online learning – does it cure all or is it satan’s creation??? bill evans school of education...
TRANSCRIPT
Online learning – does it cure all or is it Satan’s creation???
Bill EvansSchool of [email protected]
Does it cure all? Or it is Satan’s creation?
Pensacola, United States
Pensacola, Florida
Yes, we speak English!
UWF Students Flying
UWF Students Swimming
UWF Campus
UWF Backyard
A Little About Me (this is the boring part)
BackgroundResearchMy Jobs and How I startedInterestsA keenly interested participant
How We Started Online Courses at UWF
Why we startedOnline competitionChanging student population and needs
Our initial attempts at Online LearningFaculty Resistance – including meOur initial steps for acceptance
Trying to build consensus for goals Overcoming inertiaFaculty rewards and support
Training support – initial and ongoingStipendsSupport for implementationGood examplesBuilding sound programs
How to deal with non-believersThe invasive species
Hurricane Ivan and what 225 k/ph winds will doFuel costs
Growth in Total Demand forTeachers in Special Education
• 47% during the past 17 years• 2.75% per year during the past 17
years • 10,000 additional teaching
positions created per year during the past 6 years
• 12% shortage in fully certified Sp.Ed teachers
Retention of Sp. Ed teachers
• 71% of Sp. Ed. teachers rehired in 2010
• 22%-29% loss of Sp. Ed. teachers every year
Florida Hires and Needs
• 2010 New Hires• ESE 1,600• Total New Hires 18,983
• Need 2011• Total number of teachers 181,636• Total number of teachers needed 21,629
• Need 2020• Total number of teachers 215,418• Total number of teachers needed 25,632• Florida universities currently meet about 50% of need
UWF Blended and online process
• Establishing common goals for blended or online instruction
• Clear impediments to training adequate numbers of teachers in an online or blended format– University capacity – classrooms, parking, budget– Candidate issues – work and family issues, distance to
get to class, skill set for online classes, gas, hardware– University issues – faculty support for online and
blended, institutional infrastructure support, faculty load, graduate assistants, expectations for students and faculty related to amount of time with courses, faculty and student training, ongoing faculty training, ongoing faculty training
– Institutional readiness and commitment
Progress towards implementation
• Decision was made to be workforce and demand oriented not capacity driven
• Meeting the needs of the profession with retention and new hires
– We are not dinosaurs– Helping inclusive and upwardly mobile folks– Serving the taxpayers– Must reduce seat time– We have to have a strong field based component– Will improve the skills of those we train– Initial attempts to compartmentalize– Need for data not just perception– Seriously addressing training needs and infrastructure– Changing the perception of students and faculty
The Great Rewards and How to Make it Happen
Faculty travelStipends for trainingGroup supportSupport staffQMListening to students’ reviewsJob retention
What do we want the training to do???
• Serve initial certification or inservice or both?• Do we plan by program or by courses?• Do we want blended or online? And, what are
these? How will these affect marathon classes?
• How do we integrate field experience?• How do we get buy in of faculty? • Will it increase the trained workforce?• Will it help retain teachers?• Dual certification for longevity and
effectiveness
Problems/Issues with Implementation
• Students need to know what they are signing for
• Issues with synchronous presentations• Blended programs or courses?• Structure programs to let students
develop their own blended program• Hardware, training• Building courses and programs• Ongoing data collection
What we found:
• Offers upward mobility • Blended best then online, then F2F• Inclusive• Best evaluations were for blended classes• Worst evaluations were for lecture capture• More grades of C or better in blended• Blended classes have lowest withdrawal rates• Principal evals in first year indicated no difference in blended,
online program and F2F• Blended online content delivery differs from F2F – use modality• Have to provide support to students and faculty• Faculty can travel• People liked us
Where we are at now
• 60% plus courses online or blended• A strong field base component that links
to content• Consistent monitoring of student
performance• RtI for problems• This is not a one size fits all approach• Programs and courses within programs
Helpful Advice and Website
• Don’t get mad at a hammer that doesn’t work as a screwdriver
• www.blendedlearningtoolkit.com
WARNINGS
• Common goals• Match the medium to the content• Lousy content and implementation-Poor
program• Focus on real skills and practice, practice• On line programs have no greater loss of
teachers than face to face BUTSkill set is different – independent workersMust build in interactionFeedback is critical
UWF Students Studying (Dorms in the background)
My Information
Bill EvansDirector – School of Education
University of West FloridaPensacola, Florida
NATIONAL SPECIAL ED DATA
• Total number of positions in Special Ed 475,000
• Source of New Hires in Sp. Ed (2000)Entering Teachers 13,000Experienced Teachers 13,000 Switch from Gen. Ed. 40,000
Vacant 3,000 • 12% shortage of fully certified Sp. Ed. • 98% of school districts report shortage of Sp.
Ed. teachers
How are teachers trained
Traditional Alternative Other# of yrs of exp
• 1-3 74% 22% 16%
• 4-6 72%9% 19%
• 7-9 74% 3% 23%
Suppliers of all teachers
• Traditional teacher prep programs 62%
• Alternative teacher prep programs22%
• No teacher prep program6%
FLORIDA STATISTICS
• 2010 - Population 20, 468, 867 • Total number of teachers - 172,215• Total number of ESE teachers - 25,545• 14.5 % of teachers are out of field• 22% of reading teachers are not certified• 22% of ESOL teachers not certified• 8.9% of ESE teachers not certified
Teacher Turnover
• 8.6% from Traditional programs• 37% from Alternative Cert. programs• 55% from little or no training group• Traditional programs cost more initially but
more teachers are retained• Greater retention of teachers trained in
alternative programs in secondary ed than in sp ed.
• No difference in retention or perceived quality related to F2F or online training