You are here:

New conceptions for digital technology sandboxes: Developing a Fully Online Learning Communities (FOLC) model

, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Canada ; , , University of Ontario Insitute of Technology, Canada ; , University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Canada ; , Royal Roads University, Canada

AACE Award

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Vancouver, BC, Canada ISBN 978-1-939797-24-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC


This paper presents the Fully Online Learning Community, FOLC, model, offered as a transitional model for institutions addressing the challenges faced by higher education in terms of developing best practices in pedagogy and the implementation of online learning. Founded on the ideal that education is a fundamental human right, this paper describes how fully online environments can provide learner-centred, equitable, and accessible learning opportunities within problem-based learning sandboxes that are co-designed and co-constructed by learners and instructors. Assessment and evaluation are addressed as they are woven seamlessly through the learning process. Based on anecdotal and empirical evidence, the authors conclude that a dynamic and vibrant learning community can be established in fully online programs, and that these communities can have a democratizing effect on their participants.


van Oostveen, R., DiGiuseppe, M., Barber, W., Blayone, T. & Childs, E. (2016). New conceptions for digital technology sandboxes: Developing a Fully Online Learning Communities (FOLC) model. In Proceedings of EdMedia 2016--World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 665-673). Vancouver, BC, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 15, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D.R. (2014). The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: Understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3-4), 3-22.
  2. Allen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2014). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Retrieved from
  3. Armellini, A., & De Stefani, M. (2015). Social presence in the 21st century: An adjustment to the Community of Inquiry framework. British Journal of Educational Technology. Article first published online: 1 JUN 2015 DOI:10.1111/bjet.12302
  4. Badge, J., Saunders, N. & Cann, A. (2012). Beyond marks: new tools to visualise student engagement via social networks. Research in Learning Technology, 20(16283). Doi: 10.3402rlt.v2010/16283
  5. Bencze, J.L. (2008). Science & Technology Learning Cycles: Teaching & Learning based on constructivist learning principles. Retrieved from #ConstructivistEd_Model
  6. Bozalek, V., Gachago, D., Alexander, L., Watter, K., Wood, D., Ivala, E. & Herrington, J. (2013). The use of emerging technologies for authentic learning: a South African study in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology. 44(2), 629-638. Doi: 10:1111/jbet.12046
  7. Cochrane, T. (2012). Secrets of m-learning failures: confronting reality. Research in Learning Technology, ALT-C Conference Proceedings,
  8. Childs, E., vanOostveen, R., Flynn, K. & Clarkson, J. (2015). Community building in online PBL courses: Instigating criticality. Higher Education in Transformation Symposium, 2015, Dublin, Ireland.
  9. Coomey, M. & Stephenson, J. (2001). Online learning: it is all about dialogue, involvement, support and control – according to the research. In Stephenson, J. (ed.) Teaching and learning online: pedagogies for new technologies, (37-52). London: Kogan Page.
  10. Conference Board of Canada (2016). Employability Skills 2000+. Retrieved from
  11. Dennen, V. (2013). Activity design and instruction in online learning. In M.G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education-Third Edition (pp. 282-298). New York: Routledge.
  12. Desjardins, F. (2015). Official GTCU Conceptual Publication. Retrieved from
  13. Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogical creed. School Journal, 54(3), 77-80. Retrieved from
  14. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: D.C. Heath.
  15. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: The Macmillan Company.
  16. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think, a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: D.C. Heath.-664-EdMedia 2016-Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 28-30, 2016
  17. Downes, S. (2010). Personal Learning Environments. Retrieved from
  18. Downes, S. (2016). Personal and Personalized Learning. EMMA Newsletter Feb. 17, 2016. Retrieved from & Id=fa1770e58d & E=6fb1272e29
  19. Flavin, M. (2012). Disruptive technologies in higher education. Research in Learning Technology, ALT-C 2012 Conference Proceedings. Http://
  20. Garrison, D.R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Taylor & Francis.
  21. Garrison, D.R. (2013). Theoretical foundations and epistemological insights of the community of inquiry. In Z. Akyol & D.R. Garrison (Eds.), Educational communities of inquiry: Theoretical framework, research and practice (pp. 1-11). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
  22. Garrison, D.R. (2016). Thinking collaboratively: Learning in a community of inquiry. New York: Routledge.
  23. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in text based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.
  24. Garrison, D.R. & Archer, W. (2000) A transactional perspective on teaching and learning: A framework for adult and higher education. Elsevier Science: New York.
  25. Herrington, J. & Herrington, A. (1998). Authentic assessment and multi-media: how university students response to a model of authentic assessment. Higher Education Research & Development, 17(3), 305-322. Doi: 10:1080/0729436980170304
  26. Herrington, J. & Parker, J. (2013). Emerging technologies as cognitive tools for authentic learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 607-615. Doi:10.1111/bjet.12048
  27. Herrington, J., Parker, J. & Boase-Jelink, D. (2013) Social presence and participatory media in authentic learning. In Open and Distance Learning Association of Australia (ODLAA) 2013 Distance Education Summit, 4-6 February 2013, Sydney. Http://
  28. Hill, J., Domizi, D., Kim, M., & Kim, H. (2013). Teaching and learning in negotiated and informal online learning environments. In M.G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education-Third Edition (pp. 372-389). New York:
  29. Kaufman, K. (2013). 21 Ways to 21st century skills: why students need them and ideas for practical implementation. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 49(2), 78-83.
  30. Konnikova, M. (2014). Will MOOCs be flukes? Retrieved from
  31. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.-665-EdMedia 2016-Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 28-30, 2016
  32. Lehman, R.M. & Conceição, S.C.O. (2014). Concerns and Opportunities for Online Student Retention. In Motivating and Retaining Online Students: Research-Based Strategies That Work. San Francisco: Wiley & Sons.
  33. Lock, J. (2007). Laying the groundwork for the development of learning communities within online courses. In Luppicini, R. (Ed.), Online Learning Communities. 129-149, Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
  34. McCarthy, G. (2013) Authentic assessment: key to learning. In E. Doyle, P. Buckley & C. Carroll (Eds.), Innovative Business School Teaching: Engaging the Millennial Generation. 81-92. United Kingdom: Routledge.
  35. McNeill, M., Gosper, M. & Xu, J. (2012). Assessment choices to target higher order learning outcomes: the power of academic empowerment. Research and Learning Technology, 20(17595) doi:10.3402/rlt.v2010.17595
  36. Miller, M.D. (2014). Minds online: Teaching effectively with technology. Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  37. Moore, M.G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In Keegan, D. (Ed.) Theoretical Principles of Distance Education. New York: Routledge.
  38. Murphy, R., Gallagher, L., Krumm, A., Mislevy, J. & Hafter, A. (2014). Research on the use of Khan Academy in schools. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from
  39. Palmer, P. (1998). The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher’s Life. Jossey-Bass. San Francisco, CA.
  40. Parris, D.L., & Peachey, J.W. (2013). A systematic literature review of servant leadership theory in organizational contexts. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(3), 377-393.
  41. Perkins, D.D., & Zimmerman, M.A. (1995). Empowerment theory, research, and application. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 569-579.
  42. Piaget, J. (1959). The language and thought of a child (3rd ed.). London: Routledge
  43. Reeves, T., Herrington, J. & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activities and online learning. Quality Conversations: Research and Development in Higher Education, 25, 562-567.
  44. Rockinson-Szapkiw, A., & Wendt, J. (2015). Technologies that assist in online group work: A comparison of synchronous and asynchronous computer mediated communication technologies on students’ learning and community. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 24(3), 263-279.
  45. Rohs, M. & Ganz, M. (2015). MOOCs and the claim of education for all: A disillusion by empirical data. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(6).
  46. Rosemartin, D. (2013). Assessment for learning: shifting our focus. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 49(1), 21-25.
  47. Thompson, M. & Wrigglesworth, J. (2013). Students and teachers as ethical actors. In M.G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education-Third Edition (pp. 403-418). New York: Routledge.
  48. VanOostveen, R. (2015). Bachelor of Arts in Educational Studies and Digital Technology Handbook, Version 1, July 9, 2015. Unpublished.-666-EdMedia 2016-Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 28-30, 2016
  49. VanOostveen, R., Desjardins, F., Bullock, S., DiGiuseppe, M. & Robertson, L. (2010). Towards a reconceptualization of online teacher professional learning: Problem-based learning objects (PBLOs). Ed-Media Conference on Education Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, 2010, Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education, Toronto, ON.
  50. Von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80(1), 121-140.
  51. Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C. & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 403-413. Doi:10.1111/jcal.12029
  52. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  53. White, D., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents : A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9).
  54. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  55. World Economic Forum (2016). The 10 skills you need to thrive in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Retrieved from
  56. Zimmerman, M.A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations. American Journal Of Community Psychology, 23(5), 581-599. , 2016

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

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. Exploring cross-cultural digital competencies: Building the Global Educational Learning Observatory, GELO

    Roland van Oostveen, Maurice DiGiuseppe, Wendy Barber & Todd Blayone, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Canada; Elizabeth Childs, Royal Roads University, Canada

    EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2018 (Jun 25, 2018) pp. 357–364

  2. Are you ready? Assessing Digital Competencies for Online Learning via the General Technology Confidence and Use (GTCU) Instrument

    Maurice DiGiuseppe, University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT), Canada; Roland vanOostveen, UOIT, Canada; Elizabeth Childs, Royal Roads University, Canada; Todd Blayone & Wendy Barber, UOIT, Canada

    EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2017 (Jun 20, 2017) pp. 221–226

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact