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.
Ensuring Quality in Blended Courses
Through Faculty Development and
Engagement
July 8, 2013 - 8:30am, Lakeshore A
Dylan Ba...
Overview
• Introduction to UWM and Blended
• Overview of activity
– Blend13.wikispaces.com
• Breakout discussion
• Reporti...
Introductions
University of Wisconsin -Milwaukee
• Dylan Barth, djbarth@uwm.edu
• Tanya Joosten, tjoosten@uwm.edu
• Nicole Weber, nicole...
About us
TechEnhanced
Blended
Online
Traditional
Self-paced
MOOCs
Flex
Faculty development
programs and pedagogical
consultation
Te...
Delivery modes
TechEnhanced
Blended
Online
Traditional
Self-paced
MOOCs
Flex
Content
• Text
• Images
• Audio
• Video
Inter...
About UWM
blended
learning
is
growing
What is
blended?
“Hybrid (blended) courses are
courses in which a significant
portion of the learning activities
have been moved online, an...
Blended learning:
1) courses that integrate online
with traditional face-to-face class
activities in a
planned, pedagogica...
What is
blended for
UWM?
Web-enhanced
0 - 20%
Blended
21 - 99%
Online
100%
Blended 1
21 - 50%
Online with
commensurate
reduction
in seat time
Blend...
Why does your campus need to define blended?
Who needs to be involved in defining blended for
your campus?
What is blended...
Why teach
blended?
What are we
doing today?
Blend13.wikispaces.com
1.) Login or create an account
2.) Request access to the wiki to edit
1. How do you foster faculty awareness and
interest in blended teaching? How do you
motivate faculty to design effective
b...
2. What makes for an effective blended
learning model? What opportunities
should be available to help instructors
learn ef...
3. How will instructors know when they are
providing quality blended courses? How
will faculty, programs, or the campus kn...
Reporting out
1. How do you foster faculty awareness and
interest in blended teaching? How do you
motivate faculty to design effective
b...
The Information Technology Policy Committee
encourages divisions and individual
departments to ensure that their
tenure, p...
2. What makes for an effective blended
learning model? What opportunities
should be available to help instructors
learn ef...
UW-Milwaukee
Faculty Development Program:
Purpose | Format | Outcomes
Overall purpose or goals
• Design, develop, teach, and advocate for
blended courses
• A practical approach
– Get started
–...
Program format
• Taught in a blended format and in multiple
formats during the academic year
• Face-to-face meetings and o...
Program Structure
F2F 1
2.5 hrs
Online 1
F2F 2
2.5 hrs
Online 2
F2F 3
2.5 hrs
Showcase
2.5 hrs
Post-
Program
Program activities
• Presentation, demonstration, small-group
activities, facilitator feedback, peer
feedback, online disc...
Main Program Outcomes
1. Start of a redesigned course
2. New teaching skills and knowledge
3. Re-examine both face-to-face...
The 10 questions
1. As you think about your course redesign, which of your course
objectives might be met more successfull...
• Ten questions
• Online vs. F2F - Integration
• Designing learning modules
• Decision rubric for
content choices
• Learni...
Program evaluation
• Progressive & summative
– Classroom assessment techniques
– “Reality check” survey
– Anonymous survey...
Eight lessons we’ve learned
1. Incentives & time for participation
2. Participants with prior experience using technology
...
Eight ongoing challenges
1. Identification of blended courses
2. Quality control of courses
3. Certification of participan...
Online and Blended
Teaching Group (OBTG)
• User-driven, monthly meetings for sharing
questions, concerns, and resources
• ...
3. How will instructors know when they are
providing quality blended courses? How
will faculty, programs, or the campus kn...
Faculty Development Resources
Peer Evaluation Handbook
Student Evaluation Data
• Enter slides
Certification Program
Communicating Quality
Conclusions
Blend13.wikispaces.com
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Ensuring quality in blended
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Ensuring quality in blended

977 views

Published on

Presented at Sloan-C Blended, Milwaukee, WI, July 8th, 2013

With the increase in the diffusion of blended and online programming across higher educational institutions, stakeholders are looking for ways to ensure the quality of the student experience. Quality of blended programs can be ensured through faculty and instructional development and training, faculty and instructor evidence of competence and recognition for excellence, constructive evaluation and feedback on blended and online course design and delivery, and community-building opportunities among instructors and staff. Blended learning is becoming a prominent mode of programming and delivery in education. It is swiftly emerging and transforming higher education to better meet the needs of our students providing them with more effective learning experiences. This movement is leading to a renovation in the way courses are taught and programs support their students. Instructional and faculty development provides the core foundation to institutional programming in providing a framework for implementing blended and online learning pedagogy in the classroom. This student-centered, active learning pedagogy has the potential to alter the traditional classroom by enhancing course effectiveness through increased interactivity leading to superior student outcomes.
A recent study reported that "Respondents ... anticipated that the number of students taking online courses will grow by 22.8% and that those taking blended courses will grow even more over the next 2 years" (Picciano, Seamen, Shea, & Swan, 2012, p. 128). As the demand for blended learning opportunities increases, so does the need for development of instructors to teach and design blended courses and mechanisms to ensure the quality of courses and programs. The University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee (UWM) has been providing instructional development and blended learning opportunities to students for over a decade. Since 2001, UWM has developed 8 blended degree programs. In the fall of 2012, UWM offered approximately 100 blended courses and enrolled 7,655 students (26%) in at least one blended course. UWM continues to see growth, as the nation does, and continues to provide opportunities for students to best meet their needs.

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Ensuring quality in blended

  1. 1. Ensuring Quality in Blended Courses Through Faculty Development and Engagement July 8, 2013 - 8:30am, Lakeshore A Dylan Barth, Tanya Joosten, and Nicole Weber Learning Technology Center, LTC@uwm.edu University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
  2. 2. Overview • Introduction to UWM and Blended • Overview of activity – Blend13.wikispaces.com • Breakout discussion • Reporting out • Conclusions
  3. 3. Introductions
  4. 4. University of Wisconsin -Milwaukee • Dylan Barth, djbarth@uwm.edu • Tanya Joosten, tjoosten@uwm.edu • Nicole Weber, nicolea5@uwm.edu • Gerry Bergtrom, Matt Russell, Bara Omari, and Megan Haak
  5. 5. About us
  6. 6. TechEnhanced Blended Online Traditional Self-paced MOOCs Flex Faculty development programs and pedagogical consultation Technology training and support Evaluation and research The LTC provides faculty development and pedagogical consultation, technology training and support, and evaluation and research of an array of course delivery modes, including tech enhanced, blended, and online. What we do?
  7. 7. Delivery modes TechEnhanced Blended Online Traditional Self-paced MOOCs Flex Content • Text • Images • Audio • Video Interactivity • Discussions • Groups • Feedback Assessment • Written and oral examination • Discursive • Portfolio Pedagogical considerations For each delivery mode, there are pedagogical considerations to be made with regard to content delivery, interactivity, and assessment. The UWMLTC faculty development program and pedagogical consultations with our team guide instructors in making decisions about these considerations.
  8. 8. About UWM
  9. 9. blended learning is growing
  10. 10. What is blended?
  11. 11. “Hybrid (blended) courses are courses in which a significant portion of the learning activities have been moved online, and time traditionally spent in the classroom is reduced but not eliminated” (Aycock, Garnham, and Kaleta, March, 2002, para. 1).
  12. 12. Blended learning: 1) courses that integrate online with traditional face-to-face class activities in a planned, pedagogically valuable manner; and, 2) where a portion (institutionally defined) of face-to-face time is replaced by online activity (Picciano, 2006, p. 97).
  13. 13. What is blended for UWM?
  14. 14. Web-enhanced 0 - 20% Blended 21 - 99% Online 100% Blended 1 21 - 50% Online with commensurate reduction in seat time Blended 3 81 - 99% Online with commensurate reduction in seat time Blended 2 51 - 80% Online with commensurate reduction in seat time
  15. 15. Why does your campus need to define blended? Who needs to be involved in defining blended for your campus? What is blended? How is it different from face-to- face? online? others? Where will the definition live? How will it be communicated to the community?
  16. 16. Why teach blended?
  17. 17. What are we doing today?
  18. 18. Blend13.wikispaces.com 1.) Login or create an account 2.) Request access to the wiki to edit
  19. 19. 1. How do you foster faculty awareness and interest in blended teaching? How do you motivate faculty to design effective blended courses that include pedagogical or technological innovation? What incentives are in place for course redesign?
  20. 20. 2. What makes for an effective blended learning model? What opportunities should be available to help instructors learn effective practices in design and delivery of blended courses? What experiences should be provided to faculty to effectively teach blended courses? How can you develop a community of blended practitioners on campus?
  21. 21. 3. How will instructors know when they are providing quality blended courses? How will faculty, programs, or the campus know whether the course was a good course? What tools or services could be provided for evaluating the effectiveness of blended courses? How will quality be communicated to the larger campus (e.g., students, faculty, administration, etc.) ?
  22. 22. Reporting out
  23. 23. 1. How do you foster faculty awareness and interest in blended teaching? How do you motivate faculty to design effective blended courses that include pedagogical or technological innovation? What incentives are in place for course redesign?
  24. 24. The Information Technology Policy Committee encourages divisions and individual departments to ensure that their tenure, promotion, and merit processes value innovative forms of publication, research, and teaching
  25. 25. 2. What makes for an effective blended learning model? What opportunities should be available to help instructors learn effective practices in design and delivery of blended courses? What experiences should be provided to faculty to effectively teach blended courses? How can you develop a community of blended practitioners on campus?
  26. 26. UW-Milwaukee Faculty Development Program: Purpose | Format | Outcomes
  27. 27. Overall purpose or goals • Design, develop, teach, and advocate for blended courses • A practical approach – Get started – Redesign course – Develop course material – Acquire teaching skills
  28. 28. Program format • Taught in a blended format and in multiple formats during the academic year • Face-to-face meetings and online assignments – Model good blended practices – Experience blended course as a student – Effective teaching model • Experienced blended teachers are program facilitators
  29. 29. Program Structure F2F 1 2.5 hrs Online 1 F2F 2 2.5 hrs Online 2 F2F 3 2.5 hrs Showcase 2.5 hrs Post- Program
  30. 30. Program activities • Presentation, demonstration, small-group activities, facilitator feedback, peer feedback, online discussion, consultation • Emphasis on faculty “active learning” – Discussing – Questioning – Developing
  31. 31. Main Program Outcomes 1. Start of a redesigned course 2. New teaching skills and knowledge 3. Re-examine both face-to-face and online component 4. Faculty know what to expect 5. Faculty get their questions answered
  32. 32. The 10 questions 1. As you think about your course redesign, which of your course objectives might be met more successfully online than in a traditional face-to- face classroom? In consequence, what new learning activities do you think you might introduce into your course? 2. Since you will be reducing “seat time” partially or wholly in your course, you need to identify alternative ways to deliver course content. Think about a specific topic that you usually present to your face-to-face class. How might you make that portion of your course content available online? 3. Traditional testing is not the only way to assess your students’ work in an online environment. What other means of assessing or documenting student learning might you decide to use online? …see professorjoosten.blogspot.com for the full 10 questions or visit hybrid.uwm.edu
  33. 33. • Ten questions • Online vs. F2F - Integration • Designing learning modules • Decision rubric for content choices • Learning objects Course Content • Progressive/summative • Before, during, and after • Self evaluation • Peer evaluation • Student evaluation Course Evaluation • Rubrics • CATs • Templates • Traditional formats Assessment Plan • Synchronous/asynchronous • Establishing voice • Discussion forums • Small groups Online Learning Community • Managing expectations • Time management • Technology support Helping Your Students • Staying organized • Managing workload • Avoiding course and a half Course Management Course Redesign Transitioning to blended teaching
  34. 34. Program evaluation • Progressive & summative – Classroom assessment techniques – “Reality check” survey – Anonymous survey at end of program • Ongoing – Queries from instructors – Follow-up interactions – Formal debriefings – Certificate Program for Online and Blended
  35. 35. Eight lessons we’ve learned 1. Incentives & time for participation 2. Participants with prior experience using technology 3. Blended format for faculty development program 4. Involve experienced blended teachers as facilitators 5. Plenty of time for participant interaction (face-to-face) 6. Provide regular, fast, and positive feedback 7. Focus on pedagogy (redesign conversations) more than technology (support solutions) 8. Open door policy: Provide continuous support and maintain contact
  36. 36. Eight ongoing challenges 1. Identification of blended courses 2. Quality control of courses 3. Certification of participants 4. Workload issues 5. Cohorts and stragglers 6. Following up & measuring success 7. Working with math, computing, engineering, and the natural sciences 8. Scalability
  37. 37. Online and Blended Teaching Group (OBTG) • User-driven, monthly meetings for sharing questions, concerns, and resources • Demonstrations, presentations, discussions • Online community of instructors
  38. 38. 3. How will instructors know when they are providing quality blended courses? How will faculty, programs, or the campus know whether the course was a good course? What tools or services could be provided for evaluating the effectiveness of blended courses? How will quality be communicated to the larger campus (e.g., students, faculty, administration, etc.) ?
  39. 39. Faculty Development Resources
  40. 40. Peer Evaluation Handbook
  41. 41. Student Evaluation Data • Enter slides
  42. 42. Certification Program
  43. 43. Communicating Quality
  44. 44. Conclusions Blend13.wikispaces.com

×