Searching for "online engagement"
Does Presence Equal Progress? Tracking Engagement in Online Schools
Embracing online school requires a new mindset, as well as new criteria for measuring academic success—measures that take into account the nature of teaching and learning online, the types of students online schools serve, and the unique ways in which those students learn.
Teachers interact with students during synchronous learning sessions, and they connect one-on-one through calls, online chats, texts, and interactive whiteboard sessions.
Accountability measures must adapt to and reflect a self-paced, competency-based learning environment. A traditional one-size-fits-all rubric does not translate cleanly with respect to online schools.
more on online engagement in this IMS blog
per SCSU faculty request, please have compiled literature (books and peer-reviewed articles) on:
Here some names who are well regarded in the community of online learning as specialists in online discussions:
- Susan Ko
- Palloff and Pratt:
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/159169.Keith_Pratt (not sure if you are a goodreads user, I am)
the most recent peer-reviewed literature on keywords: “engag*” + “student*” + “online” = 13K+ titles for the period 2010-2016:
and about 20 articles from the link above with the general search:
A Digital Badging Dataset Focused on Performance, Engagement and Behavior-Related Variables from Observations in Web-Based University Courses By: McDaniel, Rudy; Fanfarelli, Joseph R.. British Journal of Educational Technology, v46 n5 p937-941 Sep 2015. (EJ1071635)
A Student-Centered Guest Lecturing: A Constructivism Approach to Promote Student Engagement By: Li, Lei; Guo, Rong. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, v15 Oct 2015. (EJ1060070)
Full Text from ERIC
Creating Effective Student Engagement in Online Courses: What Do Students Find Engaging? By: Dixson, Marcia D.. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, v10 n2 p1-13 Jun 2010. (EJ890707)
Full Text from ERIC
Effects From Student Engagement Online. ASHE Higher Education Report. Nov2014, Vol. 40 Issue 6, p67-73. 7p. DOI: 10.1002/aehe.20018.
Engaging Students in Online Courses By: Jacobs, Pearl. Research in Higher Education Journal, v26 Oct 2014. (EJ1055325)
Full Text from ERIC
Engaging Students via Social Media: Is It Worth the Effort? By: Mostafa, Rania B.. Journal of Marketing Education, v37 n3 p144-159 Dec 2015. (EJ1080980)
Engaging Students with Social Media By: Bal, Anjali S.; Grewal, Dhruv; Mills, Adam. Journal of Marketing Education, v37 n3 p190-203 Dec 2015. (EJ1081047)
HOW TO BETTER ENGAGE ONLINE STUDENTS WITH ONLINE STRATEGIES. By: BRITT, DR. MARGARET. College Student Journal. Fall2015, Vol. 49 Issue 3, p399-404. 6p.
Instructor scaffolding for interaction and students’ academic engagement in online learning: Mediating role of perceived online class goal structures. By: Cho, Moon-Heum; Cho, YoonJung. Internet & Higher Education. Apr2014, Vol. 21, p25-30. 6p. DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.008.
Measuring Student Engagement in an Online Program By: Bigatel, Paula; Williams, Vicki. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, v18 n2 Sum 2015. (EJ1065381)
Measuring Student Engagement in the Online Course: The Online Student Engagement Scale (OSE) By: Dixson, Marcia D.. Online Learning, v19 n4 Sep 2015. (EJ1079585)
Full Text from ERIC
On-Line Course Development: Engaging and Retaining Students By: Bruster, Benita G.. SRATE Journal, v24 n2 p1-7 Sum 2015. (EJ1083122)
Full Text from ERIC
Promoting Online Students’ Engagement and Learning in Science and Sustainability Preservice Teacher Education By: Tomas, Louisa; Lasen, Michelle; Field, Ellen. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, v40 n11 Article 5 Nov 2015. (EJ1083370)
Full Text from ERIC
Strengthening student engagement: what do students want in online courses? By: Chakraborty, Misha; Nafukho, Fredrick Muyia. European Journal of Training & Development. 2014, Vol. 38 Issue 9, p782-802. 21p. DOI: 10.1108/EJTD-11-2013-0123.
Student Engagement in Online Learning: What Works and Why. ASHE Higher Education Report. Nov2014, Vol. 40 Issue 6, p1-14. 14p. DOI: 10.1002/aehe.20018.
Student Perceptions of Twitters’ Effectiveness for Assessment in a Large Enrollment Online Course By: Rohr, Linda; Costello, Jane. Online Learning, v19 n4 Sep 2015. (EJ1079590)
Full Text from ERIC
Techniques for Student Engagement Online. ASHE Higher Education Report. Nov2014, Vol. 40 Issue 6, p37-66. 30p. DOI: 10.1002/aehe.20018.
The civic-social media disconnect: exploring perceptions of social media for engagement in the daily life of college students. By: Mihailidis, Paul. Information, Communication & Society. Oct2014, Vol. 17 Issue 9, p1059-1071. 13p. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.877054.
The Online University Classroom: One Perspective for Effective Student Engagement and Teaching in an Online Environment By: Carr, Marsha. Journal of Effective Teaching, v14 n1 p99-110 2014. (EJ1060450)
Full Text from ERIC
The Perils of a Lack of Student Engagement: Reflections of a “Lonely, Brave, and Rather Exposed” Online Instructor By: Stott, Philip. British Journal of Educational Technology, v47 n1 p51-64 Jan 2016. (EJ1086712)
The VIRI (Virtual, Interactive, Real-Time, Instructor-Led) Classroom: The Impact of Blended Synchronous Online Courses on Student Performance, Engagement, and Satisfaction By: Francescucci, Anthony; Foster, Mary. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, v43 n3 p78-91 2013. (EJ1018277)
Full Text from ERIC
More on “Classroom Discussion and Students Participation” in this IMS blog entry:
Faculty searching for survey[s] reflecting students’ feelings about the level of belonging to online community.
Drouin, M., & Vartanian, L. (2010). Students’ feelings of and desire for sense of community in face-to-face and online courses.(Survey). Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 11(3).
Keengwe, J., & Wilsey, B. (2012). Online graduate students’ perceptions of face-to-face classroom instruction.(Report). International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 8(3), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.4018/jicte.2012070106
Singh, A., & Srivastava, S. (2014). Development and Validation of Student Engagement Scale in the Indian Context. Global Business Review, 15(3), 505–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150914535137
Online Learning’s ‘Greatest Hits’
Robert Ubell (Columnist) Feb 20, 2019
dean of web-based distance learning
Learning Management Systems
Neck and neck for the top spot in the LMS academic vendor race are Blackboard—the early entry and once-dominant player—and coming-up quickly from behind, the relatively new contender, Canvas, each serving about 6.5 million students . The LMS market today is valued at $9.2 billion.
Digital Authoring Systems
Faced with increasingly complex communication technologies—voice, video, multimedia, animation—university faculty, expert in their own disciplines, find themselves technically perplexed, largely unprepared to build digital courses.
instructional designers, long employed by industry, joined online academic teams, working closely with faculty to upload and integrate interactive and engaging content.
nstructional designers, as part of their skillset, turned to digital authoring systems, software introduced to stimulate engagement, encouraging virtual students to interface actively with digital materials, often by tapping at a keyboard or touching the screen as in a video game. Most authoring software also integrates assessment tools, testing learning outcomes.
With authoring software, instructional designers can steer online students through a mixtape of digital content—videos, graphs, weblinks, PDFs, drag-and-drop activities, PowerPoint slides, quizzes, survey tools and so on. Some of the systems also offer video editing, recording and screen downloading options
As with a pinwheel set in motion, insights from many disciplines—artificial intelligence, cognitive science, linguistics, educational psychology and data analytics—have come together to form a relatively new field known as learning science, propelling advances in a new personalized practice—adaptive learning.
Of the top providers, Coursera, the Wall Street-financed company that grew out of the Stanford breakthrough, is the champion with 37 million learners, followed by edX, an MIT-Harvard joint venture, with 18 million. Launched in 2013, XuetangX, the Chinese platform in third place, claims 18 million.
Former Yale President Rick Levin, who served as Coursera’s CEO for a few years, speaking by phone last week, was optimistic about the role MOOCs will play in the digital economy. “The biggest surprise,” Levin argued, “is how strongly MOOCs have been accepted in the corporate world to up-skill employees, especially as the workforce is being transformed by job displacement. It’s the right time for MOOCs to play a major role.”
In virtual education, pedagogy, not technology, drives the metamorphosis from absence to presence, illusion into reality. Skilled online instruction that introduces peer-to-peer learning, virtual teamwork and other pedagogical innovations stimulate active learning. Online learning is not just another edtech product, but an innovative teaching practice. It’s a mistake to think of digital education merely as a device you switch on and off like a garage door.
more on online learning in this IMS blog
Gunawan, F. (2018). GAMIFICATION ANALYSIS AND IMPLEMENTATION IN ONLINE LEARNING. ICIC Express Letters, 12(12), 1195–1204.
Khan  has introduced the eight-dimensional elearning framework, a detailed self assessment instrument for institutions to evaluate the readiness and the opportunity of their e-learning classes to grow.
institutional, management, technological, pedagogical, ethical, interface design, resource support, and evaluation. Institutional refers to the administrative and academic part of the system. Management refers to the quality control, budget, and scheduling. Technological refers to the infrastructure, hardware, and software. Pedagogical refers to analysis, organization and learning strategies. Ethical refers to ethical, legal, and social and political influences. Interface design refers to the user interface, accessibility, and design content. Resource support refers to career services, journals, and online forums. Finally, the evaluation refers to the assessment of learners and educators.
gamification – definition
Modern gamification term was first introduced by
Nick Pelling in 2002 . Gamification is a concept that implements the game components
into the non-game contents such as education, marketing, administration, or even software
engineering . These components include points, badges, leaderboards, and quests.
Each of them serves the purpose to increase the level of user engagement in the learning
three components of engagement: cognitive, behavioral, and emotional .
I am collaborating on a project comparing the efficacy of two types of instructional videos. We are looking for literature that describes similar research. For example, a study might compare students who have watched voice-over ppt slides and students who have watched Khan-style videos, examining students’ content knowledge and/or some affective constructs. Alternatively, a study might compare the lengths or speeds of only one type of video.
Given the dearth of literature addressing these variables, I am hoping this community can help us uncover some additional research for our literature review. I am happy to compile and share everything that is shared with me over the coming days.
Jenay Robert, Ph.D. Research Project Manager Teaching and Learning with Technology The Pennsylvania State University
Clossen, A. S. (2018). Trope or Trap? Roleplaying Narratives and Length in Instructional Video. Information Technology & Libraries, 37(1), 27-38.
It is impossible to please everyone all the time—at least that is what survey results suggest. There are several takeaways to this study: Video length matters, especially as a consideration before the video is viewed. Timestamps should be included in video creation, or it is highly likely that the video will not be viewed. The video player is key here, as some video players include video length, while others do not. Videos that exceed four minutes are unlikely to be viewed unless they are required. Voice quality in narration matters. Although preference in type of voice inevitably varies, the actor’s voice is noticed over production value. It is important that the narrator speaks evenly and clearly. For brief how-to videos, there is a small preference for screencast instructional videos over a narrative roleplay scenario. The results of the survey indicate that roleplay videos should be wellproduced, brief, and high quality. However, what constitutes high quality is not very well established.15 Finally, screencast videos should include an example scenario, however brief, to ground the viewer in the task.
Lin, S., Aiken, J. M., Seaton, D. T., Douglas, S. S., Greco, E. F., Thoms, B. D., & Schatz, M. F. (2017). Exploring Physics Students’ Engagement with Online Instructional Videos in an Introductory Mechanics Course. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(2), 020138-1.
Kruse, N. B., & Veblen, K. K. (2012). Music teaching and learning online: Considering YouTube instructional videos. Journal Of Music, Technology & Education, 5(1), 77-87. doi:10.1386/jmte.5.1.77_1
Buzzetto-More, N. A. (2014). An Examination of Undergraduate Student’s Perceptions and Predilections of the Use of YouTube in the Teaching and Learning Process. Interdisciplinary Journal Of E-Learning & Learning Objects, 1017-32.
Chekuri, C., & Tiecheng, L. (2007). Extracting content from instructional videos by statistical modelling and classification. Pattern Analysis & Applications, 10(2), 69-81.
My note; too old as data but interesting as methodology
more on chunk theory in this IMS blog
specifically Adobe’s “findings” : http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/01/17/microlearning-instructional-design/
A Review of ‘Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online’
In Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online, Marwick and Lewis (2017) of the Data & Society Research Institute described the agents of media manipulation, their modus operandi, motivators, and how they’ve taken advantage of the vulnerability of online media. The researchers described the manipulators as right-wing extremists (RWE), also known as alt-right, who run the gamut from sexists (including male sexual conquest communities) to white nationalists to anti-immigration activists and even those who rebuke RWE identification but whose actions confer such classification. These manipulators rally behind a shared belief on online forums, blogs, podcasts, and social media through pranks or ruinous trolling anonymity, usurping participatory culture methods (networking, humor, mentorship) for harassment, and competitive cyber brigades that earn status by escalating bullying such as the sharing of a target’s private information.
Marwick and Lewis reported on how RWE groups have taken advantage of certain media tactics to gain viewers’ attention such as novelty and sensationalism, as well as their interactions with the public via social media, to manipulate it for their agenda. For instance, YouTube provides any individual with a portal and potential revenue to contribute to the media ecosystem. The researchers shared the example of the use of YouTube by conspiracy theorists, which can be used as fodder for extremist networks as conspiracies generally focus on loss of control of important ideals, health, and safety.
One tactic they’re using is to package their hate in a way that appeals to millennials. They use attention hacking to increase their status such as hate speech, which is later recanted as trickster trolling all the while gaining the media’s attention for further propagation
SHARED MODUS OPERANDI
Marwick and Lewis reported the following shared tactics various RWE groups use for online exploits:
- Ambiguity of persona or ideology,
- Baiting a single or community target’s emotions,
- Bots for amplification of propaganda that appears legitimately from a real person,
- “…Embeddedness in Internet culture… (p. 28),”
- Exploitation of young male rebelliousness,
- Hate speech and offensive language (under the guise of First Amendment protections),
- Irony to cloak ideology and/or skewer intended targets,
- Memes for stickiness of propaganda,
- Mentorship in argumentation, marketing strategies, and subversive literature in their communities of interest,
- Networked and agile groups,
- “…Permanent warfare… (p.12)” call to action,
- Pseudo scholarship to deceive readers,
- “…Quasi moral arguments… (p. 7)”
- Shocking images for filtering network membership,
- “Trading stories up the chain… (p. 38)” from low-level news outlets to mainstream, and
- Trolling others with asocial behavior.
teenagers in Veles, Macedonia who profited around 16K dollars per month via Google’s AdSense from Facebook post engagements
a long history of mistrust with mainstream media
If you’re a college instructor of communications or teach digital literacy as a librarian, see the corresponding syllabus for this article. It provides discussion questions and assignments for teaching students about media manipulation. To teach your students how to combat fake news online, see my post on Navigating Post-Truth Societies: Strategies, Resources, and Technologies.
more on fake news in this iMS blog
Online Students Need More Interaction with Peers and Teachers [#Infographic]
New research shows online learners are seeking more interaction, mobile device support and career services.
university administrators want to make sure their courses are up to standards and their students are supported.
A new report from the Learning House and Aslanian Market Research measures the opinions of 1,500 online students regarding everything from course satisfaction to study methods
institutions need to more clearly share the positive outcomes that come with completing degree and certificate programs online.”
online courses would be better if there was more contact and engagement.
more on online students in this IMS blog
Request from Plovdiv University faculty and teachers from the Plovdiv school district for literature on the issue of online reading for K4 students
- Putman, S. M. (2014). Exploring Dispositions Toward Online Reading: Analyzing the Survey of Online Reading Attitudes and Behaviors. Reading Psychology, 35(1), 1-31. doi:10.1080/02702711.2012.664250
Research continues to emerge that pro-vides us with information about the cognitive skills and strategies relevant to the proficient use of the new literacies of the Internet, but conclusions regarding dispositions and affective variables are notably limited. For this reason, it is important that researchers begin to focus concurrently on both areas to inform the educational community regarding how to meet the rapidly changing needs of our current and future students.
- Coiro, J. (2011). Talking About Reading as Thinking: Modeling the Hidden Complexities of Online Reading Comprehension. Theory Into Practice, 50(2), 107-115. doi:10.1080/00405841.2011.558435
- Hutchison, A. C., Woodward, L., & Colwell, J. (2016). What Are Preadolescent Readers Doing Online? An Examination of Upper Elementary Students’ Reading, Writing, and Communication in Digital Spaces. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(4), 435-454. doi:10.1002/rrq.146
he performance of 1,262 fourth and fifth graders on the Survey of Internet Use and Online Reading.
(c) despite reporting a preference for using the Internet, preadolescent students believe that it is more difficult to use it than to read a book, and believe that they would learn
more from a book than from the Internet;
- Huang, S., Orellana, P., & Capps, M. (2016). U.S. and Chilean College Students’ Reading Practices: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(4), 455-471. doi:10.1002/rrq.144
My note: this may seem peripheral study to the request in terms of age, but the cross-cultural study can help the Bulgarian research
Due to the impact of the Internet on reading resources, students’ reading patterns today are different from how they were in the past. College students’ reading practices have moved to different venues with the advent of Internet technology, and the modality has migrated to online reading.
- Naumann, J. (2015). A model of online reading engagement: Linking engagement, navigation, and performance in digital reading. Computers In Human Behavior, 53263-277. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.051
model of online reading engagement is outlined. This model proposes that online reading engagement predicts dedication in digital reading. Dedication in digital reading according to the model is reflected in task-adaptive navigation, and task-adaptive navigation predicts digital reading performance over and above print reading skill. Information engagement is assumed to positively predict task-adaptive navigation, while social engagement is assumed to negatively predict task-adaptive navigation. These hypotheses were tested using OECD PISA 2009 Digital Reading Assessment data from 17 countries and economies ( N = 29,395).
- Alvermann, D. E., & Harrison, C. (2016). Are Computers, Smartphones, and the Internet a Boon or a Barrier for the Weaker Reader?. Journal Of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(2), 221-225. doi:10.1002/jaal.569
If boys are spending nine hours a day media multitasking and prefer computers to books, shouldn’t they be successful at online learning? Online learning requires online reading, which means that boys, who are significantly poorer readers than girls in every nation in the world, may well be struggling to keep up. an online student may not have access to the learning that can come from group interaction, nor to the social and emotional support that can come from peers or a teacher, and the online reader could be heading for a learning apocalypse
- Park, H., & Kim, D. (2017). English language learners’ strategies for reading online texts: Influential factors and patterns of use at home and in school. International Journal Of Educational Research, 8263-74. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2017.01.002
five fourth and fifth-grade English language learners’ (ELLs) strategy use when they read online texts at home and in school. We also identify factors that play a role when these learners read online texts, as well as similar and different patterns in reading strategies at home and in school. The findings show that three factors influence the ELLs’ selection of online texts and use of reading strategies. In addition, the ELLs used nine reading strategies to enhance their reading online texts. Based on these findings, we discuss (a) the ELLs’ online reading strategies in different contexts, (b) the multidimensional zone of proximal development, and (c) collaboration between parents and teachers.
- Leu, D. J., Forzani, E., Timbrell, N., & Maykel, C. (2015). Seeing the Forest, Not the Trees. Reading Teacher, 69(2), 139-145. doi:10.1002/trtr.1406
a primary goal is to develop the ability to read in order to learn with online information. Technologies that support this goal, especially the Internet, and instructional practices that support the development of online reading should be our primary consideration for reading and literacy education, beginning in the primary grades.
- Brynge, E., Case, H., Forsyth, E., Green, G., & Hölke, U. (2015). Libraries: Sustaining the Digital Reader Experience. Scholarly & Research Communication, 1-10.
my note: role of the library
- Leu, D. J., Forzani, E., & Kennedy, C. (2015). Income Inequality and the Online Reading Gap. Reading Teacher, 68(6), 422-427. doi:10.1002/trtr.1328
my note: when you make a decision about a textbook, income and social inequality are factors needed to be considered.
Asynch Delivery and the LMS Still Dominate for Online Programs
By Dian Schaffhauser 05/22/17
a recent research project by Quality Matters and Eduventures, the “Changing Landscape of Online Education (CHLOE)” offers a “baseline” examination of program development, quality measures and other structural issues.
95 percent of larger programs (those with 2,500 or more online program students) are “wholly asynchronous” while 1.5 percent are mainly or completely synchronous. About three-quarters (73 percent) of mid-sized programs (schools with between 500 and 2,499 online program students) and 62 percent of smaller programs are fully asynchronous.
The asynchronous nature of this kind of education may explain why threaded discussions turned up as the most commonly named teaching and learning technique, mentioned by 27.4 percent of respondents, closely followed by practice-based learning, listed by 27.3 percent of survey participants.
Blackboard and Instructure Canvas dominated. Audio- and videoconferencing come in a “distant second,” according to the researchers. The primary brands that surfaced for those functions were Adobe Connect, Cisco WebEx, Zoom, Kaltura, Panopto, TechSmith Camtasia and Echo360.
While the LMS plays a significant role in online programming, the report pointed to a distinct lack of references to “much-hyped innovations,” such as adaptive learning, competency-based education systems, simulation or game-based learning tools. (my note: my mouth run dry of repeating every time people start becoming orgasmic about LMS, D2L in particular)
four in 10 require the use of instructional design support, three in 10 use a team approach for online course design and one in 10 outsources the work. Overall, some 80 percent of larger programs use instructional design expertise.
In the smallest programs, instructional design support is treated as a “faculty option” for 53 percent of institutions. Another 18 percent expect faculty to develop their online courses independently. For 13 percent of mid-sized programs, the faculty do their development work independently; another 64 percent may choose whether or not to bring in instructional design help. (my note: this is the SCSU ‘case’)
Among the many possible quality metrics suggested by the researchers, the five adopted most frequently for internal monitoring were:
- Student achievement of program objectives (83 percent);
- Student retention and graduation rates (77 percent);
- Program reputation (48 percent);
- Faculty training (47 percent); and
- Student engagement measures (41 percent).