In this session, presenters will guide participants in basic elements of engagement in online learning environments. Examples of effective practice will be offered for design, technology choices, and instructional elements. Discussion will be guided by presenters and include considerations for formal (classroom/training) environments and informal (advising, communication, support) environments.

In the Back-to-Basics session, presenters will guide participants in basic elements of engagement in online learning environments with a focus on new and emerging technologies
Educators receive notices and marketing for the latest or flashy new tool. While some tools may be useful, instructional designers and instructional deliverers need to consider certain factors when using the tool. Asking is the tool aligned with my purposes, my objectives, and my learner population fosters intentionality in choice. Considering the time and efforts needed by the designer, the instructor, and the student in that questioning promotes effective use of time and resources. Focusing on how the choice may increase engagement is key.
Additionally, educators are presented with numerous options for online instructional design elements. Designers and instructors can be overwhelmed with lists and lists of strategies to incorporate into a classroom. To promote student engagement and success, we need to choose wisely.
Whether new to applying technology in digital learning, or considering learner experience, or searching for engagement practices, this session will provide a back-to-basics discussion and guided evaluation of application of effective practices.
Technology for learning is a critical element for blended and fully online courses. Further, purposeful use of technical tools can aid in the design and delivery of instruction and reach all types of learners. Thoughtful incorporation and application of technology can better transfer the learning to the student no matter the preferred way of learning (Cleveland-Innes et al., 2019). Whether designer or instructor, there is no doubt that integration of tech tools can further connect students to content and increase engagement in the learning experience (Beetham, 2013).
However, online learners still disengage and become frustrated with coursework or training programs. Though there are factors connected to learning obstacles that stem from the learner themselves, pathways for learning and academic success can be blocked by the design and/or the delivery of the instruction itself. If in review of content, there is little to reach different types of learners, or no variation in content or learning assets, then a portion of those in a class or training program will have to work harder at the work or possibly disengage or even fail (van Merrienboer & Ayres, 2006).
Delivery of instruction needs to be based on multi-modal learning and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (CAST, 2024). Learning effectiveness leads to student satisfaction, and the connection between content and multimedia can enhance student engagement and learning (Smith, 2013). Delivering information through various formats – audio, visual, interactive, text based – appeals to multiple learning styles and intelligences (Anderson, Atkins, Ball, Homicz Millar, Selfe, & Selfe, 2006). Utilizing multi-modal learning, instructors and designers are able to better organize course content and differentiate learning.
Differentiated instruction involves providing students with different avenues to acquiring content, to processing, to constructing, and making sense of ideas. Utilization of multi-modal assets creates a more adhesive nature of knowledge and can increase placement in long-term memory and aid in recall. Creation and incorporation of these effective instructional tools increase interactivity with the learning. Also, students may be able to make connections between concepts more readily if more in tune with the course (Kelly, 2010).
With differentiated instruction, the objective is to develop teaching materials so that all students within a classroom can learn effectively, regardless of learning preference or differences in ability. Evaluation of materials, learning activities, individual and collaborative assignments, and engagement and interaction between instructor and student (communication and feedback) is key. Technology facilitation provides the platforms to offer multi-modal learner support, connection to content, and amassing of resources (Weir, 2008).
One size does not fit all in learning whether as youth learners or adult learners. Providing more than one means of content delivery opens the door to those not skilled in adapting to environments where their preferred way of learning is not overt or not present (CAST, 2024). Youth learners today require engagement for successful learning. Meanwhile, adult learners need to feel connected to the learning to internalize and engage in the process. If the adult learner does not do well in text based elearning situations, they will be uncomfortable, disconnected, and/or have to get over the obstacle of adjusting their learning style before they can even get to the knowledge or skills being taught. A more dynamic course, with a mix of purposefully applied multimedia of content and audio and visual assets, will not only appeal and connect to the adult learner but also engage the youth learner (Knowles, 1984).
Those new (or not) to technology and multimedia tools might find they spend more time trying to figure out what to do with the tool than actually using it to provide engaging instruction. Those new (or not) to online learning environments may be overwhelmed with choices of strategies and randomly choose without further evaluation.
For each effective practice, presenters will provide background on the pedagogical and andragogical framework to ensure successful development and delivery in a learning environment. Discussion will include how to mix in aspects of the three Community of Inquiry presences, social presence – teaching presence – and cognitive presence, as well as UDL to develop effective engagement with learners. The technological aspects of application will also be discussed.
Provided is an overview of the five back-to-basic practices that will be presented at the session. The research to support how each is an effective practice will be shared. Examples of effective practice in online learning will be offered for design, technology choices, and instructional elements.
Back-to-basic effective engagement practices to be covered in the session include:
Creating Community – shared objective and purpose, acknowledging the population of learners, bringing experiences to the table, including the why as well as the what, ask about students and follow up, student contributions, technology: welcome emails and videos, announcements, discussions, open forums
Presence – student, instructor, seeing self in the learning content, community, use of name, personality, connections of similar/like interests, appropriate fun and humor, technology: welcome emails and videos, announcements, discussions, open forums
OERs – free is good, access, relevant, new(er), incorporation of various experiences and backgrounds, offer students to contribute, shared found resources, technology: institutional library/databases, open access, open forums, wikis, annotated documents, group collaborative documents
Feedback – stating and modeling expectations, guided feedback versus graded feedback, instructor to student, peer feedback, creating feedback loops, use the students name, technology: discussions, assessments, online meetings
Choices – choices for use of technology tools, choices for pathways with discussions and assignments, choices in topics, collaborative choices, technology: discussions, assignments, groups
After reviewing the practices, participants will be asked to connect with other participants and engage in strategic evaluation on how these effective engagement practices can be integrated or further developed in online learning environments. Discussion will be guided by presenters and include considerations for formal (classroom/training) environments and informal (advising, communication, support) environments. Resources will be shared with participants for further exploration and application post-conference.

References
Anderson, D., Atkins, A., Ball, C., Homicz Millar, K., Selfe, C., & Selfe R. (2006). Integrating multimodality into composition curricula: Survey methodology and results from a CCCC research grant. Composition Studies, 34(2), 59-83. Retrieved from https://www.uc.edu/content/dam/uc/journals/composition-studies/docs/backissues/34-2/Anderson%2034.2.pdf
Beetham, H. (2013). Designing for Active Learning in Technology-Rich Contexts. In H. Beetham and R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=F7On-O2VrYUC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=multimodal+learning+engaging+students&ots=k5MV8Jh-cG&sig=64sSi-d8mL_-TLpr7_SfxbVFUpE#v=onepage&q&f=false
CAST. (2024). About universal design for learning. https://www.cast.org/impact/universal-design-for-learning-udl
Cleveland-Innes, M., Gauvreau, S., Richardson, G., Mishra, S., & Ostashewski, N. (2019). Technology-enabled learning and the benefits and challenges of using the Community of Inquiry theoretical framework. International Journal of E-Learning and Distance Education, 34(1). https://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/1108/1733
Kelly, R. (2010). Three strategies for engaging students through multimodal course design. Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/online-education/three-strategies-for-engaging-students-through-multimodal-course-design/
Knowles, M. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Smith, R. (2013). Improved learning outcomes through a multimodal text. Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/9/improved-learning-outcomes-through-a-multimodal-text
van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Ayers, P. (2006). Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 5-13. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02504793
Weir, L. (2008). Research review: Multimodal learning through media. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/multimodal-learning-teaching-methods-media