Post on 20-Aug-2015
Finding the Good Fit: Faculty Members,
Instruction, Evidence, and Technology
Patricia A. McGee, PhD
Patricia.mcgee@utsa.edu
Associate Professor/2003 NLII Fellow
Instructional Technology
Department of Educational Psychology
University of Texas at San Antonio
Veronica M. Diaz, PhDdrvdiaz@gmail.com
Instructional Technology ManagerMaricopa Center for Learning and Instruction
Maricopa Community CollegesAdjunct Professor, Northern Arizona University
Welcome
• Introductions
• Materials – Binder– CD– Presentation materials
available at http://elearning-design.pbwiki.com/
Seminar Overview
• Web 2.0: Diffusion, Instructional Development and Support
• Understanding Faculty Members and Learners and Web 2.0
• Content, Pedagogy, Assessment, and Tools
Part IWeb 2.0: Diffusion,
Instructional Development and Support
Web 2.0 (Twitter) and the World Simulation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgbfMY-6giY
WEB 2.0Model of Diffusion and Other Considerations
Sources: http://www.jeffro2pt0.com/images/web1_0-vs-web2_0.png and ttp://jensthraenhart.com/cblog/uploads/web20.jpg
Technology Adoption Lifecycle
http://techticker.net/2008/06/06/technology-adoption-lifecycle/
Web 2.0 Tools andDistributed Learning
Models
Delivery ModelsProportion of
Content Delivered
Online
Type of Course
Typical Description
0% Traditional Course with no online technology used — content is delivered in writing or orally.
1 to 29% Web Enhanced Course which uses web-based technology to facilitate what is essentially a face-to-face course. Uses a course management system (CMS) or web pages to post the syllabus and assignments, for example.
30 to 79% Blended/Hybrid
Distributed Engagement
Course that blends online and face-to-face delivery. Substantial proportion of the content is delivered online, typically uses online discussions, and typically has some face-to-face meetings.
80% + Online A course where most or all of the content is delivered online. Typically have no face-to-face meetings.
Sloan-C, 2007
The Models
Buffet Model
• Allows the learner to complete instructional sequences at their own pace
• Various learning environments
• Various supports
• On-campus and distributed environments
• Allows students to progress through material in the way and speed that is most appropriate for them Example: Foothill College,
Math My Way
Blended/Hybrid (Replacement)
• Blended learning courses combine online and classroom learning activities and resources in an optimal way to improve student learning outcomes and to address important institutional issues
• Classroom attendance (“seat time”) is reduced
Example: Estrella Mountain Community College, Learning College
100% Online
• All course activities, resources, interactions, and communications occur online, typically through an institutional learning/course management system
Example: Rio Salado College Online
Models and Web 2.0
• The containers• Redesign approach• Pedagogy• Discipline
What models are you most active in?
• Web enhanced (F2F)• Buffet• Blended/Hybrid• Online
INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT MODELS AND SUPPORT
Akker, 1998; Goodlad, 1994; Romiszowski,1981
Program and Course Levels
InputsGoals
Objectives
Standards
Institutional mission
Goals
Objectives
Constituents Administrators
Faculty members
Staff
Students
Faculty members
Students
ProgramLevel
CourseLevel
Object (Module or Unit) and Individual Levels
Inputs Objectives
Technology selection
Development team Designers
Media specialists
Technologists
Granular, at course level
Constituents Faculty members
Students
Faculty members
Students
ObjectLevel
IndividualLevel
Delivery models, instructional development models, and
support
Diffusion of Innovation
?
Experimentational Transitions
Stages
1. Experimentation
2. Extension and transition
3. Standardization of support
4. Integration into curriculum
5. Diffusion
Characteristics
• Data collection throughout
• Communication with campus community
• Innovative culture • Strong connection to
curriculum and disciplines • Robust support for the
faculty and students
Support Models & Innovation
• Relationship to development models
• Relationship to innovation and diffusion
• Centralized
• Experimental/pilot
• Decentralized
• None
WEB 2.0 AND INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES/CONSIDERATIONS
Quality Assurance and Web 2.0
Peer Course Peer Course ReviewReview
FeedbackFeedback
CourseCourse
Course Meets Course Meets Quality ExpectationsQuality Expectations
Course Course RevisionRevision
Instructional Designers
InstitutionsFaculty Course Developers National Standards &
Research Literature
RubricFaculty Reviewers
Training
Quality Matters Quality Matters Course Peer Course Peer
Review ProcessReview Process
QM Certified Peer Reviewers
• Peer Reviewers receive full-day training to learn– How to interpret the
standards (with examples and annotations)
– How to evaluate a course (hands-on with sample course)
• Reviews are conducted by teams of three peer reviewers– Chair – Peer reviewer
(external)– Peer reviewer (SME)
More about Quality Matters• Quality Matters (QM) is a faculty-centered, peer
review process designed to certify the quality of online and hybrid courses and online components
• A faculty-driven, collaborative peer review process
• Committed to continuous quality improvement
• Based in national standards of best practice, the research literature and instructional design principles
• Designed to promote student learning and success
The Rubric is the Core of Quality Matters
• 40 specific elements across 8 broad areas (general standards) of course quality
• Detailed annotations and examples of good practice for all 40 standards
Quality Matters & Alignment
Essential Standards that Relate to Alignment
• A statement introduces the student to the course and learning
• Navigational instructions• Learning activities foster
interaction:• Instructor-student
• Content-student
• Student-student
• Clear standards are set for instructor response and availability
• Assessment strategies provide feedback
• Grading policy is transparent and easy to understand
• Implemented tools and media support learning objectives
• and integrate with texts and lesson assignments
• The course acknowledges the importance of ADA compliance
Other QM Uses• College quality assurance
review processes• Guidelines for online/hybrid
course development• Faculty development/training
programs• Checklist for improvement of
existing online courses• An element in regional and
professional accreditation
Intellectual Property & Web 2.0
• How broad or inclusive? What tools or learning environments should be addressed?
• How is maintenance of instructional products and systems addressed?
• Employees or units involved in the production process, work time/course of employment issues, resources expended, or units involved?
• Innovation within or outside established, controlled university-owned systems?
Copyright
• Connection to models• Open tools
– YouTube– Wikis
• Faculty perceptions of copyright and fair use
• Liability issues • Student education• Best practices
Three Questions
1. Describe existing instructional delivery and development models for integrating technology into instruction.
2. What are your teaching and learning goals for Web 2.0 tools?
3. What are the support issues that will need to be addressed to achieve your Web 2.0 goals?