The Impact of Choice in Learning
Reference:
Murphy, J., Farrell, K., & Myers, J. (2024). Student choice in online asynchronous higher education courses. In Proceedings of the [Conference Name if known]. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3760213.3708894
Annotation:
The article explores how offering students choices in online asynchronous higher education courses enhances engagement, autonomy, and relevance. Drawing from theories like constructivism, self-determination, and andragogy, the authors argue that allowing flexibility in content, process, and product supports deeper learning and motivation. A pilot study with undergraduate and graduate students found that choice particularly strengthened connections to career goals, encouraged authentic learning experiences, and increased satisfaction. The findings suggest that structured opportunities for choice can transform courses into learner-centered environments that foster agency, self-regulation, and practical application.
Murphy, Farrell, and Myers (2024) does a good job of clearly connecting theory to practice by showing how student choice can improve engagement in online learning. The use of a pilot study with both undergraduates and graduate students gives it a practical angle that helps support the claims, even if the sample size is modest. The mix of quantitative survey results and qualitative student feedback adds depth and makes the findings feel more grounded. Overall, the article is well organized and easy to follow, making complex ideas accessible without being overly technical.
The ideas in this article translate well into workplace training and curriculum design because they highlight the importance of giving adults meaningful choices in how they learn. In professional settings, employees bring diverse experiences, learning preferences, and career goals, so offering flexibility in content, process, and product can make training more relevant and motivating. The emphasis on autonomy and authentic application resonates strongly with adult learning in the workplace, where practical connections often matter more than abstract theory. This approach supports consultants and trainers in creating programs that not only build skills but also encourage ownership, engagement, and long-term growth.
Exploring the difference between using the internet and processing information
Reference:
Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2005). The web as an information resource in K–12 education: Strategies for supporting students in searching and processing information. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 285–328. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003285
Annotation:
Kuiper, Volman, and Terwel (2005) review research on how K-12 students use the internet specific to how this presents challenges and opportunities for learning. What they have found is that students are good with browsing online but may find it hard to do this effectively by evaluating the credibility of sources and critically reviewing the information. The authors talk about the complexity of the internet and how this can lead to distraction or reliance to familiar sites that could not be accurate. The recommendation comes for integrating structured guidance and take a more design-based research in authentic educational settings to better understand how to help student use the internet for deeper learning.
A strength of Kuiper, Volman, and Terwel’s (2005) article is the thorough way it brings together a wide range of studies to give a clear picture of how students engage with the Web and where they struggle. The review is well organized, moving from describing student behaviors to analyzing the unique challenges of the Web as an information resource, which makes the findings easy to follow. The authors also balance theory with practical implications, connecting research insights to classroom practice. While the studies they reviewed are sometimes small-scale and varied in approach, the article does a strong job of synthesizing them into common themes and pointing out where future, more robust research is needed.
The insights from Kuiper, Volman, and Terwel’s (2005) article connect closely to learning and development because they highlight the gap between access to technology and the actual skills needed to use it meaningfully. In many workplaces, employees are expected to navigate large amounts of digital information, yet without structured guidance they can fall into the same habits as students—skimming, relying on familiar sources, or missing opportunities to critically assess content. This reinforces the importance of building training programs that go beyond technical know-how to emphasize information literacy, critical evaluation, and reflective practice. For organizational learning, the article suggests that creating structured pathways and scaffolding within training initiatives can help employees engage more deeply with digital resources, ultimately improving decision-making and performance.