There are many components to consider when developing an online course; a key framework to inform course development is student engagement. The Glossary of Education Reform defines student engagement as “the degree of attention, curiosity, interest, optimism, and passion that students show when they are learning or being taught, which extends to the level of motivation they have to learn and progress in their education” (Great Schools Partnership, 2016, para. 1). Developing and evaluating course content through the lens of engagement can help instructors create an environment that is conducive to learning and mastery of course outcomes.
Online learning “requires a shift in thinking of education as content- or teacher-centered to one centered on students’ learning . . . merely putting in-class course materials online does not in itself support good pedagogical practice” (García-Cabrero et al., 2018, pp. 814–815). Thus, instructors should consider how the content and learning activities in a course promote student engagement and achievement of learning outcomes. The Community of Inquiry model provides a framework for including “three essential elements of an educational experience: Cognitive Presence, Social Presence, and Teaching Presence” (The Community of Inquiry, n.d., para. 2). To achieve these three essential elements, it is helpful to promote student engagement in three areas: student-content engagement, student-student engagement, and student-instructor engagement (Martin & Bolliger, 2018).
This is the first in a series of pieces exploring the different types of course engagement. In this piece, we will introduce the three different types of engagement and provide some preliminary considerations for the inclusion of each engagement type in a course. In subsequent pieces, we will dive deeper into each type of engagement.
Student-Content Engagement
Instructors must consider the entire ecology of content and resources in their courses. Content and resources may include required and supplementary readings, lecture notes, presentation slides, theoretical models and frameworks, reference materials, and supporting technological tools.
Ultimately, “students have a choice of learning resources, both provided by faculty and sourced elsewhere, and spend time on the resources that they perceive to be the best value proposition for their learning” (Sturman et al., 2018, p. 22). Content and resources must be carefully selected to support student success and achievement.
It is helpful to consider the principles of UDL, or Universal Design for Learning, when optimizing student-content engagement in a course. UDL emphasizes that “there is not one means of representation that will be optimal for all learners; providing options for representation is essential” (CAST, 2018, para. 1). To reach all learners, instructors should strive to present content in a variety of modalities. In addition to providing text on a course page, consider including videos, readings, podcasts, websites, and interactive components to achieve the goal of providing multiple means of representation. To provide opportunities for students to engage with content, consider including formative assessments in a course to provide students opportunities to practice skills in a no-stakes or low-stakes environment.
Student-Student Engagement
Instructors are often peers in adulthood with adult learners, and so are fellow students. They may have in common years or even decades of experience and specific areas of interest and experiences that have shaped who they are today. For instructors, their subject-matter expertise and mastery of domain-relevant skills make them suited to mentor other adults. But for adult learners occupying the same apprentice role wherein they are actively in the learning process, what can two apprentices learn from each other? Quite a bit! Modern applications of social learning theory in both K-12 and adult learning spaces rely on student-centered and discussion-centered methods that focus on the sharing of experience and ideas as well as collaboration in problem-solving to lift the group toward set goals (Vygotsky, 1978). To provide opportunities for students to engage with their peers, consider including discussion boards, group projects, and peer review assessments.
Student-Instructor Engagement
The relationship with the instructor is one of the most valuable connections that students develop in a course. In fact, consistent and meaningful instructor presence is one of the most important drivers of student success and satisfaction, especially in online courses (Roddy et al., 2017).
The nature of online education creates a dichotomy between the role of the instructor as a mentor and guide and the role of the student as an autonomous self-director. That is, while student self-direction is necessary in the online course space, students should not be expected to completely direct their own learning without instructor guidance. Establishing a strong instructor presence online can both help guide students through course content and foster healthy student self-direction. To provide opportunities for students to engage with their instructor, consider implementing strategies for enhancing instructor presence in online courses, such as injecting personality into course content, establishing a presence in student discussion boards, and providing video or audio feedback on student assignments.
Conclusion
Ultimately, incorporating the three different types of engagement when developing a course aids in creating a robust learning environment. Providing opportunities for students to meaningfully interact with course content, their peers, and the instructor will foster student engagement and support the successful attainment of the intended learning outcomes.
References
CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning guidelines version 2.2.
The Community of Inquiry. (n.d.). About the framework: An introduction to the community of inquiry.
García-Cabrero, B., Hoover, M. L., Lajoie, S. P., Andrade-Santoyo, N. L., Quevedo-Rodríguez, L. M., & Wong, J. (2018). Design of a learning-centered online environment: A cognitive apprenticeship approach. Educational Technology Research & Development, 66(3), 813–835.
Great Schools Partnership. (2016, February 18). Student engagement. In The glossary of education reform.
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222.
Roddy, C., Amiet, D. L., Chung, J., Holt, C., Shaw, L., McKenzie, S., Garivaldis, F., Lodge, J. M., & Mundy, M. E. (2017). Applying best practice online learning, teaching, and support to intensive online environments: An integrative review. Frontiers in Education, 2(59), 1–10.
Sturman, N., Mitchell, B., & Mitchell, A. (2018). Nice to watch? Students evaluate online lectures. Clinical Teacher, 15(1), 19–23.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.