Student workload: a case study of its significance, evaluation and management at the Open University

References

• Acton, E. (2013, October 17). You get out what you put in. The Times Higher Education, 40–43.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2), 1–14. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, T., Poelhuber, B., & McKerlich, R. (2010.) Self-paced learners meet social software: An exploration of learners’ attitudes, expectations and experience. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13, 3–13. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/
   Google Scholar
• Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003). Argumentation, computer support, and the educational context of confronting cognitions. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn (pp. 1–25). Boston, MA: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-017-0781-7
   Google Scholar
• Ashby, A. (2004). Monitoring student retention in the Open University: Definition, measurement, interpretation and action. Open Learning, 19, 65–77. doi:10.1080/0268051042000177854
   Google Scholar
• Bales, R. F. (1950). A set of categories for the analysis of small group interaction. American Sociological Review, 15, 257–263. doi:10.2307/2086790
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berge, Z. L. (2002). Active, interactive and reflective elearning. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3, 181–190. Retrieved from http://www.infoagepub.com/quarterly-review-of-distance-education.html
   Google Scholar
• Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, C., Wade, A., Ramim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1243–1289. doi:10.3102/0034654309333844
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borsook, T. K., & Higginbotham-Wheat, N. (1991). Interactivity: What is it and what can it do for computer-based instruction? Educational Technology, 31, 11–17. Retrieved from ERIC database. (EJ434777)
   Google Scholar
• Conole, G., Dyke, M., Oliver, M., & Seale, J. (2004). Mapping pedagogy and tools for effective learning design. Computers and Education, 43, 17–33. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2003.12.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R. (1997). Computer conferencing: The post-industrial age of distance education. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 12, 3–11. doi:10.1080/0268051970120202
   Google Scholar
• Golanics, J. D., & Nussbaum, E. M. (2007). Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 167–180. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00251.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gomm, R., Hammersley, M., & Foster, P. (2000). Case study method: Key issues, key texts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Goodyear, P. (2006). Technology and the articulation of vocational and academic interests: Reflections on time, space and e-learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 28, 83–98. doi:10.1080/01580370600750973
   Google Scholar
• Hirumi, A. (2002). The design and sequencing of e-learning interactions: A grounded approach. International Journal of eLearning, 1, 19–27. doi:10.1080/01580370600750973
   Google Scholar
• Kear, K. (2001). Following the thread in computer conferences. Computers & Education, 37, 81–99. Retrieved form http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03601315
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kember, D., Ng, S., Tse, H., & Wong, E. T. T. (1996). An examination of the interrelationships between workload study time learning approaches and academic outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 21, 347–358. doi:10.1080/03075079612331381261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koschmann, T. (2003). CSCL, argumentation and Deweyan inquiry: Argumentation is learning. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn (pp. 261–269). Boston, MA: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-017-0781-7
   Google Scholar
• Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching (2nd ed.). London: RoutledgeFarmer.10.4324/9780203304846
   Google Scholar
• Milhalcea, R., & Tarau, P. (2004). TextRank: Bringing order into text. In Proceedings of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing EMNLP (pp. 404–411). Retrieved from http://aclweb.org/anthology//W/W04/#3200
   Google Scholar
• Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6. doi:10.1080/08923648909526659
   Google Scholar
• Northrup, P. T. (2002). Online learners’ preferences for interaction. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3, 219–226. Retrieved from http://www.infoagepub.com/quarterly-review-of-distance-education.html
   Google Scholar
• Open University. (2005). Student workload: The implications for course models development (Internal paper LTB/05/1/2). Milton Keynes: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. (2011). Explaining contact hours: Guidance for institutions providing public information about higher education in the UK. Retrieved from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/contact-hours.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Recio Saucedo, A., Whitelock, D., Gilbert, L., Hatzipanagos, S., Gillary, P., Watt, S., & Zhang, P. (2013). Improving a tutor’s feedback assessment tool: Transforming Open Mentor following two recent deployments. International Journal of e-Assessment, 3(1). Retrieved from http://journals.sfu.ca/ijea/index.php/
   Google Scholar
• Sastry, T., & Bekhradnia, B. (2007). The academic experience of students in English universities (HEPI Report No. 33). Oxford: Higher Education Policy Institute. Retrieved from http://www.hepi.ac.uk/2007/09/25/the-academic-experience-of-students-in-english-universities-2007-report/
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, O. (2003). Student retention in online, open and distance learning. London: Kogan Page.10.4324/9780203416563
   Google Scholar
• Stoecker, R. (1991). Evaluating and rethinking the case study. The Sociological Review, 39, 88–112. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.1991.tb02970.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorpe, M. (1998). Assessment and ‘third generation’ distance education. Distance Education, 19, 265–286. doi:10.1080/0158791980190206
   Google Scholar
• Thorpe, M. (2006). Perceptions about time and learning: Researching the student experience. Distances et savoirs, 4, 497–511. doi:10.3166.ds.4.497-511
   Google Scholar
• Thorpe, M. (2008). Effective online interaction: Mapping course design to bridge from research to practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24, 57–72. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/submission/index.php/AJET/index
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorpe, M., & Godwin, S. (2006). Interaction and e-learning: The student experience. Studies in Continuing Education, 28, 203–221. doi:10.1080/01580370600947330
   Google Scholar
• Van Labeke, N., Whitelock, D., Field, D., Pulman, S., & Richardson, J. T. E. (2013). What is my essay really saying? Using extractive summarization to motivate reflection and redrafting. In E. Walker & C.-K. Looi (Eds.), Workshop Proceedings of AIED 2013, 16th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (Vol. 8: Formative Feedback in Interactive Learning Environments). Retrieved from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1009/aied2013ws.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vrasidas, C., & Zembylas, M. (2003). The nature of technology-mediated interaction in globalized distance education. International Journal of Training and Development, 7, 271–286. doi:10.1046/j.1360-3736.2003.00186
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 8, 6–29. doi:10.1080/08923649409526852
   Google Scholar
• Whitelock, D. (2011). Activating assessment for learning: Are we on the way with Web 2.0? In M. J. W. Lee & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based-e-learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 319–342). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Whitelock, D., & Watt, S. (2007). Open Mentor: Supporting tutors with their feedback to students. In F. Khandia (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Computer Assisted Assessment Conference (pp. 421–432). Loughborough: Loughborough University.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar