Florence Martin

Bichronous online learning is the intentional blending of asynchronous and synchronous online experiences. Interviews with 12 award‑winning online instructors identified best practices for combining modalities (e.g., course structure, instructor presence, synchronous formats and community building), along with benefits and challenges. Findings suggest that intentional blending of synchronous and asynchronous components can enhance students’ online learning experiences and inform faculty, instructional designers, and administrators considering this modality.

Interviews with 12 award‑winning online instructors examined intentional blending of asynchronous and synchronous (bichronous) learning. Best practices spanned course design and structure, resource use, instructor presence, and purposeful synchronous formats/activities for community building. Reported benefits and challenges inform instructors, designers, and administrators considering or refining bichronous courses.

This qualitative study investigated how 12 award‑winning online instructors design, facilitate, and assess bichronous online learning (the blending of asynchronous and synchronous modalities). Through interviews, the study reports instructors’ blending decisions, sequencing (e.g., asynchronous→synchronous or A→S→A), and models (complement, replacement, enhancement), and details design, facilitation, and assessment strategies across modalities. Implications are offered for instructors, students, instructional designers, and administrators.

Integrating educational technology, educational psychology, and learning sciences scholarship, the article reconceptualizes online learner engagement by aligning cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions with online environmental affordances. It synthesizes five major research themes—engagement through communication, interaction, presence, collaboration, and community—and offers a framework and strategies to support engagement, with directions for future research.

Surveying 141 online instructors, this study categorized eight roles (e.g., Subject Matter Expert, Course Designer/Developer, Facilitator, Advisor/Mentor, Assessor/Evaluator, Technology Expert, Lifelong Learner) and examined associated competencies. All role categories were used frequently; participation in training and collaboration with instructional designers were associated with higher frequency of competency performance. Implications for instructors, instructional designers, and administrators are discussed.

Analyzing 61 adaptive learning studies (2009–2018), the review charts publication patterns, settings, and methods; maps adaptive sources (learner characteristics) and targets (content/instructional model); and identifies common foci such as learning styles, adaptive feedback, and navigation. The synthesis highlights gaps and implications for designers and researchers as adaptive technologies scale.

Reviewing 619 articles from 12 journals (2009–2018), this study mapped trends, methods, settings, and themes in online learning research. Most studies were quantitative and set in higher education. Twelve themes emerged, organized across learner-, course/instructor-, and organizational‑levels. Strong activity surrounded learner characteristics and engagement; gaps remain in organization‑level topics (leadership, policy, equity) and instructor characteristics.

With a four‑factor student readiness for online learning instrument (online attributes, time management, communication, technical), students rated importance and confidence. Importance was highest for online attributes, time management, and technical skills; confidence was strongest for online attributes and technical skills. Differences emerged by race and course format. Results inform readiness assessment and support.

To identify course design, assessment/evaluation, and facilitation practices of award‑winning online faculty, eight instructors from across the U.S. were interviewed. Results show use of systematic/backward design, attention to learner needs and interaction, and a variety of assessments (traditional and authentic) supported by rubrics. Facilitation emphasized timely response/feedback, availability and presence, and periodic communication. Recommendations for research and practice are provided.

Interviews with eight award‑winning online instructors identified effective practices across the course lifecycle. In design, faculty reported systematic/backward design, intentional interaction, and learner‑centered approaches. Assessment and evaluation featured authentic assessment, rubrics, templates, QA processes, analytics, peer/student reviews. Facilitation emphasized timely feedback, presence, availability, and periodic communication. Implications are offered for faculty development and quality assurance.

Using an instrument measuring the perceived importance of and self‑efficacy for online teaching competencies, faculty reported higher importance than ability on design, communication, and technical competencies, but the reverse for time management. MANOVA revealed differences by gender, online teaching experience, and delivery method. Findings inform targeted professional development and self‑assessment for online teaching readiness.

From 188 graduate students’ survey responses, twelve facilitation strategies were rated for their contributions to instructor presence, connection, engagement, and learning. Timely instructor responses and feedback scored highest across outcomes; the ability to contact the instructor in multiple ways best supported connection. Interactive visual syllabi were least helpful. Results guide instructors in prioritizing facilitation for community and learning.

Surveying 155 online students using Moore’s interaction framework, this study examined perceived helpfulness of engagement strategies across learner–learner, learner–instructor, and learner–content categories. Learner–instructor strategies (e.g., regular announcements, timely feedback, rubrics) were rated most beneficial; icebreakers and collaborative tools topped learner–learner, and real‑world projects and structured discussion prompts led learner–content. Results inform instructors and designers seeking to enhance engagement online.

Surveying instructors across institutions, this paper explored motivations for adopting synchronous virtual classrooms and how they are implemented. Respondents cited institutional resources, increased social presence, enhanced learning, and technology availability as key drivers. Practical patterns of use and considerations for integrating synchronous sessions into online/blended courses are discussed.

This experiment compared a location‑aware, “here‑and‑now” mobile learning implementation (iPad/iPod) with a computer‑based instruction (CBI) version during an art lesson with 109 undergraduates. Using pre/posttests and surveys, ANOVA results showed significant effects: CBI produced higher achievement, while mobile groups reported more positive attitudes. Findings highlight trade‑offs and design implications for authentic, mobile contexts.

Through student surveys, instructor interviews, and archive analyses in a graduate course using Wimba, the study examined learner–learner, learner–instructor, learner–content, and learner–interface interactions in a synchronous virtual classroom. Students valued immediacy, presenting, chat, and webcam features; instructor presence and demonstrations supported engagement with content. Implications address adopting and designing synchronous components.