Promoting Critical Reading using Google Tools – a Community of Inquiry Approach
Main Article Content
Abstract
Creating a community of learning can enhance critical reading in a classroom environment. Task design plays a critical role in the effectiveness of this process. This paper presents a case study of a face-to-face literature course that used a host of Google tools to create such a community. The Community of Inquiry (CoI) principles of teacher presence, cognitive presence, and social presence have been applied to analyze the task design using Google tools. Data collected from coursework, surveys, and interviews provide evidence that tasks using Google tools can promote community building and critical reading.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors contributing to the Irish Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning retain the copyright of their article and at the same time agree to publish their articles under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, for any purpose, even commercially, under the condition that appropriate credit is given, that a link to the license is provided, and that you indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
References
Anderson, T., Liam, R., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context.
Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. P. (2008). Developing a CoIinstrument: Testing a measure of the CoIframework using a multi-institutional sample. The internet and higher education, 11(3), 133-136.
Benson, P., & Voller, P. (2014). Autonomy and independence in language learning. Routledge.
Bloom, B. S.; Engelhart, M. D.; Furst, E. J.; Hill, W. H.; Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company.
Celentin, P. (2007). Online education: Analysis of interaction and knowledge building patterns among foreign language teachers. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 21(3), 39-58.
Chavez, C. (2008). Conceptualizing from the inside: Advantages, complications, and
demands on insider positionality. The Qualitative Report, 13, 474-494.
Cheung, R., & Vogel, D. (2014). Activity theory as a design framework for collaborative learning using Google Applications technology (pp. 140-149).
Cleveland-Innes, M., & Campbell, P. (2012). Emotional presence, learning, and the online learning environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), 269-292.
Darabi, A., Arrastia, M. C., Nelson, D. W., Cornille, T., & Liang, X. (2011). Cognitive presence in asynchronous online learning: A comparison of four discussion strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(3), 216-227.
Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12, 43-52.
Gambrell, L. B. (1996). Creating classroom cultures that foster reading motivation. The reading teacher, 50(1), 14.
Garrison, D. R. (2003). Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: The role of reflective inquiry, self-direction and metacognition. Elements of quality online education: Practice and direction, 4(1), 47-58.
Garrison, D. R. (2006). Online collaboration principles. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(1), 25-34.
Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the CoIframework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157-172.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2010). The first decade of the CoIframework: A retrospective. The internet and higher education, 13(1), 5-9.
Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D., & Gijselaers, W. (2014). A dynamic analysis of the interplay between asynchronous and synchronous communication in online learning: The impact of motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(1), 30-50.
Grant, A. (2016). How to build a culture of originality. Harvard Business Review, 94(3), 86-94.
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy in Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: OUP.
Harbour, K. E., Evanovich, L. L., Sweigart, C. A., & Hughes, L. E. (2015). A brief review of effective teaching practices that maximize student engagement. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 59(1), 5-13.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1045988X.2014.919136
Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of educational research, 70(2), 151-179.
Honebein, P. C. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments. Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design, 11-24.
Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., ... & Järvenoja, H. (2015). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125-142.
Kent, M. (2016). Adding to the mix: Students use of Facebook groups and blackboard discussion forums in higher education. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal (KM&EL), 8(3), 444-463.
Li, Q. & Crichton, S. (2008). Modeling the model: Encouraging communities of practice. In J. Salmons & L. Wilson (eds.), Handbook of Research on Electronic Collaboration and Organizational Synergy.
Rockinson-Szapkiw, A., Wendt, J., Whighting, M., & Nisbet, D. (2016). The predictive relationship among the CoIframework, perceived learning and online, and graduate students’ course grades in online synchronous and asynchronous courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3).
Seyler, D. U. (2000). The Reading Context: developing college reading skills. Allyn & Bacon.
Schumm, J. S., & Post, S. (1997). Executive learning: Successful strategies for college reading and studying. Prentice Hall.
Sierra, A. M., & Frodden, C. (2017). Promoting student autonomy through self-assessment and learning strategies. HOW Journal, 10(1), 133-166.
Sweller, J. (1999) Instructional design in technical areas. Australian Education Review No. 43. Victoria: Acer Press
Wallace, M., & Wray, A. (2016). Critical reading and writing for postgraduates. Sage.
Warner, A. G. (2016). Developing a CoIin a face-to-face class: How an online learning framework can enrich traditional classroom practice. Journal of Management Education, 40(4), 432-452.