CoI Practice – Discussion Forum

The Community of Inquiry Forums CoI Practice – Discussion Forum

This topic contains 4 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by Avatar of Swee Liang Tan Swee Liang Tan 10 years, 4 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #506
    Avatar of Marguerite Koole
    Marguerite Koole
    Key Master

    CoI Practice

    Members are welcome to post messages to one another about how the Community of Inquiry framework is being used in teaching and learning situations.

    1. #612
      Avatar of Norm Vaughan
      Norm Vaughan
      Key Master

      Welcome to our discussion forum on how the CoI framework is being put in practice in various education environments.  I am particularly interested in how the concept of teaching presence is being operationalized in courses and programs. In our upcoming book on Teaching in Blended Learning Environments: Creating and Sustaining Communities of Inquiry  we describe seven teaching presence principles:

      1. Plan for the creation of open communication and trust.
      2. Plan for critical reflection and discourse.
      3. Establish community and cohesion.
      4. Establish inquiry dynamics (purposeful inquiry).
      5. Sustain respect and responsibility.
      6. Sustain inquiry that moves to resolution.
      7. Ensure assessment is congruent with intended processes and outcomes.

       

      What are your thoughts on these seven principles?

      Can you see any of these principles applying to your own teaching practice and if so, how?

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
    2. #613
      Avatar of Swee Liang Tan
      Swee Liang Tan
      Participant

      Hi Norm

      Thanks for your questions. This is Swee Liang here, from Singapore Management University. Here are some reflections as I prepare for  a BL in a ECON103A International Economics course. As I respond to your questions, I am learning something new, which I share as well at the end.

      For (1): I will be using the First day of class (F2F), and other days where there are F2F teaching to model the type of communication (dialogue and critical discourse) I want to see taking place inside and outside of the classroom. Teaching through case study is one method to demonstrate an open communication and trust

      For trust, that students can trust me – there needs to be evidenced of faculty competency in the subject matter , and of faculty being able to empathize to struggles that students face when learning challenging materials. I like the work of Mihaly on “Finding flow”.

      For trust, that student trust each other – social presence kicks in here. To explain to students that the community is here to learn from each other, without judgement ..?  (it can be easy to say that we want this, but i think that can be challenging to convince students if there are occasions of summative peer review of each other’s work)

      For (2): To facilitate higher order thinking questions that one ask to promote reflections and discourse (see Brookfield, Discussion as a Way of Teaching). To have workshops to prepare students on how to ask critical questions, listen actively and respond thoughtfully. At SMU, our Centre for Teaching Excellence, which I an the director, runs workshop for incoming students on how to become effective learners @ SMU. A good ICT tool that enables the discourse is essential. I am using google discussion forum, but i find the aesthetic, layout and structure not user-friendly, especially when the discussion threads becomes unwieldy. If you have  suggestions for alternative platform , I would appreciate it

      For (3): On community and cohesion: What I do is that for my class, I prepare students on effective ways to do team work by showing them the structure or guides (see HERDSA Guide on Managing Student Team, 2006).  I have project work, for students to practice these skills. Our Centre for Teaching Excellence also runs workshop for incoming students on how to become effective learners @ SMU, and team work is one of the segment. I guess similar to the other 6 items, it is about communicating to students to bring in such skills from their out of class learning (community involvement project, leadership and teambuilding experience) into the classroom course environment. Seamless / connected learning (?)

      For (4 – 5- 6, and the others as well, because i see overlaps in some of these principles): I believe in getting faculty to  ”model  these behavior” through discussion – teaching using cases is one method for faculty to model this behavior. I have used Grasha and Reichmann Teaching Style Survey and found the 5 roles of faculty useful as a reference on the various roles faculty can play over the duration of the course (expert/ formal authority / personal mode / facilitator / delegator)

      Now that I have articulated this, I am beginning to see the strength of blended learning environment can be raised through integrating seamlessly with learning that comes from non-academic modules. And choosing suitable methods of teaching (eg teaching using cases) can  facilitate one to achieve the principles above …

      On (7): having the alignment of assessment to learning outcome is important, as is alignment with instructional strategies. If we are looking at creating a BL environment together with holistic development of students, the authenticity and relevance of assessment to real world issues, are just as important as alignment/congruency

      The above are raw ideas and I welcome feedback from the you and the community

      Kind regards

      Swee Liang

       

       

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
    3. #615

      Hi Swee Liang!

      Thank you for your detailed outline!  I like the way you are bringing the concepts to life by using them ‘on the ground’ – or, in this case, in the cloud and on the ground!

      I am interested in your view on how Grasha and Reichmann’s taxonomy cross-references with the three presences, and, in particular, with the facilitation, direct instruction and design of teaching presence? And how might Grasha and Reichmann inform what the students do for their own teaching of themselves, support metacognition and for peer-teaching?  That’s a lot of questions ;o) but your post really got me thinking!

      May I share your post with students on my class on Teaching in Blended Environments at KTH Royal institute of technology in Sweden?

      Cheers,

      Marti

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
    4. #616
      Avatar of Swee Liang Tan
      Swee Liang Tan
      Participant

      Hi Marti

      You are most welcome! I will try to share my thoughts the best I can, in response to your queries

      Q1: I am interested in your view on how Grasha and Reichmann’s taxonomy cross-references with the three presences, and, in particular, with the facilitation, direct instruction and design (D, DI, D) of teaching presence?

      I feel that each of five modes (expert/ formal authority / personal mode / facilitator / delegator) lend itself to the teaching presence (F, DI and D). In the case of direct instruction, the instructor takes on stronger role of being an expert / formal authority (as instructors, at least the way I see myself, we operate across these modes (and GR has identified 4 clusters) …. As a facilitator, the teaching presence of facilitation comes into play

      Q2: And how might Grasha and Reichmann inform what the students do for their own teaching of themselves, support metacognition and for peer-teaching? 

      One of the role of being a delegator is to encourage students to be self-directed learners (self-motivated /self-monitor/self-measure and self-manage), and where part of the delegation involves group work, students are encouraged to peer-teach.

      (Note: I do get cautious when using surveys that profilesa style – be it teaching / learning. So really i use these surveys to frame the things I need to implement on the ground, putting aside for the moment, essential questions regarding validity, reliability, how grounded in research these tools are, ect)

      Yes, of course! Please feel free to share my post with your students.

      I have set up a website on google and I am happy to send you an invite to the site, if you like to drop in to see how I design the site to build a teaching, social and cognitive presence. I am working with Norm to strengthen each of these presences. I felt it was weak on social presence, and I have attempted to plug that gap.

      A few questions that been festering in me ever since I “stumbled into this field”

      Should there be more presences to teaching, social and cognitive (Aside from emotional aspect)?
      And while many instructors now have common language / understanding of these presences, are our students taking our course aware of these, and why we want to in-built these? Should they be aware of their role? To my knowledge, the focus is still on role of the instructor in each of these presences when designing/developing/delivering a BL environment, and what they should do when issues arise. What about the role of the students a BL environment?
      Should the instructor alone (in teaching a course), or should the community be more involved in a university-wide redesign (academic and non-academic staff) to bring out these presences in a BL environment? Obviously the latter is preferred – how does one do it?

      I would  love to hear your thoughts on these.

      Kind regards
      Swee Liang

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.