Date post: | 14-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | hilary-gibson |
View: | 223 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Pedagogical Standards and Sustainable Distance Education
Programming
Karen GerstenAssociate Provost for Academic Programs and Faculty
Development
Laura J. EvansDean, Evelyn T. Stone University College
Session Overview
• Strategic planning process: Focus on academics
• Effective instructional design elements
• Assessment– Course level– Program levelCore Value: Without a strong academic core, an
online program is not sustainable.
Strategic Planning Components• Alignment with institutional vision and
mission• Clear program expectations• Market potential• Organizational change required to launch
and sustain distance learning• Implementation plan• Quality assurance measures• Financial planning
Program Success and Assessment:Critical Connections• Identify program goals in strategic planning
stage– Academic– Enrollment– Financial
• Study pedagogy of online learning• Know best practices• Develop policies for development and teaching• Establish assessment guidelines and protocols
– Course – Academic program – Distance learning program
External Benchmarks: Guideposts for Distance Learning Programs• Blackboard and the National Education Association Benc
hmarks: – 24 Measures of Quality in Internet-Based Distance Learning (2000)
• Sloan Pillars of Excellence – Student Satisfaction– Access– Learning effectiveness– Faculty satisfaction– Institutional cost effectiveness
• Best Practices for Electronically Delivered Programs: Eight Regional Accrediting Bodies– Institutional Context and Commitment– Curriculum and Instruction– Faculty Support– Student Support– Evaluation and Assessment
Pedagogical Principles
• Goal is student learning; program focus is teaching not technology.
• Each course needs learning outcomes based on the course, its position in the academic program, and institutional mission.
• Active learning is better than passive learning.• Prompt feedback is essential.• Course design and facilitation have to honor diverse
ways of knowing.• Expectations have to be clear including expectations
for participation—quality and quantity.• The classroom is the learning space; materials should
be incorporated into the classroom.• Learning resources have to be accessible from the
learning space.
Course Development: Essential Elements
• Planning– What am I trying to do?– How am I trying to do it?– How do I know if I did it?
• Connectivity– With the content– With each other– With the faculty
Design Principles• Chunked
information• Organization to aid
learning• Visual interest• Formative
assessment• Tools of
engagement in Blackboard
Course Design Sets Class Tone
Easy access to organizationand learning tools
Visual interest and humor
Content organized to Facilitate learning
Class Assessment: How Do I Know I Did What I Said I Would Do?
Individual assignment
1. Pop-up internal comments
2. Narrative comments with links to writing support
3. Rubric with
highlighted cells
Assessment at the Course Level
• Online learning is an academic delivery system, not an academic program. The goal is to achieve defined learning outcomes and to ensure levels of learning comparable to face-to-face classrooms.
• Course assessment– Clearly defined learning outcomes for each
course– Course assessment measures linked to
outcomes– Assessment tools/teaching tools (available at
start of course and linked to defined learning outcomes)
– Comparative assessment
Comparative Course Assessment: Online and Campus-Based
• Same instructor, same course, same semester
Points
25 25 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Project 1
Project2
Assign 1
Assign 2
Assign 3
Quiz 1
Quiz 2
Quiz 3
Quiz 4
Quiz 5
Quiz 6
Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean
Online 21.1 21.1 7.9 8.6 8.3 6.5 7.4 7.2 6.3 8.2 7.3
Campus
18.04
18.9 7.6 9.2 7.8 5.9 6.4 5.6 5.3 7.2 6.7
Same Course, Multiple Sections
From Iverson, Colky, & Cyboran, (forthcoming), E-learning takes the lead: An empirical investigation of learner differences in online and classroom delivery.
Program Assessment• Enrollment trends• Course completions• Comparable learning outcomes and
achievement• Student evaluations• Faculty evaluations• Involvement of academic leaders in
course development and oversight• Institution-wide standards• Financial contribution
Enrollment Trends: Necessary but not Sufficient Measures of Success
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
Head Count
Credit Hours
SemesterHead
Count
Credit Hours
F01 77 261
SP02 230 789
F02 297 1008
SP03 439 1593
F03 557 1959
SP04 658 2451
F04 769 2727
SP05 828 2883
F05 933 3162
SP06* 1032 3498
100-Level 200-Level 300-Level 400-Level All Levels
RU Online
On-Campu
s
RU Onlin
eOn-
Campus
RU Onlin
e
On-Campu
sRU
OnlineOn-
CampusRU
OnlineOn-
Campus
A 35.3% 29.8%39.5
% 41.9% 46.1% 46.8% 61.1% 66.5% 49.6% 48.3%
B 20.9% 28.1%24.3
% 30.2% 26.5% 32.0% 8.2% 20.8% 20.1% 27.5%
C 10.8% 17.5%13.5
% 14.6% 11.8% 13.3% 1.1% 2.8% 8.6% 11.3%
Other Pass* 0.0% 4.5% 0.5% 0.2% 0.6% 0.2% 20.8% 5.3% 7.1% 2.6%
D 3.6% 5.0% 5.4% 2.9% 2.7% 1.9% 0.3% 0.4% 2.3% 2.3%
F 12.9% 8.7% 6.7% 5.2% 7.5% 3.0% 4.3% 1.6% 6.6% 4.2%
Other Unsat* 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Incomplete* 16.5% 6.3%
10.1% 5.0% 4.9% 2.8% 4.2% 2.4% 5.8% 3.8%
Course Completion Rates and Grade Comparisons
Some studies roughly estimate that students enrolled in distance education are twice as likely to drop out than on-campus students (JALN, Dec. 2004).
A Chronicle of Higher Education article in 2000 reported that “no national statistics exist yet about how many students complete distance programs or courses, but anecdotal evidence and studies by individual institutions suggest that course-completion and program-retention rates are generally lower in distance-education courses than in their face-to-face counterparts” (Brady, 2001, p. 352).
Financial Success– FY2004: RUOnline generated 10 times its
budget in tuition revenue– Contribution margin increased from 23%
in FY2003 to 51% in FY2004– FY04 Credit tuition generated: $3,504,408– Fiscal Year 2006 to date:
•Credit tuition (fall & spring only) $ 3,772,582•FY 06 annual expense budget - $
450,554 $ 3,322,028
Achievement of Institutional Goals/ Alignment with Institutional Mission• Goals
– Extend the University's reach – Expand the University’s name recognition– Develop new student markets– Augment campus-based classes– Contribute to the University’s financial strength
• Mission– Social justice: Provide educational
opportunities to all academically qualified persons
– Achieve academic excellence
Measures of Program Success
1. Core values 2. Academic standards
3. Outcomes-based assessment 4. Accountability