Feedback is Integral: Using a Revised ICAP Framework to Achieve Active Learning in an Asynchronous Online Course
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v29i3.4555Keywords:
active learning, asynchronous online learning, ICAP FrameworkAbstract
The Interactive, Constructive, Active, Passive (ICAP) Framework (Chi & Wylie, 2014) is used to review and develop active learning in higher education. It is a hierarchical model based on overt behaviours seen by the teacher in the classroom. This principle is acknowledged as a limitation, especially in the case of online modes of study. In this paper, we revise the ICAP Framework to fit an asynchronous mode of online learning by introducing formative feedback to each ICAP mode, arguing the most active mode results in a student-produced output with evidence of having reflected on feedback. We then use the revised framework to review a course of study consisting of eight units of an asynchronous online post-graduate degree and then recommend ways in which to apply the revised ICAP Framework more generally to enhance the level of active learning in the asynchronous, online mode.
References
Ahmad, M., Junus, K. & Santoso, H.B. (2022). Automatic content analysis of asynchronous discussion forum transcripts: A systematic literature review, Education and Information Technologies, 27, 11355–11410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11065-w
Armatas, C. & Spratt, C. (2019). Applying learning analytics to program curriculum review, The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 36(3), 243-253. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-11-2018-0133
Atapattu, T., Thilakaratne, M., Vivian, R., Falkner, K. (2019). Detecting cognitive engagement using word embeddings within an online teacher professional development community, Computers and Education, 40, pp. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.020
Bada, S.O. (2015). Constructivism Learning Theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66-70. https://iosrjournals.org/iosr-jrme/pages/v5-i6.v.1.html
Baker, J. T & Tukhvatulina, S. (2023). Reflections of Adult Learners in Asynchronous Online Degree Programs, Journal of Effective Teaching in Higher Education, 6(1), 47-65. https://doi.org/10.36021/jethe.v6i1.344
Bearman, M., Lambert, S. & O’Donnell, M. (2021). Higher Education Research and Development, 40(4), 692–705. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1792849
Chi, M. & Wylie, R. (2014) The ICAP Framework: Linking Cognitive Engagement to Active Learning Outcomes, Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Cho, M.H, & Kim, B. J. (2013), Students' self-regulation for interaction with others in online learning environments, The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 69-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.11.001
Dodson, S., Roll, I., Fong, M., Yoon, D., Harandi, N. M., & Fels, S. (2018, June). An active viewing framework for video-based learning. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM Conference on Learning at Scale (pp. 1–4). https://doi.org/10.1145/3231644.3231682
Farrow, E., Moore, J. & Gašević, D. (2022). Markers of Cognitive Quality in Student Contributions to Online Course Discussion Forums, The Journal of Learning Analytics, 9(2), 38–65. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2022.7250
Galatsopoulou, F., Kenterelidou, C. Kotsakis, R. & Matsiola, M. (2022). Examining Students’ Perceptions towards Video-Based and Video-Assisted Active Learning Scenarios in Journalism and Communication Courses. Education Sciences, (12)74. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12020074.
Garratt-Reed, D., Roberts, L., & Heritage, B. (2016). Grades, student satisfaction and retention in online and face-to-face introductory psychology units: A test of equivalency theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1-10. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00673/full
Garrison, R. & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: Interaction Is Not Enough, The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2
Greenwood, J. (1998). The role of reflection in single and double loop learning, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 27(5), 1048–1053. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00579.x
Hains-Wesson, R., Pollard, V. & Campbell, A. (2017). A three-stage process of improvisation for teamwork: Action research, Issues in Educational Research, 27(1), 82-98. https://www.iier.org.au/iier27/hains-wesson.pdf
Hefter, M., Kubik, V. & Berthold, K. (2023). Can prompts improve self-explaining an online video lecture? Yes, but do not disturb!, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00383-9
Johnson, N., Seaman, J. & Poulin, R. (2022). Defining different modes of learning: Resolving confusion and contention through consensus. Online Learning, 26(3), 91-110. https://olj.onlinelearningconsortium.org/index.php/olj/article/view/3565/1193
Lim, J. Y. & Lim, K. Y. (2021). Engagement patterns in an asynchronous virtual classroom: Different use of active observation and ICAP framework. In de Vries, E., Hod, Y., Ahn, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th International Conference of the Learning Sciences - ICLS 2021. (pp. 945-946). Bochum, Germany: International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://repository.isls.org//handle/1/763
Moore, M. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
Meyers, N. & Nulty, D. (2009), How to use (five) curriculum design principles to align authentic learning environments, assessment, students’ approaches to thinking learning outcomes, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(5),5 65-577. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930802226502
O’Connor, K. (2022). Unbundling the University Curriculum: MOOCs, Online Program Management and the Knowledge Question, Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-4656-1
Prince, M., Felder, R. & Brent, R. (2020), Active Student Engagement in Online STEM Classes: Approaches and Recommendations, Advances in Engineering Education, 8(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4329.12219
Rakovic, M., Zahia Marzouk, Z., Liaqat, A., Winne, P. & Nesbit, J. (2020). Fine grained analysis of students’ online discussion posts, Computers in Education, 157,1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103982
Shi, H., Hur, J., Tang, Y. M., & Dennen V. P. (2023). Instructional strategies for engaging online learners: Do learner-centeredness and modality matter? Online Learning, 27(4), 271-294. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i4.4038
Shute, V. (2008). Focus on Formative Feedback, Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
Su, B., Bonk, C., Magjuka, R., Liu, X., Lee, S. (2005). The importance of interaction in web-based education: A program-level case study of online MBA courses. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 4(1-19). https://www.ncolr.org/issues/jiol/v4/n1/the-importance-of-interaction-in-web-based-education-a-program-level-case-study-of-online-mba-courses.html
Vale, E & Falloon, G. (2024). Using learning analytics to understand K–12 learner behavior in online video-based learning. Online Learning, 28(1), 44-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i1.3675
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Vikki Pollard, Christine Armatas, Avni Pepe
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
