Garrison, D.R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. pp. 61-72.
>The early research in the area of online communities of inquiry has raised several issues with regard to the creation and maintenance of social, cognitive and teaching presence that require further research and analysis. The other overarching issue is the methodological validity associated with the community of inquiry framework.
on communities of inquiry:
>Higher education has consistently viewed community as essential to support collaborative learning and discourse associated with higher levels of learning. Moreover, the asynchronous nature of online communication and the potential for disconnectedness has focused attention on the issue of community.
more talk about the background/theory of social/cognitive/teaching presences. blahblahblah.
on teaching presence:
>Interaction and discourse plays a key role in higher-order learning but not without structure (design) and leadership (facilitation and direction).
dialog and discourse are different:
>From a teaching perspective, this is the difference between dialogue and discourse . Facilitation supports dialogue with minimal shaping of the course of the discussion. Discourse, on the other hand, is disciplined inquiry that requires a knowledgeable teacher with the expectation that discourse progresses in a collaborative constructive manner and students gain an awareness of the inquiry process.
on coding and validity:
>There is the question, however, as to why we would want to code at the indicator level? Coding at the indicator level is difficult . Is it not a bit premature considering the early stage of this research and testing of the framework? What research questions would coding at the indicator level answer? How does being able to distinguish among the indicators add to the validity of the model? Are indicators too context specific to expect a standard set of indicators across all online educational environments?
>A community of inquiry needs to have clear expectations as to the nature of critical discourse and their postings. Participants need to be aware of the academic objectives, the phases of inquiry, and the level of discourse. These educational challenges raise the importance and role of teaching presence. The distinction between facilitation and direction must also be clear from a design perspective. Teaching presence must consider the dual role of both moderating and shaping the direction of the discourse. Both are essential for a successful community of inquiry.