Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Faculty Development in the Age of Online "Everything"

347 views

Published on

Presentation for the Midwest Scholars Conference 2013

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Faculty Development in the Age of Online "Everything"

  1. 1. Rate Your SchoolOn your paper, take a minute and rateyour school in the various areas on a scalefrom 1-5 regarding your perceived levelof university support in the various areas:
  2. 2. Session ObjectivesParticipants will: 0 Gain perspective on what it takes to provide quality support for faculty transitioning to online and hybrid classroom models 0 Gain knowledge about best practices regarding faculty development for online teaching and learning 0 Learn how to ensure that digital accessibility for persons with disabilities is infused throughout the training and support process
  3. 3. Our Campuses0 Regional campuses of major public university – Purdue University0 Purdue Calumet (PUC) is located near the Illinois border, 20 miles from Chicago 0 Mostly urban population 0 Large population of commuter, non-traditional students0 Purdue North Central (PNC) is located about 40 miles east of Purdue Calumet 0 More rural/suburban population 0 About half the size of PUC, mostly non-traditional students
  4. 4. About Us0 Anastasia Trekles- Clinical Associate Professor, Purdue University Calumet0 Pam Riesmeyer- Web Accessibility Coordinator, Purdue University Calumet0 Erin White- Coordinator of Learning and Technology & Continuing Lecturer in Education
  5. 5. The First Step: Needs Analysis0 Survey faculty to assess needs and to establish a baseline of where to start regarding the development and future implementation of faculty training for online teaching and learning0 Interview stakeholders- faculty, students, administrators, and staff0 Take inventory of current supporting infrastructure: 0 Web resources 0 Tech support 0 Training 0 One-on-one consultations
  6. 6. To illustrate…0 Awareness of accessibility and comfort level Question: What is your understanding of Web site accessibility? a. Very little, Im just starting to learn (10%) b. I have some understanding but need more (49%) c. I am well aware of Web site accessibility needs (41%)
  7. 7. I am comfortable using the following:
  8. 8. Expressed faculty concernsA persistent theme was that a lack of knowledge exists regarding the skills and support needed to design and develop online course materials (best practices and pedagogy) 63% did NOT feel competent in designing and developing online course materialsThey felt students need organized instruction in the online education process
  9. 9. IdentifyProblem(s) Faculty Budget/ Motivation Incentives Administrative Design & Support Develop a Program Technology Pedagogical (Redesign) Support Support Implement & Assess
  10. 10. Format for Training0 Mandatory or not? 0 PNC Faculty Senate passed ‘Recommendations for Online Courses’ 0 At Calumet, some departments made Distance Learning Certification program mandatory0 Interactive or not?0 In person or online?0 One-on-one or group instruction?
  11. 11. What’s Been Successful?0“Working Fridays”0Walk-in assistance during the week0Online Academy0Mentorship between faculty0One-on-one in person or virtual (webcasts)0DOC program (Develop an Online Course)
  12. 12. Accessibility0 Why do we need to address this? 0 Hearing/visually/mobility impaired 0 Colorblindness 0 Learning disabled0 Should be infused into all training0 Usability is accessibility – universal design mindset0 Accessibility doesn’t only benefit individuals with disabilities – it benefits all learners
  13. 13. Accessibility Best Practices0 PDFs, PowerPoint, Excel and Word docs0 Closed-captioning for all videos: can be searched, publishers can create CC videos (see http://www.uiaccess.com/transcripts/transcripts_on_the_ web.html#benes)0 Web Pages that adhere to accessibility standards (see http://webs.purduecal.edu/webaccessibility)0 Live Presentations (see http://www.w3.org/WAI/training/accessible)0 Testing (additional time available in LMS, images and audio usage)
  14. 14. Examples0Recommendations for training0Checklist and guidelines for accessibility0Rubrics for online courses- PNC Recommendations for Online Courses
  15. 15. How did you rate your PD?
  16. 16. Commercials, faculty Stipend, Letter of testimonials, chair’s Recognition, Publicity, support, promote increase VCAA & Chancellor’s in enrollment/ graduation endorsement rates Expanded support via web resources, work study & currently Increased training via facultyseeking to train helpdesk personnel to mentors, graduate expand their role practicums, work study
  17. 17. Resources0 Quality Matters: http://qualitymatters.org0 QM rubric: http://www.qmprogram.org/files/QM_Standards_2011- 2013.pdf0 Office of Learning and Technology: http://www.pnc.edu/distance0 Purdue University Calumet Accessibility Resources: http://webs.purduecal.edu/webaccessibility0 Book on “human issues” in technology: http://zelda23publishing.com Download these slides: http://slideshare.net/andella
  18. 18. References0 Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class differences: Online education in the United States, 2010. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/class_differences.0 Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centered learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 243-260. doi: 10.1015/j.edurev.2010.06.0010 Bernard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E. Wade, A., Wozney, L., . . . Huang, B. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379-439. doi: 10.3102/003465430740033790 Caldwell, B., Cooper, M., Reid, L., & Vanderheiden, G. (Eds.). (2008, December 11). Web content accessibility guidelines 2.0. Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/.
  19. 19. References0 Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A., and Haywood, K., (2011). The 2011 Horizon Report. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/HR2011.pdf.0 Kirschner, P.A., & Van Merriënboer, J.J.G. (2008). Ten steps to complex learning: A new approach to instruction and instructional design. In T. L. Good (Ed.), 21st Century Education: A Reference Handbook (pp. 244- 253). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.0 Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.0 Pernice, S., & Nielsen, J. (2001). Beyond ALT text: Making the web easy to use for users with disabilities. Fremont, CA: Nielsen Norman Group. Retrieved from http://www.nngroup.com/reports/accessibility/beyond_ALT_text.pdf.
  20. 20. References0 Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 794d, § 1400 et seq. (1998). Retrieved from http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?fuseAction=stdsdoc.0 Sener, J., & Shattuck, K. (2006). Research literature and standards sets support for Quality Matters review standards as of 12/5/05. Quality Matters. Retrieved from http://www.qmprogram.org/files/Matrix%20of%20Research%20Standard s%20FY0506_0.pdf.0 Swan, K., Matthews, D., Bogle, L., Boles, E., & Day, S. (2012). Linking online course design and implementation to learning outcomes: A design experiment. Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 81-88. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.07.0020 Trekles, A.M. (2009). Putting people first: Human issues in instructional technology. Highland, IN: Zelda23Publishing.0 Wang, Y, Peng, H., Huang, R., Hou, Y., & Wang, J. (2008). Characteristics of distance learners: Research on relationships of learning motivation, learning strategy, self-efficacy, attribution and learning results. Open Learning, 23(1), 17-28 doi: 10.1080/02680510701815277.

×