Cognitive Presence

The cognitive presence facilitates the sharing of meaning and understanding in a community of learning through discourse. Comparing the frequency for the cognitive presence in forums and mind maps, it is possible to note the mind maps had a larger total frequency, even though the distribution of that frequency among different categories is not always higher. Below, we explain details for each category.

The descriptors of cognitive presence (triggering event, exploration, integration and resolution) are based in the model of Practical Inquiry (Dewey, 1933). So, based on the nature of both activities (journaling and brainstorming), regarding the cognitive presence, we anticipated a large frequency of triggering events, and a lower number of exploration, integration, and resolution. The reason for this is that the tasks mainly asked for TCs to comment about insights they had while reading and viewing the materials, and make comments on their peers’ posts. Our results, as shown in Tables 1 and 2, confirmed our

expectations. However, there were also large frequencies in exploration, as we explain below.

2.4.4.1 Triggering Event.

This phase is associated with evocative and inductive practice, and it is present when students conceptualize a problem or issue (Garrison, 2017). Indicators for triggering event are recognizing the problem and expressing a sense of puzzlement. This is an example of a triggering event comment from the forums: “I began to wonder about my own education in mathematics. Is it possible that it wasn't the math I hated, but the way it was taught?”

For the mind maps, other than comments as the one above, we also included posts that contained images or videos that triggered students’ reflection about a topic (Figure 4). As shown in Tables 1 and 2, the triggering event had the highest frequency of all

categories. This is consistent with the nature of the activities, where TCs were required to write about their experience, insights and thoughts about a topic. It is also possible to note that, the frequency for each week both in mind maps and online forums is close to the amount of participants (143), which shows that many of the threads in the forums started with a triggering event, or that each student posted a triggering idea in the mind maps. This is expected within the CoI framework.

Figure 4. A sample of triggering event in the mind maps

2.4.4.2 Exploration.

The phase of exploration consists of a search for additional information (Garrison, 2017). Indicators of this phase are: “brainstorming ideas; offering supportive or contradictory ideas and concepts; soliciting narratives of relevant perspectives or experiences; and eliciting comments or responses as to the value of the information or ideas” (p. 66). Below is an example of an exploration comment from our case study:

You are quite right when you say that this lesson crosses a multitude of

mathematical strands. I would also like to add; the lesson also crosses disciplines. It touches on literacy, especially oral communication and not to mention reinforces peer work which is an essential social and academic skill. (Forum Comment) From table 1 it is possible to note that the exploration phase in the online forums had the second highest frequency in the cognitive presence. However, it is also noticeable how the frequencies dropped each week. For the mind maps, frequencies were slightly higher than for forums in exploration. However, the scenario is similar as the one observed in the forums: frequencies dropped as weeks progressed. We infer that as weeks went by, TCs gave priority to publish their original post (triggering event), and did not explored as much into their peers’ posts. This is consistent with the total frequencies for cognitive

presence, which also lowered week by week. We speculate that as time progressed, TCs lost the thrill and novelty they had when doing the activity for the first time in Week 2.

2.4.4.3 Integration.

The integration phase is considered a tentative connection of ideas (Garrison, 2017). In this phase, indicators are the convergence or integration of information, synthesizing, and providing a rationale, justification or solution. Below is an example of an integration comment from our case study:

Now thinking about it, some students may not like to participate as much as others do due to anxiousness, shyness or just not as social as others. […] I like your notion of giving the students options on if they want to participate or not. […] As a teacher, I may make my students do both types of work independent and group work and then let them choose which they feel more comfortable with, that way the can experience both and can get a sense of what type of learner they could be. (Forum Comment)

As shown in Table 1, in the forums frequencies for integration were low if compared to triggering and exploration. Comments as the one above where TCs would continue to build up on an initial idea after a mere exploration were rare in our sample. We attribute this to the nature of the activity which required very little teaching presence, so the higher-order inquiry was difficult to foster only by the TCs participating in the forums. As for the mind maps, besides comments as the one above, we included in this category the organized clusters of interrelated ideas (Figure 5). This kind of composition was very common in our mind maps and this resulted in a slightly higher frequency of integration than the one observed for online forums.

Figure 5. A sample of integration in the mind maps.

2.4.4.4 Resolution.

Resolution is considered to require a deductive test or application of a solution (Garrison, 2017). Indicators are applying, testing or defending a solution. Although rare in our case study, both for forums and mind maps (see Tables 1 and 2), comments as the one below could be found within the sample. In this particular group, TCs were discussing the use of a string as a manipulative to teach area and perimeter.

I taught a 2D shape unit to kindergarten students, for one activity I used a string as a manipulative for students to make 2D shapes...they loved it! This hands on/ physical manipulation can be used inside/ outside and in groups or individually. It is amazing to watch young children process and manipulate one piece of string into different shapes. (Forum Comment)