Avoiding Shovelware

1

Innovative Strategies toward Improving Online Course

Quality

Avoiding Shovelware

2

Susan J. Clark, PhDInstructional Designer

Beth Hale, Chemeketa CC Learning Technologies Facilitator

Greg Kaminski, Portland CCInstructional Computing Facilitator

What is Quality?

3

Degree of alignment, engagement, and accessibility.

Designing for Engagement

Designing for Engagement

Instructional Designer, Susan J. Clark, PhD

Creating the 5-Minute Learning Object

4

Design for Learner Engagement

5

“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -Benjamin Franklin

Typical Time AllotmentActivity Time

Meet with the Instructional Designer to plan the design of the course or project and to discuss training needs.

2 hrs

Develop course objectives, syllabus, and introduction

5 hrs

Locate and obtain permission to use resources 5 hrs

Plan media production 1 hr

Develop content 8 hrs

Create Course Shell 1 hr

Assemble and organize content into CMS 4 hrs

Test course 2 hrs

Revise as needed. 2 hrs

Additional Activities 0

Total 30 hrs6

“Flying by the seat of our pants...”

How is developing eLearning while delivering eLearning like the video clip?

9

7

Is more time the answer?

8

How can we provide high quality, engaging activities with so little time?Tool Criteria:

– simple to use– familiar– quick– inexpensive– portable– compatible– able to capture face-to-face

instruction (audio, animated diagrams, etc.) and make it instantly accessible online 9

SmartPen™ Example

10http://www.livescribe.com

A Pencast example of John

Sweet’s

5-Minute Learning Object) http://tinyurl.com/JSlearningobject1

11http://tinyurl.com/JSlearningobject1

What’s Next?– Faculty developed LORs– More personalized instruction– Consulting (Have Smartpen, will travel)– Research

12

Innovative Strategies toward Improving Online Course Quality

Learning Technologies Facilitator Beth Hale

Chemeketa’s New Course Development Process

Chemeketa Online– 24,000 online students annually

(unduplicated headcount)

– 15 % of college enrollment is online

– 10-15 new online courses per term

– Tech Hub support:• 2 FT instructional designers• 2 PT faculty support• Media production specialist

The Intake process

The Course Develop – ment process

Step 1: Initial Consultation Meeting Meeting with faculty Tech Hub contact to

discuss:• the course development timeline, • Quality Matters rubric, • an overview of the eLearn [CE8] system, • course design and online teaching methods, • Tech Hub training and support options, • schedule final review date

New Course Development Process

Step 2: Media Consultation Meeting

Consultation with the media specialist as

needed for multimedia projects such as video, audio, Adobe Presenter and Connect, Web 2.0 tools, and other media use in online courses.

New Course Development Process

Step 3: New Online Instructor Training

Recommended for all new online instructors, and required for faculty receiving curriculum development funding.

The eLearn Institute is our comprehensive new instructor training course, and is offered every term.

New Course Development Process

New Course Development Process

Step 4: Final Course Readiness Review

The course is reviewed before the term begins

with the Course Readiness Review checklist.

A final consultation meeting for faculty and their tech hub contact to discuss the final review and other start-of-term information.

Course Readiness Checklist

Course Readiness Checklist

Course Readiness Checklist

Course Readiness Checklist

Innovative Strategies toward Improving Online Course Quality

Instructional Computing Facilitator Greg Kaminski

The Use of Online Faculty Mentors

Portland Community College

• 90,000 students• Roughly 22,000 FTE• 4 main campuses• 18 - 22% of college enrollment online• 400 - 450 course sections / term• 25 - 30 new or revised courses / term• 2 designers – initial process

– 4 Instructional Technology Specialists to assist

Addressing Course Quality Issues

• New instructor training (online + f2f)

• More interactive technology to address different learning styles

• Best Practices sharing sessions• “Online Faculty Mentor” program

Avoiding shovelware• Direct use of PowerPoint designed for

classroom lectures (ineffective online)– Add voice through Camtasia

• Trained by Instructional Support Specialists

• Time consuming process, but worthwhile for subject that doesn’t change often, e.g. Art History

• Elluminate for synchronous interaction• Wimba Voice Tools for voice

introductions, explanations, discussions

Best Practices Sharing Sessions• Virtual sessions for instructors to

share• Elluminate (recorded)• Themes

– Promoting interaction & community– Group projects– Retention– Time management– Assessment methods– Publisher resources– Graphics & multimedia use

Course Quality Assessment

• Prior to 2005: course design checklist

• Sp 2005: Simplified version of Quality Matters– Designer recommends / Dean

approves

• Winter 2007: Quality Matters at “70% level”

Results of Review Process

• Improved course quality, with issues:– Huge time commitment for 2 people

• Difficult to hire more designers

– Large number of old courses never reviewed

– Limited SME scope

Online Faculty Mentor

• Inspired by “Online Faculty Lead” approach at Front Range Community College, CO– 14 online lead faculty cover the

disciplines– Assist with getting faculty trained,

course assignments, course reviews, student advising, development of standards

PCC Online Faculty Mentor (Pilot) Program

• “Online mentor” vs. “Online lead”– FT / PT– Implied power

• 8 mentors: cover many disciplines (not all)

• Responsibilities:– Mentor new faculty in related disciplines– Course shell selection (takeover course)– Course reviews– Input on training process– Assist with development of standards

• Compensation: Hourly project rate

Results – Promising so far…• Saving time• SME appeal • Better connection with the SAC

Issues

• Mentor time constraints• Follow-up mentoring – 1st term• Takeover course selection issues /

sharing intellectual property• Promoting college wide SAC

collaboration• Quick access to shells & all course

reviews• FT / PT• District wide travel

On the Horizon• More in-depth mentoring 1st term• Ways to insure quality of “old”

courses• Movement toward “core course

shells” created by unified team of instructors (with input of the mentor)

• Process for looking at “delivery” of course in addition to design (Observation tool) likely dept. chair instead of mentor

Questions

Have Fun!

Slideshow URL

http://www.slideshare.net/sjc25/strategies4quality-it-cwebinar