Element contents
Online Teacher Education and Interactive Technologies
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 January 2026
Summary
This Element focuses on the role of interactive technologies in enhancing pre-service teachers' engagement with learning in online environments. It begins with a brief overview of the current state of teacher education, focusing on online teaching. This is followed by analysing the concept of engagement, underscoring its importance for pre-service teachers studying online. The Element explores various dimensions of engagement – cognitive, behavioural, affective, and other – and how interactive technologies can enhance these dimensions in online learning. A key feature of this Element is its exploration of key challenges that teacher educators and pre-service teachers encounter when using interactive technologies with practical recommendations for addressing them. The concluding section shifts the focus to the future, offering recommendations for how teacher education can use interactive technologies to 'grow' teacher educators who can engage their students. Throughout the Element, practical examples complement theoretical discussions to bridge the gap between theory and practice.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781009527354Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 19 February 2026
References
Aalto, E., & Mustonen, S. (2022). Designing knowledge construction in pre-service teachers’ collaborative planning talk. Linguistics and Education, 69, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al Mamun, M. A., & Lawrie, G. (2023). pp. 1-31. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00221-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alwafi, E. M., Downey, C., & Kinchin, G. (2020). Promoting pre-service teachers’ engagement in an online professional learning community. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(2), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1108/jpcc-10-2019-0027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, B., & Simpson, M. (2004). Group and class contexts for learning and support online: Learning and affective support online in small group and class contexts. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v5i3.208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antonaci, A., Klemke, R., & Specht, M. (2019). The effects of gamification in online learning environments: A systematic literature review. Informatics, 6(3), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics6030032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arif, F. K. M., Noah, J. B., Affendi, F. R., & Yunus, M. M. (2020). Paddle your way into writing: Integrating Padlet for ESL learners. International Journal of Scientified and Technology Research, 9(3), 5407–5410. www.ijstr.org/final-print/mar2020/Paddle-Your-Way-Into-Writing-Integrating-Padlet-For-Esl-Learners.pdf.Google Scholar
Attard, C., & Holmes, K. (2020). ‘It gives you that sense of hope’: An exploration of technology use to mediate student engagement with mathematics. Heliyon, 6(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02945.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Audrin, C., & Hascoët, M. (2024). Ode to joy: The impact of enjoyment on pre-service teacher persistence. Teaching and Teacher Education, 137, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2018). Spotlight: The rise of online teacher education: What do we know? www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/research-evidence/spotlight/ite-online.pdf.Google Scholar
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2023a). Spotlight: Australia’s teacher workforce today. www.aitsl.edu.au/research/spotlights/australia-s-teacher-workforce-today.Google Scholar
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2023b). Spotlight: Technological innovations in initial teacher education. www.aitsl.edu.au/research/spotlights/technological-innovations-in-initial-teacher-education.Google Scholar
Bawa, P. (2016). Retention in online courses. Sage Open, 6(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015621777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedenlier, S., Bond, M., Buntins, K., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Facilitating student engagement through educational technology in higher education: A systematic review in the field of arts and humanities. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4), 126–150. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergdahl, N., & Hietajärvi, L. (2022). Social engagement in distance-, remote-, and hybrid learning. Journal of Online Learning Research, 8(3), 315–342. www.learntechlib.org/p/221444/.Google Scholar
Bolliger, D. U., & Martin, F. (2018). Instructor and student perceptions of online student engagement strategies. Distance Education, 39(4), 568–583. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1520041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, M., & Bergdahl, N. (2022). Student engagement in open, distance, and digital education. In Marin, V. I. & Castañeda, L. (Eds.), Handbook of open, distance and digital education. Singapore: Springer Nature, pp. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0351-9_79-1.Google Scholar
Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(2), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bostock, W. (1999). The global corporatisation of universities: Causes and consequences. AntePodium. https://hdl.handle.net/102.100.100/492466.Google Scholar
Bote-Lorenzo, M. L., & Gómez-Sánchez, E. (2017). Predicting the decrease of engagement indicators in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, pp. 143–147. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1998). The state nobility: Elite schools in the field of power (Clough, L. C., Trans.). New York: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (Nice, R., Trans.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Breslow, L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J. et al. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: Research into edX’s first MOOC. Research and Practice in Assessment, 8, 13–25. www.rpajournal.com/dev/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/SF2.pdf.Google Scholar
Brigham, T. J. (2014). Taking advantage of Google’s web-based applications and services. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 33(2), 202–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2014.897521.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burke, K., Fanshawe, M., & Tualaulelei, E. (2022). We can’t always measure what matters: Revealing opportunities to enhance online student engagement through pedagogical care. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(3), 287–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1909712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, M. (2023). Distance education for teacher training: Modes, models, and methods, 2nd ed., Washington, DC: Education Development Center. www.edc.org/distance-education-teacher-training-modes-models-and-methods.Google Scholar
Cakir, H. (2013). Use of blogs in pre-service teacher education to improve student engagement. Computers & Education, 68, 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrillo, C., & Flores, M. A. (2020). COVID-19 and teacher education: A literature review of online teaching and learning practices. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(4), 466–487. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1821184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caspari-Sadeghi, S. (2022). Applying learning analytics in online environments: Measuring learners’ engagement unobtrusively. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.840947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castro, A. J. (2010). Themes in the research on preservice teachers’ views of cultural diversity: Implications for researching millennial preservice teachers. Educational Researcher, 39(3), 198–210. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x10363819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, S., Maneewan, S., & Koul, R. (2021). Teacher educators’ teaching styles: Relation with learning motivation and academic engagement in pre-service teachers. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(8), 2044–2065. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1947226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chi, M. T. H. (2021). Translating a theory of active learning: An attempt to close the research-practice gap in education. Topics in Cognitive Science, 13(3), 441–463. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chigeza, P., & Halbert, K. (2014). Navigating e-learning and blended learning for pre-service teachers: Redesigning for engagement, access and efficiency. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(11), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2014v39n11.8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, M.-H., Cheon, J., & Lim, S. (2021). Preservice teachers’ motivation profiles, self-regulation, and affective outcomes in online learning. Distance Education, 42(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1869528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, Y. H., Yim, S. Y., & Paik, S. (2015). Physical and social presence in 3D virtual role-play for pre-service teachers. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 70–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, E. K. (2018). Developments and challenges of civic education in Hong Kong SAR, China (1997–2017). The Journal of Social Studies Education in Asia, 7, 47–63. http://jerass.com/jssea/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/JSSEA_Vol7_47-63.pdf.Google Scholar
Chung, J.-Y., & Jeong, S.-H. (2024). Korean pre-service teachers’ experiences of creating an online teaching portfolio in the teacher preparation course. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 14(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2024-0021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, S. K., & Byrnes, D. (2015). What millennial preservice teachers want to learn in their training. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 36(4), 379–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2015.1100148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corcoran, R. P., & Tormey, R. (2012). How emotionally intelligent are pre-service teachers? Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(5), 750–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.02.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummins, S., Beresford, A. R., & Rice, A. (2016). Investigating engagement with in-video quiz questions in a programming course. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 9(1), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1109/tlt.2015.2444374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dacko, A., Leung, L., Mohad, M., & Vandeloo, M. (2015). Making it personal: Understanding the online learning experience to enable design of an inclusive, integrated e-learning solution for students. eLearning Papers, 42(1), 1–14. http://openresearch.ocadu.ca/id/eprint/1244/.Google Scholar
Daher, W., Sabbah, K., & Abuzant, M. (2021). Affective engagement of higher education students in an online course. Emerging Science Journal, 5(4), 545–558. https://doi.org/10.28991/esj-2021-01296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darling-Aduana, J. (2019). Behavioral engagement shifts among at-risk high school students enrolled in online courses. AERA Open, 5(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419887736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Washington, DC: Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_REPORT.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deeley, S. J. (2018). Using technology to facilitate effective assessment for learning and feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 439–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1356906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delamarter, J., & Wiederholt, K. (2019). The affective vs. the academic: A quantitative study of pre-service teachers’ expected impact on their future students. Action in Teacher Education, 42(2), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2019.1649742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deng, R., Benckendorff, P., & Gannaway, D. (2020). Learner engagement in MOOCs: Scale development and validation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(1), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deni, A. R. M., & Zainal, Z. I. (2018). Padlet as an educational tool: Pedagogical considerations and lessons learnt. In Nakayama, M. & Lou, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Education Technology and Computers, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 156–162. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290511.3290512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewan, M. A. A., Murshed, M., & Lin, F. (2019). Engagement detection in online learning: A review. Smart Learning Environments, 6(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-018-0080-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeWitt, D., Alias, N., Ibrahim, Z., Shing, N. K., & Rashid, S. M. M. (2015). Design of a learning module for the Deaf in a higher education institution using Padlet. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 220–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dianati, S., Nguyen, M., Dao, P., Iwashita, N., & Vasquez, C. (2020). Student perceptions of technological tools for flipped instruction: The case of Padlet, Kahoot! and Cirrus. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 17(5), 4, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.17.5.4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The Online Student Engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19 (4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donnison, S. (2009). Discourses in conflict: The relationship between Gen Y pre-service teachers, digital technologies and lifelong learning. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3), 336–350. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1138.Google Scholar
Downing, J., Dyment, J., & Stone, C. (2019). Online Initial Teacher Education in Australia: Affordances for Pedagogy, Practice and Outcomes. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(5), 57–79. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v44n5.4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, T. J., & Kennedy, M. (2019). Technology enhanced learning in higher education; motivations, engagement and academic achievement. Computers & Education, 137, 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyment, J. E., & Downing, J. J. (2019). Online initial teacher education: A systematic review of the literature. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 48(3), 316–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866x.2019.1631254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Education Services Australia. (2021). Shaping Our Future: A ten-year strategy to ensure a sustainable, high-quality children’s education and care workforce 2022–2031. www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-10/ShapingOurFutureChildrensEducationandCareNationalWorkforceStrategy-September2021.pdf.Google Scholar
Ellis, D. (2015). Using Padlet to increase student engagement in lectures. In Jefferies, A. & Cubric, M. (Eds.), 14th European Conference on e-Learning: ECEl2015. ECEL – European Conference on e-Learning. pp. 195–198. https://core.ac.uk/reader/228140577.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. A., & Bliuc, A.-M. (2019). Exploring new elements of the student approaches to learning framework: The role of online learning technologies in student learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 20 (1), 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417721384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrer, J., Ringer, A., Saville, K., Parris, M. A., & Kashi, K. (2022). Students’ motivation and engagement in higher education: The importance of attitude to online learning. Higher Education, 83(2), 317–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00657-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, T., Ní Chróinín, D., & O’Sullivan, M. (2018). Developing deep understanding of teacher education practice through accessing and responding to pre-service teacher engagement with their learning. Professional Development in Education, 45(5), 832–847. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2018.1550099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gameil, A. A., & Al-Abdullatif, A. M. (2023). Using digital learning platforms to enhance the instructional design competencies and learning engagement of preservice teachers. Education Sciences, 13(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrison, D. R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61–72. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ842688.pdf.Google Scholar
Garrison, D. R. (2017). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. 3rd ed., New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geri, N., Winer, A., & Zaks, B. (2017). Challenging the six-minute myth of online video lectures: Can interactivity expand the attention span of learners? Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management, 5(1), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.36965/ojakm.2017.5(1)101-111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Getenet, S., & Tualaulelei, E. (2023). Using interactive technologies to enhance student engagement in higher education online learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 39(4), 220–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2023.2244597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Getenet, S., Worsley, S., Tualaulelei, E., & Pillay, Y. (2022). The role of technologies to enhance pre-service teachers’ engagement in an online mathematics education course. In Fitzallen, N., Murphy, C., Hatisaru, V., & Maher, N. (Eds.), Mathematical confluences and journeys (Proceedings of the 44th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia), pp. 241‒249. MERGA. https://merga.net.au/publications/annual-conference-proceedings/2022-conference-proceedings/.Google Scholar
Gill-Simmen, L. (2021). Using Padlet in instructional design to promote cognitive engagement: A case study of undergraduate marketing students. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 20, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi20.575.Google Scholar
Goepel, J. (2012). Upholding public trust: An examination of teacher professionalism and the use of Teachers’ Standards in England. Teacher Development, 16(4), 489–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2012.729784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gokbel, E. N. (2020). Online collaborative learning in pre-service teacher education: A literature review. In Alqurashi, E. (Ed.), Handbook of research on fostering student engagement with instructional technology in higher education. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 288–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goode, E., Nieuwoudt, J., & Roche, T. (2022). Does online engagement matter? The impact of interactive learning modules and synchronous class attendance on student achievement in an immersive delivery model. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 76–94. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, M. S.-J., & Lodge, J. M. (2015). Academic workload: The silent barrier to the implementation of technology-enhanced learning strategies in higher education. Distance Education, 36(2), 210–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2015.1055056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grieve, R., Padgett, C. R., & Moffitt, R. L. (2016). Assignments 2.0: The role of social presence and computer attitudes in student preferences for online versus offline marking. The Internet and Higher Education, 28, 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, W., Chen, Y., Lei, J., & Wen, Y. (2014). The effects of facilitating feedback on online learners’ cognitive engagement: Evidence from the asynchronous online discussion. Education Sciences, 4(2), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci4020193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, E., Fischman, G., & Pivovarova, M. (2023). Public beliefs about good teaching. Research in Education, 121(1), 93–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/00345237231207717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafour, M. F., & Alwaleedi, M. (2022). Students’ emotional and behavioral engagement: Cloud-based Collaborative writing and learning analytics. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(1), 374–400. https://callej.org/index.php/journal/article/view/385.Google Scholar
Hamsher, S., & Dieterich, C. A. (2017). Creating a positive atmosphere in online courses: Student ratings of affective variables in teacher education courses. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 14(7), 75–84. http://itdl.org/Journal/Jul_17/Jul17.pdf.Google Scholar
Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens: Online education as a new paradigm in learning. Internet and Higher Education, 3(1–2), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00032-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkey, K. (2006). Emotional intelligence and mentoring in pre‐service teacher education: A literature review. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 14(2), 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611260500493485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heffernan, A., Longmuir, F., Bright, D., & Kim, M. (2019). Perceptions of teachers and teaching in Australia. Monash University. www.monash.edu/perceptions-of-teaching/docs/Perceptions-of-Teachers-and-Teaching-in-Australia-report-Nov-2019.pdf.Google Scholar
Heggart, K., & Yoo, J. (2018). Getting the most from Google Classroom: A pedagogical framework for tertiary educators. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 140–153. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n3.9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., & Aston, R. (2015). What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1567–1579. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hew, K. F., Huang, B., Chu, K. W. S., & Chiu, D. K. W. (2016). Engaging Asian students through game mechanics: Findings from two experiment studies. Computers & Education, 92 –93, 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoi, V. N., & Le Hang, H. (2021). The structure of student engagement in online learning: A bi‐factor exploratory structural equation modelling approach. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(4), 1141–1153. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holzberger, D., Maurer, C., Kunina-Habenicht, O., & Kunter, M. (2021). Ready to teach? A profile analysis of cognitive and motivational-affective teacher characteristics at the end of pre-service teacher education and the long-term effects on occupational well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education, 100, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, M., & Li, H. (2017). Student engagement in online learning: A review. In F. L. Wang, O. Au, K. K. Ng, J. Shang, & R. Kwan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2017 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET), pp. 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1109/iset.2017.17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurlbut, A. R. (2018). Online vs. traditional learning in teacher education: A comparison of student progress. American Journal of Distance Education, 32(4), 248–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2018.1509265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, E. P., Wahlquist, A. E., Hortman, M., & Wisniewski, C. S. (2021). Motivating students to engage in preparation for flipped classrooms by using embedded quizzes in pre-class videos. Innovations in Pharmacy, 12(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.24926/iip.v12i1.3353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jordan, K. (2014). Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1), 133–160. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i1.1651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kabilan, M. K. (2016). Using Facebook as an e-portfolio in enhancing pre-service teachers’ professional development. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahu, E. R. (2011). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahu, E. R., & Nelson, K. (2017). Student engagement in the educational interface: Understanding the mechanisms of student success. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(1), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1344197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, M. M., Hoy, A. W., Goetz, T., & Frenzel, A. C. (2016). Teacher enthusiasm: Reviewing and redefining a complex construct. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 743–769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9354-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenney, J., & Fisher, M. (2017). Investigating the impact of embedded questions in online presentations in a hybrid undergraduate educational psychology course. In Johnston, J. P. (Ed.), Proceedings of EdMedia 2017. Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), pp. 850–853. www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/178394/.Google Scholar
Kim, Y., Glassman, M., & Williams, M. S. (2015). Connecting agents: Engagement and motivation in online collaboration. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 333–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimbrel, L. A., & Gantner, M. W. (2021). Student perceptions of instructor made videos with quizzes in an asynchronous online course. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 16(1), 24–44. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1313136.pdf.Google Scholar
Kordrostami, M., & Seitz, V. (2021). Faculty online competence and student affective engagement in online learning. Marketing Education Review, 32(3), 240–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2021.1965891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kovacs, G. (2016). Effects of in-video quizzes on MOOC lecture viewing. In Haywood, J. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale. New York: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/2876034.2876041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, K. L., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first‐year university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701698892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kriewaldt, J. A. (2015). Strengthening learners’ perspectives in professional standards to restore relationality as central to teaching. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(8), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n8.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE: Benchmarks for effective educational practices. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(2), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380309604090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacher, L. L., Jiang, A., Zhang, Y., & Lewis, M. C. (2018). Including coding questions in video quizzes for a flipped CS1. In Barnes, T. & Garcia, D. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. New York: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 574–579. https://doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Y.-J., Davis, R., & Li, Y. (2022). Implementing synchronous online flipped learning for pre-service teachers during COVID-19. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(2), 653–661. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.2.653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Y., & Martin, K. I. (2019). The flipped classroom in ESL teacher education: An example from CALL. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 2605–2633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10082-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lei, M., Clemente, I. M., & Hu, Y. (2019). Student in the shell: The robotic body and student engagement. Computers & Education, 130, 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.11.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, L.-Y., & Tsai, C.-C. (2017). Accessing online learning material: Quantitative behavior patterns and their effects on motivation and learning performance. Computers & Education, 114, 286–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S., Yu, C., Hu, J., & Zhong, Y. (2016). Exploring the effect of behavioral engagement on learning achievement in online learning environment: Learning analytics of non-degree online learning data. In Chang, C.-K., Hwang, G.-J., Chen, L. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Educational Innovation through Technology (EITT). New York: IEEE, pp. 246–250. https://doi.org/10.1109/eitt.2016.56.Google Scholar
Licorish, S. A., Owen, H. E., Daniel, B., & George, J. L. (2018). Students’ perception of Kahoot!’s influence on teaching and learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 13, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-018-0078-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lingard, B. (2018). Reforming education: The spaces and places of education policy and learning. In Hultqvist, E., Lindblad, S., & Popkewitz, T. S. (Eds.), Critical analyses of educational reforms in an era of transnational governance. Springer International, Cham, pp. 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61971-2_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, J., & Churchill, D. (2012). The effect of social interaction on learning engagement in a social networking environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(4), 401–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2012.680966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, N., Li, H., Zhao, L., Wu, Z., & Zhang, J. (2022). Promoting student engagement in online learning through harmonious classroom environment. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(5), 541–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00606-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenzie, L., & Ballard, K. (2015). Can using individual online interactive activities enhance exam results? MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 262–266. https://jolt.merlot.org/Vol11no2/Ballard_0615.pdf.Google Scholar
Mäkinen, M., Linden, J., Annala, J., & Wiseman, A. (2018). Millennial generation preservice teachers inspiring the design of teacher education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2018.1448776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, F., Sun, T., Turk, M., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2021). A meta-analysis on the effects of synchronous online learning on cognitive and affective educational outcomes. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(3), 205–242. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i3.5263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKay, J., & Marshall, P. (2001). The dual imperatives of action research. Information Technology & People, 14(1), 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1108/09593840110384771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKnight, K., O’Malley, K., Ruzic, R. et al. (2016). Teaching in a digital age: How educators use technology to improve student learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(3), 194–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2016.1175856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehta, K. J., Miletich, I., & Detyna, M. (2021). Content-specific differences in Padlet perception for collaborative learning amongst undergraduate students. Research in Learning Technology, 29, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v29.2551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, K. A. (2014). Student engagement in online learning: What works and why. ASHE Higher Education Report, 40(6), 1–114. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, G. E. (2007). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Molinillo, S., Aguilar-Illescas, R., Anaya-Sánchez, R., & Vallespín-Arán, M. (2018). Exploring the impacts of interactions, social presence and emotional engagement on active collaborative learning in a social web-based environment. Computers & Education, 123, 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.04.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morabito, M. G. (1999). Online distance education: Historical perspective and practical application. PhD, American Coastline University. www.dissertation.com/m/books/1581120575.Google Scholar
Morris, J., & Chi, M. T. H. (2020). Improving teacher questioning in science using ICAP theory. The Journal of Educational Research, 113(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2019.1709401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrquin, D., Challoo, L., & Green, M. (2019). Teachers’ perceptions regarding the use of Google Classroom and Google Docs. In Carliner, S. (Ed.), Proceedings of the E-Learn 2019: World Conference on E-Learning. New Orleans, LA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), pp. 21–30. www.learntechlib.org/p/211059/.Google Scholar
Moss, T., & Pittaway, S. (2018). Expectations and engagement: Key touchpoints in online students’ experiences of transition. In Campbell, M., Willems, J., Adachi, C. et al. (Eds.), Open oceans: Learning without borders (Proceedings of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education. Geelong: Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education,) pp. 460–465. https://2018conference.ascilite.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/ASCILITE-2018-Proceedings-Final.pdf.Google Scholar
Muljana, P. S., & Luo, T. (2019). Factors contributing to student retention in online learning and recommended strategies for improvement: A systematic literature review. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 18, 19–57. https://doi.org/10.28945/4182.Google Scholar
Murdoch, Y. D., & Lim, H. (2022). Exploring Korean College of Education pre-service teacher persistence toward a teaching career: Quantitative analysis of reasons and factors for persisting. Sage Open, 12(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221129249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumann, K. L., & Kopcha, T. J. (2019). Using Google Docs for peer-then-teacher review on middle school students’ writing. Computers and Composition, 54, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2019.102524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nieto, S. (2017). Re-imagining multicultural education: New visions, new possibilities. Multicultural Education Review, 9(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615X.2016.1276671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noble, D. F. (1998). Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education. Science as Culture, 7(3), 355–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505439809526510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noddings, N. (2008). Caring and moral education. In Nucci, L., Krettenauer, T., & Narvaez, D. (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education. New York: Routledge, pp. 161–174.Google Scholar
Oakley, G., Pegrum, M., & Johnston, S. (2013). Introducing e-portfolios to pre-service teachers as tools for reflection and growth: Lessons learnt. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 42(1), 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866x.2013.854860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oxford University Press. (2025). Interactive. In Oxford English Dictionary. 7 March. www.oed.com/dictionary/interactive_adj?tl=true.Google Scholar
Özbek, T., Wekerle, C., & Kollar, I. (2023). Fostering pre-service teachers’ technology acceptance – does the type of engagement with tool-related information matter? Education and Information Technologies, 29(5), 6139–6161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12047-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, X. (2023). Online learning environments, learners’ empowerment, and learning behavioral engagement: The mediating role of learning motivation. Sage Open, 13(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231205098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, J., & Taylor, L. (2011). Improving student engagement. Current Issues in Education, 14(1), 1–33. https://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/745.Google Scholar
Pifarre, M. (2019). Using interactive technologies to promote a dialogic space for creating collaboratively: A study in secondary education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 32, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.01.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pittaway, S. M. (2012). Student and staff engagement: Developing an engagement framework in a faculty of education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(4), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n4.8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pittaway, S. M., & Moss, T. (2014). ‘Initially, we were just names on a computer screen’: Designing engagement in online teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(7), 140–156. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2014v39n7.10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pool, J., & Laubscher, D. (2016). Design-based research: Is this a suitable methodology for short-term projects? Educational Media International, 53(1), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2016.1189246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranellucci, J., Robinson, K. A., Rosenberg, J. M. et al. (2021). Comparing the roles and correlates of emotions in class and during online video lectures in a flipped anatomy classroom. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 65, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravindran, B., Greene, B. A., & Debacker, T. K. (2005). Predicting preservice teachers’ cognitive engagement with goals and epistemological beliefs. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(4), 222–233. https://doi.org/10.3200/joer.98.4.222-233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redmond, P., Heffernan, A., Abawi, L., Brown, A., & Henderson, R. (2018). An online engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning, 22(1), 183–204. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeve, J., & Tseng, C.-M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, P., Beeson, P., & Blackmore-Wright, J. (2019). Evaluating the impact of a quiz question within an educational video. TechTrends, 63(5), 522–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00374-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, J. C., & Newby, T. (2018). The role of students’ cognitive engagement in online learning. American Journal of Distance Education, 20(1), 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde2001_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saini, C., & Abraham, J. (2019). Implementing Facebook-based instructional approach in pre-service teacher education: An empirical investigation. Computers & Education, 128, 243–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schindler, L. A., Burkholder, G. J., Morad, O. A., & Marsh, C. (2017). Computer-based technology and student engagement: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0063-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnackenberg, H. L. (2019). Are we part of the problem?: Teacher preparation programs, educational technology, and the mis-education of future teachers. In Schnackenberg, H. L. & Johnson, C. (Eds.), Preparing the higher education space for Gen Z. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 110–123.Google Scholar
Serrano, D. R., Dea‐Ayuela, M. A., Gonzalez‐Burgos, E., Serrano‐Gil, A., & Lalatsa, A. (2019). Technology‐enhanced learning in higher education: How to enhance student engagement through blended learning. European Journal of Education, 54(2), 273–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, N. (2023). Pre-service teachers as researchers of educational practices: Effects on students’ narration of their learner autobiography. Teaching and Teacher Education, 128, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, N., Getenet, S., & Tualaulelei, E. (2023). Examining students’ behavioural engagement in lecture videos with and without embedded quizzes in an online course: People, partnerships and pedagogies. In Cochrane, T., Narayan, V., Brown, C. et al. (Eds.), People, partnerships and pedagogies. Proceedings ASCILITE 2023. Christchurch: Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, pp. 224–233. https://doi.org/10.14742/apubs.2023.571.Google Scholar
Stone, C., Freeman, E., Dyment, J. E., Muir, T., & Milthorpe, N. (2019). Equal or equitable? The role of flexibility within online education. Australian & International Journal of Rural Education, 29(2), 26–40. https://journal.spera.asn.au/index.php/AIJRE/article/view/221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, C. M. M., & O’Shea, S. E. (2019). My children … think it’s cool that Mum is a uni student: Women with caring responsibilities studying online. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(6), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, C., O’Shea, S., May, J., Delahunty, J., & Partington, Z. (2016). Opportunity through online learning: Experiences of first-in-family students in online open-entry higher education. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 56(2), 146–169. https://ajal.net.au/opportunity-through-online-learning-experiences-of-first-in-family-students-in-online-open-entry-higher-education/.Google Scholar
Sugden, N., Brunton, R., MacDonald, J., Yeo, M., & Hicks, B. (2021). Evaluating student engagement and deep learning in interactive online psychology learning activities. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 45–65. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, J. C.-Y., Kuo, C. Y., Hou, H. T., & Lin, Y. Y. (2017). Exploring learners’ sequential behavioral patterns, flow experience, and learning performance in an anti-phishing educational game. Educational Technology & Society, 20(1), 45–60. www.j-ets.net/collection/published-issues/20_1.Google Scholar
Sung, H.-Y., Hwang, G.-J., Wu, P.-H., & Lin, D.-Q. (2018). Facilitating deep-strategy behaviors and positive learning performances in science inquiry activities with a 3D experiential gaming approach. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(8), 1053–1073. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1437049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suwantarathip, O., & Wichadee, S. (2014). The effects of collaborative writing activity using Google docs on students’ writing abilities. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 13(2), 148–156. www.tojet.net/articles/v13i2/13215.pdf.Google Scholar
Taşkın, N., & Kılıç Çakmak, E. (2022). Effects of gamification on behavioral and cognitive engagement of students in the online learning environment. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(17), 3334–3345. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2096190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. C. (2001). Fifth generation distance education. Instructional Science and Technology, 4(1), 1–14. https://ascilite.org/archived-journals/e-jist/docs/vol4no1/Taylor.pdf.Google Scholar
Tran, C. J. K., & Lamar, M. F. (2020). Fostering small group discussion in an online instrumental analysis course using Google Docs. The Journal of Forensic Science Education, 2(2), 1–15. https://jfse-ojs-tamu.tdl.org/jfse/article/view/34.Google Scholar
Tualaulelei, E. (2020). The benefits of creating open educational resources as assessment in an online education course. In Gregory, S., Warburton, S., & Parkes, M. (Eds.), ASCILITE’s First Virtual Conference. Proceedings ASCILITE 2020. Armidale: Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, pp. 282–288. https://doi.org/10.14742/ascilite2020.0109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tualaulelei, E., Burke, K., Fanshawe, M., & Cameron, C. (2021). Mapping pedagogical touchpoints: Exploring online student engagement and course design. Active Learning in Higher Education, 23(3), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787421990847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Meijden, H. (2005). Knowledge construction through CSCL: Student elaborations in synchronous, asynchronous and 3-D learning environments. PhD, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Vytasek, J. M., Patzak, A., & Winne, P. H. (2020). Analytics for student engagement. In Machine learning paradigms: Advances in learning analytics (pp. 23–48). Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, F. H. (2019). On the relationships between behaviors and achievement in technology-mediated flipped classrooms: A two-phase online behavioral PLS-SEM model. Computers & Education, 142, 103653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., & Stein, D. (2021). Effects of online teaching presence on students’ cognitive conflict and engagement. Distance Education, 42(4), 547–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2021.1987837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waters, J., & Gasson, S. (2006). Social engagement in an online community of inquiry: Human-Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of the Twenty Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1–22. https://cci.drexel.edu/faculty/sgasson/Pubs/JW-SG-ICIS-HCI-03[Final].pdf.Google Scholar
Watty, K., McKay, J., & Ngo, L. (2016). Innovators or inhibitors? Accounting faculty resistance to new educational technologies in higher education. Journal of Accounting Education, 36, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccedu.2016.03.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, J. (2022). These 3 charts show the global growth in online learning. World Economic Forum. www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/01/online-learning-courses-reskill-skills-gap/.Google Scholar
Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, L. (2015). A systematic literature review of design-based research from 2004 to 2013. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(4), 399–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0036-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, E. (2006). Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions. Instructional Science, 34(6), 451–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-006-0004-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zygouris-Coe, V. I. (2019). Benefits and challenges of collaborative learning in online teacher education. In Heafner, T. L., Hartshorne, R., & Thripp, R. (Eds.), Handbook of research on emerging practices and methods for K-12 online and blended learning. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 33–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.1 AA
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this element
complies with version 2.1 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), covering newer accessibility requirements and improved
user experiences and achieves the intermediate
(AA)
level of WCAG compliance, covering a wider range of accessibility requirements.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.