Online Design

From LiteracyTentWiki

Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1308] Online design
From: jataylor (jataylor_at_utk.edu)
Date: Thu Apr 01 2004 - 15:46:23 EST

Hi Jerome, Nicki, Jennifer, Ashley, and all,

In a previous response to Eileen, Jerome wrote:

"The website (http://projectideal.org/researchq_pd.htm) looks different from Blackboard or WebCT which are built on an expert-novice model of instruction. The Project IDEAL PD model is one of community-building. We want teachers to feel they are professionals exploring a new area of skill development and getting assistance from fellow professionals, not guidance from a "sage on the stage." All the exercises ask participants to develop a plan--for recruitment, orientation, teaching and assessment of distance learners. The trainer's role is to get all of the participants in the course to provide constructive criticism of each other's plan. The textbook (Handbook of Distance Education for Adult Learners) is a handbook with the collected wisdom of teachers in many states on these very topics."

This leads me to wonder about all of the decisions that go in to selecting the types of technology tools one would use to design an online course. For example, if I wanted to design an online course by having a study circle online (assuming there was a specific need), and the approach of the course would be to encourage critical reflection, social construction of knowledge, lesson plan development, critique, and implementation - how do these factors play in to deciding which technology tools to choose? Would it be necessary to even use a learning management system in this case? Would a simpler technology like a discussion list and a file sharing system do?

What factors (in addition to the ones we have discussed) have a role in online course development and design?

Thanks!

Jackie

Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1320] Dynamics of online design?
From: jataylor (jataylor_at_utk.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 02 2004 - 10:11:37 EST

Hello everyone,
I have a scenario for you, and a question: Participants are enrolled in an online PD course. The course contains a discussion board, for posting weekly "assignments". There is *action* on the board vis-a-vis posting assignments and some *inter*action on the board. It also has a discussion list, which participants use to send out one completed assignment per week, and find/receive announcements from the course facilitator.

Yet, none of the participants use the discussion list to share practices, even when they have been encouraged to do so. Noone talks on the list (well, except one participant, who has mentioned that she likes to learn from others; and obviously the course facilitator)! A few participants join in optional weekly chat sessions, which end up being trouble-shooting sessions with questions directed at the facilitator, and replies back to the group, for a just-in-time PD need.

What might be some pitfalls in online design? What are the larger issues of "positioning" in regards to teaching style, uses of technology options, and learning styles?

What dynamics might be involved in online design, under the surface?

Thanks!

Jackie

‘’’Subject:’’’ [NIFL-AALPD:1322] RE: Dynamics of online design?
‘’’From:’’’ kgongora (kgongora_at_proliteracy.org)
’’’Date:’’’ Fri Apr 02 2004 - 11:05:58 EST

re: the non-responsive students scenario...

For students to participate, they need to see the relevance of it to their success in the course. It would seem, from this example, that the nonparticipating students feel as though they are progressing through the material just fine without it, akin to an online lecture and subsequent test. If the facilitator wanted more actively engaged students, the design of the instruction feel short of that. Some students will take advantage of the medium with minimal prompting, but just as in a classroom, there will always be those who'd prefer to sit and listen.

To encourage a more collaborative learning experience, one thought might be that the assignments should be project-based and designed to require up front input from the students. Really, it's not that different from what you might do to encourage discussion in a classroom scenario, just with the added challenge of an asynchronous environment. You'd ask some probing questions first off, before presenting your material, and not just present information and then ask "Okay, so what do you think about it?" You might direct different questions to different students, coaxing them to participate where they otherwise might not.

Or, one simple example, this instructor could *start* a lesson by taking a position that illustrates the objective of a lesson. Ask each student to take a position on it, pro or con, and defend their position on the board, prior to getting to the 'meat' of the lesson. Once all have made their case, then you proceed.

These types of activities also give the instructor and students something to relate back to as they facilitate the course. It gives them something to discuss, and compels them to actively participate in that discussion, and not just react to something they've learned. It helps the student build the learning experience, and takes advantage of the benefits of online learning with a facilitator, instead of giving the student a paper to read.

Kristine Marane Góngora, Instructional Designer
ProLiteracy Worldwide
1320 Jamesville Avenue, Syracuse, NY 13210
315-422-9121, ext. 284
FAX: 315-422-6369
kgongora@proliteracy.org

http://www.proliteracy.org ProLiteracy Worldwide
http://www.vluonline.org Verizon Literacy University

Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1324] RE: Dynamics of online design?
From: Eileen Eckert (eileeneckert_at_hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Apr 02 2004 - 13:18:22 EST

What dynamics might be involved in online design, under the surface?

Several spring immediately to mind, but one of the things I'm learning is to try to focus on one point per message, otherwise all the points can easily get lost. So, one point: novices, intermediates, and experts each have different kinds of learning interests, needs, and "developmental tasks." The design needs to either cater clearly to a specific level, and help people self-select appropriately for enrollment in the course, or provide something for everyone and help them select from an array of options.

I use the terms novice, intermediate, and expert pretty loosely. There's a lot of overlap, and one may be a novice in one area and an intermediate or expert in others, but the terms can be useful for rough sorting. Novices might need more concrete information and direction; they can perform in superficially "expert-like" ways when given the rules experts follow. Intermediates might need more opportunities for reflection on practice, feedback or guidance on what they choose to practice. Intermediates are internalizing the assumptions that will guide them, personalizing knowledge and experience and turning it into "tacit knowledge." Experts have already internalized a great deal of knowledge and experience; they are going to pick and choose what they want to learn, and probably be much more internally motivated and self-directed in learning it.

I'm very much oversimplifying what I think is going on, but I think the level of expertise of the participants is an underlying element of design.

Eileen

Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1340] RE: Dynamics of online design?
From: Duren Thompson (solveig_at_utk.edu)
Date: Mon Apr 05 2004 - 08:33:42 EDT

Another observation to the "non-responsive" students scenario.

Eileen Eckert talks about "novices, intermediates, and experts each have different kinds of learning interests, needs, and "developmental tasks."

So, If the content of the online course is *New* information for most of the participants - and many feel strongly that they *don't* have expertise in this topic/area - then wouldn't they be at the *novice* level? Wouldn't it be hard to get them to "speak out" and/or share ideas/build knowledge when they feel like they just got the knowledge?

Eileen posits "Novices might need more concrete information and direction;"

- so, if the content you are presenting is designed to be an introductory course (or orientation course for example) should you *expect* a certain kind and level of discussion/participation? Should you then *expect* lower levels of conversation - or *plan* different kinds of "prompts" or course assignments to stimulate conversation around more concrete topics?

Is it just me, or are Adult Educators generally *really* polite? I see most of our practitioners very reluctant to "challenge" each other in online discussions. I see lots of "way to gos" and "I like that ideas" but very few "what do you mean by thats' or "I disagree's." Is the *public* element a factor? Is the "permanent record" element a factor? Is it a history of "Unsafe conversational environment" that may be affecting our folks? In K-12 settings, they too are having a hard time getting teachers to collaborate - and these folks see each other every day. Our AE practitioners *might* see each other once a year. "School" has a history of "go into my room and shut the door" for most instructors. A high level of autonomy and minimum of critical observation unheard of in many other professions. Are we fighting this very entrenched more' in trying to get our teachers to be collaborative critical thinkers?

OK - I'm going to bed now. An even dozen posts is *way* too many for one evening. Hopefully I won't let so many thought-provoking e-mails build up next time.  :)

Duren Thompson
Center for Literacy Studies

Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1348] RE: Dynamics of online design?
From: Eileen Eckert (eileeneckert_at_hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Apr 05 2004 - 12:22:07 EDT

Hi Duren,
Thanks for noting, Eileen "posits" not "states"--I am theorizing based on novice-expert research I've read and observations of teachers.

You wrote:

"Eileen posits 'Novices might need more concrete information and direction;
- so, if the content you are presenting is designed to be an introductory course (or orientation course for example) should you ‘’’expect’’’ a certain kind and level of discussion/participation? Should you then *expect* lower levels of conversation - or *plan* different kinds of 'prompts' or course assignments to stimulate conversation around more concrete topics?"

I don't think we should expect lower levels of participation (but we shouldn't be surprised if that's a constant challenge either). I think we should plan different kinds of prompts and more explanations. For example, an assignment might be to post a possible application of the content, or to really try something out and report the results, with the explanation that even though the idea is new, people tend to learn better when they can get their hands dirty (really or virtually).

The assignment could include instructions to give critical feedback about someone else's post, with information about how to give "critical" feedback that is positive and helpful.

I don't think it's just adult educators who are really polite; I see it with all my students online, and they are mostly adults returning to school from all sorts of backgrounds. I think that no one teaches how to give useful feedback, so students are reduced to saying, "I agree," "Way to go," or nothing at all. By useful feedback, I mean feedback that support's the learner's autonomy, is focused on the task and not the person, and directs the learner's attention to an aspect of the work that is important. (I'll send the feedback section of my doctoral lit review if anyone requests it off-list.)

For example, if someone posts a possible application, it can be much more helpful to get feedback that asks, "How would this work in your classroom (maybe with a certain type of student if you know that's an issue)?" than, "That would never work in my classroom!" And it is supportive of autonomy--it doesn't matter if it wouldn't work in my classroom, we're not talking about my classroom. Also, "You might try..." recognizes the learner's ultimate autonomy and choice in the matter more than "You should do..."

And it can be much more positive to say, "It looks to me like that application is designed to do x, y, and z" than, "You're so creative to come up with that!" And it is focused on the work rather than using the work to make judgments about qualities of the person. "You're so creative" sets a standard that people can internalize as "Uh oh, they're judging my abilities with everything I write. I'm not subjecting myself to that."

Lastly, a specific comment on an aspect of the work that is intriguing, could be better explained, doesn't seem to fit with the rest, or deserves attention for some reason is more helpful than a general, "What a good idea!" Whatever the level of expertise of the learner, it's pretty rare for an idea or application to spring forth in final form, and learning how to pick the aspects that work could improve is an important and usually appreciated skill.

I think that if we can be more explicit about how we support learning and community-building, as well as about the content, we can have more successful participation. Of course this is all based on observations and research I've read. No one's funded me to study it formally ; )

Eileen

[NIFL-AALPD:1357] Re: Online design
From: Jennifer Elmore (jennifer_at_jelmore.com)
Date: Tue Apr 06 2004 - 12:00:13 EDT

Hi everyone.
I'm responding to a series of questions that Jackie posted on Thursday. (I was offline at the end of last week - my apologies for the delayed reply.)

This leads me to wonder about all of the decisions that go in to selecting the types of technology tools one would use to design an online course. For example, if I wanted to design an online course by having a study circle online (assuming there was a specific need), and the approach of the course would be to encourage critical reflection, social construction of knowledge, lesson plan development, critique, and implementation - how do these factors play in to deciding which technology tools to choose? Would it be necessary to even use a learning management system in this case? Would a simpler technology like a discussion list and a file sharing system do?
What factors (in addition to the ones we have discussed) have a role in online course development and design?

I'd like to share a few of the questions that Steve Linberg and I considered while we were developing technology platforms for LiteracyLink (http://litlink.ket.org/) and for another multimedia resource called The Professional Development Kit (http://literacy.org/pdk).

Our answers to these (non-tech-related) questions actually drove our technology decisions. Although Steve and I used these questions to develop an online delivery mechanism ourselves, I think that they could also inform a technology selection process. If you are looking for a commercial or "pre-made" online delivery mechanism, the following issues are (I think) important to consider:

  • the kind(s) of content resources you'll likely provide
  • the nature of your online community/types of interaction you'd like to promote

CONTENT
The following is a fairly central content question: are you planning to present core content materials, around which discussion and activity can take place - or will participants be responsible for generating the content, themselves, by responding to the facilitator's questions? The technology implications are different in each case.

If you are planning to create your own content (and this content is more extensive than a list of links to other web resources), you will need to "house" it somewhere - which, in turn, recommends a more complete learning management system. A simple discussion board, for instance, probably would not handle all of your content presentation needs. If your primary learning goals involve tapping into participants' professional knowledge and providing a collaborative forum that does not assert a set of "materials" for study/consideration, a simple discussion board and file-sharing system would probably be adequate.

COMMUNITY
Defining the kind of online community you'd like to create (and the sort of communication you'd like to encourage) will help you decide which interactive tools to choose/use.

  • What would you like your ideal online community/working group to "look" like? For instance, how often might participants interact?
  • Will participants always interact as one large group - and/or will they break into smaller working groups/pairs?
  • How would you like discussions/collaborations to unfold - who will prompt activity?
  • What kind of access will participants have to facilitator(s)? What kind of access will participants have to their classmates?

Jennifer

Jennifer Elmore, M.S.Ed.
Education Consultant
http://jelmore.com

[NIFL-AALPD:1358] Re: Online design
From: Jerome Johnston (jerej_at_umich.edu)
Date: Tue Apr 06 2004 - 20:27:11 EDT

In the full message below Jackie asks:

”Would it be necessary to even use a learning management system in this case? Would a simpler technology like a discussion list and a file sharing system do?”
1. Examine what you are trying to accomplish; identify an electronic tool that provides exactly the kind of activities you are trying to support.
2. Examine the experience of your audience. Are any online tools that your audience is already comfortable with?

If your target audience is already familiar and comfortable with WebCT, adapt that tool to fit the learning goals of your project. If they are unfamiliar with any tool or system, then you are free to introduce a cost effective solution that has the characteristics you want. If you choose a "new" system for them you will have to count on a training period in which you bring your audience up to a level of fluency that will meet your goals for the experience.

I have adapted www.communityzero.com to meet the needs of Project IDEAL member states. Over the years I have insisted that each member state train their teachers in how to use that tool. Even so, when I introduced the Study Group concept last fall, to add a virtual PD activity for experience distance teachers, I learned that we had to have a two-week window before the Study Group began during which we re-trained participants to become fluent with a tool they had only recently stopped using.

Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1371] Re: Online design - LONG
From: Duren Thompson (solveig@utk.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 09 2004 - 11:08:30 EDT

For COABE two years ago, we presented on what we had learned in developing online courses, facilitating online courses, and being a student in online courses.

When it came right down to it - what we learned was what *questions* to ask yourself. Jerome below asks some of those questions. Our impression was that there was no one right way to create online courses for AE - that it all depended on your resources, your purpose, the needs of your target audience, the content, the limitations of your target audience, etc.

Without sharing the whole list (we had a two-sided, 10pt font handout which listed LOTS of questions for developers to answer prior to and during development - and we thought we hadn't listed all the question - really), here are some of the *key questions* we think go into online design (with a few comments about what decisions we've made and why).

1) First we suggest that you have done some research in the field of online PD, assessed your audience's needs and resources (as well as your own resources) and *Have a Plan* - meaning really thought through the desired outcomes, considered a realistic time schedule, and identified who will be doing the work).
2) Then we suggest the following questions about Course *Design*:
  • What delivery method(s) do we want to use?
  • Have we considered a variety of delivery technologies - alone or in combination? (web pages, software packages, e-mail, CD-ROM, etc.)
  • How accessible is each technology for learners? How flexible is it for a particular target group?
  • What is the cost structure of each technology? What is the unit cost per student?
  • What are the best technologies for supporting the desired instructional and learning approaches?
  • What kind of participant interaction does the technology enable? How easy is it to use?
  • What are the organizational requirements, and the barriers to be removed before this technology can be used successfully? What changes in the organization need to be made?
  • How new is this technology? Have we read third-party reviews? What kind of technical support can we expect?
  • How quickly can courses be implemented/mounted with this technology? How quickly can materials be changed?

(We chose Blackboard at the time because there was training for developers and facilitators available at UT for free/minimal cost, we could "rent" it cheaply, it seemed fairly easy for us to get content "into" and to change content, it allowed us the options for asynchronous and synchronous dialogue, and the interface seemed pretty straightforward and low bandwidth for our users.)

  • Are we using good general curriculum design methods?
  • Have we set clear educational goals for the course?
  • Have we obtained/created a course map/flowchart/outline?
  • If we are “adapting” existing materials, have we considered how it will be “chunked,” as well as what will need to be added and/or deleted?
  • What is the duration of the course? How many total hours should it take a participant to complete the course?
  • What kinds of learning are needed/wanted? What instructional approaches will best meet these needs?
  • What materials will we use? Have we considered copyright issues?
  • Based on our desired outcomes & the course goals, what “level or type” of learning is expected from our participants?
  • How will we assess participants learning? How will “grading” work?

(We decided on 6 weeks and 12 hours right up front for a reason I can no longer remember - not too long, but enough time for more in-depth learning. Then we actually had to stop and go back to the first question halfway through our "adaptation" of Florida's materials. We were trying to do too much - add too much information. We had to narrow our scope and *Keep It Simple.* The overall course outline became *very* important - and interestingly enough, the structure of the platform we were using - BlackBoard - influenced how we chose to "chunk" our materials AND how we were going to "assess" learning.)

  • Are we using good online curriculum design methods?
  • How will participants interact with each other and the facilitator? (Asynchronous, synchronous, or combination? Independent, indirect, cohort, group work, etc?)
  • What media do we wish to incorporate? (text, hyperlinks, audio, video, etc.)
  • Have we obtained/created a design for the layout, the interface, graphics, etc?
  • How will we keep participants motivated/engaged?
  • What resources, materials, “hands-on” access will participants need?

(We were, like everything, on a fairly short and crowded deadline to develop the course content the first year - it was almost entirely text-based, except, of course, for the richness of the web sites we linked to. We added more graphics directly into BlackBoard for the second and third offerings. We learned to link all files as pdfs (not MS Word files) and chose to put them in as links rather than use Blackboard's upload feature - it limited out control of placement and "look" of the link in the course. We learned to *warn* participants that they would need access to AE students to complete coursework - some had to arrange to "borrow" a class or two to complete the course. We are *still* problem-solving the whole discussion board, discussion list, and chat interaction issue  :)

  • What will we expect of our facilitators? (We have a separate sheet of “Questions to ask yourself as a Facilitator”)
  • How will we train our facilitators?
  • What kind of tech support will we provide? How?
  • What kind of access will they have to developers to ask questions?
  • What level of control/access will they have to make changes to the course materials?

(We didn't ask these questions until the second offering - when we had a facilitator who wasn't involved in the development. We're still working on this. One thing we *have* learned - is that we suggest facilitators should *take* the course as a student prior to facilitating it. Then they should have access to the "whys" of how the course was constructed - how the answers to how some of the questions above were determined. And we limit the changes pretty heavily - and that for facilitators to make changes - they have to be trained in the development side of the software.)

  • What will we expect of our participants? (and another separate sheet - “Questions to ask yourself as a Participant”)
  • How will we train our participants?
  • What kind of tech support will we provide? How?
  • What materials will they be expected to have/buy?
  • Have we made expectations clear throughout the course and

“promotional” materials? In multiple formats? Repeatedly?

(The "...clear expectations throughout, ...in multiple formats, repeatedly" part was something we learned over the first 3 offerings and keep getting reminded every time. We've also learned to tell folks what they NEED to read all the way through - we send them directions - and then they chose not to follow them, and have tech problems! We *still* get folks who say "Oh, I need an e-mail address for this course?" or "Oh, this is internet? I thought it would come in the mail.")

  • Have we addressed course “logistics”?
  • Who will “host” the site? How will course material be uploaded?
  • Have we addressed instructional support for the participant? (glossary of terms, syllabus, schedule, explanation of academic expectations & course logistics, contact information for facilitators, etc.)
  • When/how will students “turn in” assignments?
  • Have we considered “incompletes/failures” and completion/make up procedures?
  • Have we addressed the registration process and “drops”?
  • Have we addressed payment/money issues?
  • Have we addressed “credit” issues what will students “get” as a result of course completion?

(Many of these questions we encountered *during* the first offering of our first course. If a student signed up for the course and then never showed - how did we deal with that? If a student showed for the first assignment and never completed anything after that - what do we do? Payment/money has not been an issue so far - but we have asked ourselves the question - would asking for a minimal charge - like $30, make finishing the course more important to folks - give the course more value?)

3) We then listed a series of questions re implementation, testing, marketing, evaluation and maintenance. How will you know it is successful? How will you know *what* made it successful? We implemented a 6 month "follow-up" survey via e-mail and snailmail (for those who do not respond to the e-mail). We get about a 25 - 50% return. At the end of the course we ask them to make a plan for integrating the new information into their instruction - and on the survey we ask how they did on their plan? What worked? What didn't? What could support them better and what effect did the course have on their students?

Whew! That's a lot of info. Sorry to take so long - but I thought this might help folks.

Duren Thompson
Center for Literacy Studies

Retrieved from "http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/Online_Design"