Summary

This case study explores the development and institutional adoption of ‘Stop and Think’ tasks designed to promote asynchronous active learning within Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs). Recognising that online study is often perceived as passive, the approach embeds short reflective prompts throughout course materials, encouraging learners to pause, evaluate, and apply knowledge as they progress. Guided by Kotter’s model of change and Rogers’ diffusion of innovation, the approach was scaled across programmes through consistent design, staff guidance, and accessibility standards. Evaluation indicates strong academic endorsement, with benefits including improved pacing, comprehension, and engagement. The initiative shows how intentional digital design can transform VLEs from static repositories into interactive, inclusive, and sustainable learning spaces, offering a transferable model for fostering reflection and active engagement online.

Introduction

Much research has explored how digital technologies can enhance physical learning spaces such as lecture theatres and laboratories (Belcher, 2003; Papaioannou et al., 2023; Bingen et al., 2024). However, strategies for fostering active reflection within higher education’s digital spaces remains comparatively under-developed. Educators often assume that asynchronous study through a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) is inherently more passive than in-person learning (Wilford, 2018; Choi & Hur, 2023; Petare et al., 2023, p. 5914). Learning materials hosted within VLEs regularly take the form of pages of written materials, downloadable files, and de-contextualised multimedia resources which, in the words of one researcher, ‘is seen as passive, evoking images of learners staring blankly at screens or receiving online content while multitasking with more engaging media’ (Collier, 2014, p. 117).

This need not be the case. Various examples and case studies have shown how VLEs have the potential to be interactive, collaborative, and engaging active learning spaces (Barnett-Itzhaki et al., 2023; Caprara & Caprara, 2022). This case study presents a simple, impactful innovation within an institution’s digital architecture that facilitates the extension of active learning approaches at scale across an institution: the ‘Stop and Think’.

Context and Development

In addition to its campus-based provision, the University of Derby offers a range of programmes that are studied in an exclusively online and distance format. Supporting upwards of 5,000 students between levels 3 and 8, these programmes are studied asynchronously through the institution’s VLE. Professionallydeveloped online content is produced collaboratively by academic staff and a central online content team, which includes media producers, web developers, and learning designers.

In the absence of a physical learning space within the university campus, the digital real estate of the VLE servers is the principal environment in which teaching is conducted for these online programmes. It is thus imperative that, just as physical environments are designed with their suitability as active learning spaces as a consideration (Rands & Gansemer-Topf, 2017), this digital environment likewise be designed in such a way as to encourage active learning.

The ‘Stop and Think’ emerged as institutional practice in response to this need. The university’s online content already follows an activity-led philosophy. Units of learning typically conclude by asking students to complete formative tasks, such as a quiz, discussion board post, or journal entry, that require concerted effort and the generation of some form of output demonstrating their learning. However, students learning in online environments have exhibited limited capacity for extended concentration (Rahul et al., 2020). As such, a strategy of embedding regular, low stakes microlearning prompts and opportunities throughout the online content has been pursued.

These microlearning tasks are termed ‘Stop and Think’ opportunities. They are embedded at targeted points within the written online content and induce students to pause their reading and consider a question or prompt that invites them to actively reflect on, evaluate, or apply elements of what they have just studied. In short, students are first asked to stop, and then asked to think. In doing so, these tasks align with Vygotsky’s concept of the Zone of Proximal Development by encouraging students to independently extend their learning beyond the material they have just engaged with, while still benefiting from the asynchronous support structures provided within the digital learning environment (Vygotsky, 1978). By being embedded throughout the online content they aim to maintain a state of active engagement amongst students in between their completion of capstone activities that require a more concerted effort.

Implementation

Implementation was guided by Kotter’s (1996) Eight-Step Process for Leading Change and Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, which emphasise phased adoption and the role of change agents. The content team first designed a visually engaging banner that adhered to accessibility guidelines and was centrally stored for consistent and easy integration into any module within the university’s portfolio. This banner is shown in Figure 1:

 

Following Kotter’s principle of creating a guiding coalition, Learning Designers served as key change agents by promoting the development and implementation of ‘Stop and Think’ tasks. These centrally positioned professionals worked with colleagues to identify and exploit suitable opportunities for embedding the tasks. This aligns with Rogers’ (2003) emphasis on leveraging early adopters to facilitate the diffusion of innovations across an institution.

To support faculty in effectively utilizing ‘Stop and Think’ tasks, comprehensive guidance materials were developed and made accessible through the university’s SharePoint page. These resources provided an overview of the task’s purpose, step-by-step instructions on how to formulate them, and practical examples of their application in different subject areas. Additionally, these materials were embedded within faculty induction programs and staff training courses to familiarize new and existing educators with the approach. This strategic embedding ensured alignment with Kotter’s (1996) step of institutionalizing change by integrating new practices into the organizational culture.

This structured and multi-layered implementation strategy ensured that the impact of ‘Stop and Think’ tasks was not confined to a single module or program. Instead, their integration has led to a broader transformation across the institution, lowering barriers for faculty adoption and normalizing these tasks as a standard practice for fostering active learning in digital environments. By following structured change models, the initiative has achieved scalability and sustainability, positioning the ‘Stop and Think’ as a fundamental component of the online learning experience at the university.

‘Stop and Think’ tasks were designed as both reflective prompts and interactive features within the Virtual Learning Environment. Alongside text-based reflections, simple click-to-reveal elements enable students to self-check responses and receive immediate formative feedback, sustaining curiosity and active engagement (Barnett-Itzhaki et al., 2023).

Accessibility was integral: each component was tested for compatibility with the VLE’s built-in tools, including screen readers and mobile interfaces, ensuring all students could engage equitably. This aligns with institutional and national standards, promoting parity of experience and active participation.

Impact and evaluation

‘Stop and Think’ tasks are now standard across the university’s online content. A random sample of modules (n = 12) showed a mean of 14.5 tasks per module (Pulkkinen & Xu, 2023), indicating feasibility at scale and ease of integration into routine content development.

These prompts operationalise several active learning mechanisms already evidenced in the literature and referenced in this case study: they adopt a coaching stance that elicits self-explanation (Whitmore, 2009), use direct address to personalise and focus attention (Schoenmakers et al., 2024), connect study to prior/professional experience to support experiential learning (Kolb, 1984), and surface threshold concepts at the point of difficulty (Meyer & Land, 2003). Taken together, the design encourages metacognitive pausing, sense-making, and application, all of which are core benefits associated with active learning.

In termly surveys of academic colleagues involved in online content development, staff consistently identify the development of ‘Stop and Think’ tasks among the most frequently praised areas of practice. A thematic reading of staff comments (no direct student data has been used) suggests four recurring benefits:

1. Pacing and attention: prompts help students ‘pause and think’ rather than skim
2. Sense-making: staff describe complex material becoming ‘more understandable’
3. Application/transfer: tasks prompt learners to connect concepts to practice
4. Design support: colleagues value practical help crafting effective prompts

These comments were drawn from routine, anonymised institutional staff surveys evaluating online content development. The data has been used in accordance with the university’s ethical oversight and approval processes.

In sum, institutional uptake, per-module density, and convergent staff testimonies provide practice-based indicators of the approach’s successful implementation and perceived pedagogical value. This suggests that ‘Stop and Think’ tasks have been effectively integrated into online course design and are recognised by staff as a useful mechanism for prompting engagement, reflection, and application within asynchronous learning environments. These findings align with the active learning principles outlined above and the broader aims of making active learning happen at scale.

Conclusion

This success demonstrates the potency of digital real estate as a tool for fostering active learning. By embedding structured yet flexible reflective prompts within online course content, this approach effectively transforms Virtual Learning Environments from passive repositories of information into dynamic, interactive learning spaces. The initiative counters the perception that asynchronous digital learning is inherently passive and instead highlights the potential of VLEs to support student engagement, critical thinking, and independent learning.

A key strength of ‘Stop and Think’ is its inclusivity and sustainability. By incorporating elements of coaching, personalization, and experiential learning, ‘Stop and Think’ tasks empower students to connect their studies with their own experiences and professional contexts. This democratizes access to active learning strategies, making higher education more accessible and engaging for a diverse student body. Designed with scalability in mind, ‘Stop and Think’ tasks have been successfully embedded across multiple disciplines and academic programs. Their structured yet adaptable format allows them to be easily implemented by educators in various contexts, ensuring longevity beyond individual course iterations.

The adaptability of the ‘Stop and Think’ model underpins its transferability across institutional and technological contexts. Because the prompts are built using standard VLE text and media tools rather than bespoke code, they remain functional across platform upgrades and can be recreated in alternative learning management systems with minimal modification. The model’s principles of frequent reflection, low-stakes engagement, and accessible design can therefore be adopted by institutions regardless of their digital infrastructure. This ensures both sustainability amid evolving technological standards and relevance across disciplines, enabling educators in diverse contexts to replicate the approach within their own digital learning environments.

The ‘Stop and Think’ initiative shows how thoughtful digital design bridges the gap between passive content and active learning. Embedding short reflective interactions enhances engagement, understanding, and critical thinking in asynchronous contexts. More broadly, it demonstrates how institutions can reimagine the VLE as a dynamic, inclusive, and sustainable learning environment.

Key Takeaways

• Digital learning spaces can be active learning spaces. Thoughtful design and structured prompts can transform VLEs from passive content repositories into interactive learning environments.
• Institutional change models support effective adoption. Embedding structured approaches to change ensures that innovations like ‘Stop and Think’ are effectively implemented and sustained across the institution.
• Sustainability is key. Embedding change within institutional structures ensures long-term impact and scalability, making innovative teaching practices enduring and adaptable across contexts.

 

References

Barnett-Itzhaki, Z., Beimel, D., & Tsoury, A. (2023). Using a variety of interactive learning methods to improve learning effectiveness: insights from AI models based on teaching surveys. Online Learning, 27(3), 363-386. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i3.3575

Belcher, J. W. (2003). Improving Student Understanding with TEAL. Fac. Newsl, 16, 1–10.

Bingen H. M., Aamlid H. I., Hovland B. M., Nes A. A. G., Larsen M. H., Skedsmo K. Petersen E. K., & Steindal S. A. (2023). Use of active learning classrooms in health professional education: A scoping review. International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnsa.2023.100167

Caprara, L., Caprara, C. (2022). Effects of virtual learning environments: A scoping review of literature. Educ Inf Technol, 27, 3683–3722 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10768-w

Choi, H., & Hur, J. (2023). Passive participation in collaborative online learning activities: A scoping review of research in formal school learning settings. Online Learning, 27(1), 127-157. DOI: 10.24059/olj.v27i1.3414

Collier, A. (2014). Engaging students in online environments. In Tobolowsky, B. F. (Ed.), Paths to learning: Teaching for engagement in college. University of South Carolina.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience As the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall.

Meyer J. H. F., & Land R. (2003). Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge: Linkages to Ways of Thinking and Practising. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving Student Learning: Ten Years On. OCSLD, Oxford.

Papaioannou, G., Volakaki, M.-G., Kokolakis, S., & Vouyioukas, D. (2023). Learning Spaces in Higher Education: A State-of-the-Art Review. Trends in Higher Education, 2(3), 526-545. https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu2030032

Petare, P. A., Shamim, M., Gupta, T., Verma, R., & Singh, G. (2023). Exploring The Impact of Virtual Learning Environments on Student Engagement and Academic Achievement. Journal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences, 10(1S) 5912-5923.

Pulkkinen, J., & Xu, A. (2023) Stop and think: An investigation into the introduction of short tasks to promote active learning in an online module [Conference presentation]. TEALFEST 2023, Warwick, United Kingdom.

Rahul, R. K., Shanthakumar, S., Vykunth, P., & Sairamnath, K. (2020). Real-time Attention Span Tracking in Online Education. 2020 IEEE MIT Undergraduate Research Technology Conference (URTC), Cambridge, MA, USA, pp. 1-4, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/URTC51696.2020.9668900

Rands, M. L., & Gansemer-Topf, A. M. (2017). The room itself is active: How classroom design impacts student engagement. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(1), 26-33. https://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1336

Schoenmakers, G. J., Hachimi, J., & de Hoop, H. (2023). Can You Make a Difference? The Use of (In)Formal Address Pronouns in Advertisement Slogans. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 36(2), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2023.2215472

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.

Whitmore, J. (2009) Coaching for performance GROWing human potential and purpose : the principles and practice of coaching and leadership. Fourth edition. Nicholas Brealey.

Wilford, B. (2018). A case study exploring the factors that influence academics and their use of technology enhanced learning (TEL) to support pedagogical practice in a post 1992 Higher Education Institute in the North of England [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Teesside University.

About the author

Gary F. Fisher is the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine’s academic developer for online education. Prior to this he worked in online and blended learning in higher education (including Russell Group and post-92 universities), further education, heritage education, and rehabilitative education contexts.

gary.fisher@lstmed.ac.uk