[ Proceedings Contents ] [ Schedule ] [ Abstracts ] [ WAIER Home ]

In search of instructional design principles for online learning in higher education

Lou Siragusa
Curtin University of Technology
The assimilation of the Internet into higher education for delivering course materials to students has become common place. We have seen how the Internet has been successfully used to deliver courses entirely online as well as supporting traditional face-to-face classes. What is found, however, is that it is often just used as a depositary of information (such as course outlines and tutorial notes) for students to access, download and to print out. Educators are hearing from students dissatisfaction with the use of the Internet for learning as it appears that some costs of the course are being transferred to the students without any apparent benefits. Much of the online course development work being carried out is not informed by the vast body of knowledge of existing instructional design principles. There are ongoing concerns with how online learning can be made more meaningful to students.

This paper presents a research study currently in progress that seeks to identify effective instructional design principles for online learning. The initial phase of this research will be presented with focus on how the survey instruments are being developed. The survey instruments are intended to collect students' and lecturers' perceptions of effective instructional design principles.

Introduction

With the use of the Internet for learning now well entrenched into higher education, students and lecturers are becoming familiar with online learning environments. Courses, units and/or modules are being delivered either entirely through an educational Web-site, or they are delivered in traditional face-to-face classes with a supporting Web-site from which learning materials can be accessed. Students who have progressed beyond their first year in higher education are likely to have seen a number of different ways in which units are being delivered online. With this continuing drive to develop learning materials for delivery to students via the Internet, the question of how to develop educationally effective online learning environments requires continuing investigation (Chen, 1998, p. 87).

The vast body of knowledge and research referred to as instructional design has been largely overlooked by designers and developers of online learning environments. The Internet has undoubtedly provided a unique method of communication and delivery for participants in higher education (McBeath & Siragusa, 2000). Although creating Web pages is relatively easy, creating effective and useful Web pages is still difficult (Pan, 1998). It has been argued that existing principles of instructional design has application to this relative new medium in which all designers of educational Web-sites need to be acquainted with.

This paper presents a study in progress that aims to identify effective instructional design principles for online learning environments in higher education. It emphasises the development of survey instruments used to collect students' and lecturers' perceptions of the effectiveness of online learning environments.

Research questions

This research asked the following two questions:
  1. What are the factors that make for effective instructional design in Web-based learning in higher education? This involves examining students' and lecturers' perceptions of what elements make for effective online learning environments. This also involves an investigation into how existing principles of instructional design can be applied to online learning.

  2. What are the learning strategies that influence students' successful learning in Web-based learning environments? This involves examining how students are being instructed on how to use online learning and what learning strategies do lecturers encourage their students to use. This also involves an investigation into students' satisfaction towards the use of online learning.

Background

Oliver & Herrington (1996) suggested that "... using hypertext to organise and retrieve information resembles the workings of human memory and cognition far more closely than does the organisational structure of linear text." This would suggest that there are instructional design issues that need to be addressed when writing in HTML (Hyper Text Mark-up Language). Documents created in HTML behave differently from a typical word processed document. The way in which people read an HTML page on the Internet is different from the way they read a printed word processed document. Over recent years, authors have been documenting these differences and have acknowledged the need for further investigation into instructional design for Internet delivery. Greening (1998) argued that "...generally, instructional designers either do not always appear to take advantage of the hypermedia technology, or do so without pedagogical foundation."

Published literature regarding the use of the Internet for learning frequently comment on the need for sound instructional design to create effective online learning environments Chen (1998). The literature also reveals that decisions made at the instructional design phase of course development can influence and encourage different learning strategies that can be used by students (Smith & Ragan, 1999, pp. 138, 233-234; McLoughlin & Oliver, 1998; Bull, Kimball, & Stansberry, 1998, pp. 40-41).

The following will present some of the instructional design principles and learning strategies that were investigated by educators and researchers. These have been categorised as: Structure, Content, Motivation, Feedback/Help, Interaction, and Learning Strategies. The types of questions presented in these investigations have contributed to the design of the survey instruments used in this research.

Structure

The structure describes how the information is displayed and organised on the Web-site. As the lecturer (or unit coordinator) is often left to the task of designing the structure and appearance of the Web-site, here enters the question of the lecturer's (designer's) ability to carry out the instructional design task (Ravitz, 1998, pp. 323-332). Students are capable of determining what features, including the structure and appearance, they like most and least about the Web-site they use (Chandler & Maddux, 1998, p. 1059; Fraser, 1998, p. 8).

Content

The development of the course unit's content is the designer's major focus. The designer's task is to determine the most appropriate way of delivering the unit's content to the students. In many studies, students have been asked to give their perceptions of the content's quality they find on Web based learning environments (eg., Pujola, 1998, Appendix 1; Schlough & Bhuripanyo, 1998, p. 100). Students have been asked to give a rating from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree" to statements such as: "The objectives were clearly stated," "The content was relevant," "The content covers all essential information (both theory and practice)," "The content contained detailed step-by-step instructions," and so on. Swan, Bowman, Holmes, Sylvie, & Vargas (1998-99, pp. 98-99) collected and transcribed students' personal narratives regarding their general impressions of the content that was presented to them as they explored a particular Web-site. Students have also been asked to give their perception of the effectiveness of using the Internet for finding information relating to the unit they are studying (eg., MacDonald & Mason, 1998, p. 41).

Motivation

There are a number of factors that contribute to making a Web site pleasing to use such as the appearance of the Web site, the use of text and graphics, the amount of materials presented on each page, and so on (Summerville, 1998, pp. 431-437). The effectiveness of the lecturer has also been attributed to students' levels of motivation when using online learning environments (Agarwal & Day, 1998, p. 106; Foley & Schuck, 1998). How students cope with using online learning environments attributes to students' motivation (Everett, 1998, pp. 126-128). Other factors such as: whether students are encouraged to participate and to ask questions; the type of help available to students; students being able to keep to a schedule; and so on, contribute to how students cope with using the Internet for learning (Mory, Gambill, & Browning, 1998, pp. 105-106). How students persevere with technical problems and how these problems are resolved also contribute to students' levels of motivation (Mory et al., 1998, p. 106).

Feedback/help

Web-based learning environments should be able to provided students with a mechanism to: submit their assignments; to receive prompt feedback; seek help with technical problems; and, to seek help with coursework matters (Thomas, Carswell, Price, & Petre, 1998, p. 155). Online courseware environments (such as WebCT) have facilities for students and lecturers to be able to send and receive assignments and feedback. How effectively these facilities are used will affect the quality of the help and feedback that students receive.

Interaction

The use of interaction in Web-based learning environments has often been described as the most important feature of a Web-based learning environment (Wagner, 1998, pp. 418-420; Forsyth, 1996, p. 28). Different types of interaction includes interaction between students and interaction between students and their lecturer. How students and lecturers have used online interaction to assist with student learning has often been the subject of investigation in online learning environments (eg., Jiang & Ting, 1998; Graham & Scarborough, 1999).

Learning strategies

Through the process of thoughtful instructional design, effective learning strategies for students can be developed (Smith & Ragan, 1999, p. 138). Finding effective learning strategies for students to use has been the subject of investigation by educators working with online learning (eg., Shih, Ingebritsen, Pleasants, Flickinger, & Brown, 1998, p. 363; Hawkes, Cambre, & Lewis, 1998, p. 7; Bull, Kimball & Stansberry, 1998, pp. 40-41). When students are observed using successful learning strategies, they should be encouraged to continue using them (Smith & Ragan, 1999, p. 138). Students, for example, have been observed responding positively about taking a more active role in dealing with the course content and, therefore, were favourable towards the learning environment (Oliver & Omari, 1999).

An instructional design model

In a study that searches for effective instructional principles in online learning environments, existing models of instructional design should be examined to identify elements that are pertinent to this medium. Numerous models of instructional design have been developed for the purpose of analysis, strategy development and evaluation of course and lesson design (Smith & Ragan, 1999, p. 7). One widely accepted model is the Dick and Carey Systems Approach Model for Designing Instruction (Dick & Carey, 1996, p. 2-3) as shown in Figure 1. This model has assisted with providing a framework for developing survey instruments for this research.

Figure 1

Figure 1: The Dick and Carey systems approach model for designing instruction
(Dick & Carey, 1996, pp. 3-4)

Methodology

Quantitative and qualitative research paradigms

This research will employ elements from both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The quantitative and qualitative methods both rely upon the use of descriptive research in the form of questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Descriptive research is mostly concerned with describing and interpreting what is or what exists (Cohen & Manion, 1994, p. 67). These methods allow for the collection of data from a large group of students studying online and their lecturers without interfering (non-experimental) with how their classes are being delivered. It is impractical to interfere with a large number of classes subjecting them to various experimental procedures that test various instructional design interventions. Collecting students' perceptions of the effectiveness of their class Web-site is an achievable and practical method of inquiry. Students within a learning environment are in a good position to evaluate instruction because of their experience with many other learning environments (Fraser, 1998, p. 8). Students in higher education have also been exposed to many varieties of instruction and are, therefore, able to obtain reasonably accurate perceptions of the effectiveness of the design of online learning environments.

Triangulation

Researcher authors have commonly argued that good research practice involves the use of multiple methods to enhance the validity of the research findings (Mathison, 1988). Methodological triangulation was described by Denzin (1970) as one of the six principle types of triangulation. This type of triangulation allows for different research methods to be employed on the same object of study as a check on validity (Cohen & Manion, 1994, pp. 236-238). The quantitative data (the major component involving approximately 400 subjects) to be collected for this research allows for statistical measurement to describe the phenomena studied. The qualitative data to be collected will assist with clarifying and supporting the quantitative data. Subjects to be use for the qualitative data collection will be specifically selected from subjects that will be used in the collection of quantitative data.

Research design

Although this research will employ quantitative and qualitative research methods, this is predominately a quantitative research due to the nature of the data collection process and the data analysis techniques. Figure 2 provides a summary of the research design.

Figure 2

Figure 2: Summary of the research design

Design of survey instruments

Cognitive learning theories are currently the dominant theoretical influences on instructional design. (Smith & Ragan, 1999, p. 20). Although discussions about these theories would go beyond the scope of this paper, they have provided important foundations for instructional design principles that exist today. These principles are represented in models such as the one shown in Figure 1. In order for this research to achieve its major outcome of developing instructional design principles for online learning, an investigation into how users' (learners and instructors) perception of effective instructional design for online learning environments relate to widely accepted models of instructional design.

As this research will focus on higher education, the questionnaires and interviews will be aimed at students and lecturers in universities within Western Australia. This will involve examining as many online educational Web sites as possible by finding online lecturers and students willing to participate. By questioning as many students and lecturers as possible, a clearer picture of what they perceived to be effective instructional design principles in online learning can be made.

The task, therefore, was to create questions that solicit students' perception of how well instructional design principles had been applied to their online learning environment. From the instructional design model shown in Figure 1, the questions in Table 1 were developed. These questions assisted with collecting students' perceptions of the effectiveness of each stage of the instructional design process.

Table 1: Questions developed from Dick and Carey's systems approach
model for designing instruction (Dick & Carey, 1996)

Stages Questions
Assess needs to
identify goal(s)		The learning materials were meaningful to me.
I clearly understood what was expected of me.
I clearly understood what resources (eg., textbooks, software, etc.) I required to assist me with my learning.
I clearly understood when I should use these resources throughout the unit.
Conduct instructional
analysis		 I clearly understood the steps that I needed to follow throughout the unit.
I understood how the skills and knowledge that I learned throughout this unit helped to build my overall knowledge of the subject matter in this unit.
Analyse learners
and contexts		 I felt that I had enough prior knowledge to succeed in this unit.
The learning materials in this unit fitted in with my stage of development in this course.
Write performance
objectives		 The objectives of this unit were clearly described to me.
I clearly understood what skills and knowledge I had to learn in this unit.
Develop assessment
instruments		 I clearly understood whether I had the required prerequisites to succeed in this unit.
The test(s) in this unit provided a clear indication of what I had learned in this unit.
Develop instructional
strategy		 The learning materials for this unit were well organised and followed a logical sequence.
This unit was interesting.
The online learning materials were appealing.
The objectives for each topic were clearly defined.
Which of the following activities did you participate in:
   * Group discussions
   * Case studies
   * Simulations
   * Projects
   * Other (Please describe)
Develop and select
instructional materials		 The online component of this unit really helped me with my learning.
My lecturer/tutor put careful thought into the development of the online learning materials (topic notes, lecturer notes, lab notes, etc).
Please comment on how the online learning materials that you worked with could be improved.
Design and conduct
formative evaluation
of instruction		 I had no difficulties learning new information in this unit.
I learned all I needed to know for this unit.
I learned information that is relevant to me
I can use the information that I learned with other units within my course.
The content in this unit held my attention.
I felt confident working through the course content.
The content was clear and easy to understand.
I was satisfied with my progress of learning as I worked through this unit.
Revise instruction Please comment on the strengths of the content in this unit.
Please comment on the weaknesses of the content in this unit.
Please comment on how the content could be improved.
Design and conduct
summative evaluation		 My results were better having a unit with an online support than units without online support.
I found it easier to study with a unit with online support.
It was more enjoyable to study a unit with online support.
Please comment on the worst things about studying online.
Please comment on the best things about studying online.
Please make any other comments you wish to make including suggestions for change.

As the survey instruments are seeking students' and lecturers' perceptions (affective), the majority of the questions were written in a five-point Likert-scale style format. The questionnaires also contained a combination of factual questions and open ended questions. The wording of the questions that appeared in the final survey were modified so as to relate to online learning environments in higher education. The Background section presented a number of studies that used questions to identify instructional design principles for online learning. These questions were also incorporated into the survey instruments for this research.

Table 2 shows the dimensions used for the questionnaire and interview schedule to be administered to the students. Table 3 shows the dimensions used for the questionnaire and interview schedules to be administered to the lecturers. The questionnaires for both students and lecturers are to be administered online. The user, after completing the questionnaire, will then click on the Submit button that will pass on the responses to the researcher via email. The responses will then be sorted (by the use of a macro) into an Excel worksheet ready for analysis. The interview schedules will be modified according to the responses obtained from the questionnaire and will be administered to either individual participants or in a group interview setting.

Table 2: Dimensions used for the student questionnaire and interview schedule

DimensionDescription
Structure/
Organisation		This described how the information was displayed to students on the Web. This also described in what order the learning materials were found.
ContentThis described the content of the learning materials that students worked through. Content included the subject/course content, assignments, activities, case studies, lecturer/tutorial/laboratory notes, reading materials, tests, etc.
MotivationThis described how the learning materials and the online learning environment were made appealing and interesting for students to increase their levels of motivation.
Feedback/helpThis described how students obtained coursework feedback and technical help.
InteractionThis described how students communicated with each other and with their instructor.
Learning strategiesThis described what learning strategies instructors encouraged students to use and what learning strategies students found effective.

Table 3: Dimensions used for the lecturer questionnaire and interview schedule

DimensionDescription
Importance of the use of the Internet for teachingThis described lecturers' attitudes towards online learning. This examined how important to the lecturer is the use of the Internet for student learning.
Abilities to use the Internet for teachingThis described what skills do lecturers have to be able to create materials for online learning. This also described the time taken for lecturers to learn appropriate skills for online delivery of classes.
Internet support and trainingThis described what sort of technical support for online learning is available to lecturers and where it is utilised. This also described the amount of training available for delivery of classes online.
Decision making processThis described the level of inputs lecturers have with the decision making process of online learning development and administration.
Development activitiesThis described the amount of involvement lecturers have with the design and development of online learning environments. This also described what informs lecturers about instructional design principles for online learning including what learning strategies they encourage their students to use.

Online questionnaires

The online questionnaires are currently on a server at Curtin University of Technology for piloting. The online questionnaires can be found at the following URLs:

Survey instrumentURL
Student questionnaire http://learnt.smec.curtin.edu.au/Siragusa/students.htm
Lecturer questionnaire http://learnt.smec.curtin.edu.au/Siragusa/lecturers.htm

Questionnaire piloting

The questionnaires will be administered to a significantly large population of students and lecturers, and will collect a substantially large quantity of data for analysis and interpretation. Piloting, therefore, will be critical to ensure that the questionnaires contains appropriately constructed questions that will adequately assist with answering the research questions. As both the questionnaires (for students and lecturers) are to administered online, the "mechanics" of the how the responses are submitted also need to be piloted to ensure that the data can be easily collected and sorted for analysis.

A difficulty with piloting a questionnaire in an online format is getting feedback from students and lecturers. With paper-based questionnaires, respondents can just write any comments about the questions (such as "I don't understand what this question means") directly onto the questionnaire. To overcome this difficulty, text boxes (coloured green) were provided on the pilot questionnaires at the end of each section so that the respondents could type in comments about the questions.

Students from the Faculty of Education at Curtin University of Technology were selected for the initial pilot of the student questionnaire. The students who participated attended a face-to-face delivered class that was supported with an online component. Lecturers from the Faculty of Education at Curtin University were also asked to participate in the initial pilot. The results from these pilots are presented in the following section.

Initial reactions from both lecturers and students to the pilot were generally positive. There were minor comments provided by the lecturers and students about some of the questions in the online questionnaires. These comments resulted in modifications of both the student and lecturer online questionnaires.

Preliminary data analysis and results

The following will present some preliminary results from the initial pilot of the online questionnaire for students and lecturers. These results are presented here to demonstrate the types of responses students have submitted and how the initial analysis of the data may appear in the final study. At the time of writing, eight students participated in the initial pilot of the online questionnaire for students. Table 4 shows the brief statistics for the affective questions in the "Structure" section of the student questionnaire. Table 5 shows examples of item response charts for questions 20 and 21.

At the time of writing, two lecturers participated in the initial pilot of the online questionnaire for lecturers. Table 6 shows the brief statistics for the affective questions in the "Importance of the use of the Internet for teaching" section of the lecturer questionnaire. As with Table 5, Table 7 shows examples of item response charts for questions 13 and 14.

Table 4: Brief statistics for the affective "Structure" questions from the student questionnaire
(analysed in Lertap 5 - Nelson, 2000)

Res = 01 2345pol. means.d.cor.
20

 25%13%63%
 +4.380.86- 0.02
21

38% 38%25%
+ 3.880.78- 0.14
22


 13%88%
+4.88 0.330.48
23
13% 63%25%

 -3.880.60- 0.05
24
13%50%38% +5.250.660.29
2513%
 13%38%38%
 +3.881.270.42
26
13% 63%25%

 -3.880.60 0.48
2713%13% 50%13%13%
 +3.001.120.55
28
13%
50%25%13% +4.251.090.09
29

 13%38%50%
 +4.380.700.35
30
13% 88%


 +2.880.330.48
31

 50%25%25%
 +3.750.830.22
32

 100%


 -4.000.000.00
NR = No response, SD = Strongly disagree, D = Disagree, U = Uncertain, A = Agree, SA = Strongly agree

Table 5: Item response charts for questions 20 and 21 from Table 4
(analysed in Lertap 5 - Nelson, 2000)

Table 5

Table 6: Brief statistics for the affective "Importance of the use of the Internet for teaching"
questions from the lecturer questionnaire (analysed in Lertap 5 - Nelson, 2000)

Res =    0   1 2345pol. means.d.cor.
13
50%50%
 +4.500.501.00
14

100%
+5.000.000.00
15

 50%50%

 +3.500.501.00
16

 50%50%

 +3.500.50- 1.00
17

 50%
50%
 +4.001.001.00
18
100%

 +4.000.000.00
19
50%
50% +5.001.001.00
20

 50%50%

 +3.500.50- 1.00
21
50%

50%
 +3.501.501.00
22
100%

 +4.000.000.00
23

100%
 +5.000.000.00
24
50%
50% +5.001.001.00

Table 7: Item response charts for questions 13 and 14 from Table 6
(analysed in Lertap 5 - Nelson, 2000)

Table 7

The results presented in Table 4 indicate an average mean of approximately 4.09. This would normally be considered a favourable result as 4 represents Agree to the positively constructed questions. There are, however, some questions that may give the wrong impression such as question 30 "There was a good mix of media (eg., graphics, sound and animation)." This question may not be relevant to this particular Web-site as sound and animation may not be needed for this Web-site. Question 30 may unnecessarily lower the average mean. The final analysis, therefore, will need to take these factors into account.

The results of the data collected at this stage are inconclusive as the sample presented here is quite small. The purpose of the data collection was to pilot the questionnaires to assess the validity of the questions and to test the response submission process. The results shown in Tables 4, 5, 6 and 7 demonstrate how the data from the actual sample population may be analysed.

Conclusion

From the initial piloting of the questionnaires, students and lecturers that participated have, on the whole, reacted positively towards the questionnaires. As the piloting progresses, there may be further alterations to the questionnaires before they are released to the general population. After the piloting of the online questionnaires, the interview schedules will also be piloted.

At the time of writing this paper, the author is still seeking lecturers and students in higher education who would be interested in participating in this study. Interest can be registered to the author via email at: siragusa@ses.curtin.edu.au. All comments are most welcome.

References

Agarwal, R., & Day, E. (1998). The Impact of the Internet on Economic Education. The Journal of Economic Education, 29(2), 99-110.

Bull, K. S., Kimball, S. L., & Stansberry, S. (1998). Instructional Design in Computer Mediated Learning. Paper presented at Coming Together: Preparing for Rural Special Education in the 21st Century. Conference Proceedings of the American Council on Rural Special Education (18th, Charleston, SC, March 25-28, 1998), USA, Oklahoma.

Chandler, B., & Maddux, C. D. (1998). Student Use of Instructors' Web Sites. Paper presented at SITE 98: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (9th, Washington, DC, March 10-14, 1998). Proceedings, USA, Nevada.

Chen, L. L. (1998). Web-Based Distance Instruction: Design and Implications of a Cybercourse Model. Paper presented at the Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) Sponsored by the Research and Theory Division (20th, St. Louis, MO, February 18-22, 1998), USA, Michigan.

Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research Methods in Education (4th ed). London: Routledge.

Denzin, N. K. (1970). The Research Act in Sociology: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Method. London: The Butterworth Group.

Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction (4th ed). New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.

Everett, D. R. (1998). Taking Instruction Online: The Art of Delivery. Paper presented at the SITE 98: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (9th, Washington, DC, March 10-14, 1998). Proceedings, USA, Kentucky.

Foley, G., & Schuck, S. (1998). Web-based conferencing: Pedagogical asset or constraint? Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 14(2), 122-140. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet14/foley.html

Forsyth, I. (1996). Teaching and learning materials and the Internet. London: Kogan Page.

Fraser, B. J. (1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and applications. Learning Environments Research, 1, 7-33.

Graham, M., & Scarborough, H. (1999). Computer mediated communication and collaborative learning in an undergraduate distance education environment. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 15(1), 20-46. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet15/graham.html

Greening, T. (1998). WWW support of student learning: A case study. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 49-59. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet14/greening.html

Hawkes, M., Cambre, M., & Lewis, M. (1998). The Ohio SchoolNet Telecommunity Evaluation. Paper presented at the North Central Regional Educational Lab., Oak Brook, IL, USA, Illinois.

Jiang, M., & Ting, E. (1998). Course Design, Instruction, and Students' Online Behaviors: A Study of Instructional Variables and Students' Perceptions of Online Learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Diego, CA, April 13-17, 1998), USA, New York.

MacDonald, J., & Mason, R. (1998). Information Skills and Resource-Based Learning in an Open University Course. The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), 38-42.

Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13-17.

McBeath, C. and Siragusa, L. (2000). The place of instructional design in higher education in the computer age. In Flexible Learning for a Flexible Society, Proceedings of ASET-HERDSA 2000 Conference. Toowoomba, Qld, 2-5 July. ASET and HERDSA. http://www.ascilite.org.au/aset-archives/confs/aset-herdsa2000/procs/mcbeath.html

McLoughlin, C., & Oliver, R. (1998). Meeting the needs of gifted and talented students through technology supported distance teaching. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 35-48. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet14/mcloughlin.html

Mory, E. H., Gambill, L. E., & Browning, J. B. (1998). Instruction on the Web: The online student's perspective. Paper presented at the SITE 98: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (9th, Washington, DC, March 10-14, 1998). Proceedings." USA, North-Carolina, Washington, DC.

Nelson, L. R. (2000). Lertap. Perth: Curtin University of Technology.

Oliver, R., Herrington, J. and Omari, A. (1996). Creating effective instructional materials for the World Wide Web. Proceedings AusWeb96. http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw96/educn/oliver/

Oliver, R., & Omari, A. (1999). Using online technologies to support problem based learning: Learners' responses and perceptions. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 15(1), 58-79. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet15/oliver.html

Pan, A. C. (1998). Optimize the Web for Better Instruction. Paper presented at SITE 98: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (9th, Washington, DC, March 10-14, 1998). Proceedings. USA, New-Jersey, Washington, DC.

Pujola, J. T. (1998). Ewebuation. Edinburgh-Working-Papers-in-Applied-Linguistics, 9, 104-115.

Ravitz, J. (1998). Conditions that facilitate teachers' Internet use in schools with high Internet connectivity: Preliminary findings. Paper presented at the Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) Sponsored by the Research and Theory Division (20th, St. Louis, MO, February 18-22, 1998), USA, Massachusetts.

Schlough, S., & Bhuripanyo, S. (1998). The Development and Evaluation of the Internet Delivery of the Course "Task Analysis". Paper presented at SITE 98: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (9th, Washington, DC, March 10-14, 1998). Proceedings, USA, Wisconsin.

Shih, C. C., Ingebritsen, T., Pleasants, J., Flickinger, K., & Brown, G. (1998). Learning Strategies and Other Factors Influencing Achievement via Web Courses. Paper presented at Distance Learning '98. Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning (14th, Madison, WI, August 5-7, 1998), USA, Iowa.

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (1999). Instructional Design ( 2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Summerville, J. B. (1998). The Role of Awareness of Cognitive Style in Hypermedia. Paper presented at the Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) Sponsored by the Research and Theory Division (20th, St. Louis, MO, February 18-22, 1998), USA, Kansas.

Swan, K., Bowman, J., Holmes, A., Sylvie, S., & Vargas, J. (1998-99). "Reading" The Web: Making Sense On the Information Superhighway. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 27(2), 95-104.

Thomas, P., Carswell, L., Price, B., & Petre, M. (1998). A Holistic Approach To Supporting Distance Learning Using the Internet: Transformation, Not Translation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 29(2), 149-161.

Wagner, E. D. (1998). Interaction Strategies for Online Training Designs. Paper presented at Distance Learning '98. Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning (14th, Madison, WI, August 5-7, 1998), USA, California.

Author: Lou Siragusa
2 Urbahns Crescent, Bateman WA 6150
Ph: +61 8 9332 1114 Fax: +61 8 9332 1114
Email: siragusa@ses.curtin.edu.au

Please cite as: Siragusa, L. (2001). In search of instructional design principles for online learning in higher education. Proceedings Western Australian Institute for Educational Research Forum 2000. http://www.waier.org.au/archives/forums/2001/siragusa.html

[ Proceedings Contents ] [ Schedule ] [ Abstracts ] [ WAIER Home ]
Created 8 Sep 2001. Last revised 30 Aug 2021. URL: http://www.waier.org.au/archives/forums/2001/siragusa.html
The Forum Proceedings are © Western Australian Institute for Educational Research. However
the copyright for each individual article remains with the authors of the article.
HTML: Roger Atkinson [rjatkinson@bigpond.com]