
by students. (EP in TP)
• Expressing emotion in relation to expressing ideas was
acceptable in this course. (EP in CP)
• I felt comfortable expressing emotion through the
online medium. (EP in SP)
• The instructor demonstrated emotion in online
presentations and/or discussions. (EP in TP)
• I found myself responding emotionally about ideas or
learning activities in this course. (EP in CP).
Definition of Emotional Presence
The outward expression of emotion by
individuals, and among individuals, in a
community of inquiry, as they relate to and
interact with course content, peers and the
instructor.
Cleveland-Innes, 2007
References
Damasio, A. R. (1995). Descartes' error: emotion reason and the human
brain. New York: Quill.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2000). Critical Inquiry in
a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher
education. In Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2). pp 87-105.
Retrieved September 14, 2006 from
http://www.atl.ualberta.ca/cmc/CTinTextEnvFinal.pdf
LeDoux, J. (2002). The synaptic self: how our brains become who we
are. New York: Penguin.
Lehman, R. (2006). The role of emotion in creating Instructor and
learner presence in the distance education experience. Journal of
Cognitive Affective Learning, 2(2) (Spring 2006), 12-26. Retrieved
September 14 from:
https://www.jcal.emory.edu//viewarticle.php?id=45&layout=html
O’Regan, K. (2003). Emotion and e-learning. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 78-92. Retrieved
September 14, 2006 from: http://www.sloancorg/publications/jaln/v7n3/pdf/v7n3_oregan.pdf#search=%22%22
Emotion%20and%20E-Learning%22%22
A Rose is Only a Rose if I Think So:
Learner Characteristics &
Perceptions of Social Presence
Karen Swan, Kent State
University
LiFang Shih, University
at Albany
social presence
• the degree to which participants in
computer mediated communication feel
socially and emotionally connected
• the ability of learners to project
themselves socially and affectively into
an online community of inquiry
research to date
• social presence can be (strongly) felt by
participants in computer-mediated
communication
(Walther, 1994; Gunawardena, 1995; Tu &
McIsaac, 2002)
• and projected into text-based
asynchronous discussion using verbal
immediacy indicators alone
(Rourke, Anderson, Garrison & Archer, 2001;
Swan, 2002; 2003)
research to date
• perceptions of social presence are linked
to student satisfaction in online courses
(Gunawardena, Lowe & Anderson,1997; Tu,
2002; Richardson & Swan, 2003)
• and to (perceived) learning from them
(Walther, 1994; Gunawardena, 1995; Picciano,
2002)
but – (how) do perceptions of social
presence vary among learners?
• What factors influence perceptions of
social presence?
• How do students perceiving differing
levels of social presence project
themselves into online discussion?
• How do students perceiving differing
levels of social presence conceptualize
online discussion?
subjects & setting
• 54 (/94) graduate education students
enrolled in 4 classes complete online
survey (2/3 female; 2/3 with online
experience; ages 21-50)
MM
Instructor A
Instructor B
CE
online survey
• demographic & experiential information
• respondents asked to rate agreement
with statements (1-5 Likert scale)
concerning:
–
–
–
–
–
perceived presence of peers (8)
perceived presence of instructor (5)
satisfaction with instructor (1)
perceived learning (4)
perceived interaction (1)
results
analysis of variance reveals significant differences
between courses (but not classes or instructors)
only differences between groupings by student
characteristics related to age (and not gender,
online experience, time spent in course)
results
perc.
learning
perc.
interaction
perc. SP of
instrs.
instructor
satisfact.
low SP group
3.2
3.0
3.7
4.0
high SP group
4.8
5.0
4.9
5.0
quantitative comparison reveals meaningful
differences in perceptions between subjects
perceiving the most & least presence
qualitative analyses
• 5 subjects with the highest combined social
presence of peers ratings & 5 with the lowest
combined ratings were identified for
qualitative analyses
• content analysis of selected subjects’ use of
social presence indicators in discussion
postings using Swan’s (2002, 2003) coding
protocols & Rourke, et al.’s (2001) social
presence density index
• structured interviews of selected subjects via
email and phone analyzed using thematic
cross-case analysis
results
low SP group
high SP group
affective
interactive
cohesive
total
17.5
26.3
6.7
10.0
4.4
6.0
28.6
42.3
quantitative content analysis reveals meaningful
differences in social presence densities between
subjects perceiving the most & least presence
results
thematic content analyses
• all students reported changing
communication styles to adjust to
asynchronous format, but while high
social presence subjects adopted a more
conversational style, low social presence
subjects adopted a more formal style
results
thematic content analyses
• all students reported learning from
discussions, but while high presence
group believed they learned from others’
postings, low presence group thought
they learned solely by articulating their
own ideas
student perceiving high social presence
“When I first read and responded to a discussion
question I felt that I had written all that I could on the
subject. After reading other people’s comments on the
same question, I was able to take in different viewpoints
and see if it was something that I agreed with or totally
disagreed with. Without class discussions I would have
never thought twice about the question that I had just
answered.”
student perceiving low social presence
“Some of the responses I read led me to believe that
some of the students in the class were either ignorant
about the subject matter, or too stubborn in their way of
thinking to take the class content seriously.”
results
thematic content analyses
• all students appreciated being asked to
relate course concepts to personal
experience, but only high presence
group reported learning from others’
experiences
student perceiving high social presence
“You can learn a lot from people who offer to tell of their
personal experiences and often you can get a person
that may have had that experience themselves and
offer to share their version. Since you are not seeing the
people you are interacting with, there has to be a way to
make the online experience personable and enjoyable.”
student perceiving low social presence
“In class, you know, people come to class so that you
could see who is there and who is not, whereas online it
was not the case because you couldn't see their faces. I
couldn't put any names with any of them, and
sometimes, you know, there were two people who had
the same names and it was difficult to tell who was
who.”
conclusions
• course design can affect development of
social presence
• age might also be a factor
conclusions
• perceptions of presence are linked to its
presentation
• students with differing perceptions of
perceiving have different conceptions of
online discussion
implications for practice
• further research is clearly indicated on
relationship between learner
characteristics & perceptions of social
presence
• courses should be designed for
development of social presence
• special attention should be paid to
faculty development and student
orientations
Research
Center for
Educational
Technology
[email protected]
SOCIAL PRESENCE OF PEERS
1. Online or web-based education is an excellent medium
for social interaction.
2. I felt comfortable conversing through this medium.
3. The “Meet Your Classmates” section enabled me to form
a sense of online community.
4. I felt comfortable participating in course discussions.
5. I felt comfortable interacting with other participants in the
course.
6. I felt that other participants in the course acknowledged
my point of view.
7. I was able to form distinct individual impressions of some
course participants.
8. Online discussions enabled me to form a sense of
community.
SOCIAL PRESENCE OF INSTRUCTORS
9. The instructor created a feeling of online community.
10. The instructor facilitated discussions in the course.
11. I was able to form distinct individual impressions of the
instructor in this course.
12. I felt comfortable conversing with the instructor through
this medium.
13. My point of view was acknowledged by the instructor.
INSTRUCTOR SATISFACTION
14. The instructor in this course met my expectations.
PERCEIVED LEARNING
15. I was able to learn from the online discussions.
16. I was stimulated to do additional reading or research on
topics discussed in the online discussions.
17. Participating in the online discussions was a useful
experience.
18. Participating in the online discussions enabled me to
form multiple perspectives.
PERCEIVED INTERACTIVITY
19. I thought there was a great deal of interaction in the
online discussions.
features of text outside
paralanguage formal syntax used to
(PL) convey emotion (eg.
emoticons,
punctuation)
emotion use of descriptive
(EM) words that indicate
feelings (ie., love,
hate, sad, silly, etc.)
value expressing personal
(VL) values beliefs, &
attitudes
Someday . . . . .; How awful
for you :-( ; Mathcad is
definitely NOT stand alone
software; Absolutely!!!!!!
Asteroff,
1985; Poole,
2000;
Rourke, 2001
When I make a spelling
mistake, I look and feel
stupid; I get chills when I
think of. . .
emergent
I think that commercialization
is a necessary evil; I feel our
children have the same rights
emergent
God forbid leaving your house Gorham,
humor use of humor –
(H) teasing, cajoling, irony, to go to the library; Now it is 1988; Poole,
like brushing my teeth (which
sarcasm
2000
I assure you I do quite well)
self- sharing personal
disclosure information,
(SD)
I sound like an old lady; I am
a closet writer; We had a
similar problem. . .
expressing
AFFECTIVE INDICATORS
vulnerability
Gorham,
1988;
Rourke, 1999
greetings & greetings, closures
salutations
(GS)
Hi Mary; That’s it for now, Poole, 2000; Rourke,
Tom
2001
You know, Tamara. . . ; I
vocatives addressing
(V) classmates by name totally agree with you
Katherine
Christenson &
Menzel, 1988; Poole,
2000
group refering to the group
reference as we, us, our
(GR)
We need to be educated;
Our use of the Internet
may not be free
Gorham, 1988;
Rourke, 2001
social sharing information
sharing unrelated to the
(SS) course
Happy Birthday!!to both
of you!!!
Bussman, 1998;
Rourke, 2001
A good example was the
CD-ROM we read about
emergent
course reflection on the
reflection course itself
(RF)
COHESIVE INDICATORS
refering directly to
acknowledge- the contents of
ment (AK) others’ messages;
quoting
Those old machines sure were Rourke, 2001
something!; I agree that it is
the quickest way
agreement/ expressing
disagreement agreement or
(AG) disagreement with
I’m with you on that; I agree;
I think what you are saying is
absolutely right
Poole, 2000;
Rourke, 2001
You make a good point; Good
luck as you continue to learn;
Right on!
Rourke, 2001
others’ messages
approval expressing
(AP) approval, offering
praise,
encouragement
invitation asking questions or Any suggestions?; How old
are your students?; Would
(I) otherwise inviting
you describe that for me
response
personal advice offering specific
(PA) advice to
classmates
Gorham,
1988;
Rourke, 2001
Also the CEC website might
emergent
have some references; I would
be happy to forward them
INTERACTIVE INDICATORS
STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
What did you think about when you were preparing to post a message
to the course discussion? Did you think about how you would sound
to others? Did you think about how what you say would influence
how others think of you?
Did you use any strategies to put “personal” touches in your
messages? If so, why did you want to make yourself sound more
personal in online discussions?
How did the ways other students wrote their messages influence your
impressions of them? Did others’ language use influence that of
yours? If so, how?
What did you think about when you were responding to others’
messages?
Did you chose certain people to respond to? Have you built a sense of
bonding with those students?
Do you think a sense of bonding is important to learning in
asynchronous learning environments? Why or why not?
What were the criteria you used while choosing which messages to
respond to?
What are your impressions of your instructor? How were these
impressions formed?
From my observation of the online class discussions, I noticed that your
instructor encouraged you to refer to your personal experiences
while answering most of the questions? What do you think about
this? Do you think this made the discussions more personal?
Did your instructor's style of writing influence the way you constructed
your messages in the class? If so, how?
Did you notice that your instructor did not often participate in the class
discussions? What do you think about this? Do you think they nonethe-less facilitated the class discussions? If so, how?
Would you prefer your instructor to participate in discussions publicly
instead of giving private personal feedback to your postings? Why or
why not?
Do you think it is important that you have regular and personal
interaction with your instructor? Why or why not?
As the tone of your voice is not available in the online environment, did
you find it as a big constraint when communicating with your peers?
If so, what did you do to overcome the constraints?
Socially Rich Technologies
& the CoI Framework
Phil Ice
University of North Carolina Charlotte
[email protected]
Basis of the CoI
• Grounded in understanding the
cognitive and social processes in
largely text-based, computer-mediated
environments (Anderson, Rourke,
Garrison & Archer, 2001)
• Premised on the ability of participants
to project their personalities and intent
through text alone (Swan, 2002)
What is lacking?
• Relative low richness of text-based
communication may make ambiguous /
open ended tasks more difficult
(Arbaugh, 2005)
• Lack of paralinguistic cues prevents the
use of certain types of informal
language that is dependent upon nuance
(Liu, Bonk, Magiuka, Lee & Su, 2005)
Technology’s Impact –
Audio Feedback as an Example
• The use of audio feedback was found
to:
– Be more effective than text in conveying
nuance.
– Increase feelings of involvement and
community
– Impact content retention and application
– Increase perceptions of instructor caring
(Ice, Curtis, Phillips & Wells, 2007)
Audio and the CoI
• The following slides compare the
findings of the Summer, 2007 multiinstitutional CoI instrument validation
(n = 287) and a subgroup (n = 63) that
received audio feedback but were not
included in the larger study
• In the items addressed there was a
significant difference (p > .05) in
responses
Teaching Presence 1
• The instructor was helpful in
identifying areas of agreement and
disagreement on course topics that
helped me to learn.
– Summer 2007 / mean = 4.12
– Audio group / mean = 4.41
Teaching Presence 2
• The instructor encouraged course
participants to explore new
concepts in this course.
– Summer 2007 / mean = 4.44
– Audio group / mean = 4.63
Teaching Presence 3
• Instructor actions reinforced the
development of a sense of
community among course
participants.
– Summer 2007 / mean = 4.36
– Audio group / mean = 4.52
Teaching Presence 4
•
The instructor provided feedback
that helped me understand my
strengths and weaknesses relative
to the course’s goals and
objectives.
– Summer 2007 / mean = 4.28
– Audio group / mean = 4.64
Social Presence
•
Online or web-based
communication is an excellent
medium for social interaction.
– Summer 2007 / mean = 3.90
– Audio group / mean = 4.33
Cognitive Presence 1
•
I felt motivated to explore content
related questions.
– Summer 2007 / mean = 4.31
– Audio group / mean = 4.52
Cognitive Presence 2
•
Reflection on course content and
discussions helped me understand
fundamental concepts in this class.
– Summer 2007 / mean = 4.37
– Audio group / mean = 4.50
Questions Remain
• More research is currently being
conducted to determine what accounts
for the changes noted
• Hypothesis – Socially rich media /
technologies make online learning
more effective by allowing participants
to enhance their ability to project
personality traits
Further Research
• How do www2 technologies
impact the CoI?
• How does virtual reality impact
the CoI?
• Can the CoI be used to assess the
effectiveness of new technologies
/ techniques in online courses?
New research directions: An
investigation of the CoI framework and
the "Net Generation”
Dr. Peter Shea
University at Albany, State
University of New York
Research results related to age
• Research on the generations done at
UCF and elsewhere
• EDUCAUSE - new book – free and
downloadable – “Educating the Net
Generation…”
• Quick hide: The Millenials are coming!
Evidence from SUNY
• Other data on the issue of age
and online student satisfaction –
• N = 24,231
• 40 colleges in SUNY – 2yr, 4yr,
Grads
• Similar to UCF results…
Satisfaction with OL Courses
Satisfaction by age
implications of research on satisfaction by
age
• New research on “net
generation” (e.g. Dede, 2005)
• New learning styles?
Heightened expectations…
• Based on long-term exposure to
technology-mediated
environments
What they are getting…text…
What they want/need…immersive
multimedia
What they want/need…immersive
multimedia
Evidence in support of age and
“multimedia” effects on online student
satisfaction
Evidence from SUNY studies
•
•
•
•
•
N = 24,231
40 colleges in SUNY –
Community colleges
Four year colleges
Graduate schools
Satisfaction by “course used multimedia”
(more is better…)
Online degree? by age
(Net Gen doesn’t want what we are offering?)
But is age really that important?
Correlations with student
satisfaction in online courses
and (n=24,231):
Weak correlations:
Gender
Age
Employment
Distance
Computer Skills
(r=.08)
(r=-.09)
(r=.08)
(r=.-08)
(r=.03)
Everyone likes multimedia, not just “net gen” (but
presence of multimedia is not (yet?) a strong correlate of
online student satisfaction)
Recent Research on CoI and Age
• Youngest age group (18-25) scored lower on
teaching presence than both older age groups
• Both older age groups also reported greater
cognitive presence
• Youngest students also reported the least
cognitive presence
• But…
• When age is held constant and student ratings of
the CoI factors are added to the regression
equation, the four CoI factors completely
mediate the effect of age on learning and overall
satisfaction.
Recent Research on CoI and Age
• Age less important to both satisfaction
and learning online
• Far more important:
• Orchestration of the learning environment
for high degrees of teaching, social, and
cognitive presence
• This orchestration is under the control of
the instructor and, when done well, the
community of learners participating in the
class.