The document discusses the evolution of online faculty professional development at an educational institution, highlighting the roles of key presenters and their experiences. It outlines objectives, challenges, survey findings, and a new collaborative model for developing online courses, emphasizing flexibility and standardized outcomes. The focus is on creating effective development programs to support faculty and enhance student success in online learning environments.

1. 17TH ANNUAL SLOAN-C
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
ON ONLINE LEARNING
11-5-10 ORLANDO,FL
Effective Online
Professional Development:
The Evolution Solution

2. About Us
Celeste Stratton
 MS Johns Hopkins University/Educational Technologies
 Design & facilitate DE course development programs-15 yrs
 Coordinator of Instructional Design and Training

3. About Us
Dionne Thorne
 MA University of Maryland Baltimore County, Instructional
Systems Development
 Designs & facilitates DE course development programs-8 yrs
 Instructional Designer and QM Peer Reviewer

4. About Us
Jean Ashby
 EdD Towson University, Instructional Technology
 Designs & facilitates DE course development programs- 10 yrs
 Revolutionized developmental education for online math
courses.

5. About You
Do you have a role in faculty professional development for
online faculty?
 Administrator
 Faculty
 Instructional Designer
 Trainer
Does your institution provide full-time and adjunct faculty
professional development to improve online courses and
teaching online?

6. After this presentation, you should be able to:
1. Identify essential attributes of an online faculty
development program.
2. Recognize key characteristics contributing to evolving
professional development strategies.
3. Share projections for the future of faculty development.
Objectives

7. CCBC Faculty Professional Development
History of Online Course Development
for faculty creating a new online course
Virtual Academy: 9 consecutive full day sessions onsite
Online Teaching Institute [OTI] onsite: 4 month blended, semi
monthly onsite sessions
Distance Learning Task Force: comprehensive 6 month research
study of students, faculty and staff. New ID coordinator and
ID positions created.

8. Instructional Design Research
What are the challenges?
Increased student enrollment
Need for more adjunct faculty
Physical space limitations
Self-study: anonymous self-review survey of quality standards
Interviews: leadership, faculty trainers
Faculty focus groups: anonymous

9. Instructional Design Research
Findings
Wants vs. needs differ
Faculty want flexibility
Requests for more professional development
Response
Revise OTI: add adult learner, quality standards, disability
support content, create a more flexible format.
Teaching Online Course- separate 4 week online course for
all faculty teaching existing online courses.

10. Research & Results
CCBC surveys and focus group data summarize a need for:
 Institutional directives for professional development
 Top down support & collaboration
 Flexible offerings and online training opportunities
 Online teaching competence by persons who assess faculty
 Infrastructure for support of student success
 Standardization of courses toward common outcomes

11. Online Teaching Institute
Quality Standards
Course Outcomes Learning Obj. Assessment & Eval
Learner Support and Compliance
Adult Learner & Learner Engagement
Learning Management System
4 months, blended with few onsite requirements

12. Essentials: Then and Now
Basic needs:
Assessment Process, Surveys , Focus Groups
Faculty/participants
Institutional directive [Goals/Objectives]
Institutional Support
Professional Development Plan
Content- Instructional Problem
Technology Resources: LMS or learning space
Communication Tools

13. History – How faculty learn to teach online
 Informal learning/ mentoring self-learning and sharing by
faculty. Primary focus is technology.
 Professional development provided onsite specific to
individual courses. Focus on andragogy/pedagogy and
resources.
 Professional Development provided in a blended format over
several weeks or months with a mentor and quality assurance
tool with a measurable outcome.
 School-wide coordinated team based course development
includes a faculty professional development component
serving student centered outcomes and accreditation criteria.

14. Factors which impact model shift
Student retention
Efficiency of resources and technology
Facilitator flexibility
Qualified achievement, artifacts, e-portfolio
Varied course specific resources and learning objects
Quality standards [instructional design]
Accreditation criteria
Continuous improvement plans

15. A new model
Faculty professional development is targeted as teams build
new courses in a collaborative team environment applying
concurrent course design toward creation/revision of courses
to meet outcomes.
Results of constant evaluation

16. A similar model
Concurrent Course Cylinder [Reference : University of Georgia]
ProjectPlan
Communication
Team Module
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4

17. A new model
Team consists of: Project Leader/ Sr Instructional Designer,
Course Developer, Subject Matter Expert [Faculty], Quality
Assurance Representative, Coordinator or Dept. Chair.
Professional development offered to all team members, some
topics offered exclusive to role. Topics available on-demand.
Topics: andragogy/pedagogy, quality assurance, LMS, learner
engagement, course outcomes, learning objectives, assessment
& evaluation, disability compliance.

18. Share your experience and suggestions.
What do you think will be the next transition for faculty
professional development?
Your Turn & Our Future

19. Instructional Design Team
Thank you for your attention & interest.
Follow the presenters in Twitter:
celestestratton
ddthorne