Search

Online Learning: the SLN experience

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Notes on slide 1

    We an example. We don’t have all the answers. Here to share what we know and learn from you too. No need to reinvent the wheel. Learn from our mistakes. Use and adapt our stuff.

    4 and 9

    Since 1994 I have trained 3000 fully online faculty and over 90 online instructional designers. We have 4000 fully online courses, 107 online degree programs…100,000 fully online student enrollments.

    National survey of student engagement 2008 - Indiana University - George Kuh - online students are more engaged than F2f students http://nsse.iub.edu/ Bernard, Robert M.. Ph.D. http://doe.concordia.ca/Faculty/?page=faculty_list&categoryid=5&facultyid=10 Professor of Education Educational Technology Centre for the Study of Learning and Performance [email_address] Tel: 514-848-2424, Ext. 2027 Office: LB-545-5 Online students out perform f2f students US department of education - evaluation of evidence -based practices in online learning - a meta-analysis and review of online learning studies - 2009 The meta analysis found that on average students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving f2f instruction. http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html#edtech

    Define benefits of membership and relevance to campuses in the new decentralized model.

    Advisory board, committees, menu of services, what services do we offer as part of the membership and what do we offer to suny for free as a suny-wide program? Ownership/accountability/campus customer satisfaction. How do we appeal to non participating campuses, how are we relevant?

    Models : team development, Faculty develop with ID assistance

    Packet : SLN Online Faculty Development Program description Online course models, Training continuum, Course design process illustration Challenges : Scalability: How do you get consistently replicable results for course quality, effective faculty? Process. Large scale = chaos = templates and wizard to quick start faculty and inform and influence consistency in course design. Exemplar courses for observation. Buy-in : -Faculty mistrust: use peer lead trainer. Faculty don’t believe this will work: use faculty that have done it successfully be your advocates. Let faculty and their courses speak. -Faculty feel isolated: train as cohort. Build community/share the work/use faculty as training mentors for formative and summative course reviews. Interdisciplinary cohorts of faculty to build community of practice. Access to experienced faculty, opportunities for inter/intra disciplinary networking, peer support/training -Faculty have no online experiences: online course gives them the chance to be in a model course, gives them the perspective of the student, and opportunity to begin in a non threatening way conversation about the issues that concern them most: course ownership, time to develop, support, learning curve, plagiarism, etc. Consistency : -Use faculty and their courses as incubators to learn more about teaching and learning online and to develop best practices to fold back into the program, training, and course design. -Online conference + exemplars + access to experienced faculty + f2f training + online information + HD + pedagogy handbook of best practices + template/standards + individual ID support. -Build culture of continuous improvement and iteration of courses: Training for returning faculty to improve course and teaching – community: to collect best practices and share research results and revise/improve courses.

    Critical inquiry in a text-based environment

    Theoretical frame work - Includes class community

    Contribute to the scholarly work to understand theoretically what works, then trasform that into practice: Sloan-c

    Packet: Program description and process illustrations/models Inform our practice with research based findings. Feed it into process, models, approaches, tools, recommendations, fac dev etc.

    Support roles : HD, ID, AC/OLDirectors With out support, you can have the most beautiful course, but faculty are not trained well, scalability etc.

    Packet: SLN Role of the ID, Expectations/responsibilities, job descriptions, interview materials- questions, candidate scoring sheets. Support of mids, faculty, campuses. Challenges: How do we scale when our model that addresses consistency and quality required 1 on 1 MID support? The need and ability to rapidly scale required that we scale the MID model – extend it to campuses. We could not hire new staff every time we had 20 more faculty to support… the need to extend this to the campuses and still retain the ability to inform quality and maintain consistency required that we develop the mid model as extended SLN staff that we trained, had close contact with and guided through the processes. Faced with limited resources in 1994 (as the program began), rapidly expanding faculty development needs, and a desire to operationalize, scale, and institutionalize sustainable processes to ensure consistent quality and results in course designs, and effective online instructors, I created the role of the campus-based MID. The SLN campus-MID model, is at its simplest a train the trainer model. MIDs not only disseminate the best practices collected or researched in a coordinated and consistent manner, but also contribute themselves to the data collection, evaluation, revision, feedback, and best practices collection loop. Today SLN MIDs are a unique and successful community in the SUNY system, and this role is now institutionalized across SUNY for SLN. They comprise a large community of highly experienced online instructional design professionals all dedicated to the common cause of supporting SLN faculty from all disciplines in the development of their online courses. ACs: To effectively operationalize the a large rapidly growing program we needed a single point of contact with authority on the campus. The role of the AC emerges and evolves into the role of DL coordinator or director which in turn assists in institutionalizing SLN and DL programs on the campus. HD: The need and ability to scale required that we develop centralized tech HD: economies of scale. One HD for faculty and students instead of 64. Centralized support supported consistencies in course navigation/design. Resources/Communications: The need to communicate on large scale/timely communications of lots of processes, procedures, and information resulted in: elaborate process based on roles, broadcast lists, Web info: Faculty center, student commons, MIDcentral, campus center, student and faculty orientations.

    Approaches : build it/buy it/ standardize, collaboration/ consensus/ community, organizational culture,

    Packet: Courses for observation – takeaway- open to you. Faculty course design materials: Course information best practices, and anatomy of a module. Without stable reliable tech, you can have the most beautiful courses with well prepared faculty…. But students can’t access… Technology: How did we do it with a very small staff of 12 ? We got efficient and good at building apps that automated processes. -How did we do it with no CMSs? 1994 there were no course management systems so we built our own. It had to be good. And to be good we had start with a theoretical framework, build our understanding of effective online teaching and learning, and be able to translate that into practice: faculty development, training, templates, etc. Robust, reliable, stable network & technology. Build it. Automate it. Self-service. -How did we deal with Large scale/rapid growth/need for control and quality: Template and wizard to inform and influence course design, consistency for quality and for support Tools: Limited resources dictated that we had to have faculty develop their own courses and know how to do everything to develop, teach manage and revise their own courses. – wizards and templates and automations built in to applications/CMS. Efficient, effective, consistent on a large scale. -Small program staff resulted in an approach to empower campuses with the ability to do stuff, and self service. We got better at being more efficient, we didn’t get bigger. Approaches: -Support and service culture: How did we do it? we built SLN one instructor at a time/one course at a time/one campus at a time. The way we did it was in partnership with campuses, faculty, and staff. -Communicate and be honest. Ask what others think. Ask for help. Do what you say. Say what you do. -Faculty: focus on effective online pedagogy. Faculty-driven course design-- pedagogy not imposed by the CMS application or the instructional designer. Faculty must develop the course themselves. Opportunities for participation in online courses or discussion. Observation of live online courses.

    Key differences: The role of the professor - Guide by the side NOT sage on the stage. The role of the student – student centered not teacher centered What is learned – what the learner needs to know – motivated learning How learning occurs – experiential Malcom Knowles / 4 Principles: In design of learning according to Knowles: 1. Adults need to be involved in the planning and evaluation of their instruction. Children are sponges. 2. Experience (including mistakes) provides the basis for learning activities for adults. Children are sponges. 3. Adult learning is problem-centered rather than content-oriented. Children are sponges. 4. Adults are most interested in learning subjects that have immediate relevance to their job or personal life. Children are sponges. need to know why they need to learn something. need to learn experientially. approach learning as problem-solving. Strategies such as case studies, role playing, simulations, and self-evaluation are most useful. Instructors adopt a role of facilitator or resource rather than lecturer or grader.

    Evaluate : satisfaction and learning surveys, CI meetings, community participation, consensus and decision making

    Packet : SLN TP questionnaire and online papers. Both program evaluation and scholarly work to understand and add to the understanding of effective practices in online teaching and learning. Challenges : Different at every stage. But focus on teaching and learning and program. Faculty buy-in: can it be done, is it as good as, who owns my stuff, cheating, etc. Technology and large scale training Campus Buy in: director of DL/OL, integrate into campus operations/processes Changing landscape: Staying current, relevant, adapting to change, blended, migration, course quality and large numbers of “experienced” faculty how do we continuously improve support and services? Commit to the process. Use the info. For program evaluation and improvement, and for improving our understanding of effective practices in online teaching and learning environments 1. Use the program and communities as incubators to collect information, best practices and use them to continuously improve support, services, program. 2. Longitudinal, systematic data collection and analysis --Nationally recognized scholarly work to back us up. To address the issue of quality we needed to know what we were talking about and we needed to build it into everything we do. Observe, collect data, & share best practices.

    Quality : Course reviews/rubrics, faculty/course evaluations, peer reviews, summative/formative reviews, QM,

    Packet: New Faculty course review materials, formative and summative checklists, Returning faculty: evaluate, review, and revise your online course , TP and class community course review rubric, and example course formal course review, teaching presence survey self-assessment/diagnostic and supporting materials. All of these elements intersect/overlap. Without one the others fail… dependent on each other for success. Challenges: How do we Inform and influence course quality on a large scale? How do we get returning faculty to revise /improve their courses? how do we affect large numbers of faculty and courses that have already been trained and developed and are resistant to change with new information, best practices and approaches? Wizard to scaffold faculty with an effective quick start course design. Course templates/standards that makes technology and instructional design transparent. Opportunities for reflection, evaluation, and revision. Formal instructional design course reviews. Training. Research.

    The beginning of the conversation.

    Favorites, Groups & Events

    Online Learning: the SLN experience - Presentation Transcript

    1. 2001 recipient of the Sloan-C Award for Excellence in ALN Faculty Development Online Learning The SUNY Learning Network Experience Alejandra M. Pickett Associate Director SUNY Learning Network Faculty Development & Instructional Design
    2. This presentation will describe:
      • An introduction and background of the SUNY Learning Network (SLN).
      • The 5 key elements in SLN’s successful award-winning online faculty development program.
      • O ur challenges & some lessons learned.
      Overview
    3. Introduction State University of New York
      • The single largest public university in the nation
      • 440,000 students
      • 32,000 + faculty
      • 64 Campuses
        • 13 University Centers and Doctoral Degree Granting Inst.
        • 13 University Colleges
        • 8 Colleges of Technology
        • 30 Community Colleges
    4.  
    5. SUNY Learning Network
        • 30 of the 64 campus participate in SLN.
        • 3,000 online faculty.
        • 107 online degrees offered.
        • 100,000+ online student enrollments.
        • 4,000 + fully online courses.
        • high levels of student & faculty satisfaction.
        • CC account for 67% of student enrollments.
      !
        • SLN was referenced
        • in testimony to the Kerrey Commission
        • in Congress as the
        • 2nd largest
        • ALN in the
        • country.
      2008-2009 academic year. . .
    6. SLN Awards 2000 EDUCAUSE Award for Systemic Progress in Teaching and Learning 2001 Sloan-C award for Excellence in ALN Faculty Development 2002 Sloan-C award for Excellence in Institution-Wide ALN Programming 2003 Sloan-C Award for Excellence in Online Teaching 2006 USDLA 21st Century Best Practice Award - Online Technology - Higher Education 2009 NUTN Distance Education Innovation Award
    7. SLN Background
      • Faculty Development and Training
      • Faculty Training Materials
      • Course Development Process
      • Instructional Design & Support Team – best practices
      • Campus-based MIDs – for ongoing local Faculty Support
      • Research/Data Collection/Analysis
      • Campus-based Academic Coordinator liaison
      • Policy Development
      • Marketing & Promotional Activities
      • Technical Infrastructure (Servers/Telecommunications)
      • Technical Support/7 x 24 Operational Support
      • HelpDesk/7 days a week
      • Central Inquiry Response Capacity
      • Common Student Registration Process
      • SUNY DL Web site
      • Assisting Registrars
      ! SLN - built a University System-wide ALN Visit: http://SLN.suny.edu Historical Benefits of Membership in SLN
    8. SLN Background
      • Academic Authority
        • Offer Courses
        • Grant Degree
        • Select Faculty
        • Academic Review
      • Standard Student Services
        • Enrollment Management
        • Financial Aid
        • Advisement
      • Receive and Manage Revenue
        • Tuition, State Aid, Charge Backs, etc.
      SUNY Campus Responsibilities
    9. SLN Background Growth in online courses…
    10. SLN Background Growth in online degree programs & certificates
    11. SLN Background Growth in enrollments
    12. Yesterday 1994-95 research & development period. Objective : what works? We already assumed “no significant difference” http://www.nosignificantdifference.org/ 1995-99 synthesis of models, processes, & procedures, infrastructure, resources, support and services. Objective : will it scale? 1999-05 . . . Full-scale production. Objective : institutionalization, sustainability Where we’ve been…
    13. Migration 2006-09 Campus, Course, Faculty, and SLN programmatic migration to ANGEL and new business model. Objective : Will they buy our support and services? What are the benefits of membership? Whom do we serve? 2009 in the last month of our migration BB buys ANGEL. ?? Where we are…
    14. Today
        • 25 of the 40 campuses migrated with us to ANGEL - a 3-year process - June 2009. Future migration? To what?
        • Migration of programmatic elements, approaches, processes, methods.
        • Decentralization results in many changes for the program and campuses.
        • Supporting campuses that choose not to use the “preferred CMS.”
        • New fee for service business model.
      Our challenges ...
      • . . . Evolution now!
        • other LMSs
        • blended learning
        • eportfolio
        • quality matters
        • portals
        • digital repositories
        • social networking
        • web2.0
        • single sign-on
      • Objective : Growth and expansion, to serve the entire spectrum and continuum of SUNY online needs including web enhanced and hybrid courses. Shift to fee for services model, shift from faculty and course-centered program to community-centered support & services.
      The Future... Where are we going?
    16. Faculty Development
        • Our Roadmap...
        • Objective: develop large numbers of faculty to teach online and insure consistent and effective courses developed in a specific time frame.
        • Required: Need to develop and implement a scaleable and replicable process to train large numbers of faculty to produce technically and instructionally sound courses.
        • Result: Comprehensive and integrated faculty development and course design processes.
            • Large-scale production required that we develop ways to support & train large numbers of faculty and produce large numbers of courses of consistent quality.
            • Using a comprehensive faculty development and course design approach, we avoid cookie cutter mass production by working with individual faculty and allowing them and their content to drive course design.
            • We have the opportunity to influence and share best practices across the design of all courses.
      Share stuff we know works. Learn from faculty - what they find works. Faculty Development How we did it...
    18. ! SLN’s 5 key elements What I have learned from working with over 3000 SUNY faculty, from 40+ SUNY institutions, and thousands of students since 1994. Model : Rapid Scale: This required that we develop a consistently applied and thoughtful faculty development process. Support : Large numbers: Successful online courses have effective designs and effective/prepared instructors. = Instructional designers, HD, templates. Approaches : Our philosophy: The pedagogy dog wags the technology tail NOT the other way around. Evaluation : Program evaluation and continuous improvements: Iterate! Best practices: what is working, why, what needs to be improved? Quality : Requires a comprehensive approach to training, support, resources, best practices, exemplars, community of practice, template/standards, formal course review/rubric. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
    19. ?
            • What models does SLN use for online faculty development, course design, and training?
      Key Element Models 1
    20. Key Element
      • 4-Stage faculty development process.
      • 7 step online course design process.
      • Challenge : scalability, faculty buy-in, consistency in course quality and student experience.
      SLN faculty development, course design, training. . . 1. M odel 2. S upport 3. A pproaches 4. E valuation 5. Q uality
      • Garrison, Anderson, Rourke, Archer (2002).
    22.  
    23. SLN Background Research & Publication http://tinyurl.com/69zw4l
    24.  
    25.  
            • What key support roles are necessary?
      Support ? Key Element 2
    27. Key Elements
      • Campus-based MIDs & ACs.
      • Community, professional development.
      • Communications & regular events.
      • Technical HelpDesk support.
      • Resources in a variety of media.
      • Challenge : Limited staff resources, exponential growth, institutionalization
      SLN support. . . 1. M odel 2. S upport 3. A pproaches 4. E valuation 5. Q uality
            • What technology, tools, and approaches are necessary?
      Approaches ? Key Elements 3
    29. Key Elements
      • Home-grown CMS from 1994 – 2009.
      • Faculty develop their own courses.
      • Empowerment = build automation and build campus autonomy and self-service.
      • Andragogy
      • Challenge : limited staff & resources, no CMS, exponential growth.
      SLN technology, tools, & approaches. . . 1. M odel 2. S upport 3. A pproaches 4. E valuation 5. Q uality
    30. ! Pedagogy Andragogy
        • According
        • to Malcolm Knowles
        • 1970’s
      A Comparison… Learning experiences should be based around experiences, since people are performance centered in their learning. Acquisition of subject matter. Curriculum organized by subjects. Orientation to learning People learn what they need to know, so that learning is organized around real life application. People learn what society expects them to. So that the curriculum is standardized. Readiness to learn Interactive. Teaching methods include discussion, problem-solving, etc. Passive. Teaching methods are didactic. The learner's experience Moves towards independence . Self-directed. Teacher encourages and nurtures this movement. Dependent. Teacher directs what, when, how a subject is learned and tests that it has been learned. The learner Andragogy Pedagogy  
            • How do you evaluate and improve your program, your understanding of online teaching and learning, and your approaches?
      Evaluate ? Key Elements 4
    32. Key Elements
      • Online teaching and learning Effectiveness: Start with a theoretical framework to inform and contribute to practice, approaches, models, processes
      • Programmatic Effectiveness: In a systematic regular way ask what is working and what can be improved?
      • Challenge : proof of concept, scalability, institutionalization, sustainability.
      SLN evaluation… 1. M odel 2. S upport 3. A pproaches 4. E valuation 5. Q uality
            • How do you insure course quality ?
      ? Key Elements Quality 5
    34. Key Elements
      • Course templates/standards/wizard.
      • Course review rubric/checklists- QM
      • Revise and Improve new faculty wkshp.
      • RFIDI: http://sln.suny.edu/teachingsurvey
      • Community of faculty & IDs
      • Challenge : quality on a large scale and growing number of “experienced” online faculty.
      SLN course quality. . . 1. M odel 2. S upport 3. A pproaches 4. E valuation 5. Q uality
    35. ? ? Any questions http://www.slideshare.net/alexandrapickett/
    36. Thank you!
      • Alexandra M. Pickett
      • [email_address]
              • Join my network!
              • http://www.twitter.com/alexpickett
              • http://www.slideshare.net/alexandrapickett/slideshows
              • http://www.youtube.com/user/alexandrapickett
              • http://slnsolsummit2009.edublogs.org/
              • http://etap687.edublogs.org
              • http://twitter.com/slnsolsummit
              • http://flickr.com/photos/alexandrapickett
              • http://www.spock.com/Alexandra-M.-Pickett-TFZBh10F
              • http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandrapickett
              • http://www.pandora.com/people/alexandra.pickett
              • http://del.icio.us/alexandrapickett/
              • http://www.diigo.com/profile/alexandrapickett
              • Alejandra Subagja in Second Life http://slurl.com/secondlife/SUNY%20Learning%20Network/128/128/0
              • Skype: alexandrapickett

    + Alexandra M. PickettAlexandra M. Pickett, 3 weeks ago

    custom

    83 views, 0 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 83
      • 83 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 0
    • Downloads 3
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories

    Tags

    -->
    Search
    RSS Feed
    What's new?

    © 2009 SlideShare Inc. All Rights Reserved