Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cognitive Presence as a Catalyst for Creating a Community of Inquiry in Online Learning: Insights from a Lebanese Higher Education Context

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Higher Education in the Arab World

  • 145 Accesses

Abstract

An important feature of quality online learning is establishing and promoting an inquiry-based approach to teaching and learning that contributes to enhanced online learning experiences. The Communities of Inquiry (COI) framework dubs high student inquiry in online learning as Cognitive Presence (CP), which centers teaching and learning around students’ collaborative exploration of concepts. The purpose of this chapter is to present findings from a study that examined methods and strategies used in online teaching during and after the pandemic, and to explore faculty and students’ perceptions regarding this mode of learning. More particularly, the study explored the extent to which CP was manifested in the online learning experience. The study was guided by the COI framework as a theoretical framework and Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) as research framework to analyze facilitators of, and barriers to, realizing high levels of CP in online learning. Faculty interviews (N = 8), observations of recorded synchronous sessions (a total of 10), and student surveys (N = 114) were used to gather data. Findings from this study revealed that the sudden shift to online teaching and the absence of formal professional development resulted in an authoritarian/transmissive teaching approach and low student engagement, hence, limited CP. Nevertheless, some students found this approach helpful as they were used to traditional teaching approaches. Faculty engaged in self-directed professional learning, an approach that could be further leveraged in both traditional and online courses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Garrison DR (2009) Communities of inquiry in online learning. Encyclopedia of distance learning, 2nd edn (ISBN: 9781605661988). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-198-8.ch052

  2. Liu B, Xing W, Zeng Y, Wu Y (2022) Linking cognitive processes and learning outcomes: the influence of cognitive presence on learning performance in MOOCs. British J Educ Technol 53(5):1459–1477. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W (1999) Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. Internet Higher Educ 2(2–3):87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Garrison DR (2003) E-learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice. Routledge (ISBN: 9780203166093). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203166093

  5. Khaddage F, Fayad R, Moussallem I (2020) Online learning and the role of technologies during COVID19 pandemic “higher education Lebanon case.” In: Proceedings of EdMedia + innovate learning. Association for the advancement of computing in education (ISBN 978-1-939797-50-6). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/217361/

  6. El-Ghali HA, Ghosn E (2019) Towards connected learning in Lebanon. Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs. https://www.aub.edu.lb/ifi/Documents/publications/research_reports/2018-2019/20190221_towards_connected_learning_in_lebanon.pdf

  7. Cranfield D, Tick A, Venter I et al (2021) Digital technologies for elearning during lockdown: a comparative study. ICERI2021 Proceedings (ISBN: 978-84-09-34549-6). https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2021.1995

  8. Zgheib G, Al Daia R, Serhan M, Melki A (2020) Factors influencing students’ online learning readiness in a Middle Eastern higher education institution: implications for online course design. International J E-Learn 19(3):287–308. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343858919

  9. Tarhini A, Teo T, Tarhini T (2015) A cross-cultural validity of the e-learning acceptance measure (ElAM) in Lebanon and England: a confirmatory factor analysis. Educ Informat Technol 21:1269–1282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9381-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Melki A, Nicolas M, Khairallah M, Adra O (2017) Information and communications technology use as a catalyst for the professional development: perceptions of tertiary level faculty. Internat J Educ Devel ICT 13(3):128–144. http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu/viewarticle.php?id=2308

  11. El Turk S, Cherney I (2016) Administrators’ and faculty’s perceived online education barriers and the role of transformational leadership at a U.S. university in Lebanon. Creighton J Interdisciplin Leadership 2(1):15. https://scholarworks.merrimack.edu/soe_facpub/106

  12. Engeström Y (1987) Learning by expanding: an activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139814744

  13. Maimaiti G, Jia C, Hew KF (2021) Student disengagement in web-based videoconferencing supported online learning: an activity theory perspective. Interact Learn Environ. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1984949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Strom KJ, Viesca KM (2020) Towards a complex framework of teacher learning-practice. Profess Devel Educ 47(2–3):209–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1827449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wang Y, Wang Y, Stein D et al (2019) Examining Chinese beginning online instructors’ competencies in teaching online based on the activity theory. J Comput Educ 6(3):363–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-019-00140-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Akyol Z, Garrison DR (2008) The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence. Online Learn 12(3). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284701129

  17. Garrison DR (2011) E-learning in the 21st century, 2nd edn, Routledge (ISBN: 9780203838761). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838761

  18. Fiock H (2020) Designing a community of inquiry in online courses. Internat Rev Res Open Distribut Learn 21(1):135–153. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.3985

  19. Rourke L, Anderson T, Garrison DR, Archer W (2001) Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. Internat J Artific Intellig Educ 12:8–22. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/32229593

  20. Kilis S, Yildirim Z (2019) Posting patterns of students’ social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence in online learning. Online Learn 23(2):179–195. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i2.1460

  21. Garrison DR, Cleveland-Innes M, Fung TS (2010) Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: student perceptions of the community of enquiry framework. Internet Higher Educ 13(1–2):31–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lowenthal PR (2016) A mixed methods examination of instructor social presence in accelerated online courses. In: Handbook of research on strategic management of interaction, presence, and participation in online courses. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-9582-5.ch006

  23. Arbaugh JB (2008) Does the community of inquiry framework predict outcomes in online MBA courses? Internat Rev Res Open Distribut Learn 9(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v9i2.490

  24. Banerjee M, Wolf J, Chalasani S (2020) Enhancing cognitive presence through videos in online courses. J System Cybernet Informat 18(6):83–88. https://www.iiisci.org/journal/pdv/sci/pdfs/EA603OU20.pdf

  25. Richardson JC, Swan K (2003) Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Online Learn 7(1). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v7i1.1864

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Anderson T, Rourke L, Garrison R, Archer W (2001) Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Online Learn 5(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875

  28. Gerard L, Matuk C, Linn MC (2016) Technology as inquiry teaching partner. J Sci Teacher Educ 27(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9457-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Darabi A, Arrastia MC, Nelson DW et al (2011) Cognitive presence in asynchronous online learning: a comparison of four discussion strategies. J Comp Assist Learn 27:216–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00392.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W (2010) The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: a retrospective. Internet Higher Educ 13(1–2):5–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Redmond P (2014) Reflection as an indicator of cognitive presence. E-Learning and Digital Media 11(1):46–58. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2014.11.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Yamagata-Lynch LC, Haudenschild MT (2009) Using activity systems analysis to identify inner contradictions in teacher professional development. Teach Teacher Educ 25(3):507–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Leont’ev AN (1974) The problem of activity in psychology. Sov Psychol 13(2):4–33. https://doi.org/10.2753/RPO1061-040513024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Engeström Y, Sannino A (2010) Studies of expansive learning: foundations, findings and future challenges. Educ Res Rev 5(1):1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2009.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Engeström Y (1999) Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In: Engeström Y, Miettnen R, Punamäki R-L (eds) Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511812774.003

  36. Engeström Y (2001) Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. J Educ Work 14(1):133–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Clemmensen T, Kaptelinin V, Nardi B (2016) Making HCI theory work: an analysis of the use of activity theory in HCI research. Behaviour Inform Technol 35(8):608–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2016.1175507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Murphy E, Rodriguez-Manzanares MA (2008) Using activity theory and its principle of contradictions to guide research in educational technology. Austral J Educ Technol 24(4). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1203

  39. Nardi BA (1996) Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction The MIT Press (ISBN: 9780262140584). https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262140584/context-and-consciousness/

  40. Stroupe D, Caballero MD, White P (2018) Fostering students’ epistemic agency through the co-configuration of moth research. Sci Educ 102(6):1176–1200. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Salloum S, BouJaoude S (2017) The use of triadic dialogue in the science classroom: a teacher negotiating conceptual learning with teaching to the test. Res Sci Educ 49:829–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9640-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ (2004) Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educ Res 33(7):14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x033007014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kovanović V, Joksimović S, Poquet O et al (2018) Exploring communities of inquiry in massive open online courses. Comput Educ 119:44–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Shea P, Bidjerano T (2009) Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education. Comput Educ 52(3):543–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Arbaugh J, Bangert A, Cleveland-Innes M (2010) Subject matter effects and the community of inquiry (CoI) framework: an exploratory study. Internet Higher Educ 13(1–2):37–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Archibald D (2010) Fostering the development of cognitive presence: initial findings using the community of inquiry survey instrument. Internet Higher Educ 13(1–2):73–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitat Res Psychol 3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ (2017) Thematic analysis. Internat J Qualitat Methods 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

  49. Dabbagh N, Marra RM, Howland JL (2018) Meaningful online learning: integrating strategies, activities, and learning technologies for effective designs. Routledge (ISBN: 9781138694194) https://www.routledge.com/Meaningful-Online-Learning-Integrating-Strategies-Activities-and-Learning/Dabbagh-Marra-Howland/p/book/9781138694194

  50. Nasrallah R (2014) Learning outcomes’ role in higher education teaching. Educ Business Society Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues 7(4):257–276. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebs-03-2014-0016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Eslaminejad T, Masood M, Ngah NA (2010) Assessment of instructors’ readiness for implementing e-learning in continuing medical education in Iran. Medical Teacher 32(10). https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2010.496006

  52. Phan TTN, Dang LTT (2017) Teacher readiness for online teaching: a critical review. Internat J Open Distance E-Learn 3(1). https://ijodel.com/index.php/ijodel/article/view/18

  53. Anderson A, Barham N, Northcote M (2013) Using the TPACK framework to unite disciplines in online learning. Austral J Educ Technol 29(4). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.24

  54. Marwan A, Sweeney T (2019) Using Activity Theory to analyze contradictions in English teachers’ technology integration. Asia-Pacific Educ Researcher 28(2):115–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0418-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Naylor D, Nyanjom J (2021) Educators’ emotions involved in the transition to online teaching in higher education. Higher Educ Res Devel 40(6):1236–1250. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1811645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Tondeur J, Scherer R, Baran E et al (2019) Teacher educators as gatekeepers: preparing the next generation of teachers for technology integration in education. British J Educ Technol 50(3):1189–1209. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. The World Bank (2022) Overview. The World Bank in Lebanon. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/lebanon/overview

  58. Westberry N, Franken M (2015) Pedagogical distance: explaining misalignment in student-driven online learning activities using activity theory. Teach Higher Educ 20(3):300–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2014.1002393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Henderson C, Beach A, Finkelstein N (2011) Facilitating change in undergraduate stem instructional practices: an analytic review of the literature. J Res Sci Teach 48(8):952–984. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Salloum S, BouJaoude S (2023) Formative interventions for science teachers’ expansive learning and practices with multilingual learners: a case study from Lebanon. Prof Devel Educ. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2022.2162563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Gehrke S, Kezar A (2018) Perceived outcomes associated with engagement in and design of faculty communities of practice focused on stem reform. Res Higher Educ 60(6):844–869. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-018-9534-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Sabat M, Abdel-Massih R, Kanaan A et al (2020) Current teaching methods in STEM departments—a road map for fundamental university educational reform: evidence from Lebanon. J Applied Res Higher Educ 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-09-2020-0307

  63. Ward HC, Lu M-TP, O’Connor BH, Overton T (2015) Successful bottom-up faculty collaboration during institutional change. J Applied Res Higher Educ 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/jarhe-11-2013-0048

  64. Addis EA, Quardokus KM, Bassham DC et al (2013) Implementing pedagogical change in introductory biology courses through the use of faculty learning communities. J College Sci Teach 43(2):22–29. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43631068

  65. Allen IE, Seaman J (2016) Online report card: tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group. http://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/onlinereportcard.pdf

  66. Hart J (2020) Importance of instructional designers in online higher education. J Applied Instruct Design 9(2). https://doi.org/10.51869/92jeh

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education, University of Balamand, Koura, Lebanon

    Ghania Zgheib

  2. Department of Teacher Education, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA

    Sara Salloum

  3. Department of Nursing Program, University of Balamand, Koura, Lebanon

    Mathilde Azar

Authors
  1. Ghania Zgheib
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sara Salloum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mathilde Azar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ghania Zgheib .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Chancellor Office, University of Petra, Amman, Jordan

    Adnan Badran

  2. Department of Biology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon

    Elias Baydoun

  3. Dundee, UK

    Sandra Hillman

  4. Department of Biology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon

    Joelle Mesmar

Appendices

APPENDIX A

Student Survey

Items

SD

D

N

A

SA

1

2

3

4

5

I. Teaching Presence

     

Design and Organization

1. The instructor clearly communicated important course topics

     

2. The instructor clearly communicated important course goals

     

3. The instructor provided clear instructions on how to participate in course learning activities

     

4. The instructor clearly communicated important due dates/time frames for learning activities

     

Facilitation

5. The instructor was helpful in identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on course topics that helped me to learn

     

6. The instructor was helpful in guiding the class toward understanding course topics in a way that helped me clarify my thinking

     

7. The instructor helped to keep course participants engaged and participating in productive dialogue

     

8. The instructor helped keep the course participants on task in a way that helped me to learn

     

9. The instructor encouraged course participants to explore new concepts in this course

     

10. Instructor’s actions reinforced the development of a sense of community among course participants

     

Direct Instruction

11. The instructor helped to focus discussion on relevant issues in a way that helped me to learn

     

12. The instructor provided feedback that helped me understand my strengths and weaknesses relative to the course’s goals and objectives

     

13. The instructor provided feedback in a timely fashion

     

II. Social Presence

Affective expression

14. Getting to know other course participants gave me a sense of belonging in the course

     

15. I was able to form distinct impressions of some course participants

     

16. Online or web-based communication is an excellent medium for social interaction

     

Open communication

17. I felt comfortable conversing through the online medium

     

18. I felt comfortable participating in the course discussions

     

19. I felt comfortable interacting with other course participants

     

Group cohesion

20. I felt comfortable disagreeing with other course participants while still maintaining a sense of trust

     

21. I felt that my point of view was acknowledged by other course participants

     

22. Online discussions help me to develop a sense of collaboration

     

III. Cognitive Presence

Triggering event

23. Problems posed increased my interest in course issues

     

24. Course activities piqued my curiosity

     

25. I felt motivated to explore content-related questions

     

Exploration

26. I utilized a variety of information sources to explore problems posed in this course

     

27. Brainstorming and finding relevant information helped me resolve content-related questions

     

28. Online discussions were valuable in helping me appreciate different perspectives

     

Integration

29. Combining new information helped me answer questions raised in course activities

     

30. Learning activities helped me construct explanations/solutions

     

31. Reflection on course content and discussions helped me understand fundamental concepts in this class

     

Resolution

32. I can describe ways to test and apply the knowledge created in this course

     

33. I have developed solutions to course problems that can be applied in practice

     

34. I can apply the knowledge created in this course to my work or other non-class-related activities

     
  1. SD: Strongly disagree; D: Disagree; N: Neutral: A: Agree; SA: Strongly Agree

Appendix B

Observation Checklist

Items

N

VR

R

O

F

Notes/indicators and evidence or counter-evidence

1

2

3

4

5

Faculty/Teaching Presence

Design and Organization

1. The instructor clearly communicated important course/session topics to the students

      

2. The instructor clearly communicated important course/session goals

      

3. The instructor provided clear instructions on how to participate in course learning activities

      

4. The instructor clearly communicated important due dates/time frames for learning activities

      

Facilitation

5. The instructor was helpful in identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on course topics that helped the students to learn

The instructor identified areas of confusion or misconception and used this knowledge to enhance student learning

The instructor allowed room for student views and built on them

      

6. The instructor was helpful in guiding the class toward understanding course topics in a way that helped the students clarify their thinking

The instructor used open- and closed-ended questions purposefully to clarify students’ thinking

      

7. The instructor helped to keep the students engaged and participating in productive dialogue. What forms of dialogue?

      

8. The instructor helped keep the students on-task in a way that helped them to learn. Time on task and focus

      

9. The instructor encouraged the students to explore new concepts in this course

      

10. Instructor actions reinforced the development of a sense of community among the students (can be deduced from more-concrete items, such as group work, student discussion in breakout, acknowledging students’ concerns and comfort)

     

Indicators

Direct Instruction

11. The instructor helped to focus discussion on relevant issues in a way that helped the students to learn

      

12. The instructor provided feedback that helped the students understand their strengths and weaknesses relative to the course’s goals and objectives. What kind of feedback? Based on data

      

Social Presence

Affective expression

13. Students are given an opportunity to self-express in the course

      

14. The instructor shows interest in the students’ concerns, comfort, and belonging in the course

      

Open communication

      

15. The instructor encourages discussions with the students

      

16. The instructor encourages the students to interact with one another, share their ideas, and discuss and argue about them comfortably

      

Group cohesion

17. The instructor encourages students’ teamwork and collaboration, e.g., breakout rooms and group projects

      

Cognitive Presence (Inquiry)

Triggering event

18. The instructor poses problems that increase the students’ interest in course issues. (Inquiry)

      

19. The instructor uses course activities that pique the students’ curiosity. (Inquiry)

      

Exploration

20. The instructor incites the students to utilize a variety of information sources to explore problems posed in this course

      

21. The instructor pushes the students to do a brainstorming exercise and find relevant information that helps them resolve content-related questions and understand their different perspectives

      

Integration

22. The learning activities encourage students to combine new information to answer questions

      

23. Learning activities help students construct explanations/solutions

      

24. Learning activities involve students in reflections on course content

      

25. Course problems trigger solutions that can be applied in real life

      

26. Learning activities are authentic and can be applied in the workplace

      

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Zgheib, G., Salloum, S., Azar, M. (2023). Cognitive Presence as a Catalyst for Creating a Community of Inquiry in Online Learning: Insights from a Lebanese Higher Education Context. In: Badran, A., Baydoun, E., Hillman, S., Mesmar, J. (eds) Higher Education in the Arab World. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33568-6_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33568-6_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-33567-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-33568-6

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation