FACTORS IMPACTING THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF AN
EFFECTIVE ELEMENTARY (GRADES THREE – FIVE) ONLINE PROGRAM
by
SHARON R SYNAN
A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty
of the University of West Georgia in Partial Fulfillment
of the
Requirements for the Degree
of
Doctor of Education
CARROLLTON, GEORGIA
20??
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Public education and the school environment are both complex (Cohen, 2003). Shirky
(2008) wrote of the hesitation to innovate in an organization stating, “more people will
remember you saying yes to a failure than no to a radical but promising idea” (p.246). It is
argued the organization of education is even more weary and hesitant to innovate than traditional
business organizations because of the high stakes when dealing with students and their future,
safety, and educational development. These high stakes tend to persuade leaders and policy
makers in education to play it safe and do the things that have traditionally worked because they
already know the results (Lehmann, 2008). Innovation and change in education have been
notoriously slow but that is changing. “As we head toward the 21st century, the pace of change is
accelerating (Busick & Inos, 1992). Change is a process not an event (Fullan & Stiegelbauer,
1991). Technology advancement is credited for having led to a change in the 20th century that
was revolutionary, as the Internet provided new opportunities for learning (Hemschik, 2008). It
has been said, however, in the 21st century change is not enough. In the 21st century education
will need to be reinvented (McLeod, 2008).
Online learning opportunities in K-12 environments are growing tremendously.
According to a study conducted by Blackboard (2009), 29% of middle school students and 36%
of high school students had experience with an online class. These statistics represented an 80%
increase in secondary education. The K-12 education environment is right at the threshold of
unprecedented change and virtual education is central to the transformation (Lips, 2010; U.S.
Department of Education, 2009). Reports from past years indicate a significant increase in the
number of states providing online K-12 programs (Watson, 2005, Gemin & Ryan, 2008; Watson
& Ryan, 2006, 2007; Watson, Gemin, Ryan & Wicks, 2009). The number of students enrolled in
virtual education is reported at 1.03 million in 2007-2008, and the student enrollment is
increasing annually at 30% (iNACOL, 2009). Additionally, states like Georgia have adopted
policy changes that have increased the sense of urgency to develop and provide more online and
virtual opportunities for all students (Senate Bill 285, 2012).
Background
The policies, procedures, and ideas of K- 12 public education are changing. Recent trends
in United States policy (Hassel & Terrell, 2004; U.S. Department of Education, 2004) support
the continued expansion of online learning opportunities aimed at elementary- and secondaryschool students (Rice, 2009). Online learning in the United States was used initially to allow
school districts to offer courses they would not be able to offer otherwise (Watson &Gemin,
2008). As more scrutiny and high pressure to maximize online learning opportunities for K-12
students continues to expand so do the concerns and the scrutiny over evaluating the
effectiveness and the ability to scale out the programs considering the costs, needs, and the
barriers associated with new development (Freedman, Darrow, & Watson, 2002). The decisions
that are made by leadership in schools and government on behalf of education have far reaching
and in some case unpredictable impacts not only on our systems of education but also on the
students as individuals that are served. Blomeyer (2002) warns it is absolutely critical that further
development and rapid growth be carried forward with great consideration and in a systematic
process.
Online learning could potentially be a transformative answer to teaching and learning by
making instruction more personalized and by enhancing the experiences and quality of learning.
Online learning research has been shown as an effective alternative to improve student
performance even among students of diverse groups (iNACOL, 2009b).
Forty-two states currently offer supplemental programs, full-time online programs, or a
combination of both supplemental and full-time programs (Watson & Ryan, 2007). Cyberschools are now operating at least to some degree within the state limits in every state (Long,
2004). Survey research by Project Tomorrow found that “both students and parents see online
learning as a key to changing the traditional learning paradigm by providing instruction that is
more individualized to students’ unique needs” (Project Tomorrow, 2012 p. 6).
Definitions of Key Terms
The following key terms are used in the research and referred to in the Literature Review.
1. ADDIE - which stands for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation.
2. Asynchronous communication: Communication where the message is stored until the
receivers find it convenient to retrieve it. E-mail and computer conferencing are examples of
asynchronous communication (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
3. Blended learning occurs any time a student learns in part in a supervised brick-and-mortar
place, away from home, and at least in part through online delivery, with some element of
student control over time, place, path, and/or pace.
4. Cognitive load theory has been designed to provide guidelines intended to assist in the
presentation of information in a manner that encourages the activities of learners that optimize
intellectual performance" (Sweller, van Merriënboer, and Paas, 1998, p. 251).
5. Computer-mediated communication (CMC) Transmission and reception of messages using
computers as input, storage, output, and routing devices (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
6. Content creation tools are the tools that course designers and teachers use to create the
content in online education courses (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
7. Distance education An instructional program where the teacher and student are separated by
physical space or time, or both. A variety of educational media can be employed – from
workbooks or assignments (sent by mail), to Web-based learning environments, to high-end,
room sized IVC systems (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
8. E-learning is interactive learning in which the learning content is available online and
provides automatic feedback to the student’s learning activities (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
9. Facilitator is the on-site individual who assists students during a videoconference and helps
them learn from a virtual teacher in either a synchronous or asynchronous situation (KaplanLeiserson, 2011).
10. Formative assessment: The assessment conducted as a part of the teaching: questions and
assignments set to help the student learn effectively, but not used to determine the student’s
course results (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
11. Hybrid Course is a course of study composed of both traditional and virtual-learning
elements (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
12. Learning Management System (LMS) Software that automates the administration of
training events (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
13. Learning object A reusable, media-independent chunk of information used as a modular
building block for e-learning content (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
14. Online learning is teacher-led instruction delivered primarily via the Internet, and it includes
software to provide a structured learning environment. Teachers and students are separated by
geography.
15. Summative assessment: The assessment intending to determine a student’s overall level of
performance on the course: questions and assignments, the grades or scores of which are used in
determining the student’s course result.
16. Synchronous communication: Real-time communication such as for example online chatting
and video-conferencing (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
17. Virtual learning utilizes information and communication technologies to deliver instruction.
Virtual learning is a term frequently used interchangeably with distance learning, online learning,
e-learning, or Web-based learning (Kaplan-Leiserson, 2011).
18. Web-based learning is often referred to as online education, this is a course of study
delivered via the Internet (or more specifically, the World Wide Web). Students have electronic
access to the teacher and other students through e-mail, electronic bulletin boards, online chat
rooms, e-mail lists, and so forth. A specific Web site is set up that allows students’ access to
course materials and assignments in an “anytime/ anyplace” learning environment. In most cases,
this is exclusively an asynchronous exchange between teacher and student. (Kaplan-Leiserson,
2011)
Introduction to the Problem and Purpose
No Child Left Behind was enacted in 2001. This law, among other things, requires a
research base for educational decisions (NCLB, 2001). There is little research available that
explores K-8 online practitioners perspectives regarding pedagogical beliefs, the quality of
online practices, and the support systems employed (Hemschick, 2008). The research that has
been conducted on online learning is preliminary and very limited in regards to grades K-8
although the rise in the number of virtual schools and online courses that are available has
increased dramatically.
Presently, 80% of virtual schools use programs they have created on their own. It is
important to note the use of commercial products has increased. Reasons given for the increase
in use of commercial products has been found to be based on schools not having clear guidelines
or models to pattern quality online or virtual education program design and development (Oliver,
Kellogg, Townsend & Brady, 2010). Without a policy to drive online and virtual course
development these programs potentially could come under scrutiny for lacking quality and
credibility and thus hindering future growth (Smith, 2007).
Senate Bill 289 went into effect for all schools in Georgia on July 1, 2012. This Bill is
known as the Online Education Act and requires all schools to maximize the online learning
opportunities for students in K-12 grades. Further, the Online Education Act limits the use of
content and programs to be approved by the Online Clearing House to ensure quality
opportunities are being maintained (Senate Bill 289, 2012). Georgia Virtual School is currently
the only approved provider of online content; however, no content or courses are available
through Georgia Virtual School at this time to serve the needs of students in K-5th grade.
The purpose of this study is to explore and describe the factors that impact K-8 online
learning. “The question of how effective distance learning can be with younger students has yet
to be addressed” (Huett, Moller, Foshay and Coleman, 2008, p.64). Some unknowns include:
policies that remove barriers and ensure quality for online education in K-8, the characteristics
and needs of K-8 learners, best practices in development, design and delivery of K-8 courses and
content, and finally the teaching strategies and pedagogy of K-8 online teachers.
A great deal of effort and attention has been given to instructional design of higher
education and secondary education, but how that information and data applies to K-8 online
environments is new and just in the beginning stages (Abram, 2005; Cavanaugh, Gillan,
Kromrev, Hess, Blomeyer, & North Central Regional Education Lab, 2004; Rice, 2006).
Teachers will also need a research base of teaching strategies to ensure that content is delivered
to K-8 students in an effective way utilizing online resources as part of their pedagogy (Quilici &
Joki, 2011-12).
Research Questions
In order to examine the factors impacting the development and implementation of an
effective elementary (grades 3-5) online program the following research questions were used to
focus the study.
What factors impact the development and implementation of an effective elementary (grades 35) online program?
1. Policies
 What policies directly impact the development and implementation of elementary online
courses?
 What funding model yields the highest return on investment (ROI) for schools to obtain
elementary online courses?
 How should elementary online courses be evaluated to ensure quality and rigor?
 How should elementary online administrators, support staff, designers, and teachers by
evaluated?
2. Learners
 How does an effective design and development model of an elementary online course
promote social learning among 3rd through 5th grade students?
 How does cognitive load theory1 impact the design and development of an elementary
online course for 3rd through 5th grade students?
 What are the informal indicators and clues elementary, online, student learner’s provide
that signal satisfaction or frustration when engaged in online learning?
 What are the characteristics of elementary students who have the greatest potential of
benefiting from being enrolled in online courses?
3. Design and Development

What learning theories can developers of elementary online courses apply, and how,
when designing and developing for third through fifth grade students?

What are the appropriate style guides, interactive requirements, formative assessment
requirements, and image guidelines when creating a development manual for online
third through fifth grade elementary courses?

What navigation features are most intuitive and easiest to manipulate for elementary
students in grades three through five when accessing online courses through a
learning management system?
4. Pedagogy

What are the guidelines for communication when teaching elementary, three
through five grade students, in an online course?

1
What is the impact of timely, specific feedback in an elementary online course?
Cognitive load theory has been designed to provide guidelines intended to assist in the
presentation of information in a manner that encourages the activities of learners that optimize
intellectual performance" (Sweller, van Merriënboer, and Paas, 1998, p. 251).

What professional development is necessary before teaching an online elementary
course, and what ongoing professional development is beneficial for elementary
online teachers?

How do administrators support and model instructional leadership for teachers of
elementary online courses?
Significance of the Study
K-8 online education requires new skills and knowledge for teams of educators. These
teams include administrators, teachers, parents, support systems like counselors and media
specialist, but also designers and developers of online content and courses. Working
collaboratively in a team effort with subject matter experts (SME’s) as well as instructional
designers may be new to many educators. As the spread of online learning geared toward adult
learners begins to work its way and trickle down to the secondary and elementary levels
(Cavanaugh et al., 2004), K-8 research specific to the learner needs, development guidelines,
policies, and pedagogy at this level is critical. Research at the K-8 level in online education
provides an opportunity for exploring and finding new teaching strategies and support systems
that could potentially enhance and benefit not only online programs but other environments with
K-8 teaching strategies and support systems. In addition, online education requires educators
who are fluent in 21st Century skills to meet student needs (U.S. Department of Education,
2004c).
The growth of K-8 online education requires a research base to identify themes specific
to K-8 online education. The federal No Child Left Behind Act, through standards of
accountability, requires educational leaders to base decisions on empirical research (U.S.
Department of Education, 2005). Currently, administrators, policy makers, and teachers are
making decisions regarding K-8 online education using a limited research base.
The findings of this research may add to the base knowledge by providing empirical
research specific to the K-8 online learning and the factors that impact the quality and
implementation of these programs.
CHAPTER TWO
A REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to explore and describe the factors that impact effective K-8
online learning. A review of the literature is a foundation for the proposed study of K-8 online
education by exploring the factors that influence online education. Impacting factors include the
instructor’s pedagogical beliefs, course designs, teaching strategies, and the support systems
provided (Herrington, Herrington, Oliver, Stoney, & Willis, 2001; Kearsley, 2006; Konings,
Brand-Gruwel, & van Merrienboer, 2005; Saba, 2005; Watson, 2005). The characteristics of K8 online learners are a critical part of this study. However, research specific to this group is
limited with most research regarding online learners to be generalized to higher education and
secondary education (Barbour & Reeves, 2009).
In this literature review characteristics of successful online learners based on the research
from higher education and secondary education to build upon and to form a base. In the review
of literature four major themes have been found relating to online learning. These themes are:
policies, learners, course design and development, and pedagogy. This literature review will
focus on each theme in detail.
Policies
In policy, the most important consideration is student learning. This ultimate goal guides
policy development and decision-making. This may require policy makers to examine current
policies for seat-time and removing them; replacing them with student-centered, competency-
based approaches; or at least providing the flexibility for innovations and a shift from the
traditional in schools and districts (Nagel, 2011). When planning for the future and in order to
create a framework for best practices and policies in a 21st Century classroom, educators and
policymakers examine research-based evidence of effectiveness to guide the process (Roblyer &
Knezek, 2003). The No Child Left Behind Act (2001) requires states to offer choices and
alternative options for schooling for students who are attending schools that do not make
adequate yearly progress. For some states and school districts online learning provides one
option to meet that requirement of options (Huett, Moller, Foshay and Coleman, 2008).
The online learning format allows for the use of multimedia tools to be used when
delivering course materials and content. This use of multimedia resources gives students greater
opportunities to choose strategies that are most compatible with their learning styles and gives
the student the ability to have control over the pace and direction of their learning (Thomson,
2010). For policy makers multimedia use and electronic device use brings with it issues of
policies on the use of cellphones for learning. Schools must have a policy and plan in place to
handle multiple access points, provide instruction over digital technology literacy skills, ensure
cellphone safety and ethical use, create a social contract, parental permissions, parent
information rights, and gather feedback from students and parents (Millis, 2010).
Students in online courses have reported a benefit of online learning to have greater
flexibility and control over the content; meaning the student can engage in the class anytime,
anywhere in many cases, and they can repeat lessons if needed because they often have twentyfour hour access every day of the week (Cavanaugh, Clark, & Barbour, 2008; Li & Beverly,
2008; Wallace, 2005).
A shift to competency-based learning is possible in online learning environments. “To
enable competency-based learning (also known as proficiency-based learning) would require
policy changes at the state and federal levels, cultural shifts within education itself, and the
implementation of technologies and training to support the system” (Nagel, 2011, pg.1). Online
learning provides alternate methods of instruction that can reach beyond physical location and
time barriers (Watson & Ryan, 2007).
Online and virtual education are transforming the educational landscape but must be
supported by policy that allows and liberates a reorganization of how educators engage learners
(Searson, Jones, & Wold, 2011). Without a research base and proactive thinking to guide and
inform policy makers the danger exists to look too heavily at traditional models that have guided
brick and mortar school (Huett et al, 2008). It is necessary to develop policies that consider the
opportunities and the barriers of online and virtual environments in the environment in which
they exist (Cavanaugh & Clark, 2007; Compton, Davis & Correia, 2010; Rice, 2009). Susan
Patrick is quoted in an interview with David Nagel stating, “The single most important policy
issue for schools and districts offering online learning are policies rooted in measuring seat-time
to fund schools--rather than delivering flexible, anytime, anyplace learning for today's 21st
century students using online and blended learning” (Nagel, 2011, pg.1).
In data collected from panel members during research, panel members indicated the
importance of removing barriers to online learning and restrictions that limit access or have
eligibility requirements that are not obtainable (Rice, 2009). Policy issues also include funding
of online learning programs. Rice (2009) acknowledges educators are united on the issue of
funding, with panel members surveyed indicating they are less inclined to support policies that
attempt to take funding from traditional brick and mortar schools. It should be noted that in one
survey a quarter of the administrators indicated an interest in developing their own online
courses as a way to address decreases in funding (Project Tomorrow, 2012).
Some online high schools maximize online learning potential and remove barriers by
letting students take courses from home while others require students to take courses in a
monitored or facilitated school environment; for example, a computer lab that is supervised by
teachers or learning coaches. Some online programs are now making it possible for homeschooled students to take advantage of a publicly funded education while attending school at
home (Huett et al, 2008).
There are barriers in many states to allowing students to take classes from home. Seat
time policies and the issue of having a highly qualified teacher are two of these barriers. Some
states have addressed these issues by forming virtual charter schools, both home-school and
cyber charter (Huerta, d’Entremont, and Gonzalez, 2006). In home-school based online learning
it is important to address all aspects of current federal policies and requirements. In Wisconsin a
2004 lawsuit against Wisconsin Virtual School was filed stating Wisconsin Virtual School was
in violation of the requirement to hire highly qualified teachers. Wisconsin Virtual School was
found guilty because they were using parents as teachers even though a highly qualified teacher
was assigned to consult. The court in Wisconsin found the school had indeed violated a law
requiring charter schools to be located in the district where they are operated and the school was
ordered to stop shifting payments away from home districts of open-enrollment students of
which the majority of the student population was categorized (A.,P.P., 2007).
Even with the barriers and logistics that must be worked out parental support for online
learning is growing. “One-third of parents on the Speak Up 2011 survey said if they were on a
technology committee for a new school, they would recommend online classes as a good
investment to enhance student achievement” and “69 percent of administrators say students
should be required to take an online class to graduate from high school” (Project Tomorrow,
2012, pg. 5-7). Alabama, Florida, Michigan, Idaho, and Virginia have included online courses as
mandatory components for graduation requirements (Bonner, 2011).
If schools are serious about pursuing online education and making a strategic
commitment to delivery of courses in this manner, a restructuring of the business of K-12
education must be carefully thought through. Instructional designers working collaboratively
with teachers and administrators will be a necessity (Huett et al, 2008). Morrison, Ross, and
Kemp (2007) point out a systematic design process is important to ensure courses are effective as
well as efficient. Having a carefully planned design process will also ensure the course design
promotes a return on investment. Requiring teachers to serve roles of instructors, subject matter
experts, instructional designer and the role of technology expert on top of already burdened
teaching responsibilities is just too much (Huett et al, 2008). As new roles are defined for
education new considerations in policy and funding those roles must be determined.
Beyond the design and design process an evaluation of the course design and delivery,
grounded by research on effective online course design and delivery, must be included in the
policies that govern online and virtual environments (Rice, 2009). Research concludes that
online courses must be evaluated in a different way than face-to-face courses with student
assessment being an integral piece of all learning (Quilici & Joki, 2011-12). Quality indicators
used to measure and determine the success of online programs are similar to those currently used
in a traditional K-12 program including academic performance, retention rates, academic
achievement, and student satisfaction (Ronsisvalle & Watkins, 2005).
The identification of administrative skills necessary to manage an online education
program is another finding of research (Rice, 2009). A new profile and description of innovative
administrators include one who places a high value on both mobile and online learning in order
to create a more personalized and individual student learning experience (Project Tomorrow,
2012). Instructional leadership is a necessary element in the online environment (Quilici & Joki,
2011-12). The International Society for Education (ISTE) has adopted five NETS.A2 indicators
that include: visionary leadership, digital age learning culture, excellence in professional
practice, systemic improvement, and digital citizenship.
Teachers and learning facilitators need policies that promote defined and identified
characteristics of effective pedagogical practices and technological application that lead to
achievement gains (Rice, 2009). Evaluations in online teaching environments should be more
frequent and formative (Fang, 2007; Thomas, 2008). Online teaching requires more
concentrated individualization of instruction from teachers (Quilici & Joki, 2011-12). Policies to
address reciprocity in teacher certification should be examined (Glass, 2009). Professional
development must expand to include teacher knowledge of copyright, technology and the use of
a learning management system (Oliver, Kellogg, Townsend & Brady, 2010). When there is a
problem in communication in the online learning environment, a relatively simple situation can
escalate to a difficult problem without students, teachers, or parents realizing that there is a
problem until it is too late (Dykman & Davis, 2008)
Finally, parents as learning coaches will also necessitate training opportunities and
further examination of the changing roles of parents as they fill the responsibilities required as a
ISTE's NETS for Administrators (NETS•A) are the standards for evaluating the skills and
knowledge school administrators and leaders need to support digital age learning,
implement technology, and transform the education landscape.
2
more active partner in their child’s education (Rice, 2009). This greater responsibility does come
with benefits for parents including being able to see assignments, resources, and readings that are
available to their child (Huett et al, 2008). An example of changing policy to engage parents and
increase parent involvement is found in Bridgeport Connecticut where the Board of Education
passed on August 13, 2012 a parent engagement policy (Molnar, 2012).
Learners
There has been a growing awareness and interest level in the concept of online learning.
It is important to remember that change is a process, not an event (Fullan & Stiegelbauer, 1991).
Distance education and online learning have been available for some time but this new energy
has developed from greater awareness on a personal level of understand of online learning and
greater familiarity with the characteristics and benefits of this kind of digital learning. Parents
and students are also driven to explore further into the options of online learning because of their
desires for a more personalized learning approach. Parents are increasingly concerned that the
traditional classes students are attending in a brick and mortar public school are many times too
big and have too much emphasis on tests and homework, and not enough attention on the needs
of their individual child (Project Tomorrow, 2012). Literature suggests a trend toward greater
partnerships between schools, educators, and parents offering individualized instruction based on
student needs (Rice, 2009).
Accountability is ever increasing. Schools must meet state standards and must report
student performance on assessments; this accountability has created a greater sense of urgency
for schools and teachers to use research related to how students learn (Espresso, 2012). Strong
caution is given against the application of findings from higher education research in distance
education to the K-12 setting (Cavanaugh, Gillan, Kromrey, Hess & Blomeyer, 2004). Online
education at the high school level may be found to have very similar strategies as those used by
adults. When providing online education regarding students in kindergarten through Grade 8
(K-8), however, the learner needs are different. Cognitive processes are different for children
who have less independent learning skills (Hemschick, 2008).
To find what works best, promoting all levels; high school, middle school, and
elementary school requires research to understand how these grade bands should be
differentiated and to expand the base from a focus on adult learners to a focus on younger
learners in the online environment. Although a great deal of research has been conducted in the
context of adults as learners, little research has been completed in the context of younger online
learners (Cavanaugh et al, 2004). Not only is the design of content and characteristics of the
learner to be considered, but instructional strategies transferred from the traditional classroom or
from high school education may not be appropriate for teaching younger children who require
social interaction and have not reached the maturity level to self motivate or self regulate
(Blomeyer, 2002; Ronsisvalle & Watkins, 2005).
Students enter all environments of education with diverse backgrounds and different
levels of skill. Some variables to consider include socioeconomic status, student IQ, family
background, etc., all of which can have some degree of impact on the students’ school readiness
(Espresso, 2012). Predicting the success of students online has been tried with older students.
One prediction tool is the Educational Success Prediction Instrument (ESPI). It checks student
aptitude in four categories (Barbour & Reeves, 2009). No research is available in regards to this
instrument or a modification of it for younger learners. Some characteristics found common of
online learners include: autonomy, metacognition, self-regulatory skills, positive self-efficacy,
motivation, and internal locus of control (Cavanaugh et al, 2004; Ronsisvalle & Watkins, 2005).
Supporting the needs of younger learners by incorporating communication tools and activities to
increase social opportunities with others and for constant reinforcement or feedback on student
work have been suggested by experienced online teachers to be a priority (Oliver, Kellogg,
Townsend & Brady, 2010). Elementary students thrive when given activities that require
interaction and socialization with their peers in distance education (Anastasiades, 2003).
Vygotsky (1962) wrote learning for children is a social process and that children will focus on
interaction within the zone of proximal development.
Misconceptions exist that students will lose their ability to engage and learn socially in
online environments (Greenleaf, 2009). Very outgoing students may find they initially miss the
face-to-face interaction with their peers, and some studies indicate students with poor verbal and
reading skills may have some level of disadvantage in the online environment (Thomson, 2010).
The number of interactions and the quality of that interaction appears to be important satisfaction
components for students (Rice, 2009). It is known that younger students who consistently have
quality, meaningful interactions with their teachers and build positive relationships with their
teachers are more likely to be less frustrated when they need to stick with a difficult task (Passey,
2000).
Online courses can utilize synchronous and asynchronous sessions for learning.
Asynchronous sessions give students time without stress to “think” and process learning without
the pressure of others watching. Asynchronous sessions also provide opportunities for shy
students to collaborate with peers in ways they may not be comfortable doing in a face-to-face
environment (Barbour & Reeves, 2009). Synchronous learning sessions offer the potentially for
personal interaction some students may need or desire (Cavanaugh et al, 2004).
There are some researched benefits for students and how they learn in general in online
environments. “Studies from the National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development
have shown that for children with difficulties in learning, a multisensory teaching method is the
most effective teaching method” (Bradford, 2008, para. 1). These findings are consistent with
learning theory that promotes multisensory approaches to teaching in the early grades which
digital and online delivery can provide (Espresso, 2012).
Other benefits associated with online learning and virtual school includes more choices
and expanding opportunities for all students (Barbour & Reeves, 2009). The needs of students
are changing (Watson, 2007). The online format is able to provide individualized, student
specific differentiated learning experiences for students. Students can work at their own pace
and they have time to reflect and to control their options in the learning environment (Thomson,
2010). Some students who have had difficulty with behavior issues in the traditional school
setting may find the online learning environment a better fit as well (Barbour & Reeves, 2009).
Students who are qualified to take advanced courses may have greater access to the courses they
need by having opportunities to take online courses (Thomson, 2010). Special needs students
can work at their own pace and have access to assistive technology they can control to enhance
their learning experience in the online environment (Rice, 2009). Students indicate an increased
satisfaction by having a sense of control over their learning, being able to make choices and
work at their own pace (Espresso, 2012). Technology skills have been shown to increase along
with confidence in the use of technology for students taking online classes (Project Tomorrow,
2012).
Learning Theories and Online Instructional Design
Between the needs of learners and the actual design of instruction it is important to
consider learning theories that will guide the design. Five common learning theories include:
Gagne’s Conditions of Learning Theory, Bruner’s Constructivist Theory, Bandura’s Social
Learning Theory, Carroll’s Minimalist Theory, and Vygotsky’s Theory of Social Cognitive
Development (Patsula, 1999).
Gagne’s conditions of learning theory is built on the theory that learning has levels.
These levels are: verbal information, intellectual skills, cognitive strategies, motor skills, and
attitudes (Patsula, 1999). The learning level is important to understand and identify because each
learning level requires a different strategy to engage the learner. One of the learning levels
Gagne categorized is intellectual skills of which he steps out nine instructional events with
corresponding cognitive processes (Kearsley, 1994). Patsula (1999) points out this learning
theory was used initially for military skill training. Gagne suggests there is a hierarchy based on
the complexity of learner skills and that the tasks that make up the process to learn the skill
determine the hierarchy. This hierarchy includes: stimulus recognition, response generation,
procedure following, use of terminology, discriminations, concept formation, rule application,
and problem solving (Gagne, Briggs & Wager, 1992). The nine instructional events are found in
the table below. These events can aid in the instructional design process by providing a basis for
designing instruction and selecting appropriate media (Kearsley, 1999).
Instructional Events
1. Gaining Attention
Cognitive Process
reception
2. Informing the learner of the objective and expectations
expectancy
3. Stimulating recall of prior learning
retrieval
4. Presenting the stimulus
selective perception
5. Providing learning guidance
semantic encoding
6. Eliciting performance
responding
7. Providing feedback
reinforcement
8. Assessing Performance
retrieval
9. Enhancing retention and transfer
generalization
(Gagne, Briggs & Wager, 1992).
Bruner’s constructivist theory is a general framework for instruction based upon the
study of cognition (Ryder, 2012). Bruner theorized that learning is an active process where
learners build upon what they know, their current understanding and expand through learning
into new understandings (Patsula, 1999). Bruner categorized development and learning into
three modes of representation. Enactive is the first mode and occurs around the ages zero to one
year. It requires active motion to store information. The second mode is Iconic and occurs from
year one to year six in age. This mode relies on visual images or mental pictures to process and
store information. Finally, the third mode is known as Symbolic and occurs from seven years of
age and upward, this mode can decode symbols, images, and language for learning (McLeod,
2008). Some strategies used in instructional design based on these learning theories include
grouping information by related materials, sequencing, use graphic organizers, chunking of
information, overviews, maps, and consistency in delivery format (Patsula, 1999).
Bandura’s social learning theory emphasizes learning through observation and the
importance of modeling. This theory is used for skill based learning but also for learning soft
skills such as behavior and attitude (Patsula, 1999). Bandura’s theory added a social element,
arguing that people can learn new information and behaviors by watching other people. Bandura
conducted a famous experiment known as the Bobo Doll Experiment where children observed
adults behaving aggressively toward a Bobo doll and mimicked the aggressive behavior later
(Cherry, 2012). Some strategies that could be used to meet the needs associated with Bandura’s
social learning theory could include interactive learning objects that code behavior into words
and the use of video to demonstrate an activity (Patsula, 1999).
Carroll’s minimalist theory has minimalism as the main idea in order to minimize the
amount of explicit instructional materials, and that learning takes place in small steps. Therefore,
learning materials should be organized in self-contained mini lessons or modules, allowing
learners' strategies and preferences to determine and direct the selection and structuring of
contents (Mappin, Kelly, Skaalid & Bratt, 2000). The Minimalist model of J.M. Carroll has five
main tenets:
1. all learning tasks should be meaningful and activities should be self-contained,
2. learners should be given "real world" projects as quickly as possible,
3. instruction should permit self-directed reasoning and improvising by increasing the
number of active learning activities, (participative learning as opposed to more
passive forms of learning.)
4. training materials and activities should provide for error recognition and recovery
5. there should be a close linkage between the training and actual system.
Patsula (1999) suggests instructional design that applies this learning theory will include a
meaningful task very early in the learning process, provide quick feedback and will chunk
learning into self-contained modules or units.
Vygotsky’s theory of social cognitive development is much like Bandura’s social
learning theory (Patsula, 1999). Vygotsky’s theory emphasizes learning contexts in which
students play an active role in learning. The teacher and student roles shift away from traditional
instruction as a teacher becomes a collaborator with students, facilitating meaning construction,
and the building of knowledge (Learning Theories Knowledgebase, 2012). Vygotsky’s theory
includes social activities as important to learning including learning from others or the (MKO)
more knowledgeable other (Patsula, 1999). Gillani and Relan (1997) proposed an instructional
design model having four phases: advance organizer phase, modeling phase, exploring phase,
and generating phase. Patsula (1999) further points out that a supportive environment and
appropriate tools for student guidance is critical.
Bloom’s taxonomy is not one of the five theories researched in this review but is
important to understand and include when researching the learning needs and progression of
students. Bloom’s taxonomy is a multi-tiered model of classifying thinking according to six
cognitive levels of complexity. The following information was published by (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001, pp. 67-68)
o
o
o
o
Remembering: Retrieving, recognizing, and recalling relevant knowledge
from long-term memory.
Understanding: Constructing meaning from oral, written, and graphic
messages through interpreting, exemplifying, classifying, summarizing,
inferring, comparing, and explaining.
Applying: Carrying out or using a procedure through executing, or
implementing.
Analyzing: Breaking material into constituent parts, determining how the
parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose through
differentiating, organizing, and attributing.
o
o
Evaluating: Making judgments based on criteria and standards through
checking and critiquing.
Creating: Putting elements together to form a coherent or functional whole;
reorganizing elements into a new pattern or structure through generating,
planning, or producing.
Design and Development
“In some form or another, instructional design has always been at the foundation of
teaching and learning” (Stevens, 2012, pg. 10). Online learning and virtual learning take
place in environments that are more structured in regards to design than traditional brick
and mortar environments (MacFarlane, 2011). Development should be driven by the
desired learning outcomes, not by the available technology (Stevens, 2012). Reigeluth
(1999), suggests design theories guide and direct practitioners regarding specific methods
needed in order to attain educational goals. Instructional design can be described as a
theory or process that provides direction that will help students learn (Reigeluth, 1999).
The development of instruction based on a design requires the use of research-based
strategies. Research is critical to give developers design guidelines for creation and
implementation of effective online teaching and learning in a learning managed
environment (Reeves, 2005). The purpose of instructional design is to make learning more
“efficient and effective” (Morrison, Ross, & Kemp, 2007, pg. 2). K-12 online and virtual
education is still a relatively new approach as an acceptable alternative and there is little
systematic research and a noticeable absence of research design models (Searson et al,
2011). New research in this field is needed based on triangulated, data-based evidence
(Barbour & Reeves, 2009).
Instructional design professionals can play an important role to ensure online, virtual, and
distance education initiatives meet the objectives and purpose, which is to serve the needs of
students (Huett et al, 2008). Keeping in mind that MacFarlane (2011) has noted the benefit of a
structured learning environment, Oliver, Kellogg, Townsend, and Brady (2010) further point out
that implementing a structured instructional design process results in a higher quality design.
However, even with guidelines, models and a detailed process in place for design and
development of online instruction, lack of training in instructional design can result in frustration
and ultimately a course or content that is ineffective (Hooie, 2012).
There is a rationale for in-house development. Naturally, in many cases administrators in
schools rely on teachers to design and develop instructional content and online courses. Content
expertise alone is insufficient (Oliver et al., 2010). As K-12 organizations further implement and
enhance their online programs, roles may begin to shift and begin to be redefined (Hooie, 2012).
Kachel, Henry, & Keller (2005) point out three primary elements for K-12 online learning that
exhibits exemplary purpose, and design; “The features and design of the course, the role of the
teacher or facilitator, and the characteristics that successful online learners exhibit” (p. 14).
Researchers recognize a strong need for instructional designers to be trained in distance
education technologies and the design of content and courses in digital environments (Huett et
al., 2008). Study has further found a more interdisciplinary team approach to be effective in the
design process (Oliver et al., 2010). Such collaboration allows instructors to focus on their
particular role and area of specialty and moves away from individual initiatives and toward a
collaborative approach where team members work as partners (Huett et al., 2008). A team
approach is being utilized by public educational course providers and by private vendor course
providers (Oliver et al., 2010). Proper procedures and a plan for feedback between the
instructional designers and the teacher or subject matter experts must be in place to promote
collaborative decision-making and to prevent communication break down (Stevens, 2012).
Additionally, teams need encouragement, leadership, and feedback from management (Oliver et
al., 2010).
Instructional design models are in place to guide the process of development for
instruction in online environments. The goal is to create a process that results in the effective
and efficient design of instruction (Reigeluth, 1999; Merrill, 2007). “Models are traditionally
based on five elements which are (a) analysis, (b) design, (c) development, (d) implementation
and (e) evaluation. These components are commonly referred to as ADDIE” (Hooie, 2012, pg.
5). The instructional design is a critical part of online learning effectiveness. Well-structured
courses have been shown to be a critical student success factor (Weiner, 2003). When designing
without a design model the instructional designer is a risk of leaving out an essential element of
the design or could be working in a manner that is inefficient, carrying a low rate of return on
investment (Hooie, 2012).
Instructional designers have an opportunity in this quickly growing environment to guide
the development of K-12 distance education and to make sure that the needs of learners are met
(Huett et al., 2008). It is critical to keep in mind that the primary objective is always student
learning. Meeting the needs of students include curriculum presented in a way that maximizes
student engagement in real world applications (Barbour & Reeves, 2009). Also, research in the
area of instructional design must go beyond even traditional design practices and begin to look at
mobile devices, informal learning and the use of social media (Searson et al., 2011).
Using an instructional design process is critical. However, if the instructional design
process is too rigid it can result in a design that does not meet the ultimate goal, to maximize
student learning (Hooie, 2012). Some instructional design models make assumptions about the
learner that may be incorrect (Gordon & Zemke, 2000). A common assumption is that all
learners enter the learning environment at the same level of readiness. The best solution to
address the instructional design flaws is for the course to be implemented with flexibility
(Hooie, 2012).
Implementation success will be largely dependent upon teacher training and strategies
that focus on directing and regulating students so that they have a feeling of control over their
own learning and can regulate their learning. Flexibility increases the student choice and
stimulates motivation, interest, and engagement in the class (Thomson, 2010). The teacher of
online learning can also help learners by creating and providing clear course timelines,
schedules, and expectations so that students do not have to guess or struggle to figure out what
they should be working on or what the expectations for the course are and how they will be
graded (Artino, 2008; Cavanaugh, 2007; Dykman & Davis, 2008; National Educational
Association, 2006). When students are confused or frustrated while engaged in an online course
the instructional design may lack credibility due to the lack of common language and breakdown
communication (Earle, 1996). When asked during a study, the majority of teachers surveyed
emphasized that when teaching in online settings directions must be extremely specific and are
required of every task. Beyond the directions, setting up and maintaining a well-organized
course site is important (Thomson, 2010).
Following guidelines for creating interactive instructional activities, lessons, and
formative and summative assessments can also prevent unwanted hurdles from creeping up in
the design process (Oliver et al., 2010). Carefully designed and integrated activities online
include virtual lab experiments, design oriented projects, and online research (NEA, 2002).
Young learners with cognitive limitations such as limited short-term memory may require
breaking content into small segments, or clearer directions and models provided visually when
trying to explain abstract concepts necessitating many examples and images (Musgrove &
Musgrove, 2004). Navigation in the environment that is designed for adults must be adapted for
younger learners by making sure the instructions are clear, expectations are easy to understand
and incorporating audio, and video clips may be helpful (Barbour, 2007). Once all
considerations possible to train, collaborate, and adapt the design of instruction to increase
student outcomes instructional design content still should be evaluated with recognized
evaluation tools like iNACOL’s course evaluation (Rice, 2009).
Pedagogy
Online learning environments have the ability to leverage technology in a way that
supports constructivist teaching and learning (Luthra, 2010). Challenges for teaching in online
and distance learning environments include a pedagogy that addresses the motivations, needs,
learning styles and constraints of nontraditional learners, while achieving the same learning
outcomes (Gibbons, 2001). The disconnection when employing pedagogy currently accepted as
the norm and the methods that are possible in an information-connected environment is
becoming apparent (Davis & Roblyer, 2005).
It should not be assumed that a good classroom teacher would make a good online
teacher or vice versa (Davis & Roblyer, 2005). Online learning at the K-12 level is a vastly
different teaching experience from the experiences of teaching online at other levels (Quilici &
Joki, 2011-12). Lowes (2005) found that teachers’ practices for instruction are changed when
they learn how to teach specifically for the online environment and focus on the development of
skills and pedagogical strategies that capitalize on technology. Teacher education programs
must include practice and information of research findings including a robust knowledge base of
pedagogy in online and virtual environments (U.S. Department of Education, 2009). Knowledge
regarding subject matter and the traditional instructional approaches are necessary for teachers in
online environments just as they are for face-to-face teachers. However, online teachers need
additional skills and knowledge to be able to motivate and engage learners in the online
environment with communication skills being of primary importance (Rice, 2009). Professional
development activities are enriched when quality guidelines, standards and practices support the
training (Searson et al., 2011). Understanding the social and technological components of
teaching and learning in an online environment must be learned and practiced to ensure engaging
and quality experiences (MacFarlane, 2011).
There are many advantages to online teaching. Teaching online can facilitate learner
activities that provide additional enriching resources by using the Internet that can further
innovate and add interactivity and a dynamic component to learning materials (Durdu, Yalabik,
& Cagiltay, 2009). Online instructors can motivate students who have different learning styles
(Barbour & Reeves, 2009). “Schools that provide instruction through learning-style methods,
offer greater opportunities for students to succeed than do schools that practice traditional
teaching and learning” (Cook, 2006, p. 3). Challenges often reported in regards to teaching in
online environments can be placed into one of two categories; mismatched students’ specific
learning style preferences and the online learning environment, and difficulties with
communication (Thomson, 2010).
Online teaching requires a shift in thinking about the instructional environment and
course engagement time (Davis & Roblyer, 2005). Teachers facilitate learning first by
establishing an online presence as the instructor and support and by including students with a
sense of social presence (Thomson, 2010). When social interaction has been designed
specifically into an online course, research suggest the effectiveness of asynchronous sessions is
more pronounced and that students are more satisfied with online courses (Hiltz, Zhang, &
Turoff, 2002). “The resulting psychological effect of this social interaction is called social
presence. This study examines the effects of instructor and learner social presence on perceived
learning and student satisfaction in the online classroom” (Bouras, 2009, p. 1).
Online teachers must interact with students on an emotional and social level in order to
be truly effective (MacFarlane, 2011). Interaction is at the heart of online learning. Teachers in
online learning environments must strive to highly personalize the learning environment to
provide for communication and to reinforce learning (Oliver et al., 2010). In online learning
environments participants strive to create deeper and stronger relationships, and they also place
great value on frequent and timely feedback on assignments and responses to questions (Weiner,
2003). Experienced online teachers report frequent praise, encouragement, and feedback as the
key to success for online learners (Thomson, 2010).
“All of the reviews of the literature cited here (Artino, 2008; Cavanaugh, 2007;
Cavanaugh et al., 2008; DiPietro et al., 2008; Dykman & Davis, 2008; National
Education Association, 2006; Sitzmann et al., 2006) emphasized the positive effect of
frequent, timely, individualized, and detailed feedback from instructors on students’ selfefficacy, motivation, and/or engagement in the course” (Thomson, 2010, p.671).
Musgrove and Musgrove (2004) suggest using embedded objects and Web 2.0 tools available in
the course for elementary students, to receive immediate feedback using, for example, self-tests,
and other devices. Regardless of the technology tools that are used the essential key role of the
instructor is to develop a strong sense of community by modeling appropriate online
communication, guiding discussion, and participating as a facilitator to encourage critical
thinking and to provide encouragement (Artino, 2008; Cavanaugh, 2007; National Education
Association, 2006).
Additionally, research by Aronson & Timms (2003) suggests the role of the teacher in an
online environment would be greatly enhanced by complimenting that role with a local counselor
or facilitator. Project Tomorrow (2012) research indicates students have higher expectations of
teachers in online classes and expect more individualized attention than when taking courses in a
face-to-face class. Communication and clear expectations with detailed instructions and student
support provides students with greater understanding and a greater sense of self –efficacy
(Thomson, 2010). Teachers should be able to articulate the desired outcomes of the course
(MacFarlane, 2011).