You are here:

A Call to Action for Research in Digital Learning: Learning without Limits of Time, Place, Path, Pace…or Evidence

, Worldwide Education, Microsoft, United States ; , Johns Hopkins University, United States ; , International Society for Technology in Education, United States

Journal of Online Learning Research Volume 1, Number 1, ISSN 2374-1473 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA


This essay is a call for rethinking our approach to research in digital learning. It plots a path founded in social trends and advances in education. A brief review of these trends and advances is followed by discussion of what flattened research might look like at scale. Scaling research in digital learning is crucial to advancing understanding as digital learning quickly becomes mainstream (Watson, Pape, Murin, Gemin, & Vashaw, 2014) and as learning environments and pedagogies shift rapidly. Educators and leaders need more current and detailed insights into effective practice as education becomes more personalized (Kennedy, Freidhoff, & DeBruler, 2014).


Cavanaugh, C., Sessums, C. & Drexler, W. (2015). A Call to Action for Research in Digital Learning: Learning without Limits of Time, Place, Path, Pace…or Evidence. Journal of Online Learning Research, 1(1), 9-15. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 25, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Cavanaugh, C. (2014, June). EPLC: Potential and Design of Professional Learning Communities in the Cloud. Published in the Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference
  2. Dawson, K. (2012). Using action research projects to examine teacher technology integration practices. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(3), 117-124.
  3. Dawson, K., Cavanaugh, C., & Ritzhaupt, A.D. (2012). ARTI: An online tool to support teacher action research for technology integration. In C. Hartshorne, T. Heafner, & T. Petty (Eds.), Teacher education programs and online learning tools: Innovations in teacher preparation (pp. 375-391). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  4. Drexler, W. (2014) Personal Learning Environments in K-12. In R. Ferdig& K. Kennedy (Eds.), Handbook of Research on K-12 Online and Blended Learning (pp. 447-466).
  5. Fetterman, D.M. (1994). Steps of empowerment evaluation: From California to Cape Town. Evaluation and Program Planning, 17(3), 305–313.
  6. Kennedy, K., Freidhoff, J., & DeBruler, K. (2014). Personalized Learning for Global Citizens. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation.
  7. Martinez, S.L., & Stager, G. (2013). Invent to learn: Making, tinkering, and engineering in the classroom. Torrance, CA: Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.
  8. McKay, K., Williams, L., Atkinson, A., & Levin, E. (2014). Enhancing Support for Lowerincome Entrepreneurs through Major Public Systems. Washington, DC: Corporation for Enterprise Development.
  9. Oviatt, S. (2013). Design of Future Education Interfaces. New York, NY: Routledge.
  10. Ravitch, D. (2014, October 10). Tech companies sign pledge to respect student privacy; Critics skeptical. Diane Ravitch’s Blog. Http://
  11. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
  12. Sessums, C. (2014). Learning Communities and Support. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation.
  13. Strategic Data Project. (2013). Toolkit for Effective Data Use. Cambridge, MA: Center for Education Policy Research.
  14. Watson, J., Pape, L., Murin, A., Gemin, B., & Vashaw, L. (2014). Keeping Pace with Digital Learning: An Annual review of Policy and Practice. Evergreen, CO: Evergreen Education Group.

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