Module 2: Quality activities and assessments
Accessibility Hub, Queen’s University. (n.d.). Accessibility policies and statements. https://www.queensu.ca/accessibility/across-campus/queens-accessibility-initiatives/accessibility-policies-and-statements
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), 9–14. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v4i2.149
Astin, A. W., Banta, T. W., Cross, K. P., El-Khawas, E., Ewell, P. T., Hutchings, P., Marchese, T. J., McClenney, K. M., Mentkowski, M., Miller, M. A., Moran, E. T., & Wright, B. D. (2005). 9 principles of good practice for the assessment of student learning. American Association for Higher Education; Stylus Publishing. https://www.atu.edu/assessment/documents/other/aahe_nine_principles.pdf
Barber, C. R, McCollum, J. K., & Maboudian, W. L. (2020). The new roadmap for creating online courses: An interactive workbook. Cambridge University Press.
Bawa, P. (2016). Retention in online courses: Exploring issues and solutions—a literature review. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015621777
Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R.-M. (2016). The online teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips. Wiley Publishing.
Boucher, E. (2016, August 22). It’s time to ditch our deadlines: Why you should stop penalizing your students for submitting work late. The Chronicle of Higher Education 63(3), 28. https://www.chronicle.com/article/its-time-to-ditch-our-deadlines/
Boud, D., & Dawson, P. (2021, April 19). What feedback literate teachers do: An empirically-derived competency framework. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1910928. Used under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning guidelines, version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org
Centre for Teaching and Learning, Concordia University/Université Concordia. (2021, May 17). Providing feedback to students online. https://www.concordia.ca/ctl/digital-teaching/giving-feedback.html
Centre for Teaching Support & Innovation, University of Toronto. (n.d.). Syllabus design and course information. https://teaching.utoronto.ca/teaching-support/strategies/inclusive-teaching/strategies-for-instructors/design-information/
Center for Academic Innovation, University of Michigan. (2020, July 8). Giving good online feedback. https://onlineteaching.umich.edu/giving-good-online-feedback/
Centre for Extended Learning, University of Waterloo. (2020). Fostering engagement: Facilitating online courses in higher education.
Centre for Teaching & Learning, Queen’s University. (2021, May 24). Showcase 2021: The ethics of prompting passion [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGeO64BAU7k
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7. https://www.aahea.org/articles/sevenprinciples1987.htm
Clark, K. F. and Graves, M. F. (2005, March). Scaffolding students’ comprehension of text. The Reading Teacher, 58(6), 570–580. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.58.6.6
Conrad, D., & Openo, J. (2018). Assessment strategies for online learning: Engagement and authenticity. Athabasca University Press. https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781771992329.01
Darby, F., & Lang, J. M. (2019). Small teaching online: Applying learning science in online classes. Jossey-Bass.
deNoyelles, A., Zydney, J. M., & Chen, B. (2014). Strategies for creating a community of inquiry through online asynchronous discussions. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 10(1), 153–165. https://jolt.merlot.org/vol10no1/denoyelles_0314.pdf
Dixon, C. S. (2014). The three E’s of online discussion. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 15(1), 1–8.
Ellis, C., van Haeringen, K., Harper, R., Bretag, T., Zucker, I., McBride, S., Rozenberg, P., Newton, P., & Saddiqui, S. (2020). Does authentic assessment assure academic integrity? Evidence from contract cheating data. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(3), 454–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1680956
Harrison, D. (2020, April 29). Online education and authentic assessment. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2020/04/29/how-discourage-student-cheating-online-exams-opinion
Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M. & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002
Jaggars, S. & Xu, D. (2016). How do online course design features influence student performance? Computers & Education, 95, 270–284.
James, L. T. & Casidy, R. (2018). Authentic assessment in business education: Its effects on student satisfaction and promoting behaviour. Studies in Higher Education, 43(3), 401–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1165659
Khan, A., Egbue, O., Palkie, B., & Madden, J. (2017). Active learning: Engaging students to maximize learning in an online course. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 15(2), 107–115. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1141876.pdf
Martin, F., Ritzhaupt, A., Kumar, S., & Budhrani, K. (2019). Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Course design, assessment and evaluation, and facilitation. The Internet and Higher Education, 42, 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.04.001
Masland, L. (2021, February 9). Cameras in Zoom. Center for Academic Excellence, Appalachian State University. https://cae.appstate.edu/news/cameras-zoom. Used under CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
Nicol, D. J. & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Nilson, L. (2015). Specifications grading: Restoring rigor, motivating students, and saving faculty time. Stylus Publishing.
Rettinger, D. (n.d.). Small, scalable changes for academic integrity. University of Mary Washington. https://academics.umw.edu/academicintegrity/academic-integrity/faculty-resources/academic-integrity-materials/small-scalable-changes-for-improving-academic-integrity/
Rottmann, A., & Rabidoux, S. (2017, September 6). How to provide meaningful feedback online. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/views/2017/09/06/how-provide-meaningful-feedback-online-course
Schisler, L. (2019, September 23). A headache-free late work policy. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/effective-classroom-management/late-work-policy/
Scott, K., & McCurty, K. (2021, August 3). The online teaching strategy: How to personalize motivation. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/philosophy-of-teaching/the-online-teaching-strategy-how-to-personalize-your-motivation/
Sotiriadou, P., Logan, D., Daly, A., & Guest, R. (2020). The role of authentic assessment to preserve academic integrity and promote skill development and employability. Studies in Higher Education, 45(11), 2132–2148. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1582015
Spangler, S. (2020, September 28). Cinderella deadlines: reconsidering timelines for student work. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/course-design-ideas/cinderella-deadlines-reconsidering-timelines-for-student-work/
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2008). Plagiarism, the internet and student learning improving academic integrity. Routledge.
Troop, M., White, D., Wilson, K. E., & Zeni, P. (2020). The user experience design for learning (UXDL) framework: The undergraduate perspective. The Canadian Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(3), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2020.3.8328
University of Edinburgh (n.d.). Reflection toolkit: Assessing assignments. https://www.ed.ac.uk/reflection/facilitators-toolkit/assessment/assess-assignment
UW Office of Academic Integrity. (2021, January 7). Academic integrity (Linda Carson, Continuing Lecturer at UWaterloo) [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQFu5KP8zzo
Vecellio, S. (2021, October 8). The appreciative close: A strategy for creating a classroom community. Faculty Focus. https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/effective-teaching-strategies/the-appreciative-close-a-strategy-for-creating-a-classroom-community/
Villarroel, V., Boud, D., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D., & Bruna, C. (2019). Using principles of authentic assessment to redesign written examinations and tests. Innovation in Education and Teaching International, 57(1), 38–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1564882
Walvoord, B. E. F., & Anderson, V. J. (2010). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment in college (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Way, K. A., Burrell, L.; D’Allura, L., & Ashford-Rowe, K. (2020). Empirical investigation of authentic assessment theory: An application in online courses using mimetic simulation created in university learning management ecosystems. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(1), 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1740647
Wiggins, G. (2012, September 1). Seven keys to effective feedback. ASCD.
Wise, A. F., Speer, J., Marbouti, F., & Hsiao, Y. T. (2013). Broadening the notion of participation in online discussions: examining patterns in learners’ online listening behaviours. Instructional Science, 41, 323–343. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11251-012-9230-9
Xu, D., & Smith, S. (2013). Adaptability to online learning: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas. Teacher’s College, Columbia University. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED539911.pdf
Yukselturk, E., & Top, E. (2006). Reconsidering online course discussions: A case study. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 34(3), 341–367. https://doi.org/10.2190/6GQ8-P7TX-VGMR-4NR4
The definition of the key term Asynchronous is derived from original in Fostering Engagement: Facilitating Online Courses in Higher Education, Unit 4a by K. E. Wilson and D. Opperwall and the Centre for Extended Learning, which is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted. The derivative work has been adapted through modification of text and headings and retains the CC BY-NC-SA International 4.0 license.