Infusing instructional design principles into an active student-centred social learning framework

Social and participatory media offer a plethora of ways for students to communicate, collaborate, and learn in schools. Using a social learning approach, Casey (2013a) investigated ways that social media could be integrated into Australian public high school classrooms to enhance student learning. In the process, she developed a social learning framework as discussed in Casey (2013b). Similarly, Davidson-Shivers and Hulon (2013; Hulon & Daidson-Shivers, 2013) suggest ways to employ ID principles to prepare college instructors and pre-service teachers to integrate technology into classrooms. Prior to that, Davidson-Shivers with Rasmussen (2006) developed an instructional design (ID) model for creating effective Web-based learning environments. Through collaboration, Casey and Davidson-Shivers consider a wide range of social learning and instructional design principles and approaches to help develop frameworks for new media integration that can work within varying levels of education

Strategies Used to Evaluate Online Education

Evaluation is the process of determining the merit or worth of something (Gusky, 2000). Evaluation has a long history not only in education in general (Hogan, 2007; Worthen & Sanders, 1973), but also in the practice of instructional design, distance education, and online learning over the years (Ely & Plomp, 1996; Gagné, 1987; Moore & Anderson, 2003; Reiser, 2001; Seels & Richey, 1994). Online educators (i.e., instructors, instructional designers, administrators) in particular have had a specific interest in evaluation because critics have questioned the merit or worth of online education from its inception. Among other things, critics have questioned whether online education is as good as traditional face-to-face education (Allen & Seaman, 2017; Jaschik & Lederman, 2014).) This skepticism sparked hundreds of media comparison studies starting in the late 1990s by supporters and critics alike (see Bernard et al., 2004; Means, Toyama, Murphy, & Bakia, 2013; Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2009; Meyer, 2002, 2004; Phipps & Merisotis, 1999). These studies sought to compare student outcomes between online and face-to-face courses. The majority of these studies showed that there is no significant difference between online learning and face-to-face learning. Despite this, online educators continue to try to show that online education is as good as face-to-face education (McDonald, 2002). To complicate matters further, during the last decade, there has been an increased focus on accountability at all levels of education (Rasmussen, Davidson-Shivers, & Savenye, 2011). Because of this skepticism and increased need for accountability, as well as a general desire to create high-quality learning experiences, online educators have grappled with the best approaches to evaluate online education and in turn, create, and deliver high-quality online education. In the following chapter, we describe some of the different ways that online educators evaluate online education

Web-Based Learning: Design, Implementation and Evaluation

This second edition is a practical, easy-to-read resource on web-based learning. The book ably and clearly equips readers with strategies for designing effective online courses, creating communities of web-based learners, and implementing and evaluating based on an instructional design framework. Case example, case studies, and discussion questions extend readers skills, inspire discussion, and encourage readers to explore the trends and issues related to online instructional design and delivery.https://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/fac_books/1503/thumbnail.jp