Moller, Foshay, and Huett (2008) offered recommendations to online educators, especially instructional designers. I found the article informative though ancient in this incredibly dynamic field. In the five years that I have spent teaching in various learning formats (classroom, hybrid, and online), I have seen the issues that Simonson (2000) and Moller, Foshay, and Huett (2008) noted. Originally, online shells rarely involved instructional material nor followed good instructional design format. I've been privy to incredible change, growth, and quality in this area. In 2005, online courses typically housed a syllabus, a discussion board, quizzes/exams, and assignments. I cared little for the environment and its instructional capacity, but loved the ability to post in-class material, assignments, and most of all, the grade book online for all to see. No longer did students have to come to me for an assignment. Gone were the excuses that assignments didn't get completed because they missed the last class. Most exciting, questions about grades almost became extinct. At this early stage, I had the ability to have my courses copied from term to term. I modified assignments and discussion questions based on the student interests, but there was little instruction involved in the online format. In 2008, I moved to another school that provided blank shells to faculty, with the option of copying content from previously taught courses. Again, this was more of a communication space than instructional space.
Today, I'm proud to work as the Instructional Technologies Manager at CSU-Global where our online courses trump all other online learning spaces that I've seen. Our courses are developed by a collaborative group including an instructional designer, content expert, and web developer. The final product offers incredible instructional material, in a variety of learning formats (video, audio, visual, and written), easy access of resources, appropriate informational chunking, review material, self-assessments, interactive discussion boards, and applied assignments and portfolios that often directly assess and improve the student's professional experience. In addition to proper instructional design, our courses have additional technologies that support synchronous and asynchronous collaborative learning.
Not only have we met the equivalency theory with our design, we've exceeded face-to-face outcomes. While there's still room for improvement and growth, I believe that our courses are what these researchers had in mind when they were evaluating the needs for the future of online learning.
Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, July/August). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 2: Higher Education). TechTrends, 52(4), 66-70.
Simonson, M. (2000). Making decisions: The use of electronic technology in online classes. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 84, 29-34.
I too cared little or had no interest in online classes. It wasn't until last year was I introduced to Walden. My biggest drawback is discipline; in other words, making myself be my own accountability partner and complete the assignments on time. These classes have challenged me in more ways than one. I'm not use to being in control of my learning without the use of a "neighbor" sitting beside me in a classroom. Online classes take that away however, SKYPE, MSN/YAHOO Messenger has even brought that to a minimum. The use of SKYPE and other social/webcam media, allows the classroom/student(s) to come to you allowing you the ability to have a face to face encounter. I too feel these researchers had a very good idea of what they were attempting to do and going to do.
ReplyDeleteAs an instructor, how would you suggest that I could motivate you? Is discipline a piece of what we learn, as online learners?
ReplyDelete