crAs has already been shown that good pedagogical strategies can be applied across all classroom environments, and that should be the foundation for which the entire course is built, whether its distance education or in-person. Good pedagogical practices should include at a minimum \cite{Bernard_2004,chickering1987seven,duffy2000,baxter2019creating,callaghan2018facebook,knight2015thinking,garrison2010first}:
  1. Strategies for active learning.
  2. Collaboration among peers.
  3. Lots of opportunity for communication between the instructor and learners, both synchronously and asynchronously.
  4. Careful consideration of the time it takes for the learners to access as well as work through both required and supplemental learning material.
The driving question of this framework is: How can we conceptualize and generalize the process of creating a course grounded in the principles of good practice regardless of it’s environment? Our framework considers four major classroom interactions across three overarching dynamics that should be considered when creating a course in any classroom environment.

Construction of the DICE Framework

In their paper, \citet{garrison2010first} argues that even though community development and peer collaboration are essential for quality learning to occur, content development and course structure must be prioritized when setting a classroom environment \cite{garrison2010first,garrison2009communities}. Our framework is developed around the idea that there is no hierarchy when establishing the dynamics of a classroom environment (i.e., Learning, Instructing, and Engaging), that is we believe that placing these in a hierarchical order is detrimental to course development and delivery. Additionally, setting the course structure, preparation for students to learn the content, and community development should all begin as the course is being conceptualized and developed and continue until the course has finished. The instructor plays a role in community development \cite{swan2009constructivist}, not only through their actions, but in how they set up and structure the course and its content. Therefore, the dynamics and interactions established in this framework can begin prior to day one and should be maintained throughout the duration of the course.
Our framework includes three dynamics (learning, engaging, and instructing) as well as four interactions (developing, supporting, applying, stressors) that should be considered when developing a course within any classroom environment. This framework brings a fresh perspective and provides instructors a set of specific variables that demands consideration before, during, and after the course. The role these variables take on will be vastly different depending on a multitude of circumstances including (but not limited to) the classroom environment, course content, technology available, and instructors pedagogical reality. Most importantly, these variables align with the prior frameworks discussed in the previous section of this paper as well as [which ones are these>??] standards. Therefore, an instructor who addresses these variables will be well on their way to creating a quality course that includes rigorous pedagogical approaches regardless of the classroom environment. This means that it is also a useful framework to guide instructors who need to move an existing course into a new environment, such as from an in-person to a distance education.
Big Idea:  Refining student ENGAGEMENT around LEARNING and INSTRUCTING of meteorological concepts is critical – INTERACTIONS must go beyond numbers, equations, and computations.
Be Nimble - Adapt - Recast
Dynamic, interactive, and smart use of media files/information
“Gentech” awareness
Engage learners virtually in ways they already engage socially
Enrich the virtual experience