The dynamic and high-stakes nature of education and training demands that we rely on evidence-based practices and policies to make decisions about technology adoption and implementation within online learning ecosystems. To provide guidance to the field and practitioners, a broadly scoped literature review was conducted to identify the best practices for supporting and creating online learning ecosystems. This review provides a high-level summary of the findings organized into institutional and course best practices.
AndersenK. M.AveryM. D. (2008). Faculty teaching time: A comparison of web-based and face-to-face graduate nursing courses. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 5(1), 1-12.
2.
AngoliaM. G.PagliariL. R. (2016). Factors for successful evolution and sustainability of quality distance education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 19(3).
3.
BerkR. A. (2013). Face-to-face versus online course evaluations: A "consumer’s guide" to seven strategies. Journal of Online Teaching and Learning, 9(1), 140-148.
4.
BroadbentJ.PoonW. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1-13.
5.
BurnetteD. M. (2015). Negotiating the mine field: Strategies for effective online education administrative leadership in higher education institutions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 16(3), 13-25.
6.
CavanaghA. J.ChenX.BathgateM.FrederickJ.HanauerD. I.GrahamM. J. (2018). Trust, growth mindset, and student commitment to active learning in a college science course. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(1), ar10.
7.
ChiM. T. H.WylieR. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243.
8.
ChuangC.-Y.CraigS. D.FemianiJ. (2015). The role of certainty and time delay in student’s cheating decisions during online testing. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
9.
CollC.RocheraM. J.de GispertI.Diaz-BarrigaF. (2013). Distribution of feedback among teacher and students in online collaborative learning in small groups. Digital Education Review, 23, http://greav.ub.edu/der/
10.
CraigS. D.ChiM. T. H.VanLehnK. (2009). Improving classroom learning by collaboratively observing human tutoring videos while problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 779-789.
11.
CraigS. D.DouglasI. (2019). Distributed learning instructional theories. In WalcuttJ. J.SchatzS. (Eds.), Modernizing learning: Building the future learning ecosystem (pp. 43-60). Washington, DC: Government Publishing Office.
CraigS. D.SchroederN. L. (2020). Science of Learning and Readiness (SoLaR) Recommendation Report: Science of Learning Practices for Distributed Online Environment. Arizona State University. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD1105006
14.
DavisD.ChenG.HauffC.HoubenG. J. (2018). Activating learning at scale: A review of innovations in online learning strategies. Computers & Education, 125, 327-344.
15.
DooleyK. E.MurphreyT. P. (2000). How the perspectives of administrators, faculty, and support units impact the rate of distance education adoption. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 3(4), 1-12.
16.
DronJ. (2007). Designing the undesignable: Social software and control. Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 60-71.
17.
ErbS.ShawR. (2019). Culture Change. In WalcuttJ. J.SchatzS. (Eds.), Modernizing learning: Building the future learning ecosystem (pp. 339-356). Washington, DC: Government Publishing Office.
18.
GarrisonD. R. (2017). E-learning in the 21st century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for research and practice (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
19.
GiattinoT.StaffordM. (2019). Governance for learning ecosystems. In WalcuttJ. J.SchatzS. (Eds.), Modernizing learning: Building the future learning ecosystem (pp. 317-338). Washington, DC: Government Publishing Office.
20.
Hai-JewS. (2007). The trust factor in online instructor-led college courses. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, 19(3), 11-25.
21.
HattieJ. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY; Routledge.
22.
HattieJ.HodisF. A.KangS. H. (2020). Theories of motivation: Integration and ways forward. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101865
23.
JahnkeI.LeeY. M.PhamM.HeH.AustinL. (2020). Unpacking the inherent design principles of mobile microlearning. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25, 585-619.
24.
KimJ. Y.LimK. Y. (2019). Promoting learning in online, ill-structured problem solving: The effects of scaffolding type and metacognition level. Computers & Education, 138, 116-129.
25.
LiS.SiegleR. F.CraigS. D. (2021). Case report of the use of the Learning Science Evaluation checklist. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (pp. 561-565). Sage Publications.
26.
LiS.CraigS.D.SchroederN. L. (2023). Lessons learned from online learning at scale: A study of four exemplar learning organizations. TechTrends, 67, 84-97.
27.
Ludwig-HardmanS.DunlapJ. C. (2003). Learner support services for online students: Scaffolding for success. International Journal of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(1).
28.
MalagaR. A.KoppelN. B. (2017). A comparison of video formats for online teaching. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 10(1), 7-12.
29.
MayerR. E. (2017). Using multimedia for e-learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33, 403-423.
30.
MohammedG. S.WakilK.NawrolyS. S. (2018). The effectiveness of microlearning to improve students’ learning ability. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 3(3), 32-38
31.
MurphyJ.HanniganF.HruskaM.MedfordA.DiazG. (2016). Leveraging interoperable data to improve training effectiveness using the Experience API (xAPI). In International Conference on Augmented Cognition (pp. 46-54). Springer, Cham.
32.
NielsenJ.MolichR. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 249-256). ACM.
33.
NikouS. A.EconomidesA. A. (2018). Mobile-based micro-learning and assessment: Impact on learning performance and motivation of high school students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), 269-278.
34.
PaasF.SwellerJ. (2014). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In Mayer’sR. E. (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.) (pp. 27 - 42). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
35.
PanaderoE. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(422).
36.
PapamitsiouZ.EconomidesA. A. (2014). Learning analytics and educational data mining in practice: A systematic literature review of empirical evidence. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 49-64.
37.
ParkJ-H.ChoiH. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207-2017.
38.
RobyT.AsheS.SinghN.ClarkC. (2013). Shaping the online experience: How administrators can influence student and instructor perceptions through policy and practice. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 29-37.
39.
RoscoeR. D.BranaghanR.CookeN. J.CraigS. D. (2017). Human systems engineering and educational technology. In RoscoeR. D.CraigS. D.DouglasI. (Eds.), End-user considerations in educational technology design. (pp. 1-34). New York, NY: IGI Global.
40.
ScagnoliN. I.ChooJ.TianJ. (2019). Students’ insights on the use of video lectures in online classes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 399-414.
41.
SchatzS.ThaiK. P.CraigS. D.SchoenherrJ.LisJ.KolodnerJ. (2023). Human-Centered Design Tools. In GoodellJ (Ed.), The Learning Engineering Toolkit (pp. 279-302). Routledge.
42.
ShahrtashF. (2017). Multidimensional thinking in a community of inquiry (CoI) vs. critical thinking (CT). Budhi: A Journal of Ideas and Culture, 21(3), 14-43.
43.
ShubeckK. T.CraigS. D.HuX. (2016). Live-action mass-casualty training and virtual world training: A comparison. Proceedings of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (pp. 2103-2107). Los Angeles: SAGE.
44.
ShuteV. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of educational research, 78(1), 153-189.
45.
SiegleR. F.RoscoeR. D.SchroederN. L.CraigS. D. (2020). Immersive Learning Environments at Scale: Constraints and Opportunities. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (pp. 1165-1169). Sage Publications.
46.
SohoniS.CraigS. D.VedulaK. (2017). A blueprint for an ecosystem for supporting high quality education for engineering. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 30(4), 58-66.
47.
TaftS. H.KestenK.El-BannaM. M. (2019). One size does not fit all: Toward an evidence-based framework for determining online course enrollment sizes in higher education. Online Learning, 23(3), 188-233.
48.
ThaiK. P.CraigS. D.GoodellJ.LisJ.SchoenherrJ. R.KolodnerJ. (2023). Learning Engineering is Human-Centered. In GoodellJ (Ed.), The Learning Engineering Toolkit (pp. 83-124). Routledge.
49.
ThompsonT. L.MacDonaldC. J. (2005). Community building, emergent design and expecting the unexpected: Creating a quality eLearning experience. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(3), 233-249.
50.
TomeiL. (2006). The impact of online teaching on faculty load: Computing the ideal class size for online courses. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 531-541.
51.
TwyfordJ.CraigS. D. (2017). Modeling goal setting within a multimedia environment on complex physics content. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(3), 374-394.
52.
WalcuttJ.J.SchatzS. (2019). Modernizing learning. In WalcuttJ. J.SchatzS. (Eds.), Modernizing learning: Building the future learning ecosystem (pp. 3-16). Washington, DC: Government Publishing Office.
53.
WestR. E.JayJ.ArmstrongM.BorupJ. (2017). “Picturing Them Right in Front of Me”: Guidelines for Implementing Video Communication in Online and Blended Learning. TechTrends, 61(5), 461-469.
54.
ZippS. A.CraigS. D. (2019). The impact of user biases on interactions with virtual humans within a virtual world for emergency management training. Educational Technology Research & Design, 67, 1385–1404.
