Abstract :

Delivering online courses is not a new paradigm in U.S. higher education. Online courses and programs play a significant role in providing opportunities for adult learners to further their education without sacrificing their work and family commitments. Because of the advancement of communication technologies, the educational landscape is undergoing a rapid transformation. Higher educational institutions must have a continuous improvement mindset to integrate emerging educational technologies and best instructional pedagogies into the curricula. Revising the course content and evaluating the updated course’s effectiveness is imperative. This paper presents a study in which a revised course in the master’s program of healthcare administration is incorporated with active learning approaches. For triangulation, a mixed-method research design is employed to collect qualitative and quantitative data from multiple sources. The results from this study confirm findings derived from prior empirical research studies. The limitations and future research are also discussed. The implications for online education instructors, instructional designers, and administrators are also presented.

---

Keywords :

Active Learning, course redesign, drop-out rate, Online Learning, student satisfaction

---

References :

1. Azizan, S., Lee, A., Crosling, G., Atherton, G., Arulanandam, B., Lee, C., & Rahim, R. A. (2022). Online learning and COVID-19 in higher education: The value of IT models in assessing students’ satisfaction. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 17(3), 245–278. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v17i03.24871
2. Benková,, Bednárová, D., Bogdanovská, G., & Pavlíčková, M. (2022). Redesign of the statistics course to improve graduates’ skills. Mathematics, 10(15), 2569. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10152569
3. Betti, A., Biderbost, P., & Aurora García Domonte. (2022). Can active learning techniques simultaneously develop students’ hard and soft skills? Evidence from an international relations class. PLoS One, 17(4)  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265408

4. Bickle, M.C., Rucker, R.D. & Burnsed, K.A. (2019). Online learning: examination of attributes that promote student satisfaction. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 22(1), n1.
5. Collins, M. , & McLain, N. E. (2021). Pharmacology course redesign using high-impact practices. Journal of Nursing Education, 60(9), 529-533. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20210719-01
6. Krsmanovic, M. (2021). Course redesign: Implementing project-based learning to improve students’ self-efficacy. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 21(2), 93-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v21i2.28723
7. Gan, Z., An, Z., & Liu, F. (2021) Teacher feedback practices, student feedback motivation, and feedback behavior: How are they associated with learning outcomes? Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 697045. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.697045

8. Gopal, R., Singh, V., & Arun, A. (2021). Impact of online classes on the satisfaction and performance of students during the pandemic period of COVID 19. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 6923-6947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10523-1

9. Grijpma, J.W., Mak-van der Vossen, M., Kusurkar, R.A., Meeter, M., & de la Croix, A. (2022). Medical student engagement in small-group active learning: A stimulated recall study. Medical Education, 56(4), 432-443. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14710

10. Li, X., & Asante, I. K. (2021). International students expectations from online education in Chinese universities: Student-centered approach. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 8(1), 113–123.  https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v8i1p113

11. Lomer, S., & Palmer, E. (2023). “I didn’t know this was actually stuff that could help us, with actually learning”: Student perceptions of active blended learning. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(4), 679–698. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1852202

12. Martin, F., & Bolliger, D.U. (2022). Developing an online learner satisfaction framework in higher education through a systematic review of research. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19 50 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00355-5
13. Martin, F., Wang, C., & Sadaf, A. (2018). Student perception of helpfulness of facilitation strategies that enhance instructor presence, connectedness, engagement, and learning in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 52–65.
14. McKinney, E.,Jr, Niese, B., & Bhatia, M. S. (2023). Teaching tip: Active learning in the IS classroom: A student crowdpolling exercise for IS courses. Journal of Information Systems Education, 34(2), 118-130. https://su.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/teaching-tip-active-learning-is-classroom-student/docview/2810210798/se-2
15. Muscatello, V. S. (2023). Promoting inclusivity with student-centered instructional approaches: Evaluation of a course redesign of undergraduate research methods in psychology. (Publication No. 30522169). [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angel]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
16. Mutawa, A. M. & Sruthi, S. (2024). Enhancing human–computer interaction in online education: A machine learning approach to predicting student emotion and satisfaction. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 40(24), 8827-8843, DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2023.2291611
17. Palloan, P., Usman, Azis, A., & Hakim, A. (2021). E-Learning integrated active learning strategies to improve the critical thinking skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1899(1) https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1899/1/012162
18. Pan, T., & Fan, K. (2020). A sustainable approach: Increasing students’ information-technology competences and job-seeking capabilities through course redesign using FIT framework and active learning pedagogy. Sustainability, 12(10), 4094. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104094
19. Pedler, M., Yeigh, T., & Hudson, S. (2020). The teachers’ role in student engagement: A review. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 45(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2020v45n3.4
20. Rajeh, M. T., Abduljabbar, F. H., Alqahtani, S. M., Waly, F. J., Alnaami, I., Aljurayyan, A., & Alzaman, N. (2021). Students’ satisfaction and continued intention toward e-learning: a theory-based study. Medical Education Online, 26(1), 1961348. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2021.1961348
21. Ratan, R., Ucha, C., Lei, Y., Lim, C., Triwibowo, W., Yelon, S., Sheahan, A., Lamb, B., Deni, B., & Hua Chen, V. H. (2022). How do social presence and active learning in synchronous and asynchronous online classes relate to students’ perceived course gains? Computers and Education, 191, 104621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104621
22. Rossi, I. V., de Lima, J. D., Sabatke, B., Nunes, M. A. F., Ramirez, G.E., & Ramirez, M.I. (2021). Active learning tools improve the learning outcomes, scientific attitude, and critical thinking in higher education: Experiences in an online course during the COVID-19 pandemic. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21574
23. Russell, M. (2013). Beyond ‘I Agree’: The instructor’s role in facilitating critical thinking in online courses.The International Journal of Technologies in Learning, 19(1), 17-29. https://doi.org/10.18848/2327-0144/CGP/v19i01/49123
24. Scott, K., Young, J., Barbee, J., & Nahikian-Nelms, M. (2024). Leveraging learning science to improve student outcomes in asynchronous online medical terminology education. Medical Education Online, 29(1), 2413051. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2024.2413051

25. Shehzad, N., & Charles, T. (2023). Exploring the impact of instructor social presence on student engagement in online higher education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), ep484. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13823
26. Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D.L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., Grummer, J. A., Hennessey, K., Hsiao, J., Iranon, N., Jones, L., Jordt, H., Keller, M., Lacey, M. E., Littlefield, C. E., …, Freeman. S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,117(12), 6476-6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117.
27. Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university
28. Yu, H., Wang, S., Li, J., Shi, G., & Yang, J. (2022). Influence of online merging offline method on university students’ active learning through learning satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 842322-.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.842322

29. Wuttikietpaiboon, K. (2012). Engaging graduate students in rich asynchronous online discussions (Publication No. 3520994). [Doctoral dissertation, Sam Huston State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
30. Zilka, G. C., Cohen, R., & Rahimi, I. D. (2018). Teacher presence and social presence in virtual and blended courses. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 17(1), 103-126. https://doi.org/10.28945/