Suzan Koseoglu
University of Greenwich, Ale, Faculty Member
- University of Minnesota, Learning Technologies, Department Memberadd
Feminist critical digital pedagogy is a lens through which digital educational practice is examined to reveal, challenge, and impact systems of power. In this book, authors employ feminist critical digital pedagogy to examine teaching,... more
Feminist critical digital pedagogy is a lens through which digital educational practice is examined to reveal, challenge, and impact systems of power. In this book, authors employ feminist critical digital pedagogy to examine teaching, learning, faculty support, and research in post-secondary and higher education contexts. This book adopts two innovative processes: pedagogical peer-review and ongoing contributions.
This is an independent, open access project.
This is an independent, open access project.
Research Interests:
Recent efforts to solve the problems of education—created by neoliberalism in and out of higher education—have centred on the use of technology that promises efficiency, progress tracking, and automation. The editors of this volume argue... more
Recent efforts to solve the problems of education—created by neoliberalism in and out of higher education—have centred on the use of technology that promises efficiency, progress tracking, and automation. The editors of this volume argue that using technology in this way reduces learning to a transaction. They ask administrators, instructors, and learning designers to reflect on our relationship with these tools and explore how to cultivate a pedagogy of care in an online environment. With an eye towards identifying different and better possibilities, this collection investigates previously under-examined concepts in the field of digital pedagogy such as shared learning and trust, critical consciousness, change, and hope.
Research Interests:
Editorial for Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy: An Open Book: Veletsianos, G. & Koseoglu, S. (2022). Introducing Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy. In G. Veletsianos & S. Koseoglu (Eds.), Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy: An... more
Editorial for Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy: An Open Book:
Veletsianos, G. & Koseoglu, S. (2022). Introducing Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy. In G. Veletsianos & S. Koseoglu (Eds.), Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy: An Open Book. Equity Press. https://equitypress.org/feminist_digital_ped/introducing_feminist
Veletsianos, G. & Koseoglu, S. (2022). Introducing Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy. In G. Veletsianos & S. Koseoglu (Eds.), Feminist Critical Digital Pedagogy: An Open Book. Equity Press. https://equitypress.org/feminist_digital_ped/introducing_feminist
Research Interests:
While the mainstream discourse around Open and Distance Learning (ODL) centers on standardization, scalability, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness, I return to a much more contextual and humane understanding of teaching and... more
While the mainstream discourse around Open and Distance Learning (ODL) centers on standardization, scalability, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness, I return to a much more contextual and humane understanding of teaching and learning in ODL through feminist pedagogy. I begin my inquiry by discussing women students’ experiences through the notion of access as pedagogy, which challenges disembodied views of online learners and learning, and a view of access to resources as an opportunity for equity. My primary focus in this discussion is gender issues; however, I view feminist pedagogy as an ethical position as well as a pedagogical position that calls attentive ways of looking into structuring educational services, methods, policies, and legislations that create an inclusive learning space not just for women, but for all students who are disadvantaged in their education. Within this context, student participation can be framed as a means for transformation, contributing to one’s well-being, agency and sense of power. I highlight the need for an intersectional gender analysis in ODL, as well as openness and transparency in pedagogical processes in order to tackle human and non-human bias, misrecognition, misrepresentation and unequal participation. Education with an explicit goal for transformation leads to the use of technology for reflective, imaginative, and critical ends.
Research Interests:
This commentary explores paradigm shifts in education; in particular, the shift toward openness in higher education, drawing attention to critical perspectives and current debates related to open online learning and highlighting the... more
This commentary explores paradigm shifts in education; in particular, the shift toward openness in higher education, drawing attention to critical perspectives and current debates related to open online learning and highlighting the importance of pedagogy in these discussions. Citation (APA): *Koseoglu, S. (2019). A commentary on the paradigm shift toward openness in higher education. In A. Bozkurt, & A. Hilbelink (Eds.), Paradigm Shifts in Global Higher Education and E-Learning: An Ecological Perspective [Special issue], e-learn Magazine. Available at https://elearnmag.acm.org/special-issue-2019.cfm
Research Interests:
If we are to learn on the web and with the web, how can we respond to the barriers for meaningful participation in a constructive and ethical way and nurture a more inclusive space for all? In this chapter, I explore these issues in the... more
If we are to learn on the web and with the web, how can we respond to the barriers for meaningful participation in a constructive and ethical way and nurture a more inclusive space for all? In this chapter, I explore these issues in the light of the work of scholars who have inspired me and my own professional practice in educational technologies.
Research Interests:
The proliferation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) is no doubt one of the most talked about and debated educational phenomena of this past decade (e.g., Friedman, 2012; Hyman, 2012; Yuan & Powell, 2013), and it is at the core of... more
The proliferation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) is no doubt one of the most talked about and debated educational phenomena of this past decade (e.g., Friedman, 2012; Hyman, 2012; Yuan & Powell, 2013), and it is at the core of many of these discussions where we situate our argument. The hype surrounding MOOCs pushes educators to think critically about the purposes and structures of traditional education, both residential and online; structures which some types of MOOC of this time period are replicating. In addition, open online courses are remarkably easy to access, providing a free educational opportunity for anyone who has the resources and skills necessary to participate in a networked environment. The disruptive, or revolutionary, potential of MOOCs in higher are often tied to notions of educational equity. However, as Farmer (2013) argued, there is not yet sufficient evidence to suggest that MOOCs "are a '[d]isruptive [i]nnovation' that will resolve issues of access and cost" in higher education. First, as Bali (2014) noted, MOOCs are " the next logical step " in the evolving landscape of online education (p. 44), which is important to consider in our discussions on the potential and future of MOOCs. We believe ignoring this opens the doors to misinterpretation of the MOOC phenomenon (i.e., the hype about MOOCs) and misinforms the potential trajectories of open online courses. Second, classifying MOOCs as a single entity is problematic, as there are significant variations in MOOCs in terms of educational vision and overall course structure (Bali, 2014; Bayne & Ross, 2014; Ross, Sinclair, Knox, Bayne & Macleod, 2014). Third, we argue that issues of access and equity cannot be addressed simply by putting free content on the web. In order for learners to benefit from this educational opportunity, to be full participants, and to take advantage of these free offerings, they need, at the very least, to have a certain level of proficiency in various literacies, and to be self-motivated. These are, by and large, traits generally acquired through formal education. Finally, there is a need to further examine the meaning of disruption in education. We argue that real change in education is a collective effort that evolves as a result of the interaction between social, economic, political, and cultural realities of a society or community. In other words, education as a public good is not as flexible a domain as consumer products or services to be "disrupted" as a result of a single action, product, or philosophy (Kim, 2010; Knoll, 2009). Instead, we propose to direct our attention to innovations that are much smaller in scale: pedagogical innovations that may go unnoticed in everyday practice. We believe the future success of open online courses lies in how well we foster meaningful and memorable learning experiences through effective pedagogies and learning design. Yet, as Bayne and Ross (2014) argued, " [pedagogy] has been noticeably under-represented " in the MOOC discourse (p. 4). Furthermore, teachers' roles in MOOCs are " both significant and neglected " (2014, p. 18). In this chapter, we build on Bayne and Ross's (2014) call for a need to focus on MOOC pedagogy as a highly visible, demanding, situated, and emergent practice by examining and building from the construct of teaching presence. We start from looking at teaching presence as creating a meaningful and receptive relationship with learners. We also place a spotlight on the diversity of teacher roles in openly networked environments. We then discuss the notion of " learners as teachers " and how this reframing calls for a reconsideration of these two distinct presences: learner presence and teacher presence. Reconsidering these two, we then add to this a third presence that
Research Interests:
In this case study, I present an interpretive exploration of five open participants' learning experiences in a massive open online course (MOOC), which was offered by a higher education institute in the United States as a general... more
In this case study, I present an interpretive exploration of five open participants' learning experiences in a massive open online course (MOOC), which was offered by a higher education institute in the United States as a general education course in research writing. There were two types of enrollment in the course: formal (students who enrolled in the course for credit, six sections) and informal (open participants). Open participants had access to the public activities of the learning community, but they did not receive any academic certification, evaluation, or grading from the instructors.
Blogging was central to all educational activity in the course. In this study, participant blogs are conceptualized as social spaces created by a multitude of interactions (e.g., with content, instructors, other learners, the imagined audience). These spaces were the starting point for the researcher to examine five open participants’ learning activities in the course. Primary data sources were participant blogs, semi-structured interviews, and a case study journal with analytic reflections. Secondary data sources included participant observations, course documents and artifacts (e.g. the syllabus, course videos), and the course Twitter feed. Thematic analysis of data illustrates how open participants participated in the course in multifaceted and unique ways and created third spaces of learning—spaces that are neither informal or formal and that create opportunities for learning to occur in emergent and authentic ways (Cronin, 2014; Gutierrez, Rymes, & Larson, 1995). These spaces were possible because learners' informal identities, skills, and networks were welcomed into formal learning and capitalized on as important learning resources.
I present three typologies that point to the self-directed and authentic nature of open participation within those spaces: (1) open participants created unique course histories through their blogs, (2) open participants did not follow the formal learning path, (3) instances of meaningful learning were visible at different times in the course and beyond. These findings led me to strongly align with scholars who suggest that the traditional markers of success in formal education (e.g., sustained engagement, course completion, directly measurable outcome) are insufficient to frame participants’ involvement in open online courses. The diversity in learner goals and roles calls for a need to shift the focus of open online courses from the end product to the learning process and challenges formal narratives of success and failure in open online courses.
I particularly highlight the contextual and shifting nature of openness and argue that it is crucial for learners to be aware of and develop open literacies, which I define as the skills and attitudes needed for successfully navigating and participating in open online spaces. The three design principles I offer—(1) give voice to the authentic self, (2) recognize the contextual nature of openness, and (3) be cognizant of multiple layers of digital literacies, such as open and networked literacies—might be of interest to anyone interested in designing open online courses as spaces for individual and collective dialogue.
Blogging was central to all educational activity in the course. In this study, participant blogs are conceptualized as social spaces created by a multitude of interactions (e.g., with content, instructors, other learners, the imagined audience). These spaces were the starting point for the researcher to examine five open participants’ learning activities in the course. Primary data sources were participant blogs, semi-structured interviews, and a case study journal with analytic reflections. Secondary data sources included participant observations, course documents and artifacts (e.g. the syllabus, course videos), and the course Twitter feed. Thematic analysis of data illustrates how open participants participated in the course in multifaceted and unique ways and created third spaces of learning—spaces that are neither informal or formal and that create opportunities for learning to occur in emergent and authentic ways (Cronin, 2014; Gutierrez, Rymes, & Larson, 1995). These spaces were possible because learners' informal identities, skills, and networks were welcomed into formal learning and capitalized on as important learning resources.
I present three typologies that point to the self-directed and authentic nature of open participation within those spaces: (1) open participants created unique course histories through their blogs, (2) open participants did not follow the formal learning path, (3) instances of meaningful learning were visible at different times in the course and beyond. These findings led me to strongly align with scholars who suggest that the traditional markers of success in formal education (e.g., sustained engagement, course completion, directly measurable outcome) are insufficient to frame participants’ involvement in open online courses. The diversity in learner goals and roles calls for a need to shift the focus of open online courses from the end product to the learning process and challenges formal narratives of success and failure in open online courses.
I particularly highlight the contextual and shifting nature of openness and argue that it is crucial for learners to be aware of and develop open literacies, which I define as the skills and attitudes needed for successfully navigating and participating in open online spaces. The three design principles I offer—(1) give voice to the authentic self, (2) recognize the contextual nature of openness, and (3) be cognizant of multiple layers of digital literacies, such as open and networked literacies—might be of interest to anyone interested in designing open online courses as spaces for individual and collective dialogue.
Research Interests:
The Self as an Open Educational Resource Most discourse on open educational resources (OER) revolve around issues with access to educational content, which may include “full courses, course materials, modules, textbooks, streaming... more
The Self as an Open Educational Resource
Most discourse on open educational resources (OER) revolve around issues with access to educational content, which may include “full courses, course materials, modules, textbooks, streaming videos, tests, software, and any other tools, materials, or techniques used to support access to knowledge” (The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, 2015). However, such common definitions of OER overlook an important educational resource in the formal education system: teachers/facilitators and learners, in other words, the learning community itself. Thus, we propose a broader understanding of OER, which includes the processes and products of open scholarship as valuable resources. Here, building on Veletsianos and Kimmons’s (2013) work, we define open scholarship as any teaching, learning, and research practices that are public and that "espouse openness" (p. 167). A few important questions come to mind when we consider open scholarship as a distinct form of OER:
How might the processes and products of open scholarship align/intersect with the goals of open education?
What might the 5Rs of open education (Wiley, 2009; Wiley, 2014)—reuse, revise, remix, redistribute, and retain—mean in the context of open scholarship?
What are some ethical considerations in using and repurposing the traces of open scholarship?
We acknowledge the fact that not all educators may want to position their open educational practices as resources for others to use. However, simply by engaging in public activities (e.g., blogging, Tweeting) we open ourselves to an authentic audience where our work and ideas “can be read, viewed, used, shared, critiqued and built upon by others" (Cronin, 2014, p. 408). Thus, the complex interplay and overlapping of the imagined and authentic audiences suggest that anyone can be “a human OER” (Funes, 2014) intentionally or unintentionally.
In this session, we will critically explore these issues in the context of our own research and open educational practices. Suzan will particularly focus on the ethics of using and repurposing the products of open scholarship. Maha will refer to specific practices she undertook as facilitator of open educational learning experiences, as an open researcher, and as an open teacher. Implications on educational research and open educational practices will be also discussed.
References
Catherine, C. (2014). Networked learning and identity development in open online spaces. In: 9th International Conference on Networked Learning. [Online] Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Networked Learning 2014, p.408. Available at: http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2014/abstracts/pdf/cronin.pdf [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015].
Funes, M. (2014). A human OER. [Blog] doublemirror. Available at: http://mdvfunes.com/2014/10/22/a-human-oer/ [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015].
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. (2015). Open educational resources. [Online] Available at: http://www.hewlett.org/programs/education/open-educational-resources. [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015].
Veletsianos, G. and Kimmons, R. (2014). Assumptions and challenges of open scholarship. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), p.167.
Wiley, D. (2009). Defining “open.” [Blog] iterating toward openness. Available at: http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/1123 [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015].
Most discourse on open educational resources (OER) revolve around issues with access to educational content, which may include “full courses, course materials, modules, textbooks, streaming videos, tests, software, and any other tools, materials, or techniques used to support access to knowledge” (The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, 2015). However, such common definitions of OER overlook an important educational resource in the formal education system: teachers/facilitators and learners, in other words, the learning community itself. Thus, we propose a broader understanding of OER, which includes the processes and products of open scholarship as valuable resources. Here, building on Veletsianos and Kimmons’s (2013) work, we define open scholarship as any teaching, learning, and research practices that are public and that "espouse openness" (p. 167). A few important questions come to mind when we consider open scholarship as a distinct form of OER:
How might the processes and products of open scholarship align/intersect with the goals of open education?
What might the 5Rs of open education (Wiley, 2009; Wiley, 2014)—reuse, revise, remix, redistribute, and retain—mean in the context of open scholarship?
What are some ethical considerations in using and repurposing the traces of open scholarship?
We acknowledge the fact that not all educators may want to position their open educational practices as resources for others to use. However, simply by engaging in public activities (e.g., blogging, Tweeting) we open ourselves to an authentic audience where our work and ideas “can be read, viewed, used, shared, critiqued and built upon by others" (Cronin, 2014, p. 408). Thus, the complex interplay and overlapping of the imagined and authentic audiences suggest that anyone can be “a human OER” (Funes, 2014) intentionally or unintentionally.
In this session, we will critically explore these issues in the context of our own research and open educational practices. Suzan will particularly focus on the ethics of using and repurposing the products of open scholarship. Maha will refer to specific practices she undertook as facilitator of open educational learning experiences, as an open researcher, and as an open teacher. Implications on educational research and open educational practices will be also discussed.
References
Catherine, C. (2014). Networked learning and identity development in open online spaces. In: 9th International Conference on Networked Learning. [Online] Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Networked Learning 2014, p.408. Available at: http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2014/abstracts/pdf/cronin.pdf [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015].
Funes, M. (2014). A human OER. [Blog] doublemirror. Available at: http://mdvfunes.com/2014/10/22/a-human-oer/ [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015].
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. (2015). Open educational resources. [Online] Available at: http://www.hewlett.org/programs/education/open-educational-resources. [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015].
Veletsianos, G. and Kimmons, R. (2014). Assumptions and challenges of open scholarship. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), p.167.
Wiley, D. (2009). Defining “open.” [Blog] iterating toward openness. Available at: http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/1123 [Accessed 26 Nov. 2015].
Research Interests:
Despite the rapid growth of massive open online courses (MOOCs) in recent years, a fundamental question is still being debated widely in the education community: how to design and deliver MOOCs and move them away from the banking model of... more
Despite the rapid growth of massive open online courses (MOOCs) in recent years, a fundamental question is still being debated widely in the education community: how to design and deliver MOOCs and move them away from the banking model of education (Freire, 1974), in which the teacher has traditionally been the central authority. Our goal in this paper is to improve the MOOC pedagogy through the lens of teaching presence. We argue that teaching presence is much more than just a facilitation strategy; rather, teaching presence is about creating a meaningful and receptive relationship between and among learners. To accomplish this we propose that instead of a single facilitative role there is a diversity in teacher roles. Teachers can themselves become learners in their own classrooms, as well as enabling and encouraging learners also take on the role of teachers in this open learning process. This leads us to propose the notion of hybrid presence, a construct that emerges out of authentic relationships among esteemed co-learners (Rheingold, 2014) in an open educational environment. This hybrid presence is particularly evident in community-based MOOCs. To aid in the design and facilitation of such MOOCs we propose three interrelated learning design principles aligning with the notion of hybrid presence: prepare to cede authority, embrace plasticity, and be present with fellow learners.
All the learning design principles we propose highlight approaches that are responsive to the affordances of connectivity and diversity on the World Wide Web. In the first principle cede authority we suggest that MOOC instructors see themselves as conveners of MOOCs, and that they see the learners as co-learners in their educational journey. The second principle embrace plasticity draws attention to the importance of being receptive and responsive to the direction and nature of learner voices in distributed networks. Finally, in the last principle be present with fellow learners we suggest using tools that foster mutual empathy and awareness for both learners and teachers to be present in the environment in authentic ways. Each principle is illustrated with specific examples from different types of community-based MOOCs, such as Change11 MOOC, Rhizomatic Learning, MobiMOOC 2011, and UNIV 200: Inquiry and the Craft of Argument.
All the learning design principles we propose highlight approaches that are responsive to the affordances of connectivity and diversity on the World Wide Web. In the first principle cede authority we suggest that MOOC instructors see themselves as conveners of MOOCs, and that they see the learners as co-learners in their educational journey. The second principle embrace plasticity draws attention to the importance of being receptive and responsive to the direction and nature of learner voices in distributed networks. Finally, in the last principle be present with fellow learners we suggest using tools that foster mutual empathy and awareness for both learners and teachers to be present in the environment in authentic ways. Each principle is illustrated with specific examples from different types of community-based MOOCs, such as Change11 MOOC, Rhizomatic Learning, MobiMOOC 2011, and UNIV 200: Inquiry and the Craft of Argument.
Research Interests:
In this case study, I present an interpretive exploration of five open participants' learning experiences in a massive open online course (MOOC), which was offered by a higher education institute in the United States as a general... more
In this case study, I present an interpretive exploration of five open participants' learning experiences in a massive open online course (MOOC), which was offered by a higher education institute in the United States as a general education course in research writing. There were two types of enrolment in the course: formal (students who enrolled in the course for credit, six sections) and informal (open participants). Open participants had access to the public activities of the learning community, but they did not receive any academic certification, evaluation, or grading from the instructors.
Blogging was central to all educational activity in the course. Learners and instructors openly blogged during the course and beyond in response to the class assignments and on other areas of interest. In this study, participant blogs are conceptualized as social spaces created by a multitude of interactions (e.g., with content, instructors, other learners, the imagined audience). These spaces were the starting point for the researcher to examine five open participants' learning activities in the course. Primary data collection methods included interviews, participant observations, and document and artefact analysis. Thematic analysis of data illustrates how open participants participated in the course in multifaceted and unique ways and created third spaces of learning—spaces that are neither informal nor formal and that create opportunities for learning to occur in emergent and authentic ways (Cronin, 2014; Gutierrez, Rymes, & Larson, 1995). These spaces were possible because learners' informal identities, skills, and networks were welcomed into formal learning and capitalized on as important learning resources.
I present two typologies that point to the self-directed and authentic nature of open participation within those spaces: (1) open participants created unique course histories through their blogs, (2) open participants did not follow the formal learning path. These findings suggest that the traditional markers of success in formal education (e.g., sustained engagement, course completion, directly measurable outcome) might be insufficient to frame participants' involvement in open online courses. The diversity in learner goals and roles calls for a need to shift the focus of open online courses from the end product to the learning process and challenges formal narratives of success and failure in open online courses.
Blogging was central to all educational activity in the course. Learners and instructors openly blogged during the course and beyond in response to the class assignments and on other areas of interest. In this study, participant blogs are conceptualized as social spaces created by a multitude of interactions (e.g., with content, instructors, other learners, the imagined audience). These spaces were the starting point for the researcher to examine five open participants' learning activities in the course. Primary data collection methods included interviews, participant observations, and document and artefact analysis. Thematic analysis of data illustrates how open participants participated in the course in multifaceted and unique ways and created third spaces of learning—spaces that are neither informal nor formal and that create opportunities for learning to occur in emergent and authentic ways (Cronin, 2014; Gutierrez, Rymes, & Larson, 1995). These spaces were possible because learners' informal identities, skills, and networks were welcomed into formal learning and capitalized on as important learning resources.
I present two typologies that point to the self-directed and authentic nature of open participation within those spaces: (1) open participants created unique course histories through their blogs, (2) open participants did not follow the formal learning path. These findings suggest that the traditional markers of success in formal education (e.g., sustained engagement, course completion, directly measurable outcome) might be insufficient to frame participants' involvement in open online courses. The diversity in learner goals and roles calls for a need to shift the focus of open online courses from the end product to the learning process and challenges formal narratives of success and failure in open online courses.
Research Interests:
In this conceptual paper, we seek ways to integrate design-based research into online higher education contexts. Our goal is to promote participatory, formative, and strategic approaches to evaluation and research methods in online... more
In this conceptual paper, we seek ways to integrate design-based research into online higher education contexts. Our goal is to promote participatory, formative, and strategic approaches to evaluation and research methods in online education. In this paper, we will review the history and basic principles of design-based research, discuss its benefits and limitations, and then propose a new research framework for investigating positive cases of the effective design of online learning environments.
Research Interests:
Abstract: The technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) framework is increasingly used in teacher education programs as a measure to examine the growth of pre-service and in-service teacher... more
Abstract: The technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) framework is increasingly used in teacher education programs as a measure to examine the growth of pre-service and in-service teacher knowledge. In this study, we focus on improving evaluation methods that are compatible with the conceptual framing of TPACK. The scenario-based survey method we used seems to be promising in examining changes in teachers' planning and problem-solving skills with technology, especially if researchers need to evaluate the effectiveness of large-scale teacher education programs in limited time frames and resources. We outline the assumptions that guide our study, discuss our findings, and critically analyze the research method used. Limitations of the study are also noted.
Research Interests:
The GoNorth! Adventure Learning (AL) Series delivered educational programs about global climate change and sustainability from 2006 to 2010 via a hybrid-learning environment that included a curriculum designed with activities that worked... more
The GoNorth! Adventure Learning (AL) Series delivered educational programs about global climate change and sustainability from 2006 to 2010 via a hybrid-learning environment that included a curriculum designed with activities that worked in conjunction with the travels of Team GoNorth! as they dog sledded throughout the circumpolar Arctic. This study addresses a gap in the AL literature by identifying factors that lead to high levels of student engagement and reveals strategies for instructional designers and educators on how to design emotionally engaging online learning environments. A mixed methods study was conducted to explore patterns of learner engagement in relation to two AL programs: GoNorth! Fennoscandia 2008 and GoNorth! Nunavut 2009. Survey data were drawn from a total of 101 students in 2008 and 2009.