CoI INSTRUMENT VALIDATION
D. Randy Garrison
November 25, 2021

My goal here is to simply draw your attention to a study that provides a comprehensive overview of Community of Inquiry (CoI) instrument studies directed to confirmation of the original CoI three-factor structure (Yang & Su, 2021). The authors note that these studies have largely revalidated the CoI instrument through either exploratory, confirmatory, or both statistical methods. Parenthetically I note that this post updates previous posts where I have discussed significant contributions to refining and revising the CoI instrument (Editorial 20; Editorial 31). Furthermore, before addressing the primary focus of the Yang and Su (2021) study, I want to emphasize that this article provides an excellent reference for the extensive research over the last decade directed at confirming the validity of the three-factor structure of the CoI theoretical framework. The article also notes that systematic reviews of studies on the validation of the CoI instrument can be found in Kozan and Caskurlu (2018) and Stenbom (2018).

The purpose of the Yang and Su (2021) research was to conduct a construct-validation study of the CoI instrument. The authors state that most studies have used a correlated-factor model that cannot fully describe the CoI framework in that they do “not include an intersection of all three presences” (p. 26). They correctly observe that this is unfortunate since the CoI framework emphasizes the importance of the intersection of the three presences. This is an important observation as a behavioral understanding of the CoI framework best revealed at the intersection of the presences. Moreover, meaningful interpretation of these areas of overlap provides not only an understanding of a community of inquiry but a first test of a theoretical validation. For example, focusing on the intersection of cognitive and teaching presences provided the stimulus to develop the shared metacognitive construct that is consistent with its foundational premise and essential to a practical application of the framework. Similarly, the other intersections are consistent with theoretical expectations of collaborative learning such as the importance of setting climate for open communication and collaborative inquiry. The bottom line is that more attention should be directed to the intersection of the three presences. This approach offers the greatest opportunity to understand and develop collaborative inquiry.

Without getting into the statistical weeds of the Yang and Su study, they found the bifactor structure showed the best fit. The relevance is that this model “incorporated the overlap of each pair of presences and the intersection of all three presences ... thus indicating the bifactor structure [is] more aligned with the CoI framework” (p.27). However, further psychometric analysis suggested that cognitive presence “items were probably not measuring cognitive presence effectively [and] the CP items should probably be revised, with the support of subject matter experts, to cover cognitive presence more in-depth.” (p. 35). Notwithstanding this insight, the authors concluded that the bifactor model provided “are liable and valid representation of the CoI instrument and a fuller representation of the CoI theoretical framework” (p. 36).

In conclusion, the CoI questionnaire has proven to be an essential tool to the study and practice of communities of inquiry. The takeaway here should be a further interest in refining this instrument for the purposes of researching and implementing effective communities of inquiry. Constructive criticism should not discount the importance and strength of the CoI questionnaire. Instead, hopefully this and similar research will encourage continued development of a more refined version of the CoI survey instrument.



REFERENCES

Kozan, K. (2016). The incremental predictive validity of teaching,cognitive and social presence on cognitive load. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 11-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.05.003

Yang, H., & Su, J. (2021). A Construct Revalidation of the Community of Inquiry Survey: Empirical Evidence for a General Factor Under a Bifactor Structure. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(4), 22-40. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/5587/5610

Stenbom, S. (2018). A systematic review of the community of inquiry survey. The Internet and Higher Education, 39, 22-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.06.001




CONTRIBUTE A RESPONDING EDITORIAL


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

D. Randy Garrison
Professor Emeritus, University of Calgary
D. Randy Garrison is professor emeritus at the University of Calgary.Dr. Garrison has published extensively on teaching and learning in adult, higher and distance education contexts. He has authored, co-authored or edited twelve books and well over 100 refereed articles/chapters.His recent books are Thinking Collaboratively: Learning in a Community of Inquiry (2016) and E-Learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice (3rd Edition) (2017); for which he won second place for the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Division of Distance Learning Book Award, 2017.


EDITORIAL KEYWORDS



RECENT EDITORIALS

Faculty Development and the Community of Inquiry
D. Randy Garrison
May 6, 2022
The focus ofthis short post is to highlight the essential role of faculty development and therole of the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework in supporting faculty movingto online and

Automatic Detection of Social Presence
D. Randy Garrison
March 4, 2022
Several years ago, I provided an introduction to the role of learning analytics in the context of the Community of Inquiry framework and how we might facilitate collaborative learning through the automatic monitoring of discourse and tracking the ...

CoI Instrument Validation
D. Randy Garrison
November 25, 2021
My goal here is to simply draw your attention to a study that provides a comprehensive overview of Community of Inquiry (CoI) instrument studies directed to confirmation of the original CoI three-factor structure (

CoI Questionnaire: 2.0?
D. Randy Garrison
July 13, 2021
My goal in this post is to draw attention to an important study that used advanced statistical techniques to analyze the CoI questionnaire (Abbitt & Boone, 2021). While exploring statistical anomalies may not be front of mind for most

Purposeful and Social Interaction
D. Randy Garrison
April 22, 2021
In a previous editorial I had addressed the challenge of designing a collaborative inquiry that goes beyond simple interaction to achieve deep and meaningful learning ( Editorial 18
The Community of Inquiry is a project of the Centre for Distance Education at Athabasca University, researchers of the Community of Inquiry framework, and members of the CoI community.