




















































3294-11481-1-CE


Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, Vol. 2, No. 1, June 2013, pp. 62 - 65.  

Strategies for engagement in online courses: Engaging with the 
content, instructor, and other students 

 
Beth Dietz-Uhler1 and Janet E. Hurn2 

 
Framework 
 
In recent years, there has been an increasing focus on student engagement (e.g., Pike & Kuh, 
2009; Porter, 2009).  Student engagement occurs when "students make a psychological 
investment in learning. They try hard to learn what school offers. “They take pride not simply in 
earning the formal indicators of success (grades), but in understanding the material and 
incorporating or internalizing it in their lives” (Newmann, 1992, pp. 2-3).  Research (e.g., Kinzie, 
2010; Prince, 2004) strongly suggests that when students are engaged, they tend to perform 
better.  When students are actively engaged in the material, they tend to process it more deeply, 
which leads to successful retention of the material (e.g., Craik & Lockhart, 1972).  In this paper, 
we describe several ways in which online courses can be designed to promote student 
engagement. All of these techniques are consistent with Quality Matters Rubric Standards  
(Quality Matters, 2011) area number 5: Learning Interaction and Engagement. 

● 5.2 Learning activities provide opportunities for interaction that support active 
learning. 

● 5.3 The instructor’s plan for classroom response time and feedback on 
assignments is clearly stated. 

● 5.4 The requirements for student interaction are clearly articulated. 
Consistent with Quality Matters, we have used a number of strategies in our course 

designs to foster student engagement with the course content, with the instructor, and with other 
students (see Table 1 for a summary of these strategies).  Below, we will describe in more detail 
how these simple course design and implementation strategies can be used to promote student 
engagement. 
 
Making It Work 
 
Student Engagement with Course Content. To encourage students to engage with the course 
content, we employ several strategies.  In most of our courses, students primarily receive content 
from a textbook and from videos and interactive activities.  One strategy we use is to create short 
(no more than five minute) audio introductions to each module.  These introductions involve the 
instructor talking enthusiastically through four to five PowerPoint slides and presenting a general 
overview of the module content.  We use Knovio (www.knovio.com), which is free and does not 
require any software for students to download. Additionally, we require students to complete a 
number of engaging, online, interactive activities.  These activities are generally in the form of a 
game, which most students find to be stimulating (e.g., Davidson, 2011). Many activities of this 
sort can readily be found online (e.g., Merlot: www.merlot.org) or through textbook publishers 
(e.g., Pearson’s MyStatLab: www.mystatlab.com).  
                                                        
1 Beth Dietz-Uhler, Department of Psychology, Miami University, Middletown, OH, 45042; uhlerbd@miamioh.edu, (513-727-
3254).   
2 Janet E. Hurn, Coordinator of Regional E-Learning Initiatives, Miami University, Middletown, OH, 45042; 
hurnje@miamioh.edu, (513-727-3341). 



Dietz-Uhler, B. and Hurn, J.E. 

Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, Vol. 2, No. 1, June 2013. 
jotlt.indiana.edu  

63 

Table 1. Summary of Strategies for Student Engagement. 
Engagement with Content Engagement with the Instructor Engagement with Other 

Students 

Listen to the audio introductions Listen to audio introductions Respond to classmates’ critical 
thinking answers in discussion 
board 

Engage in the online interactive 
activities  

Watch short, how-to videos Participate in “Open Discussion” 
in Learning Management System 

Complete mini projects  Read frequent feedback in email 
and in Learning Management 
System 

Participate in exam review 
activities 

Respond to critical thinking 
questions in discussion forum 

Read “bookend” weekly emails   

 Participate  in “Ask the Professor” 
Discussion in Learning 
Management System 

Read and respond to 
individualized “How’s it going?” 
emails  

Read and respond to professor’s 
email responses 

 
Another strategy we use is to require students to complete a “mini project” for each 

module.  The mini projects are designed to require students to apply the material from the text 
and the interactive activities, relate the material to their own lives, to learn or make use of 
existing skills such as technology or creative abilities, and to be fun.  One example of a mini 
project includes writing a letter to your grandparents telling them what you will learn in this 
course, how it applies to your life and to their lives, and what questions you have about the 
material.  When students apply course material to their own lives, they tend to remember the 
information better (e.g., Roediger, Gallo, & Geraci, 2002). Another example is for students to 
create a short video (we suggest they use Screenr or Screencast-O-Matic) explaining the parts of 
the brain and the nervous system. Other mini projects involve creating posters, public-service 
brochures, and letters to a newspaper editor. 

 
Student Engagement with Instructor. We employ a number of different strategies to encourage 
interaction with the instructor. In addition to the audio introductions previously described, we 
also create short, “how-to” videos (using Screenr or Screencast-O-Matic) to present “Frequently 
Asked Questions” about the course, to show students how to access feedback in the 
Collaborative Learning Environment (CLE), or to show students how to use software to create a 
poster.  Like the audio introductions, it is important that students know that it is their instructor’s 
voice they are hearing in the audio.  Additionally, for each module, students receive feedback 
from the instructor on their work.  Feedback is given in the course CLE as well as via email. The 
instructor also sends “bookend” emails each week which provide general feedback on the prior 
module and previews the next module.  Typically, the instructor will try to add a sentence or two 



Dietz-Uhler, B. and Hurn, J.E. 

Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, Vol. 2, No. 1, June 2013. 
jotlt.indiana.edu  

64 

that is not course-related, such as a comment about a sporting event or the weather.  We also 
engage with students in an “Ask the Professor” discussion board in the course CLE.  The idea is 
for students to ask questions about the course, the material, or anything else. Other students can 
then see the student’s questions as well as the instructor’s response. 

One of the most important strategies that we use is to send personalized “how’s it 
going?” emails to students two times per semester.  The goal of these emails is to let students 
know that we care about them, which we know is vitally important to student success (e.g., 
Christophel, 1990; Swan & Richardson, 2003).  We estimate that about 90% of students respond 
to these emails to let us know how the class is going for them and how they are doing in general.  
Finally, we respond quickly to students’ emails to us.  We hear often in course evaluations that 
students appreciated our quick responses as it let them know that the instructor cared about them. 
All of these strategies are employed to achieve the goal of promoting student engagement. 

 
Student Engagement with Other Students.  There are three primary mechanisms we use to 
encourage student engagement with other students.  First, students are required to post a response 
to two other students’ critical thinking answers in the CLE discussion board.  Students post these 
responses for all modules, so they are interacting every week with their classmates.  Second, 
there is an “Open Discussion” board in the CLE, which students (and the instructor) can use to 
post comments or questions about anything.  In general, if students do not initiate discussion, 
then the instructor will.  Topics might include queries about favorite movies or books, requests 
for comments on current events, or a simple query asking how everyone’s weekend was spent.  
Third, for each exam, students are required to complete some type of review and post to the 
discussion board.  The review might take the form of generating questions about the material, 
creating a concept map, or writing a few paragraphs about how the material across three modules 
is connected.  The “interaction” takes place with the requirement that other students are required 
to read what students have posted (and yes, students are told that the CLE records, for the 
instructor, who reads what post).  
 
Future Implications 
 
We have been employing these engagement strategies in our courses for many years as they are 
consistent with how we design our courses with Quality Matters in mind.  How do we know if 
our students are engaged?  Research (e.g., Johnson, 2012) suggests that students are engaged 
when they exhibit the following behaviors: 

● Paying attention  
● Taking notes  
● Listening  
● Asking questions  
● Responding to questions 
● Reacting 
● Reading critically  
● Writing to learn, creating, planning, problem solving, discussing, debating, and asking 

questions 
● Performing/presenting, inquiring, exploring, explaining, evaluating, and experimenting 
● Interacting with other students, gesturing and moving 



Dietz-Uhler, B. and Hurn, J.E. 

Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, Vol. 2, No. 1, June 2013. 
jotlt.indiana.edu  

65 

Anecdotal evidence suggests that our students are exhibiting many of these behaviors, 
leading us to believe that they are engaged with the material, the instructor, and other students. 
For example, students are frequently interacting with other students in the online discussion 
board, they seem to take pride in the mini projects for each module, and they typically exceed 
minimum word counts on projects and critical thinking questions.  They also regularly engage 
via email with the instructor and report that they are enjoying the class and learning. 

 
References 

 
Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors, student 
motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39, 323-340. 
 
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory 
research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684. 
 
Davidson, C. N. (2011). Now you see it: How the brain science of attention will transform the 
way we live, work, and learn. New York: Viking. 
 
Johnson, B. (2012). How do we know when students are engaged? Edutopia.  Retrieved May 21, 
2012 from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/student-engagement-definition-ben-johnson. 
 
Kinzie, J. (2010).  Student engagement and learning: Experiences that matter.  In J. Christensen 
Hughes and J. Mighty (Eds), Taking stock: Research on teaching and learning in higher 
education (pp. 1390153).  Kingston, Canada: School of Public Policies, Queens University at 
Kingston. 
 
Newmann, F. (1992). Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools. 
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.  

Quality Matters (2011). Retrieved March 2, 2013 from http://www.qmprogram.org/lit-review 
2011-2013-rubricpdf/download/QM%20Lit%20Review%20for%202011-2013%20Rubric.pdf. 
 
Pike, G. R., & Kuh, G. D.  (2009). A typology of student engagement for American colleges and 
universities,  Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 185-209. 
 
Prince, M.  (2004).  Does active learning work? A review of the research.  Journal of 
Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231. 
 
Porter, S.  (2009). Institutional structures and student engagement.  Research in Higher 
Education, 47(5), 521-558. 
Roediger, H. L., III, Gallo, D. A., & Geraci, L. (2002). Processing approaches to cognition: The 
impetus from the levels-of-processing framework. Memory, 10, 319–332. 
 
Swan, K., & Richardson, J. C. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to 
students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, 
68-82. 
 


