ENGAGING ONLINE STUDENTS: USING A MULTISENSORY EXERCISE FOR DEEPER, ACTIVE LEARNING

References

• AACSB. (2017). Eligibility procedures and accreditation standards for business accreditation: AACSB International.
   Google Scholar
• Aaker, D. (2010). Brand relevance: Making competitors irrelevant. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Ally, M. (2004). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In T. A. F. Elloumi (Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (Vol. 2, pp. 15–44). Athabasca, Canada: Athabasca University.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, T. (2004). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. A. F. Elloumi (Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (Vol. 2, pp. 109–119). Athabasca, Canada: Athabasca University.
   Google Scholar
• Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 25(4), 297–308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bigatel, P. M., Ragan, L. C., Kennan, S., May, J., & Redmond, B. F. (2012). The identification of competencies for online teaching success. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(1), 59–77.
   Google Scholar
• Birch, S. H., & Ladd, G. W. (1997). The teacher-child relationship and children’s early school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 35(1), 61–79. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(96)00029-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Botta, F., Santangelo, V., Raffone, A., Sanabria, D., & Lupianez, J. (2011). Multisensory integration affects visuo-spatial working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(4), 1099–1109. doi:10.1037/a0023513
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burch, G., Heller, J. A., Burch, J. J., & Heller, N. A. (2016). Web-based and face-to-face classes: Are there unintended outcomes? Journal of Management Development, 35(8), 1031–1044. doi:10.1108/JMD-06-2015-0088
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., & Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1–32. doi:10.1007/s11162-005-8150-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casuso-Holgado, M. J., Cuesta-Vargas, A. I., Moreno-Morales, N., Labajos-Manzanares, M. T., Barón-López, F. J., & Vega-Cuesta, M. (2013). The association between academic engagement and achievement in health sciences students. BMC Medical Education, 13(1), 33–40. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-13-33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 149–210. doi:10.1007/BF01320076
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. R. G. L. A. Sroufe (Ed.), Self processes in development: Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 43–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Dale, E. (1946). Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York, NY: Dryden.
   Google Scholar
• DeLotell, P. J., Millam, L. A., & Reinhardt, M. M. (2010). The use of deep learning strategies in online business courses to impact student retention. American Journal of Business Education, 3(12), 49–56.
   Google Scholar
• Dennen, V. P., Aubteen Darabi, A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). Instructor–Learner interaction in online courses: The relative perceived importance of particular instructor actions on performance and satisfaction. Distance Education, 28(1), 65–79. doi:10.1080/01587910701305319
   Google Scholar
• Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The online student engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1079585.pdf
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Docy, F., Segers, M., Van Den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13, 533–568. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00025-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dow, M. J. (2008). Implications of social presence for online learning: A case study of MLS students. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 29(4), 231–242.
   Google Scholar
• Draper, S. W. (2009). Catalytic assessment: Understanding how MCQs and EVS can foster deep learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 285–293. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00920.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drouin, M. A. (2008). The relationship between students’ perceived sense of community and satisfaction, achievement, and retention in an online course. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(3), 267–284.
   Google Scholar
• Duke, C. (2002). Learning outcomes: Comparing student perceptions of skill level and importance. Journal of Marketing Education, 24(3), 203–217. doi:10.1177/0273475302238043
   Google Scholar
• Felder, R. (1990). Meet Your Students: Michelle, Rob and Art. Chemical Engineering Education, 24(4).
   Google Scholar
• Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Gasiewski, J. A., Eagan, M. K., Garcia, G. A., Hurtado, S., & Chang, M. J. (2012). From gatekeeping to engagement: A multicontextual, mixed method study of student academic engagement in introductory STEM courses. Research in Higher Education, 53(2), 229–261. doi:10.1007/s11162-011-9247-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graeff, T. R. (2010). Strategic teaching for active learning. Marketing Education Review, 20(3), 265–278. doi:10.2753/MER1052-8008200307
   Google Scholar
• Guthrie, J. T., & Anderson, E. (1999). Engagement in reading: Processes of motivated, strategic, knowledgeable, social readers. In J. T. Guthrie & D.E. Alvermann (Eds.), Engaged reading: Processes, practices, and policy implications (pp. 17–45). New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 184–192. doi:10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, J. R., Song, L., & West, R. E. (2009). Social learning theory and web-based learning environments: A review of research and discussion of implications. American Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 88–103. doi:10.1080/08923640902857713
   Google Scholar
• Hofer, B. (2002). Motivation in the college classroom. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Jennings, J. M., & Angelo, T. A. (2006). Student engagement: Measuring and enhancing engagement with learning. Paper presented at the Proceedings of a Symposium, Frederic Wallis House Conference Centre, Lower Hutt, Wellington.
   Google Scholar
• Karns, G. L. (2005). An update of marketing student perceptions of learning activities: Structure, preferences, and effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Education, 27(2), 163–171. doi:10.1177/0273475305276641
   Google Scholar
• Kehrwald, B. (2008). Understanding social presence in text‐based online learning environments. Distance Education, 29(1), 89–106. doi:10.1080/01587910802004860
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller, D. L. (2000). The brand report card. Harvard Business Review. p. 78.
   Google Scholar
• Krain, M. (2010). The effects of different types of case learning on student engagement. International Studies Perspectives, 11, 290–307. doi:10.1111/j.1528-3585.2010.00409.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuh, G., Cruce, T., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. (2007). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on college grades and persistence. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar, P. (2014). Multisensory Marketing – Building sustainability perspective in diverse sectors. International Journal of Marketing & Business Communication, 3(2), 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S. H., & Hoffman, K. D. (2015). Learning the ShamWow: Creating infomercials to teach the AIDA model. Marketing Education Review, 25(1), 9–14. doi:10.1080/10528008.2015.999586
   Google Scholar
• Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4–11. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1997). The experience of learning: Implications for teaching and studying in higher education Approaches to learning (3 ed., pp. 39–58). Edinburgh, Scotland: Scottish Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Michel, A., & Weiss, D. (2011). Learning across senses: Cross-modal effects in multisensory statistical learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(5), 1081–1091. doi:10.1037/a0023700
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Survey of Student Engagement. (2018). Retrieved from http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/survey_instruments.cfm
   Google Scholar
• Passyn, K. A., & Billups, M. J. (2019). How to improve written case analysis and reduce grading time: The one-page, two-case method. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(3), 1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pavio, A. (1975). Coding distinctions and repetition effects in memory. In  G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 9). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Picciano, A. G. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 21–40.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 101–109. doi:10.3200/JOEB.84.2.101-109
   Google Scholar
• Rocca, K. A. (2010). Student participation in the college classroom: An extended multidisciplinary literature review. Communication Education, 59(2), 185–213. doi:10.1080/03634520903505936
   Google Scholar
• Rosie, A. (2000). Online pedagogies and the promotion of “deep learning”. Information Services & Use, 20(2–3), 109–116. doi:10.3233/ISU-2000-202-306
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., Connell, J. P., & Deci, E. L. (1985). A motivational analysis of self-determination and self-regulation in education. In C. A. R. E. Ames (Ed.), Research on motivation in education: The classroom milieu (Vol. 2, pp. 13–51). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schaceter, D. (1996). Searching for memory: The brain, the mind, and the past. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Shams, L., & Seitz, A. (2008). Benefits of multisensory learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(11), 411–417. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shea, P., Li, C. S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175–190. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.06.005
   Google Scholar
• Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571–581. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skinner, E. A., Wellborn, J. G., & Connell, J. P. (1990). What it takes to do well in school and whether I’ve got it: A process model of perceived control and children’s engagement and achievement in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 22–32. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.22
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stice, J. E. (1987). Using Kolb’s learning cycle to improve student learning. Engineering Education, 77, 291–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svanum, S., & Bigatti, S. M. (2009). Academic course engagement during one semester forecasts college success: Engaged students are more likely to earn a degree, do it faster, and do it better. Journal of College Student Development, 50(1), 120–132. doi:10.1353/csd.0.0055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., & Maher, G. (2000). Building knowledge building communities: Consistency, contact and communication in the virtual classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(4), 359–383. doi:10.2190/W4G6-HY52-57P1-PPNE
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tagg, J. (2003). The learning paradigm college. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In M. G. M. Cole (Ed.), Readings on the development of children (Vol. 23, pp. 79–91). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, Q. (2008). A generic model for guiding the integration of ICT into teaching and learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(4), 411–419. doi:10.1080/14703290802377307
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weigel, V. B. (2001). Deep learning for a digital age: Technology’s untapped potential to enrich higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Widmann, K., Labenz, F., Haase, J., & Hennigs, N. (2018). The power of experiential marketing; exploring the causal relationships among multisensory marketing, brand experience, customer perceived value and brand strength. Journal of Brand Management, 25(2), 101–118. doi:10.1057/s41262-017-0061-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woo, Y., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social constructivist interpretation. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 15–25. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.005
   Google Scholar
• Wooldridge, B. R. (2006). The power of perception an active/experiential learning exercise for principles of marketing. Marketing Education Review, 16(2), 5–7. doi:10.1080/10528008.2006.11488952
   Google Scholar