Allcock, S. J., & Hulme, J. A. (2010). Learning styles in the classroom: Educational benefit or planning exercise. Psychology Teaching Review, 16(2), 67–79.Google Scholar

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 328 (1990). As amended, 2008. Retrieved from ada.gov/pubs/adastatute08.htm.Google Scholar

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwold, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D. M. (1985). Action science: Concepts, methods, and skills for research and intervention. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Bartunek, J. M., Gordon, J. R., & Weathersby, R. P. (1983). Developing “complicated” understanding in administrators. Academy of Management Review, 8(2), 273–284.Google Scholar

Bates, A. W. (2019). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning (rev ed.). BC Open Textbooks. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwold, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay Company.Google Scholar

Boud, D. (1991). Implementing student self assessment (2nd ed.). Sydney: HERDSA.Google Scholar

Branson, R., Rayner, G., Cox, J., Furman, J., King, F., & Hannum, W. (1975). Interservice procedures for instructional systems development: Executive Summary, Phase I, Phase II, Phase III, Phase IV, Phase V. (TRADOC Pam 350-30 NAVEDTRA 106A). Ft. Monroe, VA: U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (NTIS No. ADA 019 486 through ADA 019 490). Retrieved from http://dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a019488.pdf.Google Scholar

Brill, J. M., & Hodges, C. B. (2011). Investigating peer review as an intentional learning strategy to foster collaborative knowledge-building in students of instructional design. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 23(1), 114–118.Google Scholar

Brookhart, S. M. (2019). A perfect world is one with no grades. ASCD Express, 14(31). Retrieved from http://ascd.org/ascd-express/vol14/num31/a-perfect-world-is-one-with-no-grades.aspxGoogle Scholar

Buzan, T., & Buzan, B. (1993). The mind map book. London: British Broadcasting Corp.Google Scholar

Canning, E. A., Muenks, K., Green, D. J., & Murphy, M. C. (2019). STEM faculty who believe ability is fixed have larger racial achievement gaps and inspire less student motivation in their classes. Science Advances, 5(2), 1–7.Google Scholar

Cantillon, P., & Sargeant, J. (2008). Giving feedback in clinical settings. British Medical Journal, 337, 1292–1294.Google Scholar

Carroll, S. (2017). Meta-learning: Teaching students how to learn builds success for life. The National Teaching and Learning Forum, 26(4), 1–4.Google Scholar

Clancy, A., & Vince, R. (2019). “If I want to feel my feelings, I’ll see a bloody shrink”: Learning from the shadow side of experiential learning. Journal of Management Education, 43(2), 174–184.Google Scholar

Clark, D. R. (2015). ADDIE timeline. Retrieved from http://nwlink.com/~donclark/history_isd/addie.html.Google Scholar

Claro, S., Paunesku, D., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Growth mindset tempers the effects of poverty on academic achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(31), 8664–8668.Google Scholar

Clement, N. D., & Lovat, T. (2012). Neuroscience and education: Issues and challenges for curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(4), 534–557.Google Scholar

Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre.Google Scholar

Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. (2014). Doing action research in your own organization (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Dale, E. (1969). Audiovisual methods in teaching. New York, NY: Dryden Press.Google Scholar

de Bruyckere, P., Kirschner, P. A., & Hulshof, C. D. (2015). Urban myths about learning and education. San Diego, CA: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar

DiCarlo, S. E. (2009). Too much content, not enough thinking, and too little FUN! Advances in Physiology Education, 33, 257–264.Google Scholar

Drew, A. J. (2014). Teaching international business across multiple modes of delivery: How to maintain equivalence in learning outcomes. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 25, 185–199.Google Scholar

Ehrlinger, J., & Shain, E. A. (2014). How accuracy in students’ self perceptions relates to success in learning. In Benassi, V. A., Overton, C. E., & Hakala, C. M. (Eds.). Applying science of learning in education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum (pp. 142–151). Washington, DC: Society for the Teaching of Psychology. Retrieved from http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/asle2014/index.php.Google Scholar

Eyler, J., & Giles, D. E., Jr. (1999.) Where’s the learning in service learning? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Gannon-Cook, R., & Ley, K. (2015). Overlooking the obvious: How to use semiotics and metaphors to reinforce e-learning. Participatory Educational Research, 2(3), 109–121.Google Scholar

Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 31–36.Google Scholar

Geake, J. (2008). Neuromythologies in education. Educational Research, 50(2), 123–133.Google Scholar

Gergen, K. J. (1994). Toward transformation in social knowledge (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Gergen, K. J. (2009). Relational being: Beyond self and community. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gergen, K. J., & Thatchenkery, T. (2004). Organization science as social construction: Postmodern potentials. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40(2), 228–249.Google Scholar

Girash, J. (2014). Metacognition and instruction. In Benassi, V. A., Overson, C. E., & Hakala, C. M. (Eds.). Applying science of learning in education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum (pp. 152–168). Washington, DC: Society for the Teaching of Psychology. Retrieved from http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/asle2014/index.phpGoogle Scholar

Goggins Selke, M. J. (2013). Rubric assessment goes to college: Objective, comprehensive evaluation of student work. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar

Goodwin, B., & Miller, K. (2012). Good feedback is targeted, specific, timely. Educational Leadership, 70(1), 82–83.Google Scholar

Harrow, A. J. (1972). A taxonomy of the psychomotor domain: A guide for developing behavioral objectives. New York, NY: David McKay Company.Google Scholar

Hull, G. A., & Nelson, M. E. (2005). Locating the semiotic power of multimodality. Written Communication, 22(2), 224–261.Google Scholar

Hussey, T., & Smith, P. (2002). The trouble with learning outcomes. Learning in Higher Education, 3(3). 220–233.Google Scholar

Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Gotlieb, R. (2017). Embodied brains, social minds, cultural meaning: Integrating neuroscientific and educational research on social-affective development. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1S), 344S–367S.Google Scholar

Kagan, S. (2005). Rethinking thinking: Does Bloom’s taxonomy align with brain science? Kagan Online Magazine. Retrieved from http://kaganonline.com/free_articles/dr_spencer_kagan/289/Rethinking-thinking-does-bloom-s-taxonomy-align-with-brain-science.Google Scholar

Kember, D. (2004). Interpreting student workload and the factors which shape students’ perceptions of their workload. Studies in Higher Education, 29(2), 165–184.Google Scholar

Kember, D,. & Leung, D. Y. P. (2006). Characterising a teaching and learning environment conductive to making demands on students while not making their workload excessive. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 185–198.Google Scholar

Kirschner, P. A., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169–183.Google Scholar

Kisfalvi, V., & Oliver, D. (2015). Creating and maintaining a safe space in experiential learning. Journal of Management Education 39(6), 713–740.Google Scholar

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F. III, & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Koc-Januchta, M., Hoffler, T., Thoma, G., Prechtl, H., & Leutner, D. (2017). Visualizers versus verbalizers: Effects of cognitive style on learning with texts and pictures – an eye-tracking study. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 170–179.Google Scholar

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Krathwold, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Book II: Affective domains. New York, NY: David McKay Company.Google Scholar

Kuechler, W., & Stedham, Y. (2018). Management education and transformational learning: The integration of mindfulness in an MBA course. Journal of Management Education, 42(1), 8–33.Google Scholar

Lalley, J. P., & Miller, R. H. (2007). The learning pyramid: Does it point teachers in the right direction? Education, 128(1), 64–79.Google Scholar

Langer, E. J. (1989). Mindfulness. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar

Langer, E. J. (1997). The power of mindful learning. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar

Langer, E. J. (2000). Mindful learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(6), 220–223.Google Scholar

Lapakko, D. (1997). Three cheers for language: A closer examination of a widely cited study of nonverbal communication. Communication Education, 46, 63–67.Google Scholar

Lapakko, D. (2007). Communication is 93% nonverbal: An urban legend proliferates. Communication and Theater Association of Minnesota Journal, 34, 7–19.Google Scholar

Levinson, D. J. (1986). A conception of adult development. American Psychologist, 41(1), 3–13.Google Scholar

Liu, X., Magjuka, R. J., Bonk, C. J., & Lee, S. (2007). Does sense of community matter: An examination of participants’ perceptions of building learning communities in online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(1), 9–24.Google Scholar

Martinez, A. E. (2006). What is metacognition? Phi Delta Kappan, 87(9), 696–699.Google Scholar

McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action research: Principles and practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Mead, G. H. (1934/2015). Mind, self, & society: The definitive edition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Mehrabian, A., & Ferris, S. R. (1967). Inference of attitudes from nonverbal communication in two channels. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31(3), 248–252.Google Scholar

Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L. (2014). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-BassGoogle Scholar

Merriam, S. B., & Brockett, R. G. (2007). The profession and practice of adult education: An introduction. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., & Kramer, R. M. (1996). Swift trust and temporary groups. In Kramer, R. M. & Tyler, T. R. (Eds.). Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 166–195). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Monahan, N. (2015, October 12). More content doesn’t equal more learning. Faculty Focus. Retrieved from http://facultyfocus.com/articles/curriculum-development/more-content-doesnt-equal-more-learning.Google Scholar

Montessori, M. (1948/1973). From childhood to adolescence, including erdkinder and the function of the university (The Montessori Educational Research Center, trans.). New York: Schocken.Google Scholar

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). (2018). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

National Research Council (NRC). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school – expanded edition. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.Google Scholar

Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102–122.Google Scholar

Nilson, L. B. (2003). Improving student peer feedback. College Teaching, 51(1), 34–38.Google Scholar

O’Connor, A. B. (2006). Clinical instruction and evaluation: A teaching resource (2nd ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.Google Scholar

Pratt, D. D. (1988). Andragogy as a relational construct. Adult Education Quarterly, 38(3), 160–181.Google Scholar

Reeves, B. (2004). Benefits of interactive online characters. Unpublished manuscript, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Rhodes, T. (2010). Assessing outcomes and improving achievement: Tips and tools for using rubrics. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.Google Scholar

Robert, L. P. Jr., Dennis, A. R., & Hung, Y. C. (2009). Individual swift trust and knowledge-based trust in face-to-face and virtual team members. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(2), 241–279.Google Scholar

Rohrer, D., & Pashler, H. (2012). Learning styles: Where’s the evidence? Medical Education, 46, 630–635.Google Scholar

Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 77–88.Google Scholar

Sankey, M. D., Birch, D., & Gardiner, M. W. (2011). The impact of multiple representations of content using multimedia on learning outcomes across learning styles and modal preferences. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 7(3), 18–35.Google Scholar

Saunders, S., & Kardia, D. (1997). Creating inclusive college classrooms. Retrieved from http://crlt.umich.edu/gsis/p3_1.Google Scholar

Schenck, J., & Cruickshank, J. (2015). Evolving Kolb: Experiential education in the age of neuroscience. Journal of Experiential Education, 38(1), 73–95.Google Scholar

Scheuermann, J. A. (2018, February 5). Group vs. collaborative learning: Knowing the difference makes a difference [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://facultyfocus.com/articles/course-design-ideas/group-vs-collaborative-learning-knowing-difference-makes-difference.Google Scholar

Schinske, J., & Tanner, K. (2014). Teaching more by grading less (or differently). CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(2), 159–166.Google Scholar

Schlegel, M. J. (1995) A handbook of instructional and training program design. Springfield, VA: Eric Document Reproduction Service. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED383281.pdf.Google Scholar

Schoenfeld, A. H. (2016/1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics (reprint). Journal of Education, 196(2), 1–38.Google Scholar

Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Shea, P., Li, C. S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9, 175–190.Google Scholar

Shedroff, N. (2001). Experience design 1. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders.Google Scholar

Shelley, D. J., Swartz, L. B., & Cole, M. T. (2007). A comparative analysis of online and traditional undergraduate business law classes. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 3(1), 10–18.Google Scholar

Shireman, R. (2016). The real value of what students do in college [report]. The Century Foundation. Retrieved from http://tcf.org/content/report/the-real-value-of-what-students-do-in-college/?agreed=1.Google Scholar

Simon, E. (2018, November 21). 10 tips for effective online discussions. EduCause Review. Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/blogs/2018/11/10-tips-for-effective-online-discussions.Google Scholar

Singh, H., & O’Boyle, M. W. (2004). Interhemispheric interaction during global–local processing in mathematically gifted adolescents, average-ability youth, and college students. Neuropsychology, 18(2), 371–377.Google Scholar

Snyman, M., & van den Berg, G. (2018). The significance of the learner profile in recognition of prior learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 68(1), 24–40.Google Scholar

Stacey, R. (2000). The emergence of knowledge in organizations. Emergence, 2(4), 23–39.Google Scholar

Stacey, R. (2001). Complex responsive processes in organizations: Learning and knowledge creation. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Subramony, D. P., Molenda, M., Betrus, A. K, & Thalheimer, W. (2014). The mythical retention chart and the corruption of Dale’s cone of experience. Educational Technology, 54(6), 6–16.Google Scholar

Taylor, D. C. M., & Hamdy, H. (2013). Adult learning theories: Implications for learning and teaching in medical education: AMEE guide no. 83. Medical Teacher, 35(11), e1561–e1572.Google Scholar

Taylor, V. F. (2018). Afraid of the deep: Reflections and analysis of a role-play exercise gone wrong. Journal of Management Education, 42(6), 772–782.Google Scholar

Tobin, T. J., & Behling, K. T. (2018). Reach everyone, teach everyone: Universal design for learning in higher education. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press.Google Scholar

US Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. (2018). Table 311.5 Number and percentage of students enrolled in degree-granting postsecondary institutions, by distance education participation, location of student, level of enrollment, and control and level of institution: Fall 2015 and fall 2016. Retrieved from: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_311.15.asp?current=yes.Google Scholar

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 357–381.Google Scholar

Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.Google Scholar

Weinstein, Y. (2019, February 16). Memorizing versus understanding [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://learningscientists.org/blog/2018/2/16-1.Google Scholar

Whitman, G., & Kelleher, I. (2016). Neuroteach: Brain science and the future of education. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar

Wiggins, G. (2012). Seven keys to effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 70(1), 10–16.Google Scholar

Willingham, D. T. (2018). Does tailoring instruction to “learning styles” help students learn? American Educator, 42(2), 28–32, 43.Google Scholar

Wilson, B. G., Ludwig-Hardman, S., Thornam, C. L., & Dunlap, J. C. (2004). Bounded community: Designing and facilitating learning communities in formal courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(3), 1–19.Google Scholar

Wilson, M. (2006). Rethinking rubrics in writing assessment. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar