I found Doris's research [Shaw, 26 Oct 94] quite interesting as a way to obtain insight into whether a lesson is engaging or not. I know of a group who is taking their newly designed lessons into a mirrored area to gather some formative feedback on the lesson. By examining those other unobtrusive indicators, maybe we can find some of those strategies which would tend toward inducing mental engagement. I am interested in hearing more about what observations/indicators you found to support mental activity.
I also wish I could have been in your classroom with those issues, Rod [Sims, 25 Oct 94]! I believe that I had thought that a transaction WAS connected with an outcome--thereby concluding that a transaction contains several interactions. I think I still believe that, but I am still thinking about it. I am not really sure what you mean by "negotiable?" sounds intriguing, though as I construct several possible scenarios!
I also agree with your example of transaction and interaction. At each point in the instruction, I ask myself (as I design) what is the learner thinking (or more realistically, what do I hope the learner is thinking), and therefore need to create a transaction that induces mental activity. Which could be tested out with Doris's methodology.
I am definitely not ready to throw out the idea of attempting to create small tutorials as Tim [Spannaus, 17 Oct 94] suggested--or Georgina's finger food [Fyfe, 17 Oct 94]--to pop up when needed--in performance support systems, simulations, or learning environments--and I do agree with Merrill that old CBT terminology has us locked into a mind set--i.e., with a CBT frame you have to tell, tell, tell the student--when indeed, that is not the way to engage learners. These small tutorials ARE better termed transactions which contain consciously conceived interactions. I know I have gotten some very good ideas to incorporate, and appreciate all the input.