DUT Guide on meaningful digital teaching-learning interactions


  • Maria Hvid Stenalt Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University
  • Dorte Sidelmann Rossen Dorte Sidelmann Rossen, Centre for Educational Development, Aarhus University




Digital teaching-learning interactions are never neutral. Rather, they involve a multi-way process with many interactants, motives, materials, and actions affecting students’ sense-making. To make digital interactions meaningful on the students’ part, this guide suggests supporting students’ feelings of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Based on research and experiences from practice, this guide provides six tips for educators on what to consider and how to plan for meaningful digital teaching-learning interactions in higher education.


Ashwin, P. (2008). Accounting for structure and agency in 'close-up'research on teaching, learning and assessment in higher education. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 151-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2008.01.002

Bates, T. (2019). Teaching in a Digital Age (Second ed.). Tony Bates Associates Ltd.

Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347-364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871

Bizami, N. A., Tasir, Z., & Kew, S. N. (2022). Innovative pedagogical principles and technological tools capabilities for immersive blended learning: a systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies , 1-53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11243-w

Bockorny, K. M., Giannavola, T. M., Mathew, S., & Walters, H. D. (2023). Effective engagement strategies in HyFlex modality based on intrinsic motivation in students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874231161364

Carless, D. and Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43, 8, 1315-1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354

Damgaard, M. T., & Nielsen, H. S. (2018). Nudging in education. Economics of Education Review, 64, 313-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.03.008

Damşa, C., de Lange, T., Elken, M., Esterhazy, R., Fossland, T., Frølich, N., Hovdhaugen, E., Maassen, P., Nerland, M., & Nordkvelle, Y. T. (2015). Quality in Norwegian Higher Education: A review of research on aspects affecting student learning. Oslo: Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU).

Ellis, R. A., & Goodyear, P. (2019). The Education Ecology of Universities: Integrating Learning, Strategy and the Academy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351135863

Fawns, T. (2022). An Entangled Pedagogy: Looking Beyond the Pedagogy-Technology Dichotomy. Postdigital Science and Education, 4(3), 711-728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-022-00302-7

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001

Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133-148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2

Georgiakakis, P., Retalis, S., & Psaromiligkos, Y. (2010). Design patterns for inspection-based usability evaluation of e-learning systems. In P. Goodyear & S. Retalis (Eds.). Technology-Enhanced Learning, (pp. 167-182). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789460910623_011

Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause Quarterly, 31(4), 51-55.

Lai, M., Lam, K. M., & Lim, C. P. (2016). Design principles for the blend in blended learning: a collective case study. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(6), 716-729. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1183611

Lillejord, S., Børte, K., Nesje, K., & Ruud, E. (2018). Learning and teaching with technology in higher education - a systematic review. Oslo: Knowledge Centre for Education.

Maguire, D., Dale, L., & Pauli, M. (2020). Learning and teaching reimagined: a new dawn for higher education. JISC: Bristol, UK,

Martin, F., Polly, D., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2020). Bichronous Online Learning: Blending Asynchronous and Synchronous Online Learning. Educause Review.

Mayer, R. E. (2017). Using multimedia for e‐learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(5), 403-423. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12197

Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (2007). Interactive multimodal learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 309-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2

Munday, D. (2022). Hybrid pedagogy and learning design influences in a higher education context. Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.b5af8bae

Nielsen, J., & Loranger, H. (2006). Prioritising web usability. Pearson Education.

Nørgård, R. T., Toft-Nielsen, C., & Whitton, N. (2017). Playful learning in higher education: developing a signature pedagogy. International Journal of Play, 6(3), 272-282. https://doi.org/10.1080/21594937.2017.1382997

Pi, Z., Tang, M., & Yang, J. (2022). Seeing others' messages on the screen during video lectures hinders transfer of learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(10), 1809-1822. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1749671

Redmond, P., Abawi, L., Brown, A., Henderson, R., & Heffernan, A. (2018). An online engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning, 22(1), 183-204. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1175

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Ryan, R. & Deci, E. (2017): Self-Determination Theory. Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development and Wellness. Guildford Press. https://doi.org/10.1521/978.14625/28806

Salmon, G. (2020). Module Carpe Diem Learning Design: Preparation & Workshop. Retrieved Feb 24. 2023, from https://www.gillysalmon.com/uploads/5/0/1/3/50133443/carpe_diem_planning_process_workbook_webversion1june2020.pdf.

Salmon, G. (2004). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203465424-12

Stenalt, M. H. (2021a). A constraint-based understanding of student learning in digital education. PhD Thesis. Aarhus: Aarhus University.

Stenalt, M. H. (2021b). Researching student agency in digital education as if the social aspects matter: students' experience of participatory dimensions of online peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(4), 644-658. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1798355

Stenalt, M. H. (2022). En metode til undersøgelse af digitale interaktioner fra de studerendes perspektiv. Tidsskriftet Læring Og Medier (LOM), 15(26) https://doi.org/10.7146/lom.v15i26.130397

Stenalt, M. H., & Lassesen, B. (2021). Does student agency benefit student learning? A systematic review of higher education research. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(5), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1967874

Stenalt, M. H., Lassesen, B., Rossen, D. S., & Bager-Elsborg, A. (2019). Kan videregående uddannelser mindske frafald ved hjælp af læringsteknologi? Et systematisk review. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 14(26), 82-102. https://doi.org/10.7146/dut.v14i26.108295

Stenalt, M. H., & Rossen, D. S. (2022). Onlineundervisning: En praksisnær guide til planlægning, gennemførelse og evaluering. Samfundslitteratur.

Thomas, G., & Thorpe, S. (2019). Enhancing the facilitation of online groups in higher education: a review of the literature on face-to-face and online group-facilitation. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(1), 62-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1451897

Western Sydney University (2023). Online engagement framework. Retrieved Feb. 24. 2023, from https://lf.westernsydney.edu.au/engage/theory/online-engagement-framework#toc-anchor-2.





Stenalt, M. H., & Sidelmann Rossen, D. (2023). DUT Guide on meaningful digital teaching-learning interactions. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 18(34), 59–69. https://doi.org/10.7146/dut.v18i34.136265