Insights at the Nexus of Accessibility, Instructional Design, and Student Success

Jeff Freels; Rajagopal Sankaranarayanan

doi:10.24059/olj.v29i3.4965

Authors

Jeff Freels The University of Texas at Austin
Rajagopal Sankaranarayanan The University of Texas at Austin

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v29i3.4965

Keywords:

LMS Course Design, Student Success, Hybrid Learning Environments

Abstract

This study examines the influence of Learning Management System (LMS) course site design on student failure and withdrawal rates (DFW) in undergraduate courses in a residential hybrid educational context. Researchers used multiple linear regression analysis to explore the interactions between course-level DFW, enrollment, student satisfaction, and counts of instructor-embedded content in LMS course sites in 925 course sections in one semester at a public research university in the southern United States. Findings suggest that optimal LMS course site design supports lower DFW rates. The findings are contextualized within the Community of Inquiry (CoI) Framework, and a case is made that certain types of instructor-embedded content in LMS course sites can serve as a measurable proxy for teaching presence. This study contributes to the discourse on the impact of digital learning environment design on student outcomes and provides actionable insights for educators aiming to design student-centered digital learning spaces.

References

Ali, A. D., & Hanna, W. K. (2022). Predicting students’ achievement in a hybrid environment through self-regulated learning, log data, and course engagement: A data mining approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(4), 960–985. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211056178

Álvarez-Chaves, A., & Saborío-Taylor, S. (2025). Hybrid learning in higher education: Considerations for its implementation in course design. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 5(1), ep2505. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/15859

Anderson, T., L. Rourke, R. Garrison, & W. Archer. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning. 5 (2). 1–17. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875.

Baldwin, S. J. (2019). Assimilation in online course design. American Journal of Distance Education, 33(3), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1610304

Beatty, B. J. (2019). Hybrid-flexible course design (1st ed.), EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/hyflex

Bradley, V. M. (2021). Learning management system (LMS) use with online instruction. International Journal of Technology in Education, 4(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.36

Cleveland-Innes, M. (2019). The Community of Inquiry theoretical framework. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing collaborative online and blended learning (pp. 85–101). Routledge.

Demmans Epp, C., Phirangee, K., Hewitt, J., & Perfetti, C. A. (2020). Learning management system and course influences on student actions and learning experiences. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(6), 3263–3297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09821-1

Fayer, L. (2014). A multi-case study of student perceptions of online course design elements and success. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(1). https://doi.org/doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2014.080113

Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H. (2023). How to design and evaluate research in education (11th ed.). McGraw Hill.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87 - 105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Guppy, N., Verpoorten, D., Boud, D., Lin, L., Tai, J., & Bartolic, S. (2022). The post-COVID-19 future of digital learning in higher education: Views from educators, students, and other professionals in six countries. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6), 1750–1765. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13212

Heilporn, G., Lakhal, S., & Bélisle, M. (2021). An examination of teachers’ strategies to foster student engagement in blended learning in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00260-3

Henry, B., Marcella, K.B., Kurzweil, D., Davis, S. (2008). Using templates to build courseware to enhance ease-of-use for faculty and usability for learning. In Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2008 (pp 87-91). Chesapeake, VA. http://www.editlib.org/p/29584

Hodges, C., & Lowenthal, P. (2020). Facilitating your online course: Where to focus your efforts when a course is in progress. In Proceedings of the 2019 ICDE World Conference on Online Learning (Vol. 1, pp. 39–50). International Council for Open and Distance Education.

Larson, M., & Lockee, B. B. (2014). Streamlined ID: A practical guide to instructional design. New York, NY: Routledge.

McGuire, B. (2017). Principles for effective asynchronous online instruction in religious studies. Teaching Theology & Religion, 20(1), 28–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/teth.12363

Placencia, G., & Muljana, P. (2019). The effects of online course design on student course satisfaction. In Proceedings of the 2019 American Society for Engineering Education Pacific Southwest Section Meeting. Los Angeles, CA. https://peer.asee.org/31845

Ralston-Berg, P., & Braatz, H. (2021). Online course design structure and interface. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2021(169), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.20411

Rhode, J., Richter, S., Gowen, P., Miller, T., & Wills, C. (2017). Understanding faculty use of the learning management system. Online Learning, 21(3), 68–86. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i3.1217

Robertson, C., & Doloc-Mihu, A. (2024). Effect of LMS course structure on student success in asynchronous online courses. In Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Southeast Conference, (pp. 35–42). Marietta, GA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3603287.3651204

Sankaranarayanan, R., Yang, M. & Kwon, K. (2024). Exploring the role of a microlearning instructional approach in an introductory database programming course: an exploratory case study. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-024-09408-2

Smith, S. U., Hayes, S., & Shea, P. (2017). A critical review of the use of Wenger's Community of Practice (CoP) theoretical framework in online and blended learning research, 2000- 2014, Online Learning 21(1), 209-237. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i1.963

Sochor, C. J. (2022). Student perspectives on the presence and usefulness of navigational course elements in distance education courses [Master's thesis, Marshall University]. Marshall Digital Scholar. https://mds.marshall.edu/etd/1344

Sung, E., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). Affective impact of navigational and signaling aids to e-learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.10.019

Watson, F. F., Castano Bishop, M., & Ferdinand-James, D. (2017). Instructional strategies to help online students learn: Feedback from online students. TechTrends, 61(5), 420–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0216-y

Williams, K. N., Gombas, A. K., Cornejo Happel, C., Parodi, T. C., Lazzara, E. H., & Chaparro, B. S. (2022). A practical tool to enhance faculty and student interactions surrounding e-learning platforms. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 66(1), (pp. 1126–1130). https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181322661397