Teaching Engineering Online: Examining Instructor Practices Through the Community of Inquiry Framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v30i1.4856Keywords:
case study, community of inquiry, quality online education, teaching engineering onlineAbstract
A growing number of engineering instructors, previously accustomed to face-to-face teaching, have transitioned to online instruction, particularly after the pandemic. The teaching strategies used have become more critical in ensuring the design and delivery of quality online courses. Thus, there is a need to examine engineering instructors’ approaches to designing and delivering quality online engineering courses to enhance online teaching. This study examined the online teaching practices of engineering instructors and whether and how cognitive, social, and teaching presence were integrated into their online learning environments. In this case study, the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework was used to guide the research design. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven engineering instructors whose courses received Quality Matters (QM) certification across the United States. The findings revealed similarities and differences in how instructors teach online and establish teacher, cognitive, and social presence. Social presence, particularly group cohesion and affective expression emerged as an area that received comparatively less emphasis in the online teaching environment. While similarities exist across instructors, the limited emphasis on social presence suggests a need for further exploration and support in this aspect of online instruction.
References
ABET (2023). Accredited Programs. Retrieved November 26, 2023, from https://amspub.abet.org/aps/online-search
Adam, M. S., Abd Hamid, J., Khatibi, A., & Azam, S. F. (2025). Investigating the effects of direct instruction and facilitated discourse on social and cognitive presence in blended learning. Online Learning, 29(1), 89–108. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v29i1.4182
Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Understanding cognitive presence in an online and blended community of inquiry: Assessing outcomes and processes for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 233–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01029.x
Akyol, Z., Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). The impact of course duration on the development of a community of inquiry. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(3), 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820902809147
Anderson, T., Liam, R., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875
Arbaugh, J. B., Bangert, A., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2010). Subject matter effects and the community of inquiry (CoI) framework: An exploratory study. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.006
Arena, S. L., Lee, Y. W., Verbridge, S. S., Muelenaer, A., VandeVord, P. J., & Arena, C. B. (2021). Web conferencing facilitation within problem-based learning biomedical engineering courses. Biomedical Engineering Education, 1, 127–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43683-020-00020-1
Baytiyeh, H. (2018). Progreen online engineering diploma in the Middle East: Assessment of the educational experience. European Journal of Engineering Education, 43(2), 264–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2017.1359240
Belanger, E., Bartels, C., & She, J. (2021, August). Challenges and strategies in remote design collaboration during pandemic: A case study in engineering education. International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2021-68485
Beneroso, D., & Robinson, J. (2022). Online project-based learning in engineering design: Supporting the acquisition of design skills. Education for Chemical Engineers, 38, 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2021.09.002
Borup, J., West, R. E., & Graham, C. R. (2012). Improving online social presence through asynchronous video. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(3), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.11.001
Cabrera, I., Villalon, J., & Chavez, J. (2017). Blending communities and team-based learning in a programming course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 60(4), 288–295. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2017.2698467
Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education (n.d.). Retrieved April 12, 2024, from https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/
Cech, E. A. (2018). The (mis)framing of social justice: why ideologies of depoliticization and meritocracy hinder engineers’ ability to think about social injustices. In J. C. Lucena (Ed.), Engineering Education for Social Justice (pp. 67–84). Springer.
Chen, Y., Lei, J., & Cheng, J. (2019). What if online students take on the responsibility: students’ cognitive presence and peer facilitation techniques. Online Learning, 23(1), 37–61. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i1.1348
Chernosky, J., Ausburn, J., & Curtis, R. (2021). Students as consumers: Retaining engineering students by designing learner-centric courses of value. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 69(2), 100–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2020.1786342
d’Alessio, M. A., Lundquist, L. L., Schwartz, J. J., Pedone, V., Pavia, J., & Fleck, J. (2019). Social presence enhances student performance in an online geology course but depends on instructor facilitation. Journal of Geoscience Education, 67(3), 222–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2019.1580179
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00392.x
Delmas, P. M. (2017). Using VoiceThread to create community in online learning. TechTrends, 61(6), 595–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0195-z
Douglas, K. A., Johnston, A. C., Martin, J. P., Short, T., & Soto‐Pérez, R. A. (2022). How engineering instructors supported students during emergency remote instruction: A case comparison. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 30(3), 934–955. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22495
Dunlap, J. C., Verma, G., & Johnson, H. L. (2016). Presence+ Experience: A framework for the purposeful design of presence in online courses. TechTrends, 60, 145–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0029-4
Eggleston, A. G., & Rabb, R. J. (2021, July). Faculty development and instructional design through a quality matters tool for online and hybrid course assessment. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Virtual Annual Conference. https://peer.asee.org/faculty-development-and-instructional-design-through-a-quality-matters-tool-for-online-and-hybrid-course-assessment
Faulconer, E. K., & Chamberlain Jr, D. J. (2022). A case study of community of inquiry presences and cognitive load in asynchronous online STEM courses. Online Learning Journal, 26(3), 46. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i3.3386
Fiock, H. (2020). Designing a community of inquiry in online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 135–153. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.3985
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7¬–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071
Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2
Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001
Garrison, D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2013). The community of inquiry theoretical framework. In M. Cleveland-Innes, D.R. Garrison, & N. Vaughan (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 122–138). Routledge.
Garrison, D. R. (2017). E-Learning in the 21st century: A community of inquiry framework for research and practice (3rd ed.). Routledge/Taylor and Francis.
Garrison, D. (2023). CoI effectiveness and future development. The Community of Inquiry. Retrieved June 4, 2025, from https://www.thecommunityofinquiry.org/editorial40
Gorsky, P., Caspi, A., Antonovsky, A., Blau, I., & Mansur, A. (2010). The relationship between academic discipline and dialogic behavior in open university course forums. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 11(2), 49–72. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v11i2.820
Graham, R. (2018). The global state of the art in engineering education. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Report.
Gürdür Broo, D., Kaynak, O., & Sait, S. M. (2022). Rethinking engineering education at the age of industry 5.0. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 25, 100311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100311
Hodges, C. B., Moore, S., Lockee, B. B., Trust, T., & Bond, M. A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning
Honig, C. A., & Salmon, D. (2021). Learner presence matters: A learner-centered exploration into the Community of Inquiry framework. Online Learning, 25(2), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v25i2.2237
Hosler, K. A., & Arend, B. D. (2012). The importance of course design, feedback, and facilitation: Student perceptions of the relationship between teaching presence and cognitive presence. Educational Media International, 49(3), 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2012.738014
Hu, D., Zwickl, B. M., & Carusone, C. (2019). Impact of industry experience on faculty teaching practices in STEM. In Y. Cao, S. Wolf, & A. Bennett (Eds.), Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings (pp. 239–244). American Association of Physics Teachers. https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2019.pr.Hu
Jaksic, N. I. (2021, July). Pair-to-pair peer learning: comparative analysis of face-to-face and online laboratory experiences. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Virtual Annual Conference. https://strategy.asee.org/pair-to-pair-peer-learning-comparative-analysis-of-face-to-face-and-online-laboratory-experiences
Jo, I., Park, Y., & Lee, H. (2017). Three interaction patterns on asynchronous online discussion behaviours: A methodological comparison. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(2), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12168
Kanuka, H., & Garrison, D. R. (2004). Cognitive presence in online learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15, 21–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02940928
Kanyarusoke, K. E., & Uziak, J. (2011). Spreadsheets: The ideal tool for distance learning in engineering education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 19(2), 216–223. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.20235
Kim, G. C., & Gurvitch, R. (2020). Online education research adopting the community of inquiry framework: A systematic review. Quest, 72(4), 395–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2020.1761843
Kim, M., McFeetors, P., Jin, Q., Rose, K., Carey, J., Miller-Young, J., Jamieson, M., & Adeeb, S. (2023). “We learn things to solve real-life problems”: Understanding how nature of engineering beliefs situate developing pedagogical content knowledge in a modular engineering education professional development program. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(3). https://doi.org/ 10.53761/1.20.3.07
Koclar, S., Bozkurt, A., & Goru Dogan, T. (2021). Engineering through distance education in the time of the fourth industrial revolution: Reflections from three decades of peer reviewed studies. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29(4), 931–949. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22367
Kovanović, V., Gašević, D., Joksimović, S., Hatala, M., & Adesope, O. (2015). Analytics of communities of inquiry: Effects of learning technology use on cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 74–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.06.002
Kozan, K. (2016). A comparative structural equation modeling investigation of the relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence. Online Learning, 20(3), 210–227. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i3.654
Lim, J., & Richardson, J. C. (2022). Considering how disciplinary differences matter for successful online learning through the Community of Inquiry lens. Computers & Education, 187, 104551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104551
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
Lingard, R., & Barkataki, S. (2011). Teaching teamwork in engineering and computer science. In 2011 Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. F1C-1–F1C-5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2011.6143000
Lowenthal, P. R., & Dunlap, J. C. (2020). Social presence and online discussions: A mixed method investigation. Distance Education, 41(4), 490–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1821603
Lönngren, J., Direito, I., Tormey, R., & Huff, J. L. (2023). Emotions in engineering education. International handbook of engineering education research. Routledge.
Lönngren, J., Direito, I., Tormey, R., & Huff, J. L. (2023). Emotions in engineering education. In A. Johri (Ed.), International handbook of engineering education research (pp. 156–182). Routledge.
Maclaren, P. (2018). How is that done? Student views on resources used outside the engineering classroom. European Journal of Engineering Education, 43(4), 620–637. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2017.1396445
Majeski, R. A., Stover, M., & Valais, T. (2018). The community of inquiry and emotional presence. Adult Learning, 29(2), 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159518758696
Mann, M. M., & Tan, G. (2021). Recent strategies for improving undergraduate engineering education: A review. Proceedings of the ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference. ASEE Peer. https://peer.asee.org/recent-strategies-for-improving-undergraduate-engineering-education-a-review.pdf
Mathes, J. (2019). Global quality in online, open, flexible and technology enhanced education: An analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. International Council for Open and Distance Education. https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/read/global-quality-in-online-open-flexible-and-technology-enhanced-education/
McNeil, J. C., & Ohland, M. W. (2015). Engineering faculty perspectives on the nature of quality teaching. Faculty Scholarship. 407. https://ir.library.louisville.edu/faculty/407
McNeill, L., Rice, M., & Wright, V. (2019). A confirmatory factor analysis of a teaching presence instrument in an online computer applications course. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 22(4), 1–16.
Moore, R. L., & Miller, C.N. (2022). Fostering presence in online courses: A systematic review (2008–2020). Online Learning, 26(1), pp. 130–149. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.3071
Murphy, A. R., Moseley, E., Weaver, M., & Linsey, J. S. (2023). The impact of facilitation during idea generation in engineering design. Proceedings of the International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2023-113583
Odom, P. W., Merzdorf, H. E., Montalvo, F. J., & Davis, J. M. (2019). Analysis of student engagement data from U.S. News & World Report regarding online graduate engineering programs. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. https://peer.asee.org/analysis-of-student-engagement-data-from-u-s-news-world-report-regarding-online-graduate-engineering-programs.pdf
Olesova, L., Sadaf, A., Boicu, M., Foxwell, H. J., Pham, T. L. B., & Rytikova, I. (2024). Understanding the influence of program of study and age on shared metacognition within the community of inquiry in stem education. International Association for Development of the Information Society.
Our Quality Framework. (n.d.). Online Learning Consortium. Retrieved October 22, 2023, from https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/about/quality-framework-five-pillars/
Ossiannilsson, E., Williams, K., Camilleri, A. F., & Brown, M. (2015). Quality models in online and open education around the globe. State of the art and recommendations. International Council for Open and Distance Education. https://www.icde.org/publication/quality-models-in-online-and-open-education-around-the-globe/
Courses Currently QM-Certified. (n.d.). Quality Matters. Retrieved September 22, 2023, from https://www.qualitymatters.org/reviews-certifications/qm-certified-courses
Padayachee, P., & Campbell, A. L. (2022). Supporting a mathematics community of inquiry through online discussion forums: Towards design principles. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(1), 35–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1985177
Pierson, A. E., Brady, C. E., & Lee, S. J. (2023). Emotional configurations in STEM classrooms: Braiding feelings, sensemaking, and practices in extended investigations. Science Education, 107(5), 1126–1162. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21799
Purwandari, E. P., Junus, K., & Santoso, H. B. (2022). Exploring e-learning Community of Inquiry framework for engineering education. International Journal of Instruction, 15(1), 619–632. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15135a
Richardson, J. C., & Ice, P. (2010). Investigating students’ level of critical thinking across instructional strategies in online discussions. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.009
Richardson, J. C., Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Ice, P., Swan, K. P., Garrison, D. R. (2012). Using the community of inquiry framework to inform effective instructional design. In L. Moller, J. Huett (Eds.), The next generation of distance education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1785-9_7
Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.001
Richardson, J. C., Koehler, A. A., Tagare, D., Urena-Rodriguez, L., Xu, Q., Zhang, Z., ... & Duha, M. S. U. (2024). Community of Inquiry design decisions across disciplines. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-024-09417-1
Rutz, E., & Ehrlich, S. (2016, June). Increasing learner engagement in online learning through use of interactive feedback: Results of a pilot study. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). https://peer.asee.org/increasing-learner-engagement-in-online-learning-through-use-of-interactive-feedback-results-of-a-pilot-study.pdf
Rutz, E., & Ehrlich, S. (2016, June). Increasing learner engagement in online learning through use of interactive feedback: Results of a pilot study. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). https://peer.asee.org/increasing-learner-engagement-in-online-learning-through-use-of-interactive-feedback-results-of-a-pilot-study.pdf
Rutz, E., & Ehrlich, S. (2016). Increasing learner engagement in online learning through use of interactive feedback: Results of a pilot study. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. https://peer.asee.org/increasing-learner-engagement-in-online-learning-through-use-of-interactive-feedback-results-of-a-pilot-study.pdf
Sadaf, A., & Olesova, L. (2017). Enhancing cognitive presence in online case discussions with questions based on the practical inquiry model. American Journal of Distance Education, 31(1), 56–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2017.1267525
Sadaf, A., Wu, T., & Martin, F. (2021). Cognitive presence in online learning: A systematic review of empirical research from 2000 to 2019. Computers and Education Open, 2, 100050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100050
Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Cognitive presence and online learner engagement: A cluster analysis of the community of inquiry framework. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21, 199–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-009-9024-5
Shea, P., Hayes, S., Vickers, J., Gozza-Cohen, M., Uzuner, S., Mehta, R., ... & Rangan, P. (2010). A re-examination of the community of inquiry framework: Social network and content analysis. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.002
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
Skilling, K., & Stylianides, G. J. (2020). Using vignettes in educational research: a framework for vignette construction. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(5), 541–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2019.1704243
Stake, R. E. (2013). Multiple case study analysis. Guilford Press.
Szeto, E. (2015). Community of Inquiry as an instructional approach: What effects of teaching, social and cognitive presences are there in blended synchronous learning and teaching? Computers & Education, 81, 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.015
Tekmen-Araci, Y., & Mann, L. (2019). Instructor approaches to creativity in engineering design education. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 233(2), 395–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/095440621875879
Turk, M., Heddy, B. C., & Danielson, R. W. (2022). Teaching and social presences supporting basic needs satisfaction in online learning environments: How can presences and basic needs happily meet online? Computers & Education, 180, 104432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104432
Türel, Y. K. (2016). Relationships between students’ perceived team learning experiences, team performances, and social abilities in a blended course setting. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.07.001
Valverde-Berrocoso, J., Garrido-Arroyo, M. D. C., Burgos-Videla, C., & Morales-Cevallos, M. B. (2020). Trends in educational research about e-learning: A systematic literature review (2009–2018). Sustainability, 12(12), 5153. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125153
Varonis, E. M. (2014). Most courses are not born digital: An overview of the Quality Matters peer review process for online course design. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 31(4), 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1108/CWIS-09-2013-0053
Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. R. (2005). Creating cognitive presence in a blended faculty development community. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.11.001
Wang, H. (2018, July). Improving an online STEM course through Quality Matters certification-A case study. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Conference. https://peer.asee.org/improving-an-online-stem-course-through-quality-matters-certification-a-case-study
Wang, Y. (2022). Effects of teaching presence on learning engagement in online courses. Distance Education, 43(1), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2022.2029350
Zhang, H., Lin, L., Zhan, Y., & Ren, Y. (2016). The impact of teaching presence on online engagement behaviors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(7), 887–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116648171
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Secil Akinci-Ceylan, Evrim Baran
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
