Designing Strong Course Closures Through Continuous Feedback: Best Practices for Online Instructors

In considering this blog post, I reflected on the practices I have employed in previous managerial and athletic coaching roles to ensure successful outcomes for employees and athletes. Drawing on my experience I aligned these successful practices to any learning activity. What creates the best environment for successful results?

One of the most effective ways to ensure closing activities align with learning objectives is by gathering continuous feedback. Weekly pulse checks, single‑question surveys, and reflective discussion prompts help instructors identify misconceptions early and adjust instruction accordingly. CAST’s Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework emphasizes providing multiple means of engagement, including opportunities for learners to express needs and reflect on progress (CAST, 2018). These short feedback loops enable instructors to revise closing activities to reinforce the skills and concepts learners find most difficult.

Learning management systems (LMS) now offer rich data on learner engagement, pacing, and performance. Patterns in quiz scores, discussion participation, and assignment submissions can indicate where learners may need additional support and guidance before the course concludes. Hodges et al. (2020) emphasize that data-informed teaching supports more responsive online instruction, especially when instructors use analytics to identify gaps in understanding. When there are recurring challenges, instructors can revise closing activities to include targeted review tasks, concept maps, or collaborative discussions.

Wiggins and McTighe’s (2005) backward design model stresses that assessments and closing activities should align with learning outcomes. A structured mid-course survey or reflection activity gives learners a chance to communicate what is working and what feels unclear. Mid-course feedback helps instructors determine whether planned closing activities will truly measure understanding or whether revisions are needed to ensure alignment and accessibility.

A strong closing activity provides learners with the opportunity to reflect on their growth, challenges, and future applications of the course content (Ambrose et al., 2010). Again, this might include a written reflection, a short video, or a multimedia portfolio. Research on metacognition shows that reflective activities deepen learning and support long-term retention (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000). Offering multiple formats aligns with UDL principles and ensures all learners can demonstrate understanding in accessible ways.

Learners also benefit significantly from seeing how the course components fit together. A closing module that revisits the learning outcomes, highlights major themes, and connects activities to objectives reinforces coherence. In my opinion, this should be done throughout the course, not simply at the end. Ambrose et al. (2010) emphasize that helping learners make connections across course elements strengthens conceptual understanding and transfer. Effective course closures and forward-looking elements help learners understand how to apply their new knowledge beyond the course. This might include specific next-step resources, professional applications, or optional extension activities.

To create an environment for effective course closures, the following activities can be implemented across any course structure. First, use a systematic method to organize feedback. Instructors benefit from maintaining a structured system, such as a spreadsheet, digital notebook, or LMS-integrated tool, where available. This is used to record feedback from closing reflections, surveys, and evaluations. Categorizing comments by theme (e.g., clarity of instructions, pacing, assessment alignment) makes it easier to identify patterns. Brookfield (2017) recommends thematic coding as a practical method for analyzing student feedback in ways that lead to actionable improvements.

Conduct a post-course debrief using backward design. After the course ends, instructors can revisit the learning outcomes and evaluate whether the closing activities and assessments effectively measured them. Wiggins and McTighe (2005) argue that backward design encourages instructors to examine whether assessments truly capture evidence of understanding. Learner feedback becomes a key data source in this analysis.

Collate multiple feedback sources. In some instances, relying on a single source of feedback can lead to incomplete conclusions. Instead, instructors can collate the feedback from end-of-course evaluations, closing reflections, performance data, and instructor observations.

This multi-source approach ensures that revisions are grounded in a holistic understanding of learner needs and course effectiveness. Patton (2015) notes that triangulation strengthens the validity of instructional decisions and supports continuous improvement.

Thoughtful closing activities are essential to a successful online learning experience, but they must be informed by ongoing feedback and grounded in clear learning outcomes. When instructors embrace continuous improvement, supported by UDL principles, backward design, and systematic analysis of learner input, they create closing experiences that reinforce learning and empower students to carry their new knowledge forward.

References

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass.

Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press.

Brookfield, S. (2017). Becoming a critically reflective teacher (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review.

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). ASCD.