Instructor+Competencies

There are a number of competencies that are essential for successful facilitation of an online course by the instructor. The most important competencies are identified below.

Online learning success results from relationships. Within the context of instructor competencies three relationships resonate; learner-instructor, learner-learner, and learner-content. Student motivation, engagement, and achievement are by-products of successful online relationships. These relationships necessitate specific skills and knowledge to yield optimized learning outcomes. Competencies that engender a robust learner-instructor relationship are encouraging student-faculty contact and a sense of community, acting as a facilitator, setting clear expectations, and providing prompt feedback. Competencies that develop learner-learner relationships include nurturing a sense of community, facilitating, and encouraging collaborative learning and participation. In order for the learner to successfully internalize and construct knowledge, a relationship with the course content must be stimulated through time on task, melding of knowledge and experiences of the past with new knowledge, and reflection. Though there are dozens of competencies necessary for skillful and successful online facilitation, these are the competencies that foster the important relationships with the learner and promote engagement, motivation, and learning.

Critical Instructor Competencies
The following 10 competencies were chosen from the article by Smith (2005) as the most critical for the online instructor.

Encourage Contacts between Students and Faculty
“Development of the student-teacher relationship [is] the key to the success of distance education” ( Simonson, Schlosser, & Hanson, 1999, p. 63 ). Jackson, Jones, and Rodriguez (2010) found “the most important variable in the online classroom is the instructor’s level of interaction with students” ( p. 80 ), and Martinez-Caro (2011) established “teacher-student interaction [is] the strongest predictor of learning in e-learning” ( p. 578 ). Chyung and Vachon (2005) identified that four of the seven most significant factors contributing to a learner’s satisfaction were directly related to an instructor’s skills or their interaction with the student. The supportive and nurturing relationship of learner and instructor increases learner satisfaction with online courses ( Ali & Ahmad, 2011; Jackson et al., 2010; Shea, Fredericksen, & Pickett, 2006 ), improved motivation ( Al-Fahad, 2010; Omar, Kalulu, & Belmasrour, 2011; Park & Choi, 2009; Pigliapoco & Bogliolo, 2008 ), and better learning outcomes ( Abrami, Bernard, Bures, Borokhovski, & Tamim, 2010; Boling, Hough, Krinsky, Saleem, & Stevens, 2011; Jackson et al., 2010; Pelz, 2010 ).

Act Like a Learning Facilitator Rather than a Professor
Boling et al. (2011) argued that today’s technology requires a shift from a teacher-centered to a student-centered paradigm, which relegates the instructor to the role of mentor, guide, coach, or facilitator ( Blanchard, 2011; Cabrera-Lozoya, Cerdan, Cano, Garcia-Sanchez, & Lujan, 2012; Oncu & Cakir, 2011 ). One of the most important factors in successfully facilitating online is projecting teaching presence ( Archambault, Wetzel, Fouger, & Williams, 2010; Bradley, 2009; Pelz, 2010 ); the ability to connect with students ( Ke, 2010 ) and encourage them and provide the necessary scaffolding to promote learning and self-reliance in the learner ( Anderson, 2008; Cacciamani, Cesareni, Martini, Ferrini, & Fujita, 2012; Cercone, 2008; Tallent-Runnels, Thomas, Lan, Cooper, Ahern, Shaw, & Liu, 2006 ) while staying in the background as much as possible ( Hoic-Bozic, Mornar, & Boticki, 2009; Ke, 2010 ). Mastering this competency by transitioning from the traditional classroom to online can be a great challenge ( Allen, Crosky, McAlpine, Hoffman, & Munroe, 2009; Jackson et al., 2010 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) and can be the key to success or failure ( Lombardi, 2007 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). As teaching presence increases, so does student satisfaction ( Donovant, 2009; Ferguson & DeFelice, 2010; Gunawardena, Linder-VanBerschot, LaPointe, & Rao, 2010 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), engagement ( Ke & Hoadley, 2009 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), motivation ( Diaz & Entonado, 2009 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), and accomplishments ( Ally, 2008 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) as students “become active participants in learning” ( Yang & Cornelious, 2005, Ensuring Effective Online Instruction, para. 3 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">).

Development of a Sense of Community among Participants
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">A sense of community is vital for successful online learning ( Andrews & Haythornthwaite, 2007; Boling et al., 2011; Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) which should follow a social-constructivist approach and be community-centered ( Sharples et al., 2007 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). Instructors must take the primary role of leading community-building activities ( Ally, 2008; Muirhead, 2004 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) and his or her example is key to the establishment of a sense of community ( Ally, 2008; Ambrose & Ogilvie, 2010 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) through accurate and timely feedback ( Desai, Hart, & Richards, 2008; Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), encouragement of participation and interaction ( Boling et al., 2011; Cornelius, Gordon, & Ackland, 2011; Yang & Cornelius, 2005 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), nurturing caring and healthy relationships ( Abrami et al., 2010; Caine, 2010 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), and modeling effective and open communication ( Desai et al., 2008 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). When students feel a sense of belonging to a community and care for other members of the group significant benefits have been noted. The benefits to students are that they:
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">bond earlier and better than in traditional classrooms ( Pelz, 2010 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">),
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">engage in more reflective thinking ( Bradley, 2009 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">),
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">better understand the material ( Bradley, 2009 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">),
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">are more motivated ( Abrami et al., 2010; Boling et al., 2011; Karge, Phillips, Dodson, & McCabe, 2011 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) and satisfied ( Pigliapoco & Bogliolo, 2008 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">),
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">persist with their studies ( Pigliapoco & Bogliolo, 2008 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), and
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">learn more ( Boling et al., 2011; Fahy, 2008; Moisey & Hughes, 2008; Pigliapoco & Bogliolo, 2008 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">).

Promote Collaborative Learning
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Learning is more likely to be successful from the perspective of the student in an interactive and engaging environment ( Abrami et al., 2010; Boling et al., 2011; Pelz, 2010; Sharples et al., 2007; Yang & Cornelious, 2005 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;"> ) and another primary role of the instructor is to encourage and support this collaboration. Collaboration helps build camaraderie and common ground between learners, but can also enhance and build the learner to learner relationships that are “foundational to a strong distance education setting” ( Levine, 2005, p. 17 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). Learning in small groups enhances the learning of students over individual learning in some circumstances ( Martinez-Caro, 2011 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). By preparing learners to engage in collaborative activities “students can enhance their critical thinking skills” ( Bradley, 2009, p. 24 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), which is a principle means of enhancing and encouraging deeper learning. The most referenced outcomes from interactivity in online classes are student satisfaction ( Al-Fahad, 2010; Ali & Ahmad, 2011; Alshare, Freeze, Lane, & Wen, 2011; Muilenburg & Berge, 2005 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), increased learner motivation ( Omar et al., 2011; Park & Choi, 2009; Pigliapoco & Bogliolo, 2008 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), and positive learning and achievement outcomes ( Jackson et al., 2010; Ke & Xie, 2009; Martinez-Caro, 2011; Ruey, 2010 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">).

Use Best Practices to Promote Participation
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Bradley (2009) identified interactivity as a means of “promot[ing] higher order learning, such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, rather than rote memorization” ( p. 21 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). To get the most positive results from students in an online class, many authors agree with Watkins’ (2005) need to encourage learner-learner interaction ( Abrami, Bernard, Bures, Borokhovski, & Tamim, 2010; Ali & Ahmad, 2011; Ferguson & DeFelice, 2010; Lee, Redmond, & Dolan, 2008; Martinez-Caro, 2011; Omar, Kalulu, & Belmasrour, 2011 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). By focusing on social interaction and relevant content usable in the working environment, activities enhance learning, and the learning environment ( Boling, Hough, Krinsky, Saleem, & Stevens, 2011 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">).

Promote Reflection
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Self-reflection by the learner engenders deep learning ( Cercone, 2008; Ke & Xie, 2009 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), high-quality learning ( Ke, 2010; Ruey, 2010 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), meta-learning ( Baskas, 2011a; Bradley, 2009 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), and metacognitive expertise ( Cacciamani, Cesareni, Martini, Ferrini, & Fujita, 2012 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). Reflection also allows learners to examine their biases ( Baskas, 2011b <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), other perspectives ( Sinclair, 2009 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) so that they can internalize ( Ally, 2008; Strang, 2009 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), contextualize ( Bradley, 2009; Fidishun, 2011 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), and transform experience and knowledge into learning ( Buch & Bartley, 2002; Chan Mow, 2008 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), while boosting motivation ( Abela, 2009; Baskas, 2011a <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">), and promoting higher order learning ( Taran, 2006 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). Studies demonstrate that reflection is a key online design dimension ( Ali & Ahmad, 2011; Ke, 2010; Yang & Cornelius, 2005 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) and that students seem to prefer e-learning because of their ability to reflect before engaging in discussions ( Andrews & Haythornthwaite, 2007; Ke & Hoadley, 2009; Martinez-Caro, 2011; Sinclair, 2009 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">).

Be Clear About Course Requirements
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">A primary factor contributing to student dissatisfaction in online classes is unclear instructional directions or expectations ( Chyung & Vachon, 2005 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). Studies also show that quality design of e-learning courses requires clearly defining expectations ( Ali & Ahmad, 2011; Gunawardena et al., 2010; McGlone, 2011 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) so the learner is positioned to meet objectives. Discussion of expectations will also prevent disappointment if the learner’s expectations for the course are different than what will be covered ( Zemke & Zemke, 1995 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">).

Give Prompt Feedback
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">One of the principle means of executing and achieving previous competencies is through the use of prompt and accurate feedback. Muirhead (2004) identified feedback as one of eight tasks online instructors must do for successful learning to occur. The giving of prompt feedback is also a major component of teaching presence facilitation and the encouragement of learner participation ( Ally, 2008; Pelz, 2010 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). Feedback is part of developing community between participants in an online class ( Pigliapoco & Bogliolo, 2008 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) while fostering reflection ( Chickering & Gamson, 1987 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">).

Emphasize Time on Task
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">To enhance learning, the concepts and objectives of the course need to be clearly presented in a lively form so that the learner spends more time-on-task and engaged with the content ( Ali & Ahmad, 2011; Alshare et al., 2011; Lam & Bordia, 2008 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). If activities are “relevant and useful to students,. . . [and] focus on the importance and utility of content ” ( Abrami et al., 2010, p. 20 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) learner motivation is optimized to inculcate the material.

Encourage Students to Bring Real-life Examples into the Online Classroom
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">According to andragogy, students are more interested in immediate problem-centered approaches to learning, so that learning can improve their work, family, or personal life ( Abela, 2009; Blanchard, Hinchey, & Bennett, 2011; Kenner & Weinerman, 2011 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). By encouraging students to bring their experience and problems into the classroom learners are able to construct deeper and more robust knowledge, while expanding their abilities to handle actual problems ( Allen et al., 2009; Ruey, 2010 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">). This application of real-world learning is a motivator ( Fidishun, 2011 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">) and enriches learning.

Conclusion
<span class="QuoteChar" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">Among the dozens of competencies to choose from, I chose these because they are paramount to the success of the learner regarding the relationships necessary for educational success. The most important relationships for success in any academic endeavor are learner-instructor, learner-learner, and learner-content. These competencies are theory based, but also engender these relationships. Encouraging contact between students and faculty and acting like a learning facilitator build the learner-instructor relationship, which is also enhanced as a sense of community develops. The learner-learner relationship flows from developing a sense of community and the interaction necessary for collaborative learning and participation. Deep knowledge construction requires reflection, while clear course requirements, prompt feedback, time on task, and bringing real-life examples foster all of the relationships. By integrating these competencies in my online classroom, my students and I have extended this classroom success to the workplace and personal lives.

<span class="QuoteChar" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 120%;">[//The content on this page contains excerpts from Watts (2012)// .]


 * ~ **Previous Page** ||~  ||~ **Home** ||~   ||~ **Online Faculty Guide** ||~   ||~ **Next Page** ||


 * = References ||
 * * Abela, J. (2009). Adult learning theories and medical education: A review. //Malta Medical Journal, 21//(1), 11-18. Retrieved from http://www.um.edu/mt/umms/mmj/PDF/234.pdf
 * Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Bures, E. M., Borokhovski, E., & Tamim, R. (2010, July). //Interaction in distance education and online learning: Using evidence and theory to improve practice. The Evolution from Distance Education to Distributed Learning//. Symposium conducted at Memorial Union Biddle Hotel, Bloomington, IN. Retrieved from http://www.aect.org/events/symposia/Docs/InteractionDEnext120510.pdf
 * Al-Fahad, F. N. (2010). The learners’ satisfaction toward online e-learning implemented in the college of applied studies and community service, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia: Can e-learning replace the conventional system of education? //Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE), 11//(2), 61-72. Retrieved from https://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/
 * Ali, A., & Ahmad, I. (2011). Key factors for determining students’ satisfaction in distance learning courses: A study of Allama Iqbal Open University. //Contemporary Educational Technology, 2//(2), 118-134. Retrieved from http://cedtech.net/
 * Allen, B., Crosky, A., McAlpine, I., Hoffman, M., & Munroe, P. (2009). A blended approach to collaborative learning: Making large group teaching more student-centred. //The International Journal of Engineering Education, 25//(3), 569-576. Retrieved from http://www.ijee.ie/
 * Ally, M. (2008). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.), //The theory and practice of online learning// (pp. 15-44). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University.
 * Alshare, K. A., Freeze, R. D., Lane, P. L., & Wen, H. J. (2011). The impacts of system and human factors on online learning systems use and learner satisfaction. //Decision Sciences: Journal of Innovative Education, 9//(3), 437-461. Retrieved from http://www.dsjie.org/dnn/default.aspx
 * Ambrose, J., & Ogilvie, J. (2010). Multiple modes in corporate learning: Propelling business IQ with formal, informal and social learning. //Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 14//(2), 9-18. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/sites/default/files/Multiple_Modes_in_Corporate_Learning_Propelling_Business_IQ_with_Formal,_Informal_and_Social_Learning_0_0.pdf
 * Anderson, T. (2008). Teaching in an online learning context. In T. Anderson (Ed.), //The theory and practice of online learning// (pp. 343-365). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University.
 * Andrews, R., & Haythornthwaite, C. (2007). Introduction to e-learning research. In R. Andrews, & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.). //The SAGE handbook of e-learning research// (pp. 1-51). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
 * Archambault, L., Wetzel, K., Fouger, T. S., & Williams, M. K. (2010). Professional development 2.0: Transforming teacher education pedagogy with 21st century tools. //Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27//(1), 4-11. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/learn/ publications/journals/jdlte.aspx
 * Baskas, R. S. (2011a). //Applying adult learning and development theories to educational practice//. Retrieved from ERIC Database. (ED519926)
 * Baskas, R. S. (2011b, March 27). //Adult learning assumptions//. Retrieved from ERIC Database. (ED517971)
 * Blanchard, R. D., Hinchey, K. T., & Bennett, E. E. (2011, April). //Literature review of residents as teachers from an adult learning perspective//. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED521385
 * Boling, E. C., Hough, M., Krinsky, H., Saleem, H., & Stevens, M. (2011). Cutting the distance in distance education: Perspectives on what promotes positive, online learning experiences. //Internet and Higher Education// (Advance online publication). doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.11.006
 * Bradley, J. (2009). Promoting and supporting authentic online conversations – which comes first – the tools of instructional design? //International Journal of Pedagogies and learning, 5//(3), 20-31. Retrieved from http://jpl.e-contentmanagement.com/
 * Buch, K., & Bartley, S. (2002). Learning style and training delivery mode preference. //Journal of Workplace Learning, 14//(1), 5-10. doi:10.1108/13665620210412795
 * Cabrera‐Lozoya, A., Cerdan, F., Cano, M.‐D., Garcia‐Sanchez, D., & Lujan, S. (2012). Unifying heterogeneous e‐learning modalities in a single platform: CADI, a case study. //Computers & Education, 58//(1), 617‐630. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.09.014
 * Cacciamani, S., Cesareni, D., Martini, F., Ferrini, T., & Fujita, N. (2012). Influence of participation, facilitator styles, and metacognitive reflection on knowledge building in online university courses. //Computers & Education, 58//, 874-884. Retrieved from http://www.journals.elsevier.com/computers-and-education/
 * Caine, G. (2010). Making connections between e-learning and natural learning. //E-Learning Handbook, 33//, 1-10. Retrieved from http://www.cainelearning.com/PRODUCTS/From_natural_learning_to_elearning.pdf
 * Cercone, K. (2008). Characteristics of adult learners with implications for online learning design. //Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education Journal (AACE), 16//(2), 137-159. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/j/AACEJ
 * Chan Mow, I. T. (2008). Issues and difficulties in teaching novice computer programming. In M. Iskander (Ed.), //Innovative techniques in instruction technolgy, e-learning, e-assessment, and education// (pp. 199-204). London, England: Springer Science+Business Media.
 * Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. //American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39//(7), 3-7. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED282491).
 * Chyung, S. Y., & Vachon, M. (2005). An investigation of the profiles of satisfying and dissatisfying factors in e-learning. //Performance Improvement Quarterly, 59//(3), 227-245. doi:10.1177/0741713609331546
 * Cornelius, S., Gordon, C., & Ackland, A. (2011). Towards flexible learning for adult learners in professional contexts: An activity-focused course design. //Interactive Learning Environments, 19//(4), 381-393. doi:10.1080/10494820903298258
 * Desai, M. S., Hart, J., & Richards, T. C. (2008). E-learning: Paradigm shift in education. //Education, 129//(2), 327-334. Retrieved from http://www.projectinnovation.biz/education_2006.html
 * Fahy, P. J. (2008). Characteristics of interactive online learning media. In T. Anderson (Ed.), //The theory and practice of online learning// (pp. 167-199). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University.
 * Ferguson, J. M., & DeFelice, A. E. (2010). Length of online course and student satisfaction, perceived learning, and academic performance. //International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11//(2), 73-84. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl
 * Fidishun, D. (2011, March). //Andragogy and technology: Integrating adult learning theory as we teach with technology//. Retrieved from http://frank.mtsu.edu/~itconf/proceed00/fidishun.html
 * Gunawardena, C. N., Linder-VanBerschot, J. A., LaPointe, D. K., & Rao, L. (2010). Predictors of learner satisfaction and transfer of learning in a corporate online education program. //The American Journal of Distance Education, 24//(1), 207-226. doi:10.1080/08923647.2010.522919
 * Hoic-Bozic, N., Mornar, V., & Boticki, I. (2009). A blended learning approach to course design and implementation. //IEEE Transactions on Education, 52//(1), 19-30. doi:10.1109/GTE.2007.914945
 * Jackson, L. C., Jones, S. J., & Rodriguez, R. C. (2010). Faculty actions that result in student satisfaction in online courses. //Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 14//(4), 78-96. Retrieved from http://jaln.sloanconsortium.org/index.php/jaln
 * Karge, B. D., Phillips, K. M., Dodson, T. J., & McCabe, M. (2011). Effective strategies for engaging adult learners. //Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 8//(12), 53-56. Retrieved from http://journals.cluteonline.com/index.php/TLC/article/view/6621
 * Ke, F. (2010). Examining online teaching, cognitive, and social presence for adult students. //Computers & Education, 55//, 808-820. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.013
 * Ke, F., & Hoadley, C. (2009). Evaluating online learning communities. //Educational Technology Research & Development, 57//(1), 487-510. doi:10.1007/s11423-009-9120-2
 * Ke, F., & Xie, K. (2009). Toward deep learning for adult students in online courses. //Internet and Higher Education, 12//, 136-145. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.001
 * Kenner, C., & Weinerman, J. (2011). Adult learning theory: Applications to nontraditional college students. //Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41//(2), 87-96. Retrieved form http://www.crla.net/journal.htm
 * Lam, P., & Bordia, S. (2008). Factors affecting student choice of e-learning over traditional learning: Student and teacher perspectives. //The International Journal of Learning, 14//(12), 131-139. Retrieved from http://ijl.cgpublisher.com/product/pub.30/prod.1585
 * Lee, D., Redmond, J. A., & Dolan, D. (2008). Lessons from the e-learning experience in South Korea in traditional universities. In M. Iskander (Ed.), //Innovative techniques in instruction technology, e-learning, e-assessment, and education// (pp. 216-222). London, England: Springer Science+Business Media.
 * Levine, S. J. (2005). Creating a foundation for learning relationships. In S. J. Levine (Ed.), //Making distance education work: Understanding learning and learners at a distance// (pp. 17-24). Okemos, MI: LearnerAssociates.
 * Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview (ELI Paper 1). In D. G. Oblinger (Ed.), //EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative: Advancing Learning through IT Innovation// (pp. 1-12). Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf
 * Martinez‐Caro, E. (2011). Factors affecting effectiveness in e‐learning: An analysis in production management courses. //Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 19//(3), 572‐581. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cae.v19.3/issuetoc
 * McGlone, J. R. (2011). Adult learning styles and on‐line educational preference. //Research in Higher Education Journal, 12//, 1‐9. Retrieved from http://www.aabri.com/rhej.html
 * Moisey, S. D., & Hughes, J. A. (2008). Supporting the online learner. In T. Anderson (Ed.), //The theory and practice of online learning// (pp. 419-439). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University.
 * Muilenburg, L. Y., & Berge, Z. L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. //Distance Education, 26//(1), 29-48. doi:10.1080/01587910500081269
 * Muirhead, B. (2004). Contemporary online education challenges. //International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning (ITDL), 1//(10). Retrieved from http://itdl.org/journal/oct_04/article05.htm
 * Omar, A., Kalulu, D., & Belmasrour, R. (2011). Enhanced instruction: The future of e-learning. //International Journal of Education Research, 6//(1), 21-37. Retrieved from http://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-educational-research/
 * Oncu, S., & Cakir, H. (2011). Research in online learning environments: Priorities and methodologies. //Computers & Education, 57//, 1098-1108. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.009
 * Park, J.-H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. //Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12//(4), 207-217. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/12_4/18.pdf
 * Pelz, B. (2010). (My) three principles of effective online pedagogy. //Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 14//(1), 103-116. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln_main
 * Pigliapoco, E. E., & Bogliolo, A. A. (2008). The effects of psychological sense of community in online and face-to-face academic courses. //International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 3//(4), 60-69. Retrieved from http://www.online-journals.org/i-jet
 * Ruey, S. (2010). A case study of constructivist instructional strategies for adult online learning. //British Journal of Educational Technology, 41//(5), 706-720. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00965.x
 * Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In R. Andrews, & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), //The SAGE handbook of e-learning research// (pp. 219247). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
 * Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., & Pickett, A. (2006). Student satisfaction and perceived learning with on-line courses: Principles and examples from the SUNY learning network. //Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4//(2), 2-31. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln_main
 * Simonson, M., Schlosser, C., & Hanson, D. (1999). Theory and distance education: A new discussion. //American Journal of distance Education, 13//(1), 60-75. doi:10.1080/08923649909527014
 * Sinclair, A. (2009). Provocative pedagogies in e-learning: Making the invisible visible. //International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21//(2), 197-209. Retrieved from http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/
 * Smith, T. C. (2005). Fifty-one competencies for online instruction. //The Journal of Educators Online, 2//(2), 1-18. Retrieved from http://www.thejeo.com/Ted%20Smith%20Final.pdf
 * Strang, K. D. (2009). Measuring online learning approach and mentoring preferences of international doctorate students. //International Journal of Educational Research, 48,// 245-257. Retrieved from http://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-educational-research/
 * Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. //Review of Educational Research, 76//(1), 93-135. Retrieved from http://rer.sagepub.com/content/76/1/93.full.pdf
 * Taran, C. (2006). Enabling SMEs to deliver synchronous online training – practical guidelines. //Campus-Wide Information Systems, 23//(3), 182-195. doi:10.1108/10650740610674193
 * Watkins, R. (2005). //75 e-learning activities: Making online learning interactive//. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer/John Wiley & Sons.
 * Watts, S. W. (2012). //Online instructor competencies//. Unpublished Manuscript, Department of Education, Northcentral University, Prescott Valley, AZ.
 * Yang, Y., & Cornelious, L. F. (2005). Preparing instructors for quality online instruction. //Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8//(1). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring81/yang81.htm
 * Zemke, R., & Zemke, S. (1995). Adult learning: What do we know for sure? //Training, 32//, 69-82. Retrieved from ERIC Database. (ED504481) ||