creating a background review folder and adding to the domain_study fo…

0_domain_study/README.md

@@ -1 +1,11 @@
-# Domain Research
+# README
+
+This folder contains documentation and research for our Milestone 1 domain study:
+
+* [`problem_statement.md`](problem_statement.md):
+Identifies the core issue of student engagement in online learning.
+* [`systems_thinking_analysis.md`](systems_thinking_analysis.md): Applies
+systems thinking to reveal root causes.
+* [`research_question.md`](research_question.md): Defines a targeted,
+actionable research question for our project.
+* [`background_review`](background_review): Reviews existing knowledge and technologies.

0_domain_study/background_review/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+# Background Review Overview
+
+This section provides a comprehensive review of the educational domain related
+to our problem: student engagement in online learning. Each file below addresses
+a critical area that supports our problem framing and system understanding.
+
+- [`intervention_strategies_to_enhance_student_engagement.md`](intervention_strategies_to_enhance_student_engagement.md)
+- [`impact_of_disengagement.md`](impact_of_disengagement.md)
+- [`data_privacy_impact.md`](data_privacy_impact.md)

0_domain_study/student_engagement.md → 0_domain_study/background_review/intervention_strategies_to_enhance_student_engagement.md

@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ improve participation and academic performance.
 
 1. [Borup, J., West, R. E., Thomas, R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). *The
 adolescent community of engagement framework*](http://www.editlib.org/p/112371)
-2. [Castillo-Montoya, M. (2016). *Deepening understanding of prior knowledge.*
-](https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1273208)
+2. [Castillo-Montoya, M. (2016). *Deepening understanding of
+prior knowledge.*](https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1273208)
 3. [Darby, F., & Lang, J. M. (2019). *Small Teaching Online: Applying Learning
 Science in Online
 Classes*](https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Small+Teaching+Online%3A+Applying+Learning+Science+in+Online+Classes-p-9781119619093)

0_domain_study/problem_statement.md

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+# Addressing Student Engagement in Online Learning
+
+## Problem Identification
+
+In the era of increasingly prevalent online learning, maintaining student
+engagement has become a significant challenge. Many students, particularly
+in self-paced or asynchronous online courses, struggle with motivation,
+timely completion of assignments, and active participation. This leads to
+higher dropout rates and reduced learning outcomes.
+
+From a personal perspective, many students report feeling isolated and
+unfocused during remote learning. This disengagement often shows up as
+procrastination, minimal interaction with course materials or peers, and
+ultimately, failure to achieve educational goals.

0_domain_study/systems_thinking_analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+# Summary of the Group's Understanding of the Problem Domain (Applying Systems Thinking)
+
+Applying systems thinking to student engagement in online learning reveals a
+complex interplay of factors, not merely individual student shortcomings. The
+problem of disengagement is an emergent property of the online learning system,
+influenced by multiple interconnected elements:
+
+## Events
+
+Observable instances of disengagement, such as:
+
+- Missed deadlines.
+- Low forum participation.
+- Minimal login activity.
+- Poor performance on assessments.
+
+## Patterns/Trends
+
+Over time, these events form patterns, such as:
+
+- A consistent decline in activity after the initial weeks of a course.
+- Higher disengagement in certain types of courses (e.g., self-paced vs. instructor-led).
+- Specific demographic groups showing lower engagement.
+
+## Underlying Structures
+
+These patterns are driven by structural elements within the online learning ecosystem:
+
+### Course Design
+
+- Lack of interactive elements.
+- Monotonous content delivery.
+- Insufficient opportunities for peer collaboration.
+- Overwhelming workload.
+
+### Platform Limitations
+
+- User interface complexities.
+- Poor accessibility.
+- Inadequate technical support that frustrates students.
+
+### Instructor Pedagogy
+
+- One-way information delivery.
+- Infrequent feedback.
+- Lack of personalized attention from instructors.
+
+### Institutional Policies
+
+- Enrollment caps.
+- Grading policies.
+- Support services that do not adequately address the unique needs of online learners.
+
+### Socio-economic Factors
+
+- Students balancing work, family, or other commitments.
+- Access to reliable internet and suitable learning environments.
+- Financial pressures.
+
+## Mental Models
+
+The prevailing beliefs and assumptions held by stakeholders:
+
+### Students
+
+- Beliefs about self-discipline.
+- The value of online degrees.
+- The perception that online learning is inherently easier or less demanding.
+
+### Instructors
+
+- Assumptions about student autonomy.
+- The effectiveness of traditional teaching methods in an online setting.
+- The challenges of monitoring engagement remotely.
+
+### Administrators
+
+- Focus on enrollment numbers over retention rates.
+- Lack of investment in robust online learning support systems.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+Understanding these interconnected layers through systems thinking allows the
+team to move beyond simply observing disengagement to identifying leverage
+points for intervention. For instance, addressing a lack of interactive course
+design (structure) might be more impactful than solely focusing on individual
+student motivation (event/pattern).