SALT 2009 - Faculty Success

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

    Favorites, Groups & Events

    SALT 2009 - Faculty Success - Presentation Transcript

    1. Factors Influencing Instructor Success
      in
      Online Courses
      Phil Ice, Ed.D.
      SALT, Washington Interactive Technologies Conference
      2009
    2. What Factors Influence Instructor Success in Online Courses?
    3. Using the Community of Inquiry Framework to Measure Success
      • proposed in 2000 by Garrison, Anderson and Archer
      • a process model of learning in online and blended educational environments
      • grounded in a collaborative constructivist view of higher education
      • assumes effective online learning requires the development of a community of learners that supports meaningful inquiry and deep learning
    4. social presence
      cognitive presence
      LEARNING
      teaching presence
    5. Social Presence
      • the ability of participants in a community of inquiry to project themselves socially and emotionally -- as ‘real’ people
      • the degree to which participants in computer mediated communication feel socially and emotionally connected
    6. Social Presence - Elements
      • affective expression (expressing emotion, self-projection)
      • open communication (learning climate, risk free expression)
      • group cohesion (group identity, collaboration)
    7. Cognitive Presence
      • the extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community of inquiry
    8. Cognitive Presence - Elements
      • triggering event (sense of puzzlement)
      • exploration (sharing information & ideas)
      • integration (connecting ideas)
      • resolution (synthesizing & applying new ideas)
    9. Teaching Presence
      • the design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes
    10. Teaching Presence - Elements
      • design and organization (setting curriculum & activities)
      • facilitation (shaping constructive discourse)
      • direct instruction (focusing & resolving issues)
    11. Community of Inquiry Survey
      • 9 social presence items (3 affective expression, 3 open communication, 3 group cohesion)
      • 12 cognitive presence items (3 triggering, 3 exploration, 3 integration, 3 resolution)
      • 13 teaching presence items (4 design & facilitation, 6 facilitation of discourse, 3 direct instruction)
    12. CoI Survey Validation
      • tested in graduate courses at four institutions in the US and Canada
      • principal component factor analysis
      • three factor model predicted by CoI framework confirmed
      • Arbaugh, Cleveland-Innes, Diaz, Garrison, Ice, Richardson, Shea & Swan – 2008
      • now the most frequently cited process model in the literature (over 350 citations – Google Scholar)
    13. Commonly Accepted Factors
      Courses Previously Taught
      Institutional Training
      Technical Support
      Pedagogical Guidance
      Origin of Degree
      Degree Level
    14. Study 1
      • West Virginia University
      • Impact of Pedagogical Training and Technical Support (n = 18 instructor and 512 students)
      • Training and Support hours regressed on Teaching Presence Subscales of Facilitation of Discourse and Direct Instruction
      • Number of courses previously taught was treated as a co-variable
    15. Study 1
      • The equation was significant - HOWEVER
      • Pedagogical Guidance accounted for 2.1% of variance
      • Technical Support accounted for 1.9% of variance
      • Previous online teaching experience was not a significant predictor – in fact some of the highest scores came from first time instructors
      Ice, 2007
    16. Study 2
      • American Public University System
      • Modality for last degree earned – online vs. face to face
      • Degree Level
      • Co-variables – age, gender, courses previously taught, completion of additional pedagogical training
      • Regressed on Teaching Presence, Social Presence and Cognitive Presence and Facilitation of Discourse and Direct Instruction Subscales (n = 94 instructors and 4219 students)
    17. Study 2
      • The equation was significant, HOWEVER
      • Gender was the only significant predictor
      • Being female accounted for 4% of the variance in Teaching Presence, Cognitive Presence and Facilitation of Discourse subscale
      Patrizi and Ice, 2009
    18. So, what does matter?
      Research shows that commonly accepted factors have no impact.
      Is it all a matter of one’s outlook toward learning?
    19. Social Basis of Learning
      • Theory and research suggest that collaborative learning is the most effective means of facilitating learning in online environments.
      • Based on Vygotsky’s concept of social mediated practice
      • Collaborative learning posits that individuals construct knowledge through dialogue, group discussion and peer modification.
      • The success of collaborative learning is dependent upon the ability of group members to assist peers in diagnosing and modifying misconceptions.
    20. Epistemology - Constructivism
      • Proponents of constructivism argue that knowledge is created through a process of inquiry and discovery in which external stimuli are interpreted in a unique manner by each learner.
      • A multitude of realities situated within each learner.
      • Dependent upon learners ability to analyze, synthesize and evaluate information.
      • Creation of meaningful, personalized knowledge.
    21. Epistemology - Objectivism
      • Learning is a sequential process in which individual units of declarative knowledge are assembled into larger declarative, procedural and conditional constructs to define reality.
      • Learners display an understanding of a single reality through declarative, procedural and conditional knowledge.
      • Premised on the instructor having complete control over the materials, pace and direction of learning.
      • Not dependent on how individuals internalize or interpret such information
    22. (Arbaugh & Benbunan-Fich, 2006, p. 438)
    23. Methodology
      • An exploratory sequential design with data transformation was implemented. Priority was given to the transformed qualitative components.
      • 11 instructors interviewed – probing for understanding of technology.
      • Syllabi and learning activities placed within socio-epistemological framework.
      • Ethnographic reporting from instructional designers.
    24. Analysis
      • Triangulation of data with correlation emphasized.
      • Iterative, interpretive process to assess faculty understanding of application of technology.
      • Qualitative data used to support relationshiops from analysis of transformed data – understanding of technology & relationships to socio-epistemological orientations
      • Establishment of grounded theory was an objective.
      • Later confirmatory samplings.
    25. Socio-epistemological classification of course activities by instructor.
      Activity type means for subgroup B versus all other instructors.
    26. Interview Data
      • Four instructors (Sharon, Stan, Linda & Monica) did not differentiate between technologies and pedagogical applications of technologies.
      • Viewed technological tools as a replacement for pedagogy in online courses.
      • Believed various technologies would dictate how learning activities are structured.
      • Believed technologies had singular uses.
      • Beliefs not altered by significant training and support.
      • Perception not detected among other faculty.
    27. Relationships
      • Of all course activities, an average of 88.10% of those developed by the 4 instructor subgroup were individual. In contrast, the means for all other instructors were relatively balanced between individual (52.57%) and collaborative (47.43%) activities.
      • With respect to Arbaugh and Benbunan-Fich’s (2006) Teaching Approaches Framework, an average of 76.19% of subgroup B’s activities were classified as objectivist-individual as compared to a mean of 27.02% for all other instructors.
      • Constructivist – Group oriented instructors had statistically significant higher scores across all TP, SP, CP and all subscales
    28. Implications
      • Socio-epistemological orientations may impact instructors’ ability to construct and facilitate effective online learning experiences.
      • The potential to screen potential instructors on the basis of socio-epistemological orientations may be of benefit to administrators.
      • Training and support structures may be needed to address paradigmatic orientations of faculty.
      • More research is needed to validate this study and the hypotheses developed.
    29. Director of Course Design, Research & Development
      American Public University System
      pice@apus.edu
      Thank You!
      Phil Ice, Ed.D.
      Director of Course Design, Research & Development
      American Public University System
      pice@apus.edu
    SlideShare Zeitgeist 2009

    + philicephilice Nominate

    custom

    117 views, 0 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    Factors Influencing Faculty Success in Online Cours more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 117
      • 117 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 0
    • Downloads 4
    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