Learner-content interaction in distance education: The weakest link in interaction research

References

• Abuseileek, A. F. M. (2008). Hypermedia annotation presentation: Learners’ preferences and effect on EFL reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition. CALICO Journal, 25, 260–275. doi:10.1558/cj.v25i2.260-275
   Google Scholar
• Acarturk, C., & Ozcelik, E. (2016). Secondary-task effects on learning with multimedia: An investigation through eye-movement analysis. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85, 126–141. doi:10.1080/00220973.2016.1143793
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alavi, M., Marakas, G. M., & Yoo, Y. (2002). A comparative study of distributed learning environments on learning outcomes. Information Systems Research, 13, 404–415. doi:10.1287/isre.13.4.404.72
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. C., & Biddle, W. B. (1975). On asking people questions about what they are reading. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation, Vol. 9 (pp. 89–132). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, T., & Garrison, D. R. (1998). Learning in a networked world: New roles and responsibilities. In C. Gibson (Ed.), Distance learners in higher education (pp. 97–112). Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Anderton, E. K. (2005). An evaluation of strategies to promote self-regulated learning in pre-service teachers in an online class (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3193866), Mobile, Alabama: University of South Alabama.
   Google Scholar
• Angeli, C., Valanides, N., & Bonk, C. (2003). Communication in a Web-based conferencing system: The quality of computer-mediated interactions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34, 31–43. doi:10.1111/1467-8535.d01-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bannan-Ritland, B. (2002). Computer-mediated communication, elearning, and interactivity: A review of the research. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3, 161–179. Retrieved from http://www.infoagepub.com/quarterly-review-of-distance-education.html
   Google Scholar
• Barron, A. E., & Atkins, D. (1994). Audio instruction in multimedia education: Is textual redundancy important? Journal of Educational Multimedia & Hypermedia, 3, 295–306. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=225990http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=225990
   Google Scholar
• Bernard, R. M., & Naidu, S. (1992). Post-questioning, concept mapping and feedback: A distance education field experiment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 23, 48–60. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.1992.tb00309.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, 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
• Boucher, T. A., & Barron, M. H. (1986). The effects of computer-based marking on completion rates and student achievement for students taking a secondary-level distance education course. Distance Education, 7, 275–280. doi:10.1080/0158791860070208
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, W. M. (1973). Repeating questions in prose learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 31–38. doi:10.1037/h0034061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chun, D. M. (2001). L2 reading on the web: Strategies for accessing information in hypermedia. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14, 367–403. doi:10.1076/call.14.5.367.5775
   Google Scholar
• Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996). Effects of multi-media annotations on vocabulary acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 80, 183–198. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01159.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clyde, A., Crowther, H., Patching, W., Putt, I., & Store, R. (1983). How students use distance teaching materials: An institutional study. Distance Education, 4, 4–26. doi:10.1080/0158791830040101
   Google Scholar
• Daniel, J., & Marquis, C. (1988). Interaction and independence: Getting the mix right. In D. Sewart, D. Keegan, & B. Holmberg (Eds.), Distance education: International perspectives (pp. 339–359). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Darabi, A., Liang, X., Suryavanshi, R., & Yurekli, H. (2013). Effectiveness of online discussion strategies: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Distance Education, 27, 228–241. doi:10.108008923647.2013.837651
   Google Scholar
• Dede, C. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science, 323, 66–69. doi:10.1126/science.1167311
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P. (1999). Introduction: What do you mean by “collaborative learning”? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1–19). New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duchastel, P., & Whitehead, D. (1980). Exploring student reactions to inserted questions in text. Innovations in Education & Training International, 17, 41–47. doi:10.1080/0033039800170106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dymock, D., & Hobson, P. (1998). Collaborative learning through audioconferencing and voicemail – A case study. Distance Education, 19, 157–171. doi:10.1080/0158791980190111
   Google Scholar
• Frase, L. T. (1968a). Effect of question location, pacing and mode upon retention of prose material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 244–249. doi:10.1037/h0025947
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frase, L. T. (1968b). Questions as aids to reading: Some research and theory. American Educational Research Journal, 5, 319–332. doi:10.3102/00028312005003319
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frase, L. T., Patrick, E., & Schumer, H. (1970). Effect of question position and frequency upon learning from text under different levels of incentive. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 52–56. doi:10.1037/h0028823
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gabriel, M. A. (2004). Learning together: Exploring group interactions online. Journal of Distance Education, 19, 54–72. Retrieved from http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/105/90
   Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R. (1993). A cognitive constructivist view of distance education: An analysis of teaching-learning assumptions. Distance Education, 14, 199–211. doi:10.1080/0158791930140204
   Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R. (1995). Constructivism and the role of self-instructional course materials: A reply. Distance Education, 16, 136–140. doi:10.1080/0158791950160110
   Google Scholar
• Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., & Martens, R. L. (2005). The surplus value of an authentic learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 509–521. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamaker, C. (1986). The effects of adjunct questions on prose learning. Review of Educational Research, 56, 212–242. doi:10.3102/00346543056002212
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartley, J., Fraser, S., & Burnhill, P. (1974). A selected bibliography of typographical research relevant to the production of instructional materials. AV Communication Review, 22, 181–190. doi:10.1007/BF02768620
   Google Scholar
• Hillman, D. C. A., Willis, D. J., & Gunawardena, C. N. (1994). Learner-interface interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. American Journal of Distance Education, 8, 30–42. doi:10.1080/08923649409526853
   Google Scholar
• Holden, J. T., & Westfall, P. J.-L. (2006). An instructional media selection guide for distance learning. Boston, MA: United States Distance Learning Association.
   Google Scholar
• Holmberg, B. (1995). Theory and practice of distance education (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Holmberg, B. (2003). A theory of distance education based on empathy. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 79–86). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Holmberg, B. (2005). The evolution, principles and practices of distance education. Oldenburgh: B/S-Verlag der Carl von Ossietzky Universitat.
   Google Scholar
• Holmberg, B., & Schuemer, R. (1989). Tutoring frequency in distance education: An empirical study of the impact of various frequencies of assignment submission. In B. Holmberg (Ed.), Mediated communication as a component of distance education (pp. 45–80). Hagen: Zentrales Institut für Fernstudienforschung.
   Google Scholar
• Hurd, S. (2001). Managing and supporting language learners in open and distance learning environments. In M. Mozzon-McPherson & R. Vismans (Eds.), Beyond language teaching towards language advising (pp. 135–148). London: CILT Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. H. (1985). Generative learning versus mathemagenic control of text processing. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), The technology of text: Vol. 2. Principles for structuring, and displaying text (pp. 9–45). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Jung, I., Choi, S., Lim, C., & Leem, J. (2002). Effects of different types of interaction on learning achievement, satisfaction and participation in Web-based instruction. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39, 153–162. doi:10.1080/14703290252934603.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keegan, D. (1980). On defining distance education. Distance Education, 1, 13–36. doi:10.1080/0158791800010102
   Google Scholar
• Keegan, D. (1986). Foundations of distance education. London: Croom Helm.
   Google Scholar
• Kember, D. (1994). The teacher is more important than the medium: Pre-packaged instructional materials are not axiomatic with surface learning. Distance Education, 15, 153–159. doi:10.1080/0158791940150110
   Google Scholar
• Kizilcec, R. F., Bailenson, J. N., & Gomez, C. J. (2015). The Instructor’s face in video instruction: Evidence from two large-scale field studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 724–739. doi:10.1037/edu0000013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohlmeier, M., McConathy, W. J., Cooksey Lindell, K., & Zeisel, S. H. (2003). Adapting the contents of computer-based instruction based on knowledge tests maintains effectiveness of nutrition education. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 77(Suppl. 4), 1025–1027. Retrieved from http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/77/4/1025S.full.pdf+html
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockwood, F. (1994). Materials production in open and distance learning. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Madland, C., & Richards, G. (2016). Enhancing student-student online interaction: Exploring the study buddy peer review activity. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17, 157–175. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2179
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marland, P. W., & Store, R. E. (1982). Some instructional strategies for improved learning from distance teaching materials. Distance Education, 3, 72–106. doi:10.1080/0158791820030105
   Google Scholar
• Marland, P., Patching, W., Putt, I., & Store, R. (1984). Learning from distance-teaching materials: A study of students’ mediating responses. Distance Education, 5, 215–236. doi:10.1080/0158791840050205
   Google Scholar
• Marland, P., Patching, W., Putt, I., & Putt, R. (1990). Distance learners’ interactions with text while studying. Distance Education, 11, 71–91. doi:10.1080/015879190011010
   Google Scholar
• Marland, P., Patching, W., & Putt, I. (1992). Thinking while studying: A process tracing study of distance learners. Distance Education, 13, 193–217. doi:10.1080/015879192013020
   Google Scholar
• Mason, L., Pluchino, P., Tornatora, M. C., & Ariasi, N. (2013). An eye-tracking study of learning from science text with concrete and abstract illustrations. The Journal of Experimental Education, 81, 356–384. doi:10.1080/00220973.2012.727885
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May, S. (1993). Collaborative learning: More is not necessarily better. American Journal of Distance Education, 7, 39–50. doi:10.1080/08923649309526832
   Google Scholar
• McGill, T. J., Volet, S. E., & Hobbs, V. J. (1997). Studying computer programming externally: Who succeeds? Distance Education, 18, 236–256. doi:10.1080/0158791970180205
   Google Scholar
• Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3, 1–7. doi:10.1080/08923648909526659
   Google Scholar
• Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: A systems view (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thompson/Wadsworth.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, A., Gibbs, G., & Taylor, E. (1980). The work of the study methods group (Study Methods Group Report No. 1). Milton Keynes: The Open University. Institute of Educational Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Naidu, S. (2016). Mainstreaming open, flexible, and distance learning. In K. W. Lai, S. Stein, P. Field, & K. Pratt (Eds.), Our world in your place: 30 years of distance learning and teaching at the University of Otago (pp. 92–108). Dunedin: University of Otago.
   Google Scholar
• Naidu, S., & Bernard, R. M. (1992). Enhancing academic performance in distance education with concept mapping and inserted questions. Distance Education, 13, 218–233. doi:10.1080/0158791920130205
   Google Scholar
• Narayanan, N. H., & Crowe, E. C. (2002). Integrating eye movement and haptic interaction data for comparing multimedia interfaces. Journal of Applied Systems Studies, 3, 236–259. Retrieved from http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~naraynh/jass.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept maps and vee diagrams: Two metacognitive tools to facilitate meaningful learning. Instructional Science, 19, 29–52. doi:10.1007/BF00377984.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okebukola, P. A., & Jegede, O. J. (1988). Cognitive preference and learning mode as determinants of meaningful learning through concept mapping. Science Education, 72, 489–500. doi:10.1002/sce.3730720408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padilla Rodriguez, B. C., & Armellini, A. (2013). Interaction and effectiveness of corporate e-learning programmes. Human Resource Development International, 16, 1–10. doi:10.1080/13678868.2013.803753
   Google Scholar
• Padilla Rodriguez, B. C., & Armellini, A. (2015). Expanding the interaction equivalency theorem. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 16(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2085/3392
   Google Scholar
• Parker, A. (1999). Interactivity in distance education: The critical conversation. AACE Journal, 1, 13–17. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/8117
   Google Scholar
• Pawan, F., Paulus, T. M., Yalcin, S., & Chang, C. (2003). Online learning: Patterns of engagement and interaction among in-service teachers. Language Learning and Technology, 7, 119–140. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num3/pdf/pawan.pdf
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhode, J. (2009). Interaction equivalency in self-paced online learning environments: An exploration of learner preferences. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(1). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/603/1179
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothkopf, E. Z. (1970). The concept of mathemagenic activities. Review of Educational Research, 40, 325–336. doi:10.3102/00346543040003325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowntree, D. (1990). Teaching through self-instruction: How to develop open learning materials. London: Kogan Page.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, M., Kleiman, G., Carey, R., & Douglas, J. (2009). Comparing self-paced and cohort-based online courses for teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41, 443–466. doi:10.1080/15391523.2009.10782538
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder, B. A. (2006). Multimedia-enhanced instruction in online learning environments (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.94.831&rep=rep1&type=pdf
   Google Scholar
• Shackelford, J. J., & Maxwell, M. (2012). Sense of community in graduate online education: Contribution of learner to learner interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(4). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1339/2317
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sims, R. (1997). Interactivity: A forgotten art? Computers in Human Behavior, 13, 157–180. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(97)00004-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, J. J. (1993). The SPICE project: Comparing passive to interactive approaches in a video-based course. The Journal, 21, 62–66. Retrieved from http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/9312062297/spice-project-comparing-passive-interactive-approaches-videodisc-based-course
   Google Scholar
• Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness: What the research tells us. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education, practice and direction (pp. 13–45). Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.
   Google Scholar
• Thorpe, M. (2014). Online interaction: Why it matters to use forums strategically. Distance Education in China, 7, 15–23. doi:10.13541/j.cnki.chinade.2014.07.003
   Google Scholar
• Tuovinen, J. E. (2000). Multimedia distance education interactions. Educational Media International, 37, 16–24. doi:10.1080/095239800361473
   Google Scholar
• Vrasidas, C. (2000). Constructivism versus objectivism: Implications for interaction, course design, and evaluation in distance education. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6, 339–362. Retrieved from http://vrasidas.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/continuum.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vrasidas, C., & McIsaac, M. S. (1999). Factors influencing interaction in an online course. American Journal of Distance Education, 13, 22–36. doi:10.1080/08923649909527033
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   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
• Wallace, T., Grinnell, L., Carey, L., & Carey, J. (2006). Maximizing learning from rehearsal activity in Web-based distance learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17, 319–327. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/6311
   Google Scholar
• Zawacki-Richter, O., & Naidu, S. (2016). Mapping research trends from 35 years of publications in Distance Education. Distance Education, 37, 245–269. doi:10.1080/01587919.2016.1185079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, T. D. (2012). Exploring learner to content interaction as a success factor in online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13, 152–165. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1302/2342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar