4    The Effective Use of Text, Visuals, and Audio in Online Graduate Learning

Jane Costello, Pam Phillips, Denise Carew, and Daph Crane

In this chapter, we share the reflections and experiences of four senior instructional designers (SIDs) as a form of self-study (Crafton, 2005; Grant & Hurd, 2010) at Memorial University of Newfoundland (Memorial). In our work, numerous instructional design approaches, including design considerations in using text, visuals, and audio in graduate online courses, emerged over time from literature reviews and discourses with content authors and fellow SIDs. These approaches and considerations might be relevant to others involved in online program or course development in higher education. Much of the material presented is also relevant to blended course offerings. We present a critical examination of considerations of and strategies for media and associated technologies in selecting an appropriately balanced mix of text, visuals, and voice for teaching and learning; the use of a team-based approach; examples of successfully implemented media blends; the role that SIDs played; and the supports provided to content authors in designing online graduate courses.

Design and Development of Online Graduate Courses at Memorial

We work at Memorial as SIDs in the Centre for Innovation in Teaching and Learning (CITL), which supports the development and delivery of courses and programs at the university. CITL also supports the implementation and administration of technologies that enhance teaching and learning both on campus and online. Memorial embarked on distance education in 1967 with credit-based distance courses offered at smaller centres around the province. Its long history of distance education influenced how the learning design and development team is structured today. This team has grown and evolved with the changing needs of students and instructors.

SIDs work across multiple academic units—any faculty, discipline, school, or department—as opposed to being assigned to just one. SIDs are paired with content authors (faculty members or lecturers) to develop and redevelop fully online undergraduate and graduate courses. The online course design and development process at Memorial can take up to nine months depending on the nature of the course. Memorial uses the Quality Matters Higher Education Rubric to guide course design and development and as a quality check. The academic unit identifies the content author, who enters into an agreement with the university, through CITL, to develop the online courses. Content authors might or might not teach the online courses. However, they are encouraged to use any content developed for their online courses in their on-campus teaching. SIDs also provide consulting services for on-campus courses when needed.

CITL’s Approach to Online Course Design

Team-Based Design

A collaborative, team-based approach is used in developing online courses. This approach capitalizes on a broad range of skills and expertise. A typical course development team includes the content author; senior instructional designer; assistant to instructional designer (AID); copyright officer; video producer, including related team members, such as camerapersons and editors; and multimedia specialists. The SID is the team leader. The AID is responsible for web design and assisting in researching educational technologies. The multimedia developer creates dynamic digital animations, illustrations, simulations, games, and interactive media that address challenging concepts using storyboards developed by the instructional designer, AID, and content author. Audio and video production needs are taken care of by the video producer and her team. In some cases, the producer collaborates with multimedia developers on multimedia learning objects. Other team members, such as programmers and library staff, are added when required.

A Designing for Learning Perspective

Instructional design decisions “have a direct impact on delivery and influence student learning and engagement of all participants in the course” (Costello, 2013, p. 142). “Designing for learning” (Jones, Dirckinck-Holmfeld, & Lindström, 2006; Laurillard, 2012) is recommended. This relational view acknowledges that “designers have limited direct control over how their designs are enacted” (Jones et al., 2006, p. 51). Designers cannot design learning, for they “cannot control that which learners bring to the learning, only what is offered for them to use”; learners determine how the learning unfolds (Costello, 2013, p. 141). Designers can design learning environments. Activities for students to engage with content and resources can be designed in an online course, and assessment schemes can include the provision of marks for participation in activities or the assessment of their learning of course topics. Ultimately, it is up to individual learners if, how, and when they choose to participate in the learning experience designed. Ball and Cohen (1999) remind us of the essential need for continual “thoughtful discussion among learners and teachers [since] it is the chief vehicle for analysis, criticism and communication of ideas, practices, and values” (p. 13). Part of the responsibility of SIDs is to design venues for “analysis, criticism and communication.”

Instructional Design as Reflective Practice

Similar to teachers who reflect on the impacts of their teaching practices on students and use their reflections to improve their practices, a reflective practice approach (Schön, 1983) is used in instructional design work. SIDs continuously challenge preconceived constructs and explore innovative ways to enhance course design. In doing so, the examination of SID practice, while designing courses, builds on the foundation of their skills.

SIDs strive to be reflexive of the impacts of design decisions and recommendations (Grant & Hurd, 2010) for content authors, faculty members, lecturers, and students. One area where this is accomplished is through the thoughtful, critical examination of the instructional design considerations when selecting the most appropriate media mixes: text, visuals, and audio. Relatedly, SIDs identify challenges and questions that emerge from discourses with content authors, literature reviews, environmental scans, and research forays to find solutions to these challenges and questions. The research often involves evaluation of instructional or technological interventions in learning events and activities in the courses on which SIDs are working. The results of discourse and research are then shared with team members, other faculty members, lecturers, and SIDs to expand and improve the knowledge of instructional design and course design. In doing this, SIDs foster a community of practice to increase knowledge of course design (Wenger, 1998, 2015; Wenger & Wenger-Trayner, 2015) within the community while creating the best learning opportunities for students.

Factors that Influence Online Course Design

Course design must allow students to use their talents and help them to build on their weaknesses. This is done through careful planning and built-in guidance that encourages learner-centredness and deep learning (Fink, 2003). Knowing the learning population is one of the first steps in designing a course, in conjunction with context analysis (Stöter, Bullen, Zawacki-Richter, & von Prümmer, 2014). According to Knowles (1984), the careful planning of adult learning environments involves a strong overview of the course, including (1) identification of needs; (2) formulated learning goals, with well-defined expectations; (3) appropriate selection of resources (not too elementary but not too complex) with appropriate use of media that support a variety of learning strategies; and (4) evaluation of learning outcomes. These are essentially the basic tasks or steps in designing an online graduate course. Ally (2008) discussed components of effective online learning that should be considered when designing online learning materials such as learner preparation, activities, interaction, and transfer (p. 32). These, too, are incorporated.

SIDs’ reflections on design practice have highlighted several factors that influence online course design and help students to be successful. Fink (2003) suggested that these situational factors relate to learning goals, teaching and learning activities, and feedback and assessment. Major factors are identified as the most relevant for discussion with the content author and development team during the planning phase of an online graduate course. These are discussed below.

Characteristics of Graduate Learners

Stöter et al. (2014) provided a summary of literature related to the characteristics of adult learners in higher education. Graduate students differ from undergraduate students in more than simply being older and more mature. Graduate students are organized, self-motivated, experienced, persistent, independent, computer literate, research skill orientated, able to demonstrate self-efficacy, and capable of being self-regulatory in their learning. Additionally, they accept more responsibility for their learning in terms of reading course material and contributing to, reflecting on, discussing, and assessing their learning experiences. This might seem like a tall order for any graduate student. However, any mature student will recognize that being stronger in one quality can make up for a weakness in another. Breunig (2005), referencing Frier (1970) and Hooks (1994), noted that “students are not empty vessels, but rather are individuals with life experience and knowledge, situated within their own cultural, class, racial, historical, and gender contexts” (pp. 117–118). Grant and Hurd (2010) recommended helping students to “develop skills and processes which are of relevance to their course of study as well as everyday life” (p. 5) rather than to learn content in isolation. Graduate students should build on their wealth of knowledge and experience.

Adult Learning in Online Environments

Most adults learn through a combination of activities in the cognitive, affective, and behavioural learning domains. Both the behaviourist theory and the cognitivist theory have been considered, and will continue to be, when designing online courses (Ally, 2008). Constructivist and constructionist theories are best suited to designing technology-supported, student-centred learning environments. Today the human dimension of online learning is of particular interest with a move from a technology-orientated to a pedagogical-orientated course; there is a “shift from what technology could do to what learners could do, to how they would enable their learning through the technology available to them” (Conrad, 2014, p. 383). Student-centred learning includes the ideals of “valuing student voice, promoting and practicing dialogue, shared decision-making, and valuing their previous experiences and their ways of knowing” (Breunig, 2005, p. 117). These learning environments promote active student engagement, group work, experiential learning, problem-based learning, social learning, co-construction of knowledge, and self-directed learning.

Papert (1990) stated that constructivism is the “idea that knowledge is something you build in your head. Constructionism reminds us that the best way to do that is to build something tangible—something outside of your head—that is also personally meaningful” (Constructivism section, para. 3). Technology can be used as a cognitive tool to construct rather than passively acquire knowledge, with the support of each other and the instructor.

Faculty Member Readiness

Faculty members and lecturers indicate their readiness by exhibiting a comfort level with technology. They are familiar with online facilitation and available to develop online courses. This readiness affects design decisions related to the learning activities and resources selected for inclusion (Bates, 2015; Dysart & Weckerle, 2015; Palloff & Pratt, 2011; Phillips, Hammett, St. Croix, White, & Wicks, 2017; Robyler & Doering, 2013).

Phillips et al. (2017) conducted a study of the technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) of faculty members and lecturers at Memorial using the instrument created by Schmidt, Baran, Thompson, Koehler, Mishra, and Shin (2009). The TPACK study asked participants to document their experiences with technology integration. The faculty members and lecturers surveyed noted that they changed their instructional strategies when teaching graduate students versus undergraduate students. They preferred to design their graduate courses to allow students to utilize their prior knowledge and experience as means of engaging in deeper learning. Knowing and effectively supporting their students can deter content authors from simply using “technology for disseminating information, rather than being challenged to use it in ways that assist students in building knowledge” (Dysart & Weckerle, 2015, p. 257). As facilitators, faculty members guide students through course content and the learning experience, thereby empowering them to embrace responsibility for their learning.

Geo-Socio-Economic Considerations

Campbell and Schwier (2014) suggested that the “sociocultural, geopolitical, and economic contexts” (p. 347) of the institution of higher education can influence course design decisions, including media selection and use. Contexts such as a growing international student body, considerations of indigenization, curricular goals of the institution or department, accreditation requirements, and accessibility standards do not drive course design but might influence it. Online learning environments can become spaces for students to effectively communicate in and contribute to analytical and global dialogues (Lundy & Stephens, 2015, p. 1058), thereby bringing their opinions to the world and exposing themselves to real-world relevance.

There is a growth in students entering graduate-level studies directly from the undergraduate level. This is possibly a product of the economy and credential creep (Bertrand, 2006). Many students see the attainment of higher credentials as a way to maintain their current employment positions or become eligible for promotions or pay increases.

Economic constraints at institutions of higher learning can influence course offerings, staffing levels, library holdings, and technology offerings and support systems. Academic support units, like CITL, must work within such constraints. Creativity often alleviates the challenges associated with these economic constraints.

Interaction

Interaction is active or passive communication with another student, the content, or the instructor (Moore, 1989). Anderson (2008) suggested that individuals’ perspectives, attained via interaction, are central to constructivist-based learning. Interactivity fosters the development of learning communities and is achievable using multiple modalities (pp. 55–56). One model commonly used to design and explain learning communities is the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000), which highlights social presence and interaction in online courses. The basis of the framework is that learning occurs within the online community through the interaction of three core elements of presence: social, cognitive, and teaching (Garrison, 2009; Garrison et al., 2000).

The CoI facilitates the growth of an online community of practice supporting the development of “21st century learning skills (e.g. critical thinking, communication, collaboration)” (Phillips et al., 2017, p. 13), employing “social and participatory media” (Conole, 2014, p. 221). Although there is some debate about who originated the concept of Web 2.0, Aced (2013) noted that the term was coined by Di Nucci in 1999 and made popular by O’Reilly in 2003. By design, many Web 2.0 technologies make it easier for students to communicate and collaborate, and they provide new mechanisms for inquiry-based and exploratory learning (Conole & Alevizou, 2010; Evans & Haughey, 2014). Technology, such as Web 2.0 tools, makes communication and collaboration possible. The TPACK study conducted at Memorial revealed that, though there are many Web 2.0 tools for potential educational use, respondents did not seem to be aware of many of them. The study also revealed that newer technologies were not being used optimally (Phillips et al., 2017, p. 41). It is important for SIDs and content authors to explore how technologies can enhance teaching and learning.

Web 2.0 tools can facilitate interaction, providing “unprecedented access to information, new means of learner engagement, and dynamic asynchronous and distance learning options” (Lambert, Erickson, Alhramelah, Rhoton, Lindbeck, & Sammons, 2014, p. 7). A study on the use of Twitter (Rohr & Costello, 2015; Rohr, Costello, & Hawkins, 2015) revealed that it can be an effective means to encourage engagement and community in online classes. If designed appropriately, then some activities can encourage students to think critically while gaining exposure to authentic activities that they undertake in their daily lives, such as blogging, vlogging, and writing and/or presenting papers.

Copyright

Faculty members and lecturers are responsible for ensuring that all content not their own is identified and that appropriate permissions are obtained. This content includes materials that might be protected by copyright. Reviewing copyright guidelines and possibly linking to resources or creating your own are discussed in the planning phase. Copyright officers at Memorial assist content authors with this task.

Media

Consider all media formats—text, visual, and audio—early in the planning process. They can be combined in many ways to produce other formats, such as multimedia and video. These media types, their affordances, and their potential uses are discussed in the next section and constitute the focus of the remainder of this chapter.

Media Implementation at Memorial in Online Graduate Courses

Defining Media

Media comprise “anything that carries information between a source and a receiver” (Smaldino, Lowther, Russell, & Mims, 2015, p. 4), such as text, visuals, and audio, thereby facilitating communication and learning. Technology includes the tools, devices, software, and applications used to help develop and communicate the message. They stand alone “until commanded to do something or until they are activated or until a person starts to interact with the technology” (Bates, 2015, p. 201). Technology allows one to “control and integrate a variety of media” (Smaldino, Lowther, & Mims, 2019, p. 99), for example using a smartphone to access course content in the learning management system (LMS) or recording and editing a video using software.

Media and technologies give learners opportunities to develop digital, information, and visual literacy skills. Kereluik, Mishra, Fahnoe, and Terry (2013) defined digital and information literacy as the “ability to effectively and thoughtfully evaluate, navigate, and construct information using a range of digital technologies”; it also means effectively to “seek out, organize, and process information from a variety of media . . . [and] the responsible use of technology and media” (p. 130). Visual literacy, a component of digital and information literacy, involves being able “effectively [to] find, interpret, evaluate, use and create images and visual media” (Lundy & Stephens, 2015, p. 1058). The stronger a user’s skills in visual literacy, the more benefit she or he can derive from it.

Types of Media and Technologies

The media used in online graduate courses include text, visuals, and audio or combinations thereof in forms of video and multimedia. It is important for content authors and instructors to be familiar with each type so that the best media and technology are selected for the learning situation.

Text is the most common way to present content. Content includes, but is not limited to, the course syllabus, module notes, lectures, and presentations. Course designers can organize, format, and present text in a number of ways using an LMS or other online technologies, such as blogs. Text can be presented alone or complemented with visuals that relate to the content.

Learners typically can recall and apply more information when resources include text and visuals. Visuals “engage students in the learning process, and images stimulate their critical and creative thinking” (Aisami, 2015, p. 542). They help to scaffold learning by enabling students to make connections and build on their background knowledge sets. Digital cameras and scanners ease capturing of visuals (Smaldino, Lowther, & Russell, 2012, p. 202), and editing software facilitates the manipulation of images. Levin’s five instructional classifications for visuals include (1) decoration, to make instruction more appealing and motivating; (2) representation, to convey information quickly and easily; (3) organization, to help show relationships; (4) interpretation, to help explain difficult concepts; and (5) transformation, to help students remember information (Lohr, 2008, pp. 15–17). Well-designed visuals allow students to select or notice important information, structure information, and integrate new information and prior knowledge (Lohr, 2008). Kosslyn (1980) noted that visuals enable students to imagine things not evident in the content, thereby facilitating problem solving and comprehension.

Audio can be used to present content in ways that engage learners and make it easier for them to process the content. Audio involves hearing and listening. Similar to visual communication, an audio message is “effectively composed by a sender and deciphered by a receiver to develop the meaning” (Smaldino et al., 2012, p. 210). The ability of the instructor to organize and present an audio message, the technology chosen to record and play the audio, and the ability of the students to interpret the message are all factors that influence the effectiveness of audio in teaching and learning (Smaldino et al., 2012). Some common types of digital audio recording include music, voice, sound effects, and sounds in nature, which can be created for or accessed through a CD, streaming, a podcast, or Internet radio (Smaldino et al., 2019, p. 174).

Feedback on assignments provided via voice can empower student learning (Costello & Crane, 2015). Instructors can make notes while reviewing the student’s work, record their feedback immediately via audio, and send it to the student. Students hear their instructors providing constructive criticism of their work using a medium that reduces the potential for misunderstanding of intention since intonation is discernible. Ice, Curtis, Phillips, and Wells (2007) found that providing audio feedback took less time than providing textual feedback and that students perceived it to be of better quality. Some learning management systems have built-in, audio-based feedback tools. Instructors can also use their own devices to record audio feedback and deliver it to students.

Video provides a higher level of fidelity than audio because it often combines visual and audio elements, possibly text, transitions, and special effects, all in a media format. Some video features that can help to enhance learning include “the ability to depict motion, show processes, offer risk-free observation, provide dramatizations and support skill learning” (Smaldino et al., 2019, p. 181). Videos can be streamed (embedded) in the online learning environment, or links can be provided for students to access them. Both video and audio are considered to be portable and multimodal.

Elin (2001), citing Feldman (1997, p. 24), stated that multimedia comprise the “seamless integration of data, text, sound, and images of all kinds with a single, digital information environment” (p. 4). Elin added that multimedia “can be accessed interactively by the user” (p. 4). The SIDs at CITL generally consider multimedia to be the combination of two or more media produced as an embedded stand-alone object. Interactive multimedia allow learners to engage with the content, using more than just navigational controls. Learners can respond to and manipulate aspects of the object, such as in a drag-and-drop activity. Multimedia that move on a timeline, allowing learners to use navigational controls to play, pause, and stop them, can be considered video or animation rather than interactive multimedia. It is important to keep in mind the twelve principles of good design proposed by Mayer (2005, 2009, 2014) when designing and using multimedia for learning.

Mixed media are two or more media combined on a web page, on a presentation slide, or in a document. Mixes of text, visuals, and audio can be used in lieu of a video mini-lecture. Having audio in the mix allows students to benefit from the nuances of intonation in the instructor’s voice, thus helping to reduce the likelihood that the speaker’s intentions will be misunderstood. Although video is generally seen as more favourable than audio, images with text and possibly an audio file can be a more effective way to present content. It is important that mixed media are designed with a specific purpose in mind and are not overused.

Presentation software helps students and instructors to produce and present content and instructional materials in multiple ways using combinations of text, visuals, and audio. Blogs and many other interactive social technologies allow instructors and students to post their thoughts related to a course topic and comment on others’ posts, thereby generating discussion and co-constructing knowledge (Rohr & Costello, 2015). An ePortfolio allows and encourages learners to collect, reflect on, and share their work incorporating a variety of media in their learning (Baskin, 2008).

Synchronous online technologies can be used to bring instructors, students, and guests together for presentations, demonstrations, and dialogues. These sessions can be recorded so that students unable to attend them can watch the recordings later. Many students take advantage of recorded presentations to review material before tests and exams or as resources for their assignments. Johnson (2010) noted a similar result from a lecture capture study at Memorial. Students can also use synchronous tools to communicate and collaborate on course work outside scheduled sessions. In Memorial’s LMS, the synchronous tool is embedded, thereby eliminating the need for additional links or passwords.

Many students have difficulty understanding what it means to reflect and be critical learners—to read, write, or think critically (Quitadamo & Kutz, 2007). King, Wood, and Mines (1990) claimed that there is little evidence of critical thinking at the undergraduate level and even less at the graduate level. Since critical thinking is often unfamiliar to students, they might need information, instruction, and activities that explain what it is and is not as well as means to practise and develop their critical learning skills. Media and technologies, when appropriately selected, can enhance understanding and help students to perfect these skills. Models or samples can spark creativity and interest and set expectations.

Selecting Media and Technologies

The effectiveness of online learning is influenced, in part, by careful planning and selection of the appropriate resources, including media and technologies. Bates (2015) identified content, content structure, and skills as elements to consider in choosing media (p. 228). Learning outcomes determine the content and skills that are desirable for students to develop. The nature of the course, teaching philosophy, learning environment, and amount of material presented inform content structure. It is important to analyze the learning situation and learning outcomes and to select instructional strategies, media, and technologies that can help students to achieve the outcomes. Some activities can be completed better without media and technologies. Prensky (2001), as reported by Anderson (2008), suggested that “different learning outcomes” are best attained by using “particular learning activities”; we learn, for example,

• behaviours through imitation, feedback, and practice
• creativity through playing
• facts through association, drill, memory, and questions
• judgement through reviewing cases, asking questions, making choices, receiving feedback, and coaching
• language through imitation, practice, and immersion
• observation through viewing examples and feedback
• procedures through imitation and practice
• processes through system analysis, deconstruction, and practice
• reasoning through puzzles, problems, and examples
• skills (physical or mental) through imitation, feedback, continuous practice, and increasing challenge
• speeches or performance roles by memorization, practice, and coaching
• theories through logic, explanation, and question. (pp. 62–63)

Although some media and technologies are better suited to specific learning situations, no one medium or technology is ideal for all situations (Bates, 2015; Martin, 2008). The successful implementation of media and technologies “depends on [our] ability to appreciate the requirements within the learning situation and select and use [them] to meet those needs” (Bower, 2008, p. 14). This reinforces the need for pedagogy to drive technology selection.

Although there are no rules about which specific medium and technology to use in any given situation, there are guidelines, rubrics, and models that can inform choices, for example Mayer’s (2005, 2009, 2014) cognitive theory of multimedia learning, Koumi’s (as referenced in Bates, 2015) xMOOCs (massive online open courses) video and print guide, Anstey and Watson’s (2018) Rubric for E-Learning Tool Evaluation, Bates’s (2015) ACTIONS model, Martin’s (2008) Instructional Indicators model, Bates’s (2015) SECTIONS framework, and Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) TPACK model. Using these resources, SIDs help content authors to choose the most appropriate medium for the learning situation and its outcome. This involves identifying the characteristics, educational affordances, and design considerations of various media and technologies and then evaluating each “against the learning goals and outcomes desired, while recognizing that a new educational medium or application might enable goals to be achieved that had not been previously considered possible” (Bates, 2015, p. 223). Choose the technology that allows you to create the media to match the instructional strategies that support student learning and intended learning outcomes.

Before looking at successful implementations of media and technologies, we provide a brief survey of some of their advantages and disadvantages. Some identified advantages include students’ access to courses at their own convenience (time, place, and pace); cost effectiveness of delivery; increased accessibility; relative safety compared with some real-life situations; and savings in terms of data storage since less physical space is needed to house digital materials. Some identified disadvantages include unintended or unexpected perceptions of visual materials because of a lack of awareness of differences in students’ backgrounds and cultures; unintentional infringement of copyright; concerns about privacy and security among both students and instructors; and the absence of tactile and olfactory experiences because they are not relayed by technology (Anderson, 2008; Bates et al. 2017; Brineley, 2014; Dick & Carey, 1996; Gagné, Briggs, & Wagner, 1992; Mantiri, 2014; Smith & Ragan, 1993). Additionally, the creation of some types of media can challenge resources in terms of cost, skill, technology, and time needed to create them.

Examples of Successful Implementation of Media and Technologies

Media and technologies are used in online graduate courses at Memorial to help present content, enhance interaction, facilitate demonstration or performance guidance, assess work and provide feedback, and promote reflection. These uses emerged over time in discussions about media in online courses with content authors, other team members, and fellow SIDs. A description of each use along with a discussion of concepts and specific examples is presented below. Many of the examples can be found in the provincial learning object repository hosted by Memorial, Linney (https://linney.mun.ca).

Presentation of Content

The amount and format or organization of the text-based content are critical to giving students the best opportunities to learn in an online course. Page upon page of plain text and long weekly reading lists can be unmotivating for students. Dividing content into units or chunks using appropriate headings aids flow and makes the content more manageable for students. The use of white space provides eye relief and helps with readability. A research project led by the Nielsen Norman Group (n.d.), looking at people’s eye movements while engaging with a web page, revealed that people are more likely to read concise and accessible content presented objectively that can be scanned.

Using different media and technologies to present text-based content can make it easier for learners to process the content. Using illustrations to depict abstract concepts often difficult for students to grasp is an effective use of media. Adding images to text is not a guarantee, however, of effective learning or “an improvement in learning” (Mayer, 2005, p. 31). Text does not always present troublesome concepts or abstract ideas effectively. Content authors are reminded to think of course participants and their expected levels of knowledge when selecting the images and details required.

A frequent practice employed in presenting content is the use of audio or video clips to introduce the instructor and the course. The instructor records a welcoming message that sets the tone for the course. Audio and video should be recorded at a proper level, the voice should be audible and clear, and transcripts should be provided to listeners and viewers. Provide user controls where necessary. The use of lengthy presentations through audio or video recordings conveying content typically communicated in a traditional face-to-face class lecture (the Socratic method) is discouraged. A few basics to think about when preparing scripts or outlines for audio and video recordings are keep the script short, up to six minutes (Guo, Kim, & Rubin, 2014) and use a conversational style of language to portray an approachable instructor. Succinct, focused videos tend to deter pontification. Speak at a normal pace with enthusiasm. Table 4.1 includes examples of how text-based content has been effectively presented in online graduate courses at Memorial. Examples include timelines, maps, caricatures, audio recordings, et cetera.

Table 4.1 Examples of presentation of content.

When presenting content, ensure that it is accurate. The object’s design conveys its meaning clearly, making it easy to interpret and process. Objects should be clear and concise, free of extraneous information, and easy to scan and read. Consider both responsiveness and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles, see Chapter 3 for a discussion of UDL. Finally, ensure that copyright has been cleared for all items.

Interaction

Interaction with content, other students, teams, or instructors can take place asynchronously or synchronously using media and technologies, such as email, discussion, video, audio, chat technology, or web conferencing. Interactions with others foster and strengthen social presence. Interactions with content can take place in a content page, a specially designed multimedia item, or a technology such as a simulation. Examples of the effective use of media and technologies to enhance interaction in online graduate courses at Memorial are presented in Table 4.2. Discussion forums, guest speakers, and video assignments are some examples.

One means to incorporate, and hopefully increase, interaction in online courses is through the use of guest speakers. They provide many benefits to students, such as support, professional networking, alternative voices, and real-life experiences (Costello, 2013, 2014; Costello & Rohr, 2016). Costello (2013) studied their use and found that they can offer professional connections to students and instructors alike, bringing a form of enculturation to the learning community as they connect theoretical studies to daily applications in real life (p. 143). Costello (2013, 2014) warns that guests ill chosen can present issues. For example, there might be an expectation of reciprocation; they might not know how to relate to the students at their level; the nature of the course might not be understood; and ill-timed guests might not receive the attention that they deserve.

To generate good discussions, use provocative questions versus yes/no questions, and topics for podcasts or vlogs must be broad enough for each learner to offer a unique perspective or to build on comments by others. Decide if synchronous sessions are to be scheduled before registration begins. The schedule should be provided at registration or just as the course begins. Make an effort to involve students in selecting the sessions’ dates and times. Include guidelines for recording video for those unable to attend the sessions. Synchronous sessions can be facilitated using a variety of platforms. CITL refers to them as online rooms.

Table 4.2 Examples of enhancing interaction.

Demonstration or Performance Guidance

When learning a complex task, students develop skills, procedures, and techniques. It is critical that they know how to approach a task and its associated steps. Students also require guidance when completing tasks, as well as evaluation and feedback, as they work to master those tasks. Table 4.3 shows how media have been used effectively for demonstration or performance guidance in online graduate courses at Memorial. The examples include screen shots, various videos, and the RSA Animates style animations (Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce). RSA style animations are time-lapsed video recordings of a live drawing of a concept described with audio.

Instructors can support students in completing a task “at the exact moment that they need help performing [it]” (Lohr, 2008, p. 6) through the use of media and technologies. For example, recording videos of students as they perform tasks can be very effective when evaluating their work and providing feedback on it. Videos can also be used to prepare students for outcomes prior to experiencing actual situations. This approach is especially useful for complex tasks in which students might need to watch the demonstration multiple times.

Approaches to tackling problems can be illustrated. Animation can also be used for demonstration and practice guidance. Animated presentations involve taking a series of pictures and putting them together to form the illusion of continuous motion. They are designed to present information quickly, clearly, and engagingly. However, animations can often become monotonous and annoying rather than engaging and useful. Therefore, it is important that they are designed with a specific purpose in mind and are not overused. Also consider duration and adaptability to various devices, and be sure to include user controls such as pause and fast-forward.

The choice of media for demonstration or to provide performance guidance depends on what students need, their expected prior knowledge, and the level of proficiency required. Ask yourself the following questions:

• Is the video of high quality? For example, is it clear and sufficiently detailed to be useful to the learner?
• Does it therefore support learning?
• Will the video be streamed or downloaded?
• Where will it be hosted?
• Does the video player include controls allowing the learner to play, pause, stop the video, et cetera?
• Are close-ups of apparatus used effectively?
• What technology will you use to edit the video?
• Do animations, when used, solve a learning problem?

Videos that do not have user controls might require students to watch an entire video, or most of it, to find a specific piece of information. When video-recording, focus the camera on the speaker, and avoid background distractions. Use a mixture of close-ups and pan or wide shots and multiple cameras if possible. Attain releases from participants. If on location, then attain permits. Consider the use of transcripts, and ensure that copyright has been cleared where necessary.

Table 4.3 Examples of demonstration or performance guidance.

Assessment and Feedback

Assessment is “a task whereby learners demonstrate what they know or can do,” whereas feedback is composed of “the comments provided to learners on their work” (Costello & Crane, 2015, p. 212). Faculty members and lecturers determine to what degree students have met the course learning objectives by assessing their work. Assessment is formative, ongoing throughout the course, or summative, at the end of the course.

Many faculty members and lecturers perceive the assessment of student work to be an onerous task. Using media and technologies to complete assessments and provide feedback, in a timely and efficient fashion, will help students to learn. Teachers who give students feedback on assessment items increased their teaching presence (Shea et al., 2011). Costello and Crane (2013, 2015) provided a comprehensive review of media and technologies suitable for student-centred feedback in online learning. They discussed the relationship between feedback methods and technologies. Their review also covered methods, technologies, and types of feedback. Table 4.4 provides examples of approaches to assessment and feedback effectively integrated into online graduate courses at Memorial.

In discussing assessment options with content authors, it is important to consider various types of assessment and to encourage the use of audio, video, or other media to provide electronic feedback. Automated tutors, auto-scoring of assignments, reflective networks, and self-check feedback methods require extra time for initial planning, design, and set-up. Content authors can perceive spending this extra time negatively, but these assessment and feedback methods generally provide time savings in the long run.

When using media for assessment and feedback, include questions for formative and summative assessments. Opportunities to apply material rather than simply to recall information are preferred, as is the ability of students to use feedback for continuous improvement.

Table 4.4 Examples of assessment and feedback.

Reflection

Reflection requires students to think about their learning in terms of where they are, where they have come from, and where they hope to arrive. It is useful as a self-assessment practice, requiring that students plan, monitor, and assess their understanding and performance. They can reflect on personal situations related to the content or on what and how they are learning (i.e., metacognition). Social activity can be an essential part of reflective practice; by reflecting together, students can begin to understand their own learning in relationship to others’ learning styles and experiences.

A straightforward way to encourage students to reflect is to design a reflection box on the course content page. Asking students to reflect on what they are reading or doing can make the content more meaningful and memorable. Examples of how media have been used effectively to promote student reflection in online graduate courses at Memorial are provided in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5 Examples of promoting reflection.

When using media for reflections, ensure that the reflections relate to course content and outcomes. Learners should have the skills to take quality images to use in blogs and ePortfolios. Assignments should be broad enough that they are relevant when learners are completing them. Determine whether the ePortfolio platform will be useful and accessible to students following graduation.

Challenges Encountered

Selecting media and technologies for maximum benefit to the learner is not without challenges. SIDs in CITL at Memorial work with many amazing content authors knowledgeable in pedagogy, willing to work in a team environment, and enthusiastic about their online courses. Content authors’ and instructors’ sometimes limited experiences in using media in online courses present a variety of challenges. Many of them recur, and some are related to either course design decisions or challenges inherent in the media themselves. Nevertheless, it is the responsibility of the development team to design the best learning environment in which facilitators guide students to learn so that they can achieve the learning outcomes.

Time Commitment

Content authors have the challenge of developing courses beyond their daily instruction, research, and service responsibilities. Many of them comment that it takes more time to design and develop a course than they expected.

Media in Course Design

Content authors’ lack of understanding of effective course design principles, including appropriate media selection and use, can lead to students who are not prepared for class, become bored, or display poor knowledge retention (Fink, 2013, pp. 26–28). Increased knowledge of how to design learning experiences could help to counter these issues. As noted in the Memorial TPACK study, though faculty members and lecturers were confident in their content knowledge and, to a lesser degree, their pedagogical knowledge, they were much less confident in their technological knowledge and how to integrate technology (and media) into their teaching (Phillips et al., 2017). They acknowledged their lower confidence in “adapting their teaching style[s] to different learners . . . solving technical problems; knowing different technologies; and choosing technologies that enhance a lesson” (Phillips et al., 2017, p. 40).

Learning about media and technology, and their affordances for teaching and learning, takes time. Consequently, content authors often default to what they are familiar with, simply abandoning media and technologies all together.

Universal Design for Learning

Courses that do not consider UDL principles reduce the equity of access for all and increase the need for student accommodation. Knowledge of these principles requires time if they are to be incorporated effectively. Unfortunately, UDL and accessibility are often afterthoughts and thus counter to the UDL approach.

Responsive Design

As more instructors and students use mobile devices to interact with their online courses, it becomes increasingly important to employ responsive design in media and content delivery. Designing courses to ensure they are responsive on any type of device can affect design choices and development time and cost. Although free media and technologies exist, expertise is often needed to incorporate them into courses or to develop solutions from scratch.

Learning Outcomes

Learning outcomes are often a challenge to write at the correct level, for the right audience, and in terms of being measurable. In some cases, they are written after the course has been designed, including media selection. However, they should be written prior to consideration of which media to use. The media and technologies chosen are derived from the learning outcomes that shape the content, activities, and assessment in the course.

Alternative Assessment

Having the time and patience to learn about alternative approaches to assessment, the media and technologies that facilitate these alternatives, and their integration into a course is not a luxury afforded to all. Many faculty members revert to traditional and familiar approaches—papers and exams—yet they are not always the most suitable.

Accessibility

One challenge associated with all media relates to accessibility, though it is manifested in different ways for different media. Course content, including media, needs to be accessible through enabling technologies. Some media mixes are challenging to students with vision impairment. Visuals require alternative text for screen readers to make them accessible, necessitating graphic and web design skills. Audio and video require transcripts and possibly described audio or video, or closed captioning, to make them accessible. There can be technical issues for students when playing audio and video and interacting with multimedia.

Student Engagement

As previously noted, learning environments, experiences, and activities can be designed, but learning cannot. Although media and technologies might be carefully selected and incorporated into learning experiences, instructors have no control over whether or how students will interpret or use them.

Resourcing Media Creation

Creating multimedia objects requires a significant commitment in terms of human, time, and technical resources. Expertise is often required.

Open Resources and Copyright

Reusing resources created by others can be beneficial to student learning if they address the learning outcomes. However, some content authors require training and support in searching for, selecting, and integrating these resources; troubleshooting technical issues; and supporting students in their use. Although content authors are encouraged to use content developed for their online courses in their on-campus teaching, this sometimes presents challenges of copyright since typically it is cleared only for the online course unless otherwise requested.

Free Media and Technologies

Having the autonomy to select suitable free media and technologies can be a challenge for some instructors. There are implications when they use freely available online technology versus technology that the academic institution administers and supports. When instructors encounter issues with free technology, they are left to their own resources to problem-solve it, to teach students how to use it, and to prepare how-to job aids—all of which takes valuable time away from other responsibilities.

The Lack of Design Supports

Some content authors cherish the autonomy and flexibility to design learning experiences, resources, and media elements on their own. In doing so, they do not always incorporate sound design choices and sometimes resist available assistance. This results in less than ideal learning experiences for students. Bates et al. (2017) noted that this lack of support from educational technologists and instructional designers is one of the main barriers to the adoption of online learning.

The Art of Course Facilitation

Facilitating an online course is an art that takes time to master. It comes with practice and, to a degree, insight into one’s teaching practice. Instructors can benefit from dialogue, guidance, and support in this area.

Course Sustainability

A course is never truly in a “finished” state. If the content, activities, and media are not sustainable after the process of development, then the instructor is likely to abandon those that present challenges as they arise. Instructors need to be trained on how to select media and use technologies. Provisions must be made for editing in order to maintain currency. Additionally, the use of online resources accessed through hyperlinks that constantly change presents a challenge to currency and maintenance in terms of the effort required to check them on a regular basis or to find alternative resources.

Recommendations

The challenges discussed above need to be addressed early in course design. It is important to design courses effectively so as to improve the likelihood that students will have “significant learning experiences, the kind that are being called for in many parts of society today” (Fink, 2013, p. 29). SIDs bring several recommendations to content authors’ attention when planning online graduate courses and associated media while keeping learners’ needs and course outcomes in mind.

Content Writing and Design

There is an art to writing content for online delivery; essays and monologues are not always needed. Course notes can paraphrase an assigned reading, add to it, or challenge students to think about it from alternative viewpoints. Use a consistent tone, voice, and tense as well as a standard style, such as that of the American Psychological Association or Modern Language Association, when designing and writing course content. To facilitate readability, break the content into small sections with appropriate headings. Enable learners to work independently by providing lectures or learning notes on course topics and opportunities for students to check their understanding and receive timely feedback. Incorporate multiple activities for students to interact with peers, the instructor, and the content. Notes also contribute to instructors’ presence in online courses.

Selecting and using textbooks effectively in the course are important. It is recommended that content authors choose textbooks that support the course outline and topics rather than build a course around specific textbooks. As a means to reduce mistakes and the time required to keep courses current, refrain from using specific textbook page numbers in the content, except for assigned readings. This is crucial today with frequent textbook editions and multiple formats—such as e-book, published hard- or softcover book, audiobook, and open educational resources—available. When selecting a book format, consider its terms of use, the ability to print excerpts from it, restrictions on access to it and its related resources, and maintenance of websites where the resources reside. Where possible, use library holdings and open educational resources.

Online resources, though an economical choice for readings, are at the mercy of the owner of the website. Choosing reputable sites associated with an established organization will increase the chances that the links will remain durable. When choosing a video, consider the stability of the site where it is located, the quality of the video, how closely its content relates to course topics, and any copyright concerns. SIDs provide expertise in recommending the most suitable and sustainable media and technologies.

Enhancing Interaction

To increase interactions among students, content authors should design their contributions in ways that increase student participation. One idea is to encourage students to share assignments with their classmates, who can provide constructive feedback prior to final submission to the instructor for grading.

Design activities involving videos such that they foster active rather than passive learning. Students can interact with the content in several ways, by using guiding questions about the video, working with interactive features that give them control, integrating questions into the video, and making the video part of a larger homework assignment.

Rohr et al. (2015) suggest that the “course’s philosophy, content, and participants’ capabilities” (p. 257) should be taken into account when considering the use of Web 2.0 technologies. Topicality and close timing with other activities should be considered. Make students aware of how and why Web 2.0 is being used, whether “for communication of course logistics, reporting on current events, or other assessment-related activities” (p. 257). Because grading some activities takes time, finding ways to expedite the process, such as aggregators that compile tweets, are beneficial.

Demonstration or Performance Guidance

With students in mind, consider how course design, including the design and use of media and technologies, can assist in their understanding of abstract or difficult concepts. Paying special attention to these items is important since crowding too much information into a small area can make it difficult to read and process. Content authors should think about areas where media can foster deep learning by presenting concepts in alternative formats. This can also ensure that the media have a learning focus and are not distracting.

Assessment

Providing students with choices in how they demonstrate their learning can have positive impacts on their autonomy, flexibility, engagement, and self-directed learning. To increase choices, look beyond exam-focused assessment and consider learner-centred authentic assessment approaches. For example, students can choose audio-recorded responses to questions versus written responses or a video-based assignment versus a paper submission. Providing choices can ease concerns about accessibility. Accommodation of students’ requests not to participate in work that employs Web 2.0 technologies can be considered on a case-by-case basis. In many such cases, alternative forms of technology or assessment can be used.

Faculty Readiness

Content authors are expected to have basic word-processing and email skills when developing online courses. The course development team will assist content authors in using the LMS and other tools used in the design, development, and delivery of the course. Some content authors come to CITL with clear content knowledge but little experience in designing and teaching an online course. Working on small chunks at a time, using design aids such as course maps, providing examples and guidance, and offering constant feedback aid the design process. Also, we recommend that content authors become familiar with the unique needs of online learners and how to facilitate a course online. Over time, they will develop the art of facilitation.

Support of Instructional Designer

Content authors, through post-pilot discussions and data attained from course development surveys, say that they have learned new ways to design their on-campus courses and use media and technologies after being guided through the development of an online course with an instructional designer. A participant in the TPACK study noted that “when developing for online [courses] we came up with new ways of doing things that we wouldn’t realize . . . in a classroom environment; so it can be a catalyst for new ideas” (Phillips et al., 2017, p. 45). Fink (2003) also noted that learning solid design skills for developing courses can help to “integrate new ideas about teaching, solve major teaching problems, and allow institutions to offer better support for faculty and better educational programs for students (and society)” (p. 25).

Supports for Content Author and Instructor

It is critical to think of the types of supports required: during course planning and development, before teaching the first offering (pilot), during the pilot, when the pilot is complete and course design evaluation begins, and when the course is a regular online offering. Additional supports for the content author and instructor include teaching with technological resources, use of copyright-protected works, resources for troubleshooting technical issues, and resources for accessing and modifying an online course. The frequency and degree to which these supports are used vary depending on an individual’s role in the online course (content author only, content author and facilitator, or facilitator only) and readiness to assume these roles.

Conclusion

In this chapter, we presented instructional designers’ perspectives on the use of text, visuals, and audio in online graduate learning. At Memorial, it is the responsibility of the development team to design the best learning environment for facilitators and students using sound instructional design approaches. In setting the context of where and how SIDs work in CITL, we discussed and shared examples of the numerous considerations of how media are selected during course design. We also explored challenges often encountered and offered recommendations to avoid pitfalls.

Resource commitments (time, human, and technical) are required for the creation of media. Developers might wish to invest these resources in creating media that address troublesome concepts that have significant impacts on students’ learning. Providing instructors with guidance and support in selecting media and technologies will facilitate their appropriate use.

Working with SIDs to increase knowledge of course design gets faculty members thinking about new ways of doing things in relation to planning and delivering their courses. Ultimately, faculty members might be served best by learning how to find open educational resources or to use technologies to create their own media, thereby being responsive to students’ learning needs.

The degree to which working with an instructional designer to select and integrate media and technologies effectively in online courses is little understood in Canada. Our hope is that this chapter provides a glimpse of team-based course design and media selection from CITL SIDs’ perspectives. The challenges of how to increase faculty members’ and lecturers’ knowledge of media and technologies, how to entice these educators to avail themselves of the supports provided, and how to address all pedagogical and technological needs still remain.

References

Aced, C. (2013). Web 2.0: The origin of the word that has changed the way we understand public relations [Conference session]. Representing PR: Images, identities and innovations, Barcelona International PR conference, Barcelona, Spain. -Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266672416_Web_20_the_origin_of_the_word_that_has_changed_the_way_we_understand_public_relations

Aisami, R. S. (2015). Learning styles and visual literacy for learning and performance. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 538–545.

Ally, M. (2008). Foundations of education theory for online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 15–44). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Anderson, T. (2008). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 45–74). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Anstey, L., & Watson, G. (2018, September 10). A Rubric for Evaluating E-Learning Tools in Higher Education. EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/9/a-rubric-for-evaluating-e-learning-tools-in-higher-education

Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Towards a practice-based theory of professional education. In G. Sykes & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3–31). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Baskin, P. (2008). Electronic portfolios may answer calls for more accountability. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Electronic-Portfolios-May/20892

Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Vancouver, BC: Tony Bates Associates

Bates, T., Desbiens, B., Donovan, T., Martel, E., Mayer, D., Paul, R., . . . Seaman, J. (2017). Tracking online and distance education in Canadian universities and colleges: 2017. Vancouver, BC: The National Survey of Online and Distance Education in Canadian Post-Secondary Education. Retrieved from http://contactpoint.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/publicreport_2017_10_10.pdf

Bertrand, F. (2006). A profile of master’s degree education in Canada. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Association for Graduate Studies. Retrieved from www.cags.ca/documents/publications/best_practices/CAGS-Master.pdf

Bower, M. (2008). Affordance analysis—Matching learning tasks with learning technologies. Educational Media International, 45(1), 3–15.

Breunig, M. (2005). Turning experiential education and critical pedagogy theory into praxis. Journal of Experiential Education, 28(2), 106–122.

Brineley, J. E. (2014). Learner support in online distance education: Essential and evolving. In O. Zawacki-Richter & T. Anderson (Eds.), Online distance education: Towards a research agenda (pp. 287–310). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Campbell, K., & Schwier, R. A. (2014). Major movements in instructional design. In O. Zawacki-Richter & T. Anderson (Eds.), Online distance education: Towards a research agenda (pp. 346–380). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Conole, G. (2014). The use of technology in distance education. In O. Zawacki-Richter & T. Anderson (Eds.), Online distance education: Towards a research agenda (pp. 217–236). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in higher education: A report commissioned by the Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/5162.pdf

Conrad, D. (2014). Interaction and communication in online learning communities: Toward an engaged and flexible future. In O. Zawacki-Richter & T. Anderson (Eds.), Online distance education: Towards a research agenda (pp. 381–402). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Costello, J. (2013). Guest speaker impact on learning community (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Lancaster, UK.

Costello, J. (2014, September). Educational considerations derived from a study of students’ conceptions of guest speakers in humanities courses. Paper presented at EARLI SIG 9, Phenomenography and Variation Theory 2014 Conference, Oxford, UK.

Costello, J., & Crane, D. (2013). Technologies for learner-centered feedback. Open Praxis, 5(3), 217–225.

Costello, J., & Crane, D. (2015). Promoting effective feedback in online learning. In S. Keengwe (Ed.), Handbook of research on active learning and the flipped classroom model in the digital age (pp. 212–230). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Costello, J., & Rohr, L. E. (2016, May). Effectiveness of guests in large enrolment online courses as an instructional strategy. Paper presented at Networked Learning 2016, Lancaster, UK.

Crafton, L. K. (2005). The scholarship of teaching and self-study in teacher education: Walking the walk. English Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 3–6.

Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The systematic design of instruction (4th ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Dysart, S., & Weckerle, C. (2015). Professional development in higher education: A model for meaningful technology integration. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 14(1), 255–265.

Elin, L. (2001). Designing and developing multimedia. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Evans, T. D., & Haughey, M. (2014). Online distance education models and research implications. In O. Zawacki-Richter & T. Anderson (Eds.), Online distance education: Towards a research agenda (pp. 131–149). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences, Revised and updated: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wagner, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

Garrison, D. R. (2009). Implications of online learning for the conceptual development and practice of distance education. Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 93–104.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.

Grant, S., & Hurd, F. (2010). Incorporating critical pedagogy into the scholarship of teaching and learning: Making the journey alongside our students. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 4(2), 1–12.

Guo, P. T., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos [Conference session]. Association for computing machinery, New York, USA. doi:10.1145/2556325.2566239

Ice, P., Curtis, R., Phillips, P., & Wells, J. (2007). Using asynchronous audio feedback to enhance teaching presence and students’ sense of community. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(2), 3–25.

Johnson, A. (2010). Lecture capture project: Post-pilot report. Unpublished report. St. John’s, NL: Distance Education and Learning Technologies, Memorial University of Newfoundland.

Jones, C., Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., & Lindström, B. (2006). A relational, indirect, meso-level approach to CSCL design in the next decade. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 35–56.

Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., Fahnoe, C., & Terry, L. (2013). What knowledge is of most worth: Teacher knowledge for 21st century learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29(4), 127–140.

King, P. M., Wood, P. K., & Mines R. A. (1990). Critical thinking among college and graduate students. The Review of Higher Education, 13(2), 167–186.

Knowles, M. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kosslyn, S. M. (1980). Image and mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Lambert, C., Erickson, L., Alhramelah, A., Rhoton, D., Lindbeck, R., & Sammons, D. (2014). Technology and adult students in higher education: A review of the literature. Issues and Trends in Educational Technology, 2(1), 1–19.

Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. New York, NY: Routledge.

Lohr, L. L. (2008). Visual literacy for educators and performance specialists. In L. Lohr (Ed.), Creating graphics for learning and performance: Lessons in visual literacy (pp. 3–27). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Merrill Prentice Hall.

Lundy, A. D., & Stephens, A. E. (2015). Beyond the literal: Teaching visual literacy in the 21st century classroom. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1057–1060.

Mantiri, F. (2014). Multimedia and technology in learning. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(9), 589–592.

Martin, F. (2008). Instructional indicator’s model. In A. Igoe (Chair), Media Selection Models symposium. Symposium conducted at Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.

Mayer, R. E. (Ed.). (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Mayer, R. E. (Ed.). (2009). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Mayer, R. E. (2014). Research-based principles for designing multimedia instruction. In V. A. Benassi, C. E. Overson, & C. M. Hakala (Eds.), Applying science of learning in education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum (pp. 59–70). University of New Hampshire Scholars’ Repository. Retrieved from http://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1286&context=psych_facpub

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teachers’ knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.

Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6.

Nielson, J. (1997, September 30). How users read on the web. Nielson Norman Group, Fremont, CA: United States. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-users-read-on-the-web/

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2011). The excellent online instructor: Strategies for professional development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Papert, S. (1990). A critique of technocentrism in thinking about the school of the future. Retrieved from http://www.papert.org/articles/ACritiqueofTechnocentrism.html

Phillips, P., Hammett, R., St. Croix, L., White, G., & Wicks, C. (2017). Teaching with technologies using the TPACK framework: A report of research conducted at Memorial University. Unpublished report. St. John’s, NL: Centre for Innovation in Teaching and Learning, Memorial University of Newfoundland.

Quitadamo, I. J., & Kurtz, M. J. (2007). Learning to improve: Using writing to increase critical thinking performance in general education biology. Life Science Education 6(2), 140–154. doi:10.1187/cbe.06-11-0203

Robyler, M. D., & Doering, A. H. (2013). Integrating educational technology into teaching (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Rohr, L. E., & Costello, J. (2015). The use of Twitter as an assessment tool in a large enrollment online course. Online Learning: Official Journal of the Online Learning Consortium: Invited Papers/OLC 20th Anniversary Conference Special Issue, 19(4), 25–36.

Rohr, L. E., Costello, J., & Hawkins, T. (2015). Design considerations for integrating Twitter into an online course. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(4), 241–249.

Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson A. D., Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Shin, T. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123–149.

Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic.

Smaldino, S., Lowther, D., & Mims, C. (2019). Instructional technology and media for learning (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Smaldino S., Lowther, D., & Russell, J. (2012). Instructional technology and media for learning (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Smaldino, S., Lowther, D., Russell, J., & Mims, C. (2015). Instructional technology and media for learning (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (1993). Instructional design. Danvers, MA: John Wiley & Sons.

Stöter, J., Bullen, M., Zawacki-Richter, O., & von Prümmer, C. (2014). From the back door into the mainstream: The characteristics of lifelong learners. In O. Zawacki-Richter & T. Anderson (Eds.), Online distance education: Towards a research agenda (pp. 421–457). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E. (2015, April 15). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. Retrieved from https://wenger-trayner.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/07-Brief-introduction-to-communities-of-practice.pdf

Wenger, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Introduction to communities of practice: A brief overview of the concept and its uses. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/