This document summarizes an online course on ethics and legal responsibilities taught over multiple continents. It describes the pedagogical approach, tools used, phases of the course including student paper summaries and group presentations, and a final individual project. Challenges included engaging diverse students across time zones, while benefits included deep learning from peer interactions and authentic experiences. Student feedback was largely positive about what they learned, though some struggled with workload or peer evaluations.

1. October 27, 2014
Presented by Dr. Christopher Hartt, PhD
Faculty of Agriculture
Multi-continent
groups

2. My background
Teaching since 2008
Online using WebCT, Eluminate Live,
Blackboard 8.1, Moodle, Blackboard Learn,
Camtasia, Elive
B.A.(83), MBA(86), PhD(13)
22 years as Entrepreneur/Intrapreneur
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

3. The Course
M.A. Communications and M. Public
Relations
Ethics and Legal Responsibilities - Fall 2011
25 2nd year students, at times in 7 provinces
and 4 continents (one student did travel to
Africa later in the semester) frequently in 10
time zones (at one point 12)
Completely online
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

4. Pedagogical
Approach
From experience
– difficult to engage online students
– Task must be linked to grades
– Procrastination must be discouraged
From Literature
– Need for authentic experience (Hetherington & Reeves
2003)
– Value of social interaction (Salmon, 2013)
– Importance of Collaboration (Palloff & Pratt, 2010)
– Assessment (Moore & Kearsley, 2011; Palloff & Pratt,
2010)
– And a great deal more from work on Large Course
committee at Saint Mary’s University
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

5. Issues/Demographi
cs
Different time zones
Employed students
Age range
24 female – 1 male (not really an issue but fits
here best)
Experience gap
Commitment gap
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

6. Tools available
Textbooks
Elluminate Live (or Elive)
Moodle
– Chat*
– Forums*
– Testing*
– Assignments*
– Wikis
– Linked content* (webpages, articles and videos)
– Videos*
– Peer grading*
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE
* Employed in this course

7. Course
in10t mirnuote dvidueo cof tthei opronf was posted in
moodle
Briefly explained the nature of the course,
the attitude and the syllabus (also posted)
A live chat was scheduled where the prof
participated in the general class chat room
(students were told they could ask for a
general chat or Elive session at any time)
Students also emailed questions via moodle;
answers were shared in the course page
(questions were left anonymous)
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

8. Groups
5 groups of 5 were generated randomly
Each group was assigned a chat room
The group was required to have at least one 60
minute chat per week for the duration of the
course
– Topics were assigned weekly
Students scheduled their own chats via email
– Working out their time zone issues
There were group tasks assigned for
presentation to the whole of the class in
addition to peer learning activities
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

9. Phase 1
There was no textbook for the course
In lieu, a series of articles were provided via links through
the library (50 to begin with in two groups)
Week 1 each student was assigned an article
Each student discussed the article within their group
Student posted a 500 word summary of the article to a
discussion forum (naming the thread)
Week 1 articles were basic concepts in Ethics
Students chose a book to read for a later book review
assignment
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

10. Week 2
Students were assigned 4 discussions each to comment on and
ask respectful questions of the original summarizer
Summarizers then updated their posts to clarify the papers
In the group chats the students described the paper
summaries they had read so that the whole of their group
were familiar with their content
Each group was assigned a basic topic in Ethics for which they
were to prepare a PowerPoint presentation (10 slides). They
began discussing this task in their chat
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

11. Week 3
Week 3 each student was assigned an another article
These articles were either more specific to communications
theory or related to the legal issues aspect of the course
Once again each student discussed the article within their
group
Student posted a 500 word summary of the article to a
discussion forum (naming the thread)
The group advanced their work on the PowerPoint
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

12. Week 4
Students were assigned 4 discussions each to
comment on and ask respectful questions of the
original summarizer
Summarizers then updated their posts to clarify
the papers
In the group chats the students described the
paper summaries they had read so that the
whole of their group were familiar with their
content
Each group posted a draft PowerPoint on the
basic concept assigned
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

13. Phase 2 (3 weeks
to complete)
Each student was asked to select 2 Basic
Concepts PowerPoints to comment on in order
to provide the other groups with feedback (no
more than 5 per ppt)
Students peer graded the discussion forums and
feedback from classmates (using the moodle
peer grade tool)
Students began looking for topics for their final
project
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

14. Phase 2 part 2
Groups updated their PowerPoints and added explicatory
notes
Groups provided M/C questions based on their ppt
Individual students peer graded the group powerpoints
Students further discussed the materials in their groups
A Multiple choice test was completed on the material covered
in the papers and ppts
Each group chose an article from a third batch posted to
discuss in the group (not on test)
– These articles were more advanced and focused difference in
perceptions
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

15. Phase 3
This phase focused on the final project
During the phase we continued to work on the
discussions of papers from the previous phases
Students also presented and discussed their
book reviews within the group and then posted
to a discussion forum in the same model as the
earlier papers
Students reviewed new papers based on their
interests
Groups discussed ideas generated for the final
project
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

16. Final Project
The final project in the course was to find a situation in
which a decision was made and explain how that decision
could be viewed as both ethical and unethical depending of
the theories of ethics which were applied (essentially an
advanced Critical Thinking exercise)
Students prepared and shared a proposal
A two part final paper was written (3,000 words on both the
ethical and unethical arguments [6,000 total words required])
A 30 video clip was also submitted for each side – media tool
A press release or briefing note was also prepared
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

17. Beginnings of the
final project
Proposals shared within groups only
– Some proposals were based on news reports
– Others were based on the students work situation (some of
these were help confidential)
Ideas were discussed, some students changed
their plans
Group members suggested papers they had read
which might be helpful
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

18. Development of
the ideas
Once final ideas were developed longer
summaries were developed
Shared with the full class (unless confidential)
Feedback through forums and group chats
Once prof had the proposals more papers were
posted for use by individual students or
suggested if not available through library (each
set of papers was in its own folder)
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

19. Final Phase
Students posted their videos
Students posted or submitted their final papers
Students graded each other within the groups
via a model which prevented same grading
– Xx12-1 where x is the number of students in the group
– No two students could be given the same score
Students also self-evaluated
An M/C test on the legal issues aspect was
completed online
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

20. Reflections
A young student had some difficulties with the more experienced
members of her group – met and phone calls
One group actually worked out how each of them could get the
same grade on the peer evaluation
One mature student had difficulty with the relatively low grades she
received from her peers (always had A+ before)
Several of these students have sought me out since and the
comments were that they learned more from this course than any
others
Not everyone was thrilled with the amount of work
I was only asked to join a group chat on two occasions
I reviewed the group chats regularly and posted answers to
questions that came up
Sometimes students would email specific questions that arose in the
chats.
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE

21. Thank you
Dalhousie Centre for Learning and Teaching
COHERE
Dalhousie Faculty of Agriculture
Do you have any
Questions??
June 3, 2014 | presented by Jane Smith
PRESENTATION TITLE