Technological Applications to the Marketing Classroom

Leventhal, R., & Swanson, A. (2015, August). Technological applications to the marketing classroom. Journal of Research and Interactive Marketing. ISSN: 2040-7122

Technological Applications to the Marketing Classroom Richard Leventhal, PhD [email protected] Andree C. Swanson, EdD Forbes School of Business, Ashford University Author Biographies Dr. Richard C. Leventhal -- Dr. Leventhal earned his Ph.D. in Higher Education/College Administration from the University of Denver, a Master’s In Business Administration with an emphasis in Marketing Research from San Francisco State University, and a BS in Marketing from Cornell University. He has had more than 15 years experience with three Fortune 500 corporations as a senior executive in both marketing and sales. In addition, he has been a senior Professor of Marketing at Metropolitan State University in Denver and an adjunct Professor of Marketing in the MBA program at Regis University in Denver. He currently is a Professor of Marketing Online for Ashford University in Denver, Colorado. Dr. Andree Swanson -- Dr. Andree Swanson earned a doctorate in Educational Leadership with a focus on distance education from the University of Phoenix. Additionally, Dr. Swanson earned two masters degrees: a Masters of Human Relations from the University of Oklahoma and a Masters of Arts in Organizational Management from the University of Phoenix. She holds an undergraduate degree in Business Administration and Management from the University of Maryland -- European Division. Dr. Swanson's academic interests are in business and leadership (servant leadership), emotional intelligence, and student engagement in distance education. Structured Abstract Purpose The purpose of this qualitative study is to identify resources that are available in the online marketing classroom, and to further contemplate the applications for marketing managers. Exploration of the rationale for using technology to deliver course material and the positive results that accrue in terms of these efforts will be completed. Design/methodology/approach An exploratory qualitative research design was used for this study so as to gain broad perspective of technology’s application to the classroom. Findings Four types of learners exist: 1) visual learners; 2) auditory learners; 3) read and write learners, and 4) kinesthetic learners (Fleming & Mills, 1922a, 1922b). All four types must be addressed in the online learning environment. Attention to the learning styles and implementing a course design that addresses these learning styles will improve the quality of the online learning environment (Richmond & Cummings, 2005).


Practical implications Many educators in higher education use various forms of rudimentary technology in the classroom, but have yet to embrace, or understand the full potential of such applications. Online learning uses both synchronous and asynchronous techniques to engage the student so as to improve the individual’s knowledge, skills, and abilities. Originality/value Technology applications to the marketing classroom has become a necessity for delivering course content to a wide audience of individual learners, both in higher education and in industry as well. Keywords: instructional technology, marketing, higher education, e-learning Purpose The purpose of this qualitative study is to identify resources that are available to faculty in the online marketing classroom and to further contemplate the applications for marketing managers. Faculty are required to connect with their online students, yet students do not always have a sense of e-connectivity (engagement over the Internet) (Slagter van Tryon & Bishop, 2006). Swanson, Hutkin, Babb, and Howell (2010) wrote that increased interactivity in the online classroom “will help the students’ with their understanding” of class materials. Improving the e-connectivity in the classroom will benefit the students by increasing the opportunities to interact with the faculty which should reduce attrition and increase retention. The study reviewed the current literature on the topic of adding audio in the online marketing classroom. Background Contrary to popular belief, distance education has been around since Biblical times, beginning with the letters that Paul wrote to the Apostles. Even Genghis Khan used a mobile method of delivering training via horseback (Swanson et al., 2010). Later, in the 20th century, several different societies (Swedish, British, Austrialian, and American) created correspondence courses (Swanson et al., 2010). In the late 1950s and early 1960s, innovators reached out to a new learning audience through New York University (NYU) television broadcast of Sunrise Semester (Swanson et al., 2010). Today, in the early 2010s, no longer are participants in learning using computers, but students are accessing the classrooms via smartphones, tablets, and notebooks. Goundar (2011) stated, “Mobile devices are becoming ubiquitous in the world today” (p. 1). The study is focused on distance learning and how increased social interaction (econnectivity) can positively influence student retention (Slagter van Tryon & Bishop, 2006). “The extent to which students in online learning environments perceive themselves as being socially connected to their peers appears to be a key factor in predicting online course successes (Biocca, Harms, & Burgoon, 2003; Kreijns, Kirschner, Jochems, & van Buuren, 2004)” (Slagter van Tryon & Bishop, 2012, p. 347). Benjamin Franklin is attributed with saying, "Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” But, technology has evolved and


today communication is over some form of technology. People (students / employees) wish social connectivity via Twitter, Facebook, and others, thus, the desire for social connectivity online (e-connectivity). The VARK model, established by Neil D. Fleming, defined four types of learners, visual, auditory, read and write, and kinesthetic learners (Fleming & Mills, 1992a, 1992b). Using the VARK as the framework for this study, the researchers found several studies that related to VARK and teaching entry-level medical students (Anjali & Ratnaker, 2014; Khanal, Shah, & Koirala, 2014; Koksal, Acikgul, & Aslander, 2013; Panambur, Nambiar, & Heming, 2014; Peyman, Sadeghifar, Khajavikhan, Yasemi, Rasool, Yaghoubi et al., 2014; Prithishkumar & Michael, 2014). The consensus from the studies was the finding that learners are various backgrounds, “age, culture, level of mentality preparedness, intelligence and psychological conditions” (Peyman et al., 2014, p. 1). The importance of remembering the differences of individual students when designing course content is evident. Whether medical students or millennial students or returning adults, course designers and facilitators of classroom activities must incorporate and consider the VARK model. As there are many variables to consider when applying the VARK model, the researchers chose to focus on the aural modality and the implementation of an audio message at the beginning of a class. Design/Methodology/Approach The exploratory qualitative research design was used for this study. Iacobucci and Churchill (2010) stated exploratory research is used to gain awareness and generate ideas. Research was conducted in three key areas: 1) e-connectivity, 2) a review of screencasts in the online classroom, and 3) considerations of accrediting bodies for including voice in the classroom. Using Jing, two screencasts were created to identify faculty perceptions on including a welcoming screencast into the online classroom. Jing is a free screen capture tool created by TechSmith which allows users to capture an image on their computer screen and save it as an image or record it as a video. Users can record up to 5 minutes of video from their screencasts and save it to their computer or save up to 2 GB to TechSmith’s free online storage system Screencast.com. Jing screenshots or videos can be shared via email, instant message, Twitter, Facebook and other methods. (Swanson & Tucker, 2012, p. 1) Findings In the twenty-first century, it is necessary for faculty to find new methods to engage with students to increase learning outcomes. The trend for online classrooms is to have stagnant lectures with less-than-dynamic discussion board postings. A just-in-time methodology is typically used by the students on the discussion boards or assignments, leading to a mere posting to achieve the assignment goals. Interaction between the student and instructor rarely occurs using this methodology. Students like the independence of online learning, but often experience loneliness and isolation (Goodyear, 2006; Rovai, 2002).


To achieve e-connectivity, students must be active learners. This methodology of learning motivates and helps to engage students. Drew and Mackie (2011) stated, “Active learning … is promoted as a means to develop the kinds of skills and dispositions deemed necessary for a lifetime of learning” (p. 452). In an effort to achieve active learning, Ormiston (2011) asserted that technology is a fundamental element and that faculty must focus on student engagement. Chen, Wei, Wu and Uden (2009) stated that the use of learning technologies must be used to support e-connectivity (social interaction online) and learning activities. While conducting a literature review on active learning and learning styles, 30 years worth of educational research on the topic of “learning styles” can be found (Khan, 2013, p. 128). Khan (2013) purported that in the field of education there is a “tendency to overgeneralize” (p. 129). Although Khan wrote a book on “ways to improve education” (p. 130). Khan is not arguing that there is a generalized theory on the use of dialog-based, selfpaced video. Khan presented that there is “compelling evidence—both anecdotal and statistical—that particular types of practices with videos and software seem to be resonating with particular students and teachers” (p. 130). “… do what makes sense and not try to confirm a dogmatic bias with pseudoscience” Salman Khan, The One World School House: Education Reimagined Four types of learners exist: 1) visual learners, 2) auditory learners, 3) read and write learners, and kinesthetic learners (Fleming & Mills, 1992a, 1992b). To improve retention of course materials, faculty must include all four of these learning styles. Adults that learned during their formative years watching Sesame Street “want their information in short and quick forms.” (Types of Learners, n.d., p. 14). The average adult attention span is between six and twenty minutes, but this varies greatly depending on factors such as the initial interest in the topic, the heat of the room, the time of day, and the energy level of the learner (Johnstone & Percival, 1976; Middendorf & Kalish, 1996). (Types of Learners, n.d., p. 14) In an effort to reach those students who are more than read and writer learners, the option to use screencasting may be a viable option. Screencasting is video recording of what is available on the creator’s computer screen. Audio and text maybe added to these files. Typical screencasts are no more than 5 minutes in length. “The use of screencasting technology, among others, is on the increase in higher education institutions” (Lloyd & Robertson, 2012, as cited in Morris & Chikwa, 2014, p. 26). Sugar, Brown, and Luterbach (2010) stated that screencasts were powerful in terms of combining sound and screen images to communicate a message in the online classroom. Green, Pinder-Grover, and Millunchick (2012) explored through a quantitative study on students’ perceptions of the use of screencasts in the classroom. The results of this research highlighted a positive outcome through the use of screencasts. Mohamad Ali, Samsudin, Hassan, and Sidek (2011) investigated the use of screencasts (with narration) to improve student learning outcomes. An experimental design was created for their study. Mohamad Ali et al. found the method of incorporating a narrative screencast (video) in the online classroom was not only efficient, but an effective means to relay course


information. A specific point that was highlighted through their research was the reduction in learning time. In an onground classroom, a topic that might take three to four hours for students to master took far less time to complete in the online classroom. Mohamad Ali et al. found “that short and simple instructional screencast, specifically with narration can be an ideal tool to support online self-pace learning” (p. 81). Morris and Chikwa (2014), in the conduct of their study on the usefulness of screencast, found that the effective use of screencasts may improve student grades, student expectations on their assignments. Latartara (2013) stated that videos should be no more than 15 minutes long, but should probably be broken into segments from 3 to 5 minutes each. “If you are showing more than one video lecture, present them in a nested or indented outline to display the content structure (Moore, 2013). Adding the runtime of each lecture can help students with time management” (Latartara, 2013, para. 2). Drew and Mackie (2011) researched the perceptions of graduate students on the use of student-generated audio files; however, they discussed the use of instructor-generated audio files in the form of podcasts. Drew and Mackie, in their literature review, found several studies that document that motivation is increased and the use of sound enhances the student learning experience. They do acknowledge there may be a need for training due to the use of the audio technology. Chappius and Chappius (2008) found that a student’s motivation is increased when they have a better understanding of the assessment that he or her is taking. Cuthrell, Fogarty, Smith, and Ledford (2013) conducted a survey of both graduate and undergraduate students on their perceptions of “peer audio feedback” (p. 13). Students valued the ability to listen to feedback. Cuthrell et al. found many studies have been completed that confirm a positive reaction of “asynchronous audio feedback” (p. 15). Ford, Burns, Mitch, and Gomez (2012) conducted a quasi-experimental study on the effectiveness of using classroom capture technology (CCT). The benefits of using an audiovisual program and imbedding into the classroom include the ability to review the information at any time or place. Ford et al. (2012) states that “these materials are both dynamic and perfectly tailored to a particular course” (p. 192). Students benefit from the ability to rewatch the video to better understand the topic. Although this study focused on the ability to add video to a traditional, on-ground course, the concept applies to the online classroom as well. Students review the CCT videos online. Violino (2012) conducted a study of 500 American students and found that at least 90% of these students use technology to save on study time. Furthermore, Violino stated that 98% of students who have devices will use them for school (whether e-reading, accessing their online course, posting on discussion boards, or listening to podcasts). Sams and Bergmann (2013) mentioned in their research that videos are not always easy to make. They recommend creating screencasts through the use of Jing (more on this follow) or even using resources that are available from the Kahn Academy (https://www.khanacademy.org/) or YouTube, the Education channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3yA8nDwraeOfnYfBWun83g).


In addition to relaying course concepts, faculty have the task of conveying feedback. The written word can be dry and unemotional, or students can read into what was written and detect a tone that may not be there (Swanson & Tucker, 2012). Students often feel alienated in the online classroom environment and utilizing effective feedback strategies can encourage student participation and communication in the online environment. Traditional methods of providing feedback such as attaching a standardized rubric with generic comments, typically do not facilitate additional communication between the student and the instructor. (Swanson & Tucker, 2012, p. 1) Sull and Cavanugh (2011) recommend that faculty use audio (and video in the form of screencasts) to explain their feedback in more detail. Faculty should not worry about the professional production of the screencast, but focusing on the content. Marriott and Teoh (2012) conducted a study on adding audio and visual feedback to students. Marriott and Teoh found that the potential to “significantly enhance the learning environment for students in a wide range of disciplines through e-assessment and the use of audio and video feedback” (p. 594). Adding a personal connection is important to the online classroom and with potential clients. Sull (n.d.) and Swanson et al. (2010) discussed the importance of making this connection. Not only does this increase the opportunities to e-connect, but this can help students and clients understand the topic or material presented. Sull (n.d.) discussed the availability of technologies where voice and photos can be added to the classroom or email. Results of Screencast Study In the study including introductory screencasts in the online classroom, 97 people participated. Ninety-five were online instructors and 39 were full-time faculty. Fifty-eight participants were online part-time instructors. Eighty-nine percent (87 faculty) have taught online from one to 14 years. Participants were provided two screencast videos to view. Participants were asked if they include an introductory video in their classroom. Forty-two (43%) of the participants do use an introductory video in the online classroom. Many comments reflecting participant opinions on the ease of creating videos to viewing the videos were collected. Some participants saw this an interesting option that they had not considered and were eager to try in the future. Others were very reluctant to give this a try and thought that an introductory video was not necessary. One participant indicated that she did “not want students to see me and assume I am too young to provide value.” Another participant provided a very blunt response, but it may be indicative of many when it comes to technology: It is not necessary. I connect with my students through discussions, announcements, and personal messages. They don’t need a video of my life with perky music. They need to know I’m approachable and available. They need to know I’ll work with them and that I support them. They don’t need to hear my voice or see a picture of my dog. (Participant # 44)


Also, universities and colleges pay high dollars for learning management systems. These systems often do not support additional technology. One participant confirmed this line of thought by stating, “Technology issues of moving an item such as this into the resident platform. Also, getting students to view tools like this may not be easy and enticing as one might think.” Higher Education Implications In countries all over the world, accrediting bodies of higher education are concerned with student engagement. Robinson and Hulliger (2008) conducted a study on online student engagement and found that “online students were modestly engaged” (p. 101) and had a pattern of engagement that was different from onground students. Because of the autonomy given the online learner, it is difficult to engage these students. With the use of technologies, the opportunities for e-connectivity (engagement over the Internet) (Slagter van Tryon & Bishop, 2006) can be improved. El-Khawas et al. (2005) as cited in Robinsons and Hulliger (2008) affirm that the use of technology can enhance the learning experience and add to a “person’s growth and development” (p. 103). Training and Development Implications Tools such as screencasts make training easily available for the global workforce. Screencasts can be developed in a short period of time in one training office and then made available within hours to the workforce around the world. Michelle Baker (2014), TD magazine, discussed the recent changes in the training classrooms. Gone are the days when technical devices were not allowed in the training environment. Now they are encouraged. Baker (2014) stated, “According to the Pew Internet Project, as of January 2014, 90 percent of American adults have a cellphone, 58 percent have a smartphone, and 42 percent own a tablet” (para. 1). Baker (2014) lists several tools and devices to use, but highlights Jing. Jing. Although it's not a mobile app, this free screencasting tool can facilitate learning by allowing you to capture what's on your computer screen and instantly share it as an image or video file. You can use it to create simple how-to video tutorials. It also can be used by learners to create a video to teach back what they learned in a training session and share it with others, or to demonstrate the skills and knowledge they acquired. This tool is consistently ranked highly among training professionals for its ease of use. (Baker, 2014) The ability of training managers to use Jing and provide immediate training is of great value to the talent development world. Managerial Implications The demands for the delivery of course content in higher education is constantly undergoing a metamorphosis. The idea of being able to offer course material to literally hundreds of thousands of individuals on a global basis through use of “mass open online courses” (aka “MOOCS”) has gained popularity, with several universities engaging in this effort. However, we see that many educators in higher education will use various forms of rudimentary


technology in their classrooms, but have yet to embrace, or understand, the full potential of such applications. At its very basic form, online courses can employ both a synchronous and asynchronous technique into their classroom, be it a “live” Skype chat with the students (synchronous), or embedding videos into the online lectures (asynchronous) which a student can view at his/her convenience. The goal of our efforts is to present course content is that will improve the following skills of our students: • increasing analytical abilities and strengthening said applications • build knowledge of how to use information resources in a timely and effective manner • capability of handling diverse perspectives • sharpening ethical skills • improve communication skills Change is inevitable when you are faced with the challenge of applying technology to your tasks. An inherent fear exists that “being able to ramp up” to a certain level of proficiency is a rather time consuming and difficult task. If there is one inherent fear, it is that “change” is inevitable. This may be true, but keep in mind that we are using technology in the classroom so our students may be able to build upon the basics, and have the capability to apply said information. The emphasis should be on applied learning so that the student can also assess their desired proficiencies. Managers should be aware that certain trends will affect the use of elearning: •

• •

• • •

Big Data is popular today because it allows us to capture data about how individuals use on-line learning so that managers may be able to design and implement course material that will provide relevant information that is attuned to an individual’s needs, and then allow us to determine the return-on-investment for various learning efforts that may be used Personalized learning in terms of deigning the needed pedagogy, curriculum and learning environments, so that managers may be able to meet the needs of our student learners Use of mobile learning allows for easy access for course material anywhere and anytime. The smaller screens also means that delivery of content has to be modified and presented in smaller doses; this may make it easier for the learner to remember what they have been exposed to Make the task of content creation more “user” friendly, especially for the faculty; you may be able to incorporate the generation of quizzes, tests and content exercises as an automatic function from within the course content. You may allow for course “customizing” by automatically matching course content or difficulty to the students skill set The application of “augmented learning” which is an on-demand learning technique where the environment adapts to the learner. By 2018. it is estimated that there will be approximately 200 million users of this technique


•

Use of cloud based learning management systems (LMS) will grow at a rate of approximately 25% through the year 2020, totaling approximately eight billion dollars by 2018. In 2014, the use of cloud based authoring tools grew 50% in North America. (Lakaris, 2015)

As discussed, the very essence of technology has applications for both higher education and business organizations as well. Clayton Christensen, the Kim B. Clark Professor of Business Administration at the Harvard Business School, has said that “In the future, I don’t think universities themselves will be nearly as prominent as they have been in the past”. Thus, the challenge is to be able to adapt to this technological “tidal wave”, or become part of history.


References Anjali Ganesh and Ratnakar U. P. (2014), SCMS Journal Of Indian Management, Vol. 11 Issue 3, pp. 26-36. Baker, M. (2014), “Tech tools for training”, available at https://www.td.org/Publications/Magazines/TD/TD-Archive/2014/07/Tech-Tools-for-Training (accessed 31 January 2014) Bollinger, D. U. and Des Armier, D. Jr. (2013), “Active learning in the online environment: The integration of student-generated audio files”, Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 201-211. Brown, A., and Slagter van Tryon, P. J. (2010), “Twenty-first century literacy: A matter of scale from micro to mega”, The Clearing House, Vol. 83, pp. 235-238. Chappuis, S., and Chappuis, J. (2008), “The best value in formative assessment”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 14-19. Chen, N. S., Wei, C. W., Wu, K. T., and Uden, L. (2009), “Effects of high level prompts and peer assessment on online learners’ reflection levels”, Computers and Education,Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 283–291. Cuthrell, K., Fogarty, E., Smith, J., and Ledford, C. (2013), “Implications of using peer audio feedback for the college learner: Enhancing instruction”, Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, Vol. 79 No. 4, pp. 13-21. Drew, V., and Mackie, L. (2011), “Extending the constructs of active learning: implications for teachers' pedagogy and practice”, Curriculum Journal, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 451-467. Ford, M. B., Burns, C. E., Mitch, N., and Gomez, M. M. (2012), “The effectiveness of classroom capture technology”, Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 191-201. Fleming, N. D., and Mills, C. (1992a), “Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection”, To Improve the Academy, Vol. 11, pp. 137-149. Fleming, N. D., and Mills, C. (1992b), “VARK a guide to learning styles”, available at http://www.vark-learn.com/English/index.asp (accessed 31 January 2015). Friedman, B. (2013), How to teach effectively, Lyceum Books, Chicago, IL, available at http://lyceumbooks.com/pdf/howtoteacheffectively_typesoflearners.pdf (accessed 31 January 2015). Goodyear, P. (2006), “Technology and the articulation of vocational and academic interests: Reflections on time, space and e-learning”, Studies in Continuing Education, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 83-98. Green, K. R., Pinder-Grover, T., and Millunchick, J. M. (2012), “Impact of screencast technology: Connecting the perception of usefulness and the reality of performance”, Journal of Engineering Education,Vol. 101 No. 4, pp. 717-737. Iacobucci, D., and Churchill, Jr., G. A. (2010), Marketing research (10th ed.), South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, OH.


Khan, S. (2013), The one world schoolhouse: Education reimagined. Grand Central Publishing, New York, NY. Khanal, L., Shah, S., and Koirala, S. (2014), Russian Open Medical Journal, Vol. 3, Issue 3, pp. 1-8. doi: 10.15275/Rusomj.2014.0305. Koksal, M. S., Acikgul, K., and Aslaner, R. (2013), Education In Medicine Journal. Vol. 5, Issue 3, pp. 53-63. doi: 10.5959/Eimj.V5i3.151. Laskaris, J. (2015), “eLearning trends to follow in 2015 [Infographic]”, available at http://blog.talentlms.com/elearning-trends-follow-2015-infographic/ (accessed 31 January 2015). Latartara, W. (2013), “Active learning strategies in an online environment. The University of Mississippi, available at http://elearning.olemiss.edu/2014/10/active-learning-strategies-in-anonline-environment-part-2/ (accessed 31 January 2015). Marriott, P., and Teoh, L. K. (2012), “Using screencasts to enhance assessment feedback: Students’ perceptions and preferences”, Accounting Education, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 583-598. Mohamad Ali, A. Z., Samsudin, K., Hassan, M., and Sidek, S. F. (2011), “Does screencast teaching software application needs narration for effective learning?”, Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology (TOJET), Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 76-82. Morris, C., and Chikwa, G. (2014), “Screencasts: How effective are they and how do student engage with them?”, Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 15 No. 3, p. 25. Ormiston, M. (2011), Creating a digital-rich classroom: Teaching and learning in a Web 2.0 world. Solution Tree Press, Bloomington, IN. Panambur, S., Nambiar, V., and Heming, T. (2014). Oman Medical Journal. Vol. 29, Issue 6, pp. 461-463. doi: 10.5001/Omj.2014.120. Peyman, H., Sadeghifar, J., Khajavikhan, J., Yasemi, M., Rasool, M., Yaghoubi, Y., Nahal, M., and Karim, H. (2014), Journal Of Clinical & Diagnostic Research, Vol. 8, Issue 8, pp. 1-4. doi: 10.7860/Jcdr/2014/8089.4667. Prithishkumar, I. J., and Michael, S. A. (2014), Journal of Postgraduate Medicine, Vol. 60, Issue 2, pp. 183-186. doi: 10.4103/0022-3859.132337. Richmond, A., and Cumming, R. (2005), Implementing Kolb’s learning styles into online distance education. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 45-54. Robinson, C., and Hulliger, H. (2008), “New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning”, Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 101-109. Rovai, A. P. (2002), “Building sense of community at a distance”, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1-16. 3(1), 1-16, available at http://www.irrodl.org/incex.php/irrodl.article/view/79/152 (accessed 31 January 2015). Sams, A., and Bergmann, J. (2013), “Flip your students' learning”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 70 No. 6, pp. 16-20. Slagter van Tryon, P. J., and Bishop, M. J. (2006), “Identifying “e-mmediacy” strategies for web-based instruction: A Delphi study”, Quarterly Review of Distance Education, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 49-63.


Slagter van Tryon, P. J., and Bishop, M. J. (2012), Evaluating social connectedness online: The design and development of the Social Perceptions in Learning Contexts Instrument. Distance Education, 33(3), 347-364. doi:10.1080/01587919.2012.723168 Sugar, W., Brown, A., and Luterbach, K. (2010), “Examining the anatomy of a screencast: Uncovering comment elements and instructional strategies”, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 1-20. Sull, E. C. (n.d.), “Small things can make the difference between a good or great distance educator”, Distance Learning, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 67-71. Sull, E. C., and Cavanaugh, A. (2011), “A miniguide to the use of audio files in the distance learning class”, Distance Learning, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 89-93. Swanson, A., Hutkin, R., Babb, D., and Howell, S. (2010, September), “Establishing the best practices for social interaction and e-connectivity in online higher education classes”, Doctoral dissertation, University of Phoenix, Arizona. Swanson, A. C., and Tucker, J. (2012, October), “Use of Jing and Joinme to provide asynchronous audio and video feedback”, in Association for Distance Education and Independent Learning (ADEIL) 2012 Conference, Grand Junction, CO. available at http://www.adeil.org/?q=node/1660 (accessed 31 January 2015). Violino, B. (2012), “Education in your hand”, Community College Journal, Vol. 83 No. 1, pp. 38-41. Zepke, N., and Leach, L. (2010, November), “Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action”, Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 167-177.