Online Teaching - An Introduction

Uploaded on


More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. Online Teaching An Introduction for the New Online Instructor Using the literature of online teaching at community colleges and at four year colleges and universities. Prepared by Jennifer Little Morehead State University December 7, 2013
  • 2. “On average, students in online learning conditions performed modestly better than those receiving face-toface instruction.” (U.S. Department of Education, 2010)
  • 3. Objectives Introduce: • Theory of Online Learning • Online Teaching is Different • Online Instructional Design • Successful Online Teachers • Successful Online Students • Ensuring Quality • Universal Design & Accessibility • Successful Online Institutions
  • 4. “Online instructors must engage students and encourage them to be actively involved in class instruction and discussion.” (Jackson, Jones, & Rodriguez, 2010, p. 80)
  • 5. Constructivist Teaching & Learning Constructivists view knowledge as something that is actively constructed in a learning environment comprised of meaningful experiences and interaction with others. Applying the constructivist approach requires teachers to create learning environments that provide meaningful experiences and interactions. • Chickering’s Seven Principles • Cognitive Apprenticeship Model
  • 6. Chickering’s Principles for Good Teaching Practice • Encourage contact between students & faculty • Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students • Encourage active learning • Give prompt feedback • Emphasize time on task • Communicate high expectations • Respect diverse talents and methods of learning (Montgomery, 2012)
  • 7. Cognitive Apprenticeship Model “Teaching methods that emphasize apprenticeship give students the opportunity to observe, engage in, and invent or discover expert strategies in context.” (Boling, Hough, Krinsky, Saleem & Stevens, 2011, p. 123) 1. 2. 3. 4. Content – Subject Knowledge Method – Modelling, Coaching & Scaffolding Sequencing – Ordering of Learning Activities Sociology – Social Characteristics of Learning Environments
  • 8. Online Teaching is Different Traditional Higher Education Model: • • • • • • • Linear Learning – Structure & Regulation of Ideas Learning Hierarchy- Transmission of Knowledge Learning as Product – Learning is Delivered Value on Knowledge – Authority by Position and Title Competition – Decisions Imposed by the Few Tradition – Past Provides the Foundation Faculty Centric – Faculty Satisfaction Drives Quality (Puzziferro & Shelton, 2009)
  • 9. Online Teaching is Different Emerging Higher Education Model: • Connectivist Learning – Reciprocal & Spontaneous Exchange of Ideas • Learning Equality – Creative Exchange and Creation of Knowledge • Learning as Process – Learning is Experienced • Value on Experience – Earned Authority by Impact & Inspiration • Collaboration – Decisions Determined with Diverse Inputs Who Share and Exchange the Decision Making Role • Innovation – Future Provides a Foundation • Student Centric – Student Learning Outcomes (Puzziferro & Shelton, 2009)
  • 10. Online Teaching is Different • Requires a paradigm shift from teaching to learning • Instructor is a facilitator, not distributor • Instructor knows content and how to use authentic assignments that engage students • Instructor communicates differently from a face-to-face class
  • 11. Communication by Instructor • • • • Is a continuous process throughout course Is prompt and personal Shows concern for student learning Clear instructions in syllabus and course shell can eliminate uncertainties and questions
  • 12. Online Instructional Design • Starts with learning outcomes • Has a strong syllabus with learning expectations and assignments clearly outlined • Due dates are explicit for pacing and deadlines • Modules are created for scaffolding and clear course organization • Rubrics are provided for assignments (Fish & Wiskersham, 2009)
  • 13. Online Instructional Design • Elicits higher order thinking or critical thinking • Promotes active student engagement • Allows for learning style differences (Fish & Wiskersham, 2009)
  • 14. Online Instructional Design • Takes more time than traditional face-to-face classes • Creates high levels of interaction with content, instructor, and fellow students • Creates a sense of community with students in each class (e.g., Collaborate, audio wrap-ups) • Use of multimedia fosters engagement and improves the learning experience (Boling, Hough, Krinsky, Saleem, & Stevens, 2011)
  • 15. Successful Online Instructors • Actively engage students which reduces attrition • Foster collaboration • Allow time for reflection • Provide individualized feedback • Provide timely grading (Boling, Hough, Krinsky, Slaeem, & Stevens, 2009)
  • 16. Successful Online Instructors • Are accessible via email, phone, or online forums • Employ authentic learning activities – Relevant to the real world – Learners develop the method to complete the activity – Learners view the problem through different perspectives (Herrington, Reeves, & Oliver, 2006)
  • 17. Successful Online Learners • Like the flexibility to study around family and job commitments • Often have more opportunities to participate in the course than in face-to-face classes • Can learn at their own pace • Are self-motivated • Have access to technology and use it readily • Are organized and self-directed (Koenig, 2009)
  • 18. Successful Online Learners • Have capacity to learn with limited support • Have ability to express their ideas • Have ability to cope with non-structured settings • Can relate to online instructor • Can relate to other online students • Access research materials proficiently (Beaudoin, Krutz, & Eden, 2009)
  • 19. Successful Online Learners • Engage and interact with course content • Share information and communicate with each other • Collaborate with each other • Learn from one another
  • 20. Student Satisfaction Students Value: • Social exchanges with other students and faculty • Being part of a community • Real-world assignments that require interacting with local communities • Dislike group activities when classmates lack involvement
  • 21. Ensuring Course Quality • Quality Matters is a faculty-centered, peer review process that is designed to certify the quality of online courses and online components • Universal Design for Learning: A Rubric for Evaluating Your Course Syllabus
  • 22. Ensuring Instruction Quality • Learning House Course Delivery Rubric – Social presence and availability – Instructor feedback – Student retention – Forum participation – Reinforcement of course/institutional policies – Student pacing (O’Malley, 2013)
  • 23. Universal Design Universal design is the design of products and environments to be: • Usable by all people, • To the greatest extent possible, • Without the need for adaptation or specialized design. • It is better to plan from the outset for a diverse population by implementing universal design changes within the society or environment -- addressing barriers through flexible and responsive policies, programming, coursework and settings. (National Clearinghouse on Disability and Exchange)
  • 24. Universal Design for Learning Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a set of principles for curriculum development that give all individuals equal opportunities to learn. Why is UDL necessary? Individuals bring a huge variety of skills, needs, and interests to learning. Neuroscience reveals that these differences are as varied and unique as our DNA or fingerprints. Three primary brain networks come into play:
  • 25. Universal Design for Learning Source: UDL Guidelines
  • 26. Accessibility for those with sight, hearing, mobility and learning style differences • • • • • • • Include an accommodation statement in syllabus Choose course tools carefully Use color with care Provide accessible document formats Choose fonts carefully (sans serif, 16 point minimum) Convert PowerPoint ™ to accessible HTML If it’s auditory make it visual, if it’s visual make it auditory • Video and audio material must be captioned • Provide text transcripts for screenreaders
  • 27. Who Benefits? • • • • • Students with disabilities Students who speak English as a second language International students Older students A teacher whose teaching style differs from a student’s preferred learning style • All students! (Lewandowski, 2011)
  • 28. Successful Institutions • Provide training and support to faculty on – – – – – Learning management system and related technology Student learning techniques Group collaboration Learning communities Relating content to events or subjects outside of class (Tirrell & Quick, 2012) • Provide release time for online course development • Encourage faculty to share ideas and examine new online methods (Boling, Hough, Krinsky, Saleem, Stevens, 2012)
  • 29. Successful Institutions • Foster Learning Communities for Faculty & Staff – Enhance academic and social engagement – Provide multicultural awareness – Promote job satisfaction (Jackson, Stebelton, & Laanan, 2013) • Encourage Faculty Mentorship Programs (Batts, Pagliari, Mallett, & McFadden, 2010)
  • 30. Successful Institutions • Ensure quality online teaching practices • Experiment with alternative course delivery methods (e.g., KCTCS Learn on Demand service) • Have robust advising networks with coaches or advisors for students • Have a 24/7 Help Desk
  • 31. “If we focus merely on increasing access and efficiency in course delivery, and not on producing high quality online learning experiences that increase commitment, deliver cutting edge course content, and improve collaboration among faculty and students, online learning environments will never reach their full promise.” (Barcelona, 2009, p. 196)
  • 32. References • • • • • Barcelona, R. J. (2009). Pressing the online learning advantage: Commitment, content, and community. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 57(3), 193197. Batts, D., Pagliari, L., Mallett, W., & McFadden, C. (2010). Training for faculty who teach online. Community College Enterprise, 16(2), 21-31. Beaudoin, M. F., Krutz, G., & Eden, S. (2009). Experiences and opinions of elearners: what works, what are the challenges, and what competencies ensure successful online learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 5(1), 275-289. Boling, E. C., Hough, M., Krinsky, H., Saleem, H., & Stevens, M. (2012). Cutting the distance in distance education: Perspectives on what promotes positive online learning experiences. Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 118-126. Engleman, M., & Jeffs, T. (2008). Increasing student engagement with Universal Design for Learning. World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (ELEARN) 2008. Las Vegas, NV: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
  • 33. References (continued) • • • • • • Fish, W. W., & Wickersham, L. E. (2009). Best practices for online instructors: Reminders. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(3), 279-284. Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2006). A model of authentic activities for online learning. In Juwah, C., Ed., Interactions in online education: Implications for theory and practice. London: Routledge. Jackson, L. C., Jones, S. J., & Rodriguez, R. C. (2010). Faculty actions that result in student satisfaction in online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 14(4), 78-96. Jackson, D. L., Stebleton, M. J., & Laanan, F. S. (2013). The experience of community college faculty involved in a learning community program. Community College Review, 41(3), 3-19. Juwah, C., Ed. (2006). Interactions in online education: Implications for theory and practice. London: Routledge. Koenig, R. J. (2009). Comparing effectiveness of undergraduate course delivery: A student perspective. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 6(2), 69-80.
  • 34. References (continued) • • • • • • Lewandowski, M. (2011). Everyday accessibility: A practical blueprint for online course implementation of universal accessibility standards. World Conference on E-learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (ELEARN) 2011. Honolulu, HI: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. McCall, M. (2013). The Kentucky Community and Technical College Learn on Demand model. Change, 45(3), 60-65. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Center for Technology in Learning. Montgomery, L. (2012). Teaching online: A beginner's survival kit. In P. Resta (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2012 (687-691). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. O’Malley, M. (2013). Online course delivery assessment: one librarian’s experience. Kentucky Libraries, 77(4), 24-28. Puzziferro, M., & Shelton, K. (2009). Supporting online faculty – Revisiting the seven principles (a few years later). Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(3), 1-11.
  • 35. References (continued) • • • • • Rose, R., & Ray, J. (2012). Design techniques for getting online courses done right. In P. Resta (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2012 (832-834). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Shank, P. (2004). Competencies for online instructors. Retrieved from Simocelli, A., & Hinson, J. (2010). Designing online instruction for postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 19(2), 211-220. Smith, V. C. (2010). Essential tasks and skills for online community college faculty. New Directions for Community Colleges, No. 150, 43-55. Tirrell, T., & Quick, D. (2012). Chickering’s seven principles of good practice: Student attrition in the community college online courses. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 36(8), 580-590.