Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Designing for Deep and Meaningful Student-to-Content Interactions

  • Supporting students’ cognitive processing in online courses:
  • Published:
TechTrends Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allen, I., & Seaman, J. (2005). Growing by degrees: Online education in the United States, 2005. Report sponsored by The Sloan Consortium.

  • Anderson, T. (2002, May). An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. IT Forum Paper #63. Athabasca University.

  • Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bender, T. (2003). Discussion-based online teaching to enhance student learning: Theory, practice, and assessment. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boettcher, J. (2000, March). The state of distance education in the U.S.: Surprising realities. Syllabus, 13, 36–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. (2001). Dimensions of transactional distance in the World Wide Web learning environment: A factor analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(4), 459–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1933). How we think (rev. ed.). Boston, MA: DC Heath.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap, J., & Grabinger, R. S. (2003). Preparing students for lifelong learning: A review of instructional methodologies. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 16(2), 6–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foshay, R., & Bergeron, C. (2000). Web-based education: A reality check. TechTrends, 44(5), 16–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R. (2003). Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: The role of reflective inquiry, self-direction and metacognition. In J. Bourne & J. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Practice and direction. Volume 4 in the Sloan C Series, Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved July 18, 2005, from http://communitiesofinquiry.com/documents/SLOAN%20CP%20Chapter%202003.doc

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21 st century: A framework for research and practice. London, UK: RoutledgeFarmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical thinking in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M., Hill, J., & Land, S. (1997). Student-centered learning and interactive multimedia: Status, issues, and implications. Contemporary Education, 68(2), 94–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, D., Willis, D., & Gunawardena, C. (1994). Learner-interface interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 30–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg, B. (1993). Key issues in distance education: An academic viewpoint. In Harry, K. John, M., & Keegan, D. (Eds.), Distance education: New perspectives. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janicki, T., & Liegle, J. (2001). Development and evaluation of a framework for creating web-based learning modules: A pedagogical and systems approach. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(1). Available: http://www. aln.org/publications/jaln/v5n1/v5n1_janicki.asp.

  • Jensen, L. (1998). Interaction in distance education. Available: http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~mcisaac/disted/week2/7focuslj.html.

  • Jonassen, D. (1985). The technology of text (Vol. 2). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5), 20–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, G. (2004). Promoting cognition in multimedia interactivity research. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 15(1), 43–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig-Hardman, S., & Dunlap, J. (2003). Learner support services for online students: Scaffolding for success. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(1). Retrieved October 15, 2006, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/131/211

  • Lynch, M. M. (2002). The online educator: A guide to creating the virtual classroom. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction [Electronic version]. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2). Retrieved September 21, 1999, from http://www.ajde.com/Contents/vol3_2.htm#editorial

  • Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: A systems view (2nd edition). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muirhead, B. (2004). Encouraging interaction in online classes [Electronic Version]. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1. Retrieved March 21, 2007 from http://itdl.org/Journal/Jun_04/article07.htm

  • Northrup, P. (2001). A framework for designing interactivity into web-based instruction. Educational Technology, 41(2), 31–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, R., Omari, A., & Ring, J. (1998). Connecting and engaging learners with the WWW. In B. Black & N. Stanley (Eds.), Teaching and learning in changing times: Proceedings of the 7th annual teaching learning forum (pp. 237–241), Perth: The University of Western Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, R. (1990). Critical thinking. Rohnert Park, CA: Sonoma State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. (1999). What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Washington, DC: Institute of Higher Education Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shale, D., & Garrison, D. R. (1990). Introduction. In D. R. Garrison & D. Shale (Eds.), Education at a distance (pp. 23–39). Malabar, FL: Robert E. Kreiger Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shortridge, A. (2001, March). Interactive web-based instruction: What is it? And how can it be achieved? Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 4(1) [Online]. Available: http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-jist/docs/old/vol4no1/2001docs/shortridge.html

  • Sims, R. (1997). Interactive learning as an “emerging” technology: A reassessment of interactive and instructional design strategies. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1), 68–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stouppe, J. (1998). Measuring interactivity. Performance Improvement, 37(9), 19–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thurmond, V. (2003). Examination of interaction variables as predictors of students’ satisfaction and willingness to enroll in future Web-based courses. Doctoral dissertation. University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS.

  • Uttendorfer, M. (2003). Interactivity in an online course: Making it more than page turning. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of world conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (pp. 147–149). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, E. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waits, T., Lewis, L. and Greene, B. (2003, July). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2000–2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. [NCES 2003-017]. Retrieved on June 1, 2005 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2003017

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, A. (1929). The aims of education. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Designing for Deep and Meaningful Student-to-Content Interactions. TECHTRENDS TECH TRENDS 51, 20–31 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-007-0052-6

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-007-0052-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation