The rise of online courses has created an ongoing demand for instructional designers in higher education. Collaboration between faculty and instructional designers in developing online engineering courses has therefore increased. Potential challenges during the collaboration can be addressed when faculty and instructional designers have a mutual understanding of instructional design principles. This article provides a resource kit that contains a synthesis of online learning theories and examples collected from online engineering courses. These examples can help create a course design that recognizes students’ cognitive load and provides meaningful interactions.
AhmadG. (2015).
Instructional strategy based on associative relevance improves e-learning. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning,
5(3), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.17706/ijeeee.2015.5.3.165-172
2.
BainK. (2004). What the best college teachers do.
Harvard University Press.
BellR. L.SmetanaL. K. (2008).
Using computer simulations to enhance science teaching and learning. National Science Teachers Association,
3, 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.605182
5.
BerretD. (2016, February 29). Instructional design: Demand growth for a new breed of academic. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/
6.
BransfordJ. D.JohnsonM. K. (1972).
Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,
11(6), 717–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5371(72)80006-9
7.
BriganceS. K. (2011).
Leadership in online learning in higher education: Why instructional designers for online learning should lead the way?Performance Improvement,
50(3), 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.20262
8.
ChienY.-T.ChangC.-Y. (2011).
Comparison of different instructional multimedia designs for improving student science-process skill learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology,
21(1), 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9286-3
9.
Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. The Free Press.
10.
EitelA.ScheiterK.SchülerA.NyströmM.HolmqvistK. (2013).
How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: Evidence for scaffolding. Learning and Instruction,
28, 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.002
FreemanS.EddyS. L.McDonoughM.SmithM. K.OkoroaforN.JordtH.WenderothM. P. (2014).
Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
14.
GagneR. M. (1985). The condition of learning and theory of instruction.
Rinchart & Winston.
15.
GeriN.WinerA.ZaksB. (2017). Probing the effect of interactivity in online video lectures on the attention span of students: A learning analytics approach. In Eshet-AlkalaiY.BlauI.CaspiA.GeriN.KalmanY.Silber-VarodV. (Eds.), In Proceedings of the 12th Chais Conference for the Study of Innovation and Learning Technologies: Learning in the Technological Era (pp. 39–44). The Open University of Israel.
16.
GlazatovT. (2012).
Applying instructional design system theory to mobile learning environments. Journal of Applied Learning Technology,
2(2), 231–256.
17.
GuoP. J.KimJ.Rubin, (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference (pp. 41–50). ACM.
HarskampE. G.MayerR. E.SuhreC. (2007).
Does the modality principle for multimedia learning apply to science classrooms?Learning and Instruction,
17(5), 465–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.010
20.
HunterM. (1994). Mastery teaching: Increasing instructional effectiveness in elementary and secondary schools, colleges, and universities.
Corwin.
KangY.RitzhauptA. D. (2015).
A job announcement analysis of educational technology professional positions: Knowledge, skills, and abilities. Journal of Educational Technology Systems,
43(3), 231–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239515570572
24.
Kekkonen‐MonetaS.MonetaG. B. (2002).
E‐learning in Hong Kong: Comparing learning outcomes in online multimedia and lecture versions of an introductory computing course. British Journal of Educational Technology,
33(4), 423–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00279
LagerstromL.JohanesP.PonsukcharoenM. U. (2015, June 14). The myth of the six-minute rule: Student engagement with online videos. In Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, WA. https://www.asee.org/public/conferences/56/papers/13527/view
27.
LammersW. J.MurphyJ. J. (2002).
A profile of teaching techniques used in the university classroom: A descriptive profile of a US public university. Active Learning in Higher Education,
3(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468742002003001785
28.
LemovD. (2010). Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that put students on the path to college.
Jossey-Bass.
MayerR. E. (2003).
The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction,
13(2), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/s09594752(02)00016-6
31.
MayerR. E. (2006). Ten research-based principles of multimedia learning. In O’NeilH. F.PerezR. S. (Eds.), Web-based learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 371–390).
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32.
MayerR. E. (2014). Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment principles. In MayerR. E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 345–368).
Cambridge University Press.
33.
MayerR. E. (2017).
Using multimedia for e‐learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
33(5), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12197
34.
MillerG. A. (1956).
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review,
63(2), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158
35.
MorenoR.ValdezA. (2005).
Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development,
53(3), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504796
36.
OstrowK. S.HeffernanN. T. (2014, July 4–7). Testing the multimedia principle in the real world: A comparison of video vs. text feedback in authentic middle school math assignments. In StamperJ.PardosZ.MavrikisM.McLarenB. M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th international conference on educational data mining (pp. 296–299), The International Educational Data Mining Society.
37.
RiendeauD. (2013).
Delightful beginnings. The Physics Teacher,
51, 380.
38.
SwannW. (2013).
The impact of applied cognitive learning theory on engagement with eLearning Courseware. Journal of Learning Design,
6(1), 61–74.
TitsworthB. S. (2004).
Students’ notetaking: The effects of teacher immediacy and clarity. Communication Education,
53(4), 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/0363452032000305922
