You are here:

The R2D2 Model for Effective Online Teaching and Enjoyable Online Learning
PROCEEDINGS

, Wayne State University, United States ; , Indiana University, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-60-0 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Abstract

The R2D2 model—read, reflect, display, and do—is a new model for designing and delivering online learning. Such a model is especially important to address the diverse preferences of online learners of varied generations and Internet familiarity. The four components can be utilized either separately or integrated as a problem solving process. The first quadrant primarily focuses on knowledge acquisition through online readings, explorations, listening to online lectures, and podcasting. The second component of the model promotes learning through reflective activities such as online blogs, reflective writing tasks, self-check examinations, and electronic portfolios. In the third quadrant, visual representations of the content is highlighted with techniques such as virtual tours, timelines, animations, and concept maps. Fourth, the model emphasizes what learners can do with the content in hands-on activities including simulations, scenarios, and real-time cases. When thoughtfully designed, content delivered from this perspective should be more engaging and enriching for learners.

Citation

Zhang, K. & Bonk, C.J. (2006). The R2D2 Model for Effective Online Teaching and Enjoyable Online Learning. In T. Reeves & S. Yamashita (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2006--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 1547-1553). Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved January 16, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2004). Entering the mainstream: The quality and extent of online education U.S., 2003 and 2004. Needham, MA: Sloan Consortium. Retrieved June 28, 2005, from the Sloan Consortium official website: http://www.sloan-C.org/resources/entering_mainstream.pdf
  2. Bonk, C.J., & Dennen, V.P. (1999). Teaching on the Web: With a little help from my pedagogical friends. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 11 (1), 3-28.
  3. Carr, S. (2000, February 11). As distance education comes of age, the challenge is keeping the students. The Chronicle of Higher Education, A39-A49. Retrieved June 6, 2005, from http://chronicle.com/prm/weekly/v46/i23/23a00101.htm.
  4. Dede, C. (2005). Planning for neomillennial learning styles: Implications for investments in technology and faculty. Retrieved June 29, 2005, from http://www.educause.edu/content.asp?page_id=6069 & Bhcp=1
  5. Felder, R.M., & Brent, R. (2005).Understanding Student Differences. Journal of Engineer Education, 94(1), 57-72.
  6. Frankola, K. (2001). Why online learners dropout. Workforce, 80, 53-58.
  7. Jost, M., Mumma, P., & Willis, J. (1999). R2D2: A constructivist/interpretivist instructional design model. In Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 1999, 1489-1494. Norfolk, VA: AACE.
  8. Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
  9. Lawrence, G. (1993). People types and tiger stripes: A practical guide to learning styles, (3rd ed.). Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Types.
  10. McCarthy, B. (1987). The 4MAT system: Teaching to learning styles with right/left mode techniques (Revised ed.). Barrington, IL: EXCEL.
  11. Oblinger, D. (2003). Understanding the “new students”. Educause (July/August 2003). 37-47.
  12. Oliver, R., Omari, A., & Herrington, J. (1998). Exploring student interactions in collaborative WorldWide Web computer-based learning environments. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7 (2/3). 263-287.
  13. Pittenger, D.J. (1993). The utility of Myers-Briggs type indicator. Review of Educational Research, 63, 467-488.
  14. Rosenberg, M.J. (2001). E-Learning: Building Successful Online Learning in Your Organization. New York, McGraw Hill.
  15. Pedersen, D. (2005). Online development made easy—at least easier. Distance Learning, 2 (3), 22-23.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.