Category: Post 2

Posted on

OTL 301 – post 2

 

My view of effective practice has not changed much as I’ve moved through this material. Having studied at Athabasca U. for both a Masters and now a doctorate degree I have been exposed to the COI framework on multiple occasions and have taken courses with some of the theorists attached to it.  I feel that my approach to teaching (online, blended and/or in-person) is guided by various aspects and principles of the COI framework. However, I also have a few arguments with this theoretical standpoint.

Some of the basic principles such as open, honest communication to build trust seem to be principles that can work in many different scenarios.

Posted on

otl 201_post 2. presencing the social

In thinking about my intro post, I can foresee that it might both increase and decrease social presence – or maybe, the hypothesized ‘benefits’ of social presence. For example, seeing my picture, and assuming that I am a white male might  generate a negative reaction for some, which would still imply ‘social presence’ – however, is it good?

One of the challenges I see with theories of ‘social’ presence in the online learning world is that ‘social’ presences online and the tools to generate that presence, change rapidly. For example, a student (or instructor) of the millennial generation may have multiple social media platforms that could broadcast their presence.

Or, many academics have multiple published papers and books, that in turn generate a ‘social presence’. Sometimes when theories seem to fit too easily, it might mean there are some potential weaknesses. Like other theories, there are both potential advantages and disadvantages to adopting various theoretical paradigms such as COI, and related theoretical components, such as ‘social presence’.

 

Posted on

Post 2 – some skepticism

  • What questions would you like to explore on the topic of cognitive presence?

My explorations of the COI model and theorizing has left me with many more questions than learnings. Like many models, especially those trying to quantify and evaluate processes of the brain (e.g. critical thinking) – I find them lacking in various components. For example, I have found the COI model and explorations of cognitive presence are lacking significantly in explorations of multiple cultures, and other epistemologies and ontologies. The COI model is built upon a social constructivism foundation – a set of theories that are contested and debatable.

Yet, there are some aspects of the theories of cognitive presence that I also find useful. Like many things, I do not see it as as an either/or. However, I am still skeptical of the statement provided in the final sentence: “We believe such an approach is capable of refining the concept and model presented here to the point where it can be a reliable and useful instructional tool for realizing higher-order educational outcomes.”

I find this hard to fathom when this set of theorizing has not been explored in, for example, communities of Indigenous learners, or, English as a second (or third, or fourth, etc.) language – especially if it’s frequently been built upon content analysis as the methodology for confirmation. I have found too much of the COI literature to be promotional, as opposed to engaging in critical thinking, which it purports to explore and essentially quantify. We humans know so little about brain function and processes – and some of the theorizing and writing on this subject seems to stretch what ‘we know’ –  a little too far for my comfort. Thus leaving me with many questions to explore in relation to theories of cognitive presence.