Using teaching assistants effectively

Recently, due to a new policy in our school connecting Teaching Assistant-eligibility with class size (specifically for online courses), I am asked by colleagues if I have any advice for effectively using teaching assistants (TAs). My record of effectively using TAs, however, is hardly stellar. I have had just as many failures as successes. For me, "effectiveness" has come down to two things:

• Hiring a great TA who can take on responsibility that actually helps with workload, and who needs little management after initial explanation. My preference is to hire a TA who has previously taken the course with me because she or he knows the content, course structure and requirements, and my style.
  
  
• Clearcut, time-consuming assignments that the TA can be responsible for. The issue is workload, so if there are specific activities that the TA can do that reduces workload, yippee!

What I look for is a TA who is able to help without my constant guidance...if I have to manage everything, then a TA doesn't help the workload issue. Once hired, I meet ASAP with the teaching assistant and provide needed training to ensure she or he is comfortable with the course format and structure. I try to be very clear about roles and responsibilities -- mine and the TA's, not only for the two of us but for the students (e.g., I am available for these types of questions, issues, and so on; and the TA is available for these types of questions, issues, and so on). I try to be clear about the amount of time expected, if possible, and exactly what to do when; I set up both a master schedule and weekly schedule that we both reference to direct our efforts and time. I also set up a regular weekly time when we check in with each other, to make sure we are on track and that expectations are clear.

If possible and appropriate, I will use a TA to support some of my grading activities. When I do this, I provide my TA with “models” of graded work from a prior semester. I also make sure that the TA understands the assignment students have been asked to complete, why they've been asked to complete it, and how it is to be assessed; rubrics and similar assessment tools really help to make the assessment criteria clear to the students and the TA, making the grading process easier. To ensure consistency, I have both of us grade 1-3 randomly selected assignments and then meet with the TA to compare results. This helps the TA, and me, feel more confident about the grading.

In terms of who grades what, I tend to lean more towards having assignments that the TA grades completely, as opposed to splitting the grading of each assignment between the two of us. My reasoning has to due with grading consistency and equity. Although we can achieve some interrater reliability (especially when using a well-developed rubric or assessment tool), this takes time. For me it is more efficient to hand over a grading assignment to the TA. I base my selection of grading assignment on the requirements and complexity of the assignment -- saving the higher-stakes, more complex grading assignments for myself -- and the constraints of my own schedule (having the TA grade assignments during busy times).

I have also found it helpful in terms of workload to have the TA involved in help sessions and discussions (especially threaded discussions, if an online or blended course). For example, for more technical courses, I ask the TA to hold weekly help sessions where students can get specific technical assistance. Similarly, because I tend to set up my online course schedule so that assignments are due end of day on Sundays, I will ask the TA to be available to answer assignment questions throughout the weekend since there tends to be more questions right before the deadline.

The right TA can be a fantastic addition to a course. Spending the up-front time necessary to find the right TA and determine how you will use the TA in a way that really helps you teach the course -- enhancing your experience as well as the students' experience -- makes all the difference in the world.

Three-pronged approach to online discussions for learning

Although I have of late neglected this blog while writing for other venues, I am stimulated to regroup after attending a few sessions about online teaching and learning at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) annual conference. I have no beef with the research methods described by presenters. Instead, I find it disconcerting when researchers fail to attend to basic, foundational needs when designing the online discussions they research. In my mind, designing and facilitating online discussions for learning requires a three-pronged approach. The three prongs are: relevance, expectations, and preparation. And, if you haven't adequately addressed these three prongs, then the research results will likely be shallow and lack meaning.


Relevance
This seems obvious, but for some reason it is often missed. Students are busy folks...they don't have time for busywork and resent activities that feel like phluff. An online discussion for learning needs to be relevant – have a clear purpose – for students to attend to it in personally, professionally, and/or academically meaningful ways. If the online discussion they are being asked to participate in is seen as irrelevant – from their perspective...which is what counts when considering student engagement – then they will fail to contribute to the discussion as you had hoped, and will fail to take anything of value away from the discussion. Even when you have set up a relevant online discussion, you still may not attract the student participation you are looking and hoping for. Hence the next two prongs...

Expectations
“I asked them to post twice, and [with a disheartened tone] they only posted twice...” I'm not quite sure why we expect students to do more than we ask them to do. Let's face it, we get what we ask for; if we ask for two posts, that's what we will get from busy people (especially if the online discussion is seen as irrelevant). The “post x number of times” strategy for encouraging participation is a downright horrible way to go about this. In an on-campus course, when was the last time you said, “Class? During today's discussion of the readings, everyone must contribute one original statement, and comment on one peer's statement”? Never, because if we did that it would lead to a very strange, unnatural exchange...one that didn't even resemble the fruitful, organic discussions we want to facilitate.

But, if we don't specify how many posts we want students to contribute, how we will ensure that discussion happens? If you want a deep discussion, you have to set up the discussion to encourage depth; I've shared a number of strategies in this blog, such as discussion protocols, inspiration points, and one-minute papers. For example, if at the end of a week-long online discussion I ask students to submit a one-minute paper (note, not really a one-minute paper, but inspired by the concept) that addresses the following --

• Summarize the discussion in 150-250 words
  
• Share your most important contribution, and describe in 150-250 words why it was important to the discussion (include how others reacted to your contribution)
  
• Share a contribution that someone else made that was of particular value to you. In 150-250 words, describe why it was of value, and how you and others responded to that contribution during the discussion

-- then students will not necessarily just post twice. Instead, they will post to contribute something of value to the discussion. That may take only one post (although unlikely) or 15 posts. But, since they have to ultimately summarize, share, and describe the discussion, they will more than likely fully attend to the discussion...especially if it is relevant and tied to assessment.

Assessment is an important part of expectations. If we expect students to put time and energy into an online discussion, then we not only need to tell students what we want from them in an online discussion we need to make their discussion participation worth points towards final grade. Again, using the one-minute paper example, if you tell students up-front that you require a one-minute paper submitted at the end of each discussion, what the paper must include, and how you will assess it and award points, students are more likely to produce what you am looking for. And, the online discussion activity will more likely lead to something students see as valuable as opposed to busywork.

Preparation
What I’ve shared above is all well and good if students know how to participate in an online discussion. Too often we assume they know what to do, when they don't. Online discussions are nothing like face-to-face discussions, so students need assistance preparing for and participating in online discussions. Setting expectations, as described above, can certainly help. But, providing students with guidelines for posting comments (e.g., post early in the discussion to ensure your peers will see your comment, be sure to read everyone else's post in the thread before responding), examples of fruitful and not-so-fruitful online discussions (with you pointing out what makes them fruitful or not), and models of appropriate online discussion posts (which you can do by being active in the online discussions yourself) can help students develop the skills of online discussion.


Final thoughts...researchers, if you attend to these three foundational needs and then run your study, the results will more likely lead to important contributions...and I will happily be in the front row at your conference presentation.

Determing the essential learning objectives for a course

Recently, I've had to do some thinking about how to design and facilitate effective accelerated courses. We are implementing an accelerated format -- Maymester -- over a three-week period of time between the spring and summer terms. This is a popular approach at many institutions, allowing students to take another 3-credit hour course before leaving for summer break (or, for those year-round students, it gives them a way to take 6 credits between mid-May and the end of July).

Those who have taught an accelerated course already know the challenges, such as determining how much preparation (including reading) students can realistically accomplish between Wednesday and Thursday; how to address both formative and summative assessment needs that require quick turn-around to be useful; how to structure daily 3-1/2 hour class sessions that are engaging; and how to thoroughly cover all of course content. There is certainly a lot to consider to ensure that the quality of an accelerated course is high.

Instead of feeling overwhelmed by the challenges, I have found that a close examination of the course learning objectives to be a useful starting place. The point of reexamining them is to make sure you are focusing on the essential learning objectives as you develop the accelerated course. For example, in looking at a course I typically teach during a 15-week semester, I saw that I had included a mixture of both essential and nice-to-have learning objectives. For the accelerated format, I want to focus on the essential learning objectives, and make sure I am developing learning activities and assessments that map to those objectives.

How am I defining essential? The essential learning objectives are those that, if not reached by students, would negatively influence students’ (a) abilities to continue on in the program (or with the next course/s); (b) professional preparation, including abilities to do well on professional exams and certifications; and (c) confidence and efficacy as university students and emerging professionals. In other words, the essential learning objectives are those that make-or-break the course.

To help my colleagues and I determine the essential learning objectives for an accelerated course (or any course for that matter), I came up with a few prompts:

1. What should students be able to do as a result of this course that they cannot do now?


2. How do you want students to be changed as a result of this course?


3. For this course, what are the culminating performances of learning and achievement (e.g., the highest stage of development; performances that are significant, critical)?


4. What learning objective(s) have the most positive influence on students’ ability to be professionally and/or academically successful?


5. What learning objective(s), if not achieved by the students, would cause you to see the course as having failed?


6. What is the single, most important takeaway from this course?

These prompts may not be useful to everyone developing an accelerated course, but I have found it a helpful starting place in my own process.


[Note: On a related theme, please see my post on the Problems of Practice (PoP) approach to course/training design.]

Voting a question off the island; or, different ways to think about quizzes and exams

Given the nature of the courses I teach, I tend to use authentic projects for assessment purposes. However, because of recent conversations with students, I've been reconsidering my avoidance of quizzes and exams. What I have heard from students is that quizzes and exams help them gauge their acquisition and comprehension of content, which can be very helpful for formative reasons in advance of project work. These conversations spurred me to reexamine my past uses of quizzes and exams, and explore different ways of structuring quizzes and exams for formative and summative assessment needs. Philosophically, I am more interested in assessments that are learning opportunities for students than I am in assessments that function as judgments of performance. Here are a few quiz and exam ideas that reflect (hopefully) that philosophical stance:

• Collaborative exams. I like collaborative exams, in general, because they can address both formative and summative assessment needs. Under this category, I have tried three different strategies --
  
  1. I have students in small groups (typically 2-3 people) complete the exam. One exam is submitted between the three of them, with the responses a collaborative effort. I do this in class, as opposed to as a take-home, so I can monitor participation and contribution.
     
  2. I have students in small groups spend half the class time discussing the questions, and then use the remaining class time complete an individual exam. Although the responses are not collaboratively composed, each student's responses are (hopefully) enhanced because of the preceding conversation with their peers.
     
  3. Finally, following a three-step process, each student submits two versions of the exam. Step 1: Each student completes the exam alone as a take-home, prior to the in-class exam session. Step 2: In class, students come together in groups of 2-3, discuss their answers to each question, and select the answer they want to formally submit as a group (or construct a new answer). Step 3: Students submit their original individual exams, and their collaborative exams (with each being worth a certain number of points towards overall exam grade).
  
  
• Student exam construction. I have found that the questions students ask about a topic says a lot about their understanding of the topic. Therefore, I really like having students develop questions. So, for this strategy, I ask students to construct an exam. I ask students to construct an exam, and provide a rationale for why it is an appropriate exam and why all of the questions are important to include. Sometimes this is the end of the assignment, and my assessment is strictly on the exam and rationale. Other times they are then given the exam to complete, and the assessment is based on both activities. It depends on my learning objectives. I have also had students do this as individuals and in small groups. I prefer having them do it in small groups because I believe the exchange of ideas, priorities, and rationales is a valuable learning activity.
  
  
• Got-it-'til-you-get-it exam. Especially with the support of technology (such as the quiz/exam tools within a learning management system like eCollege or Blackboard, a form created in Google Docs, or any number of data-collection web tools), it is easy to make an exam available to students for extended periods of time, and allow them to continue to work on their exam responses -- receiving feedback throughout -- until mastery is accomplished. What I like about this strategy is that it attends to both formative (via feedback on responses as they approach mastery) and summative (once mastery is accomplished) assessment needs.
  
  
• The People's Choice exam. When possible, I like to give students choices. It is hard for me to write a question that speaks to everyone in a class. Instead, I construct 2-3 questions for each topic or sub-topic, and ask student to select the one they wish to answer. Students report that they appreciate being able to choose the question.
  
  
• On-the-spot quiz construction. For quick-and-dirty quizzes on a recent set of readings or activity, I will ask students (as individuals, pairs, or small groups) to write a question on an index card with their name(s) included, and throw the cards into a hat. Then I will pull three questions from the hat that everyone must answer. I like this strategy because I want students to enhancing their questioning skills, and like that they have some say in the questions that they respond to. I ask for names on the cards to make sure that students take the question writing seriously.
  
  
• Quiz-plus-one. Another strategy I like is to pass out a quiz minus one question. I then ask students to construct the missing question and answer it. This gives students a chance to answer a question they'd really like to answer (one I may not have even thought of), personalizing each quiz. It also gives me a bank of questions I can use in the future!
  
  
• Voting-a-question-off-the-island. This strategy allows students to make a choice about which questions "count" and which do not. I have done this in one of two ways: students can choose not to answer one question (leaving it blank), or students answer all the questions but indicate which one they do not want counted in their grade. I prefer the latter tactic because it provides me with valuable information; it tells me which question(s) students struggle with, and the nature of the struggle because I have their attempted response available. Knowing this helps me make instructional decisions to make sure that students understand and appropriately apply the challenging content.
  
  
• Stump-the-professor, Phone-a-friend, Are-you-smarter-than-a-5th-grader?, and other game-like exams. I like using games and game-like strategies throughout my courses. In terms of assessment, I like to use games such as --
  • Stump the Professor is a strategy I've used in various contexts, and it works well for quizzes. I will ask small groups of students to compose a question they think will stump me, write it on an index card (along with their names), and throw it into a hat. Then, I pull out each question one at a time. For each question, students have a certain amount of time to respond in writing (either as individuals or in their original small groups) -- depending on how many questions there are -- as I work out my response. They submit their response, and then I share mine. Sometimes I am stumped, and I distribute points for that. This strategy helps them enhance their question construction, gives them some ownership over the questions, and is fun.
    
  • Phone a friend. For this strategy, small groups of students support each other as they each complete a quiz or exam. As a small group, they decide which question they need help with. They then construct no more than two questions they can ask me about the question (or, alternatively, I have allowed groups to ask me up to 5 yes-or-no questions). This strategy encourages students to consider what questions they can answer with each other's support, and which question they really want help with. They have to be very thoughtful as they construct the questions they ask me to make sure that after there "phone call" with me that they can proceed. It offers them additional opportunities for learning -- not only from each other, but also from me.
    
  • What's my line? Similar to Stump the Professor, small groups of students construct a question they can answer but they think will stump the other groups. I collect the questions, share each of them -- one at a time -- and give student groups a certain amount of time to respond to each one. Students receive points for correct answers, and points for the number of other groups they stump with their question.
    
  • Name that answer! For this strategy, I develop 3-5 complex questions about the topic, and a set of corresponding hints. Small groups of students compete to see which groups can determine the answer to a question with the fewest number of hints.
    
  • Are you smarter than a 5th grader? The idea behind this strategy is to have student groups compete on quickly answering questions. I use this strategy for quizzes when I do not need to consider the quality of the response, just if it is correct or not. If I am not using a student-response-system (e.g., Clickers), then I pass out different instruments (e.g., bell, whistle, drum) to small groups so that they can chime in when ready to respond.
  
  
• Quizzes about content of collaborative projects. I use a variety of strategies to assess individual student contribution to collaborative projects, and this strategy is one I frequently use. Once I receive a collaborative project, I will construct a quiz about each project. Then, I will require each student to complete the quiz about her or his project. Students know about the quiz in advance (as part of the project description, as incentive to attend to the details of the project and participate fully), and well complements the other tools I use for group projects (e.g., team contracts, team member assessment tools, structured walk-throughs).
  

These are just a few ideas for using quizzes and exams in support of student learning. In addition, I have found these strategies to be valuable in providing me with data that formatively informs my teaching and the direction of the course. Although quizzes and exams are not typically my first choice of assessment approach, these strategies have the potential to enhance student learning, and give them confidence as they prepare to work on more authentic activities and projects.

Encouraging students to read before class...is it hopeless?

This is a topic on the minds of many of my faculty colleagues (and me!) -- how to get students to complete the assigned readings before class...or at all. My initial thoughts on this have always been that the readings have to be relevant:

1. To achieving the learning objectives
   
2. To completing the assignments and projects of the course
   
3. To student assessment
   
4. To the world outside of the course (whether in support of future study, of being a professional, of being a citizen)
   

Beyond this, however, there are important considerations that have to do with student readiness and time, and faculty expectations and habits.

Student readiness and time

Are students skilled at reading academic text? They may do a lot of reading (of materials like blogs, Facebook/MySpace pages, text messages, popular media text, and so on), but that sort of reading doesn't translate well to academic reading (see previous post on October 2, 2008). Also, students may not know the difference between skimming, scanning, directed reading, deep reading, and so on. Being clear about what we want students to do with their reading, and how to do it requires our attention. So, we need to scaffold students' reading via modeling and think-alouds, and providing them with examples of how we would mark and/or take notes on the text. In addition, we need to assist students in translating their approach to reading to an academic approach to reading. Spending some time on this sort of prereading instruction will help students learn how to process academic text.

Related, we also need to keep in mind that we have prior knowledge -- the schema -- to process new reading on topics we know about. Students may not. So, it takes them longer to process. An additional thing we can do is help students connect new reading to what they already know.


Do students have time to read the text? An interesting study by Ronald Carver several years ago (1985, How good are some of the world's best readers, Reading Research Quarterly, 20(4), 389-419) compared the word count and comprehension rate of strong student readers with people who read as a consistent part of their profession (such as faculty). There was a 150 word per minute difference between the strong student readers and the professional readers. The takeaway for me is the realization that some students do not read as fast as we do, which means that it may take them much more time to complete an assigned reading; something that takes us an hour to read, may take students 2-4 hours to read. If we are asking students to do other things between classes too, we need to take time-on-reading/task into consideration.

Also, students often have legitimate constraints on their time. Many of them work 15-20 hours a week, some have dependent care responsibilities, and many are concurrently taking several courses. The last thing they need are reading assignments that are not directly and clearly relevant to the work of the course (and beyond). I deal with this by making sure that the reading is critical to being able to complete assignments, and I tie the reading into those assignments in terms of assessment. And, I scale back my reading assignments so that students can deeply process, engage with, and apply a few readings, as opposed to assigning many readings and finding that they barely remember anything they've read and cannot apply the content of the readings to assignments.


Faculty expectations and habits

Are we clear about why we are asking students to read something? We need to remind (and keep reminding) students about the connections between the reading assignments and the course assignments and assessment (and the connection to the profession, etc.). Also, it doesn't hurt to share your enthusiasm for the reading -- why you think the reading is good, what some of the "a-ha" excerpts were for you, what you would like them to focus on, and so on. It sure would be nice to instill a love of reading in the process...

Do we lecture on (or provide students with a summary of) the same material that's in the text? When we do this, students quickly learn that they don't need to do the reading as long as they attend to the lecture and/or summary.

Do we engage students in activities that require them to apply the readings? Again, another thing students figure out quickly is that if we do not actively have them do something with the readings in class or for projects, that they don't need to read. And, it has to go beyond asking for volunteers to share their thoughts about the reading. Students need to know -- preferably in advance -- what you will be asking them to do with the readings during the next class meeting (for example, involving them in small group discussions using discussion protocols). This way they know how to prepare, what to prepare...and that everyone has to prepare (so, no hiding in the back of the room). [Note: I have several blog posts on facilitating discussions and using discussion protocols. I use discussion protocols all the time, and find them to be highly effective in establishing expectations for reading.]

Do we hold students accountable for completing the readings? This gets at assessment. If we are going to ask students to complete readings, how will we determine if they have been completed and what is the students' reward or payoff for completing the readings (beyond the "learning is reward enough" payoff)? I prefer more authentic approaches to this, so I require students to use the readings to defend their instructional design work; for example, students have to submit design documents in support of a lesson they have developed, and in those design documents they have to use the readings to support their decisions (and I often require them to triangulate their citations so they can demonstrate how more than one author/reading supports each decision). But, I also like assessment strategies that focus on specific readings, such as having students:

• Write one-minute papers summarizing the readings -- I then assess and award points for those summaries
  
• Assign inspiration points to each other for contributing valuable perspectives, ideas, counterarguments, summaries and so on to the discussion -- I track those points and apply them to the final grades [Note: For more on inspiration points, see the post in this blog.]
  

Getting students to read in preparation for class is difficult, but if you attend to issues related to reading preparation, reading assignments (in and out of class), and assessment, you can take appropriate action and help students be more successful.

Pecha Kucha, an alternative format for presentations

My students and I have been exploring an interesting format for presentations, called Pecha Kucha (pronounced peh-cha ku-cha...but said really fast). The basic format is 20 slides/images, 20 seconds per slide/image (so, just under 7 minutes per presentation). Developed by two architects (see the Wikipedia entry for more background and links to useful resources) as a way to structure presentations of architectural designs in an efficient and non-detrimental-to-the-message way, Pecha Kucha is gaining in popularity. So, what is it exactly? For a few online examples of Pecha Kucha, see Daniel Pink's YouTube video on the topic of emotionally intelligent signage, Ginny Brady's Vimeo video on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and Dean Shareski's example for his students. Dean's stands out for me because I like that he is asking students follow the Pecha Kucha format for their reflections at the end of the course (his example serves as a model for the students). For examples of live, on-stage Pecha Kucha presentations, see Jeremy Fuksa's Facebook presentation at a Pecha Kucha Night in Kansas City, and Glasgow's Pecha Kucha Night (Note: adult content, view at your own risk).

For examples of the format in action during face-to-face sessions, search YouTube...there are several examples, although not really one that stands out for me as an exemplar. Why? Because there seems to be a tendency with the format for presenters to simply talk faster in order to say as much as possible in 20 seconds...instead of allowing the image up on the screen to speak for itself with limited commentary. It doesn't seem that folks use silence to their advantage (or music, for that matter), to allow the audience to process, reflect on, and explore an intellectual and emotional connection with the image (and this seems like a big loss because I perceive the format as a way to encourage us to present stronger visual images, instead of relying on our spoken words...). And, it seems a useful structure for storytelling...and I don't see a lot of great examples of its use in that arena (not that they're not out there). Another thing I have noticed is that it seems that the structure discourages presenters from more actively engaging the audience, and discourages them from using the physical space (many examples simply show the presenter standing rigid to the side of the screen, talking quickly). My final observation has been that given the intentional informality of a Pecha Kucha session, presenters seem to stutter, utter many "ummms" and "ands" and run out of time. Informality shouldn't replace the need for preparation...or the presenter's message is fuddled or lost.

My students and I are exploring all of these aspects, and are in the process of creating some examples that might end up inspiring others to check out Pecha Kucha. Once we have something to share, I will be sure to post them in this blog. [Also, another instructional use I am considering -- so will keep you posted -- is providing students with a set of 20 images. Then, having each of them do their own Pecha Kucha presentation with that set of images. They can change the image order, say what they want, add a soundtrack, etc. (And, may I could allow them to change out up to five of the 20 images with something else, or add elements to the existing images.) I think it would be fascinating to see how different -- or similar -- each student's presentation ends up.]

A suggestion if this post has encouraged you to look into Pecha Kucha. Instead of only relying on online videos of Pecha Kucha in action, see if there is a Pecha Kucha Night in your area. I recently attended Pecha Kucha Night in Denver, and found the experience insightful in terms of understanding how the format plays out. I also enjoyed connecting in a live, physical space with like-minded practitioners...all interested in design and creative expression.

Note: Also see my short article in PerformanceXpress on the topic.

Get out there and observe

I have been so lucky recently to have multiple opportunities to observe my colleagues teaching on-campus and online. It has served to rejuvenate my own teaching...encouraging me to reflect on my teaching and course design decisions. These observations have reinforced for me the following:

• The importance of connecting with students and enhancing social presence.
  
• The value of establishing and continually reminding students of the relevance of their coursework in terms of the profession for which they are preparing.
  
• The need to use a variety of instructional strategies in order to engage all of the students in the room.
  
• The criticality of providing students with clear directions and expectations at the get-go.
  
• The usefulness of consistent and frequent opportunities for students to receive feedback.
  

If you are able, ask colleagues if you can observe them in action (or, better yet, for a learning community with a group of colleagues that allows for observation and follow-up and continued discussion about teaching and learning). Or, check with your Center for Faculty Development. Ours has a list of faculty who have agreed to allow colleagues to visit their classrooms. Definitely an opportunity to take advantage of.

Appropriate class size for online courses?

What is the thinking these days about class size for online instruction? I was asked this question today. This is a question that online educators frequently examine. My professional recommendation, supported by the literature, is that online class sizes be limited to 15 to 20 students. Why? Here is what we know:

1. Attrition in online courses and programs is a problem. The attrition typically has three sources: inconsistent expectations, underdeveloped time management and self-directed learning skills, and lack of social presence. In terms of expectations, students continue to think that online courses are easier than on campus courses, that they will be able to fulfill the requirements of the course at their own pace, and so on. As for time management and self-directed learning skills, online educational opportunities tend to require students to take on more responsibility for tracking course requirements, due dates, and the like. Students need to be more autonomous than many of them are used to (e.g., the structure of on-campus courses and the weekly required face-to-face classes with professors tends to eliminate the need for students to manages a lot of the logistical overhead). In terms of social presence, if students experience limited to no connection with the professor and fellow students, they can feel disconnected, disengaged. If they have no voice, or feel that they have no voice, they don't/won't use it...and drift away.
   
   
2. Effective graduate-level teaching (whether online or on campus) involves students in relevant, meaningful projects that help prepare them for the profession; requires professors to provide high levels of constructive feedback; offers students multiple opportunities for exploration, practice, failure; engages students in mentoring and coaching relationships with faculty; involves highly engaging instructional experiences and formats; and so on.

Addressing the issues above (#1) in a way that reflects effective teaching practice (#2) is intensive, especially when the course is online. The transactional distance involved in an online course -- the fact that we are not all in the same room at the same time, and that we are working together asynchronously in a primarily text-based format -- exponentially increases the amount of time a professor needs to attend to the course and the students. So, when there are more than 20 students in an online course, something has to give, something suffers. Either the professor cannot adequately address the issues in #1, or has to significantly scale back the teaching approaches and strategies, or both.

Therefore, since we do not want to compromise on either front, my answer to the question is -- Allow online educators and students to get the most out of the educational opportunity by limiting class sizes to 15 to 20 students. Please.

Design guidelines and standards for eLearning

Always looking for tools to use when considering the quality and effectiveness of my eLearning course design and teaching, here are links to a few resources I have found quite useful:

National Standards for Online Courses and Online Teaching from the North American Council for Online Learning (NACOL)

Rubric for Online Education from CSU Chico

Research-Based Web Design & Usability Guidelines from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Establishing a Quality Review for Online Courses in EDUCAUSE Quarterly

What does it really mean to "engage the learner"?

For a number of years now, I start my courses with the following activity (stated differently for different contexts):

1) Describe your best learning experience. Think about your most valuable, effective learning experience and in at least 250 but no more than 500 words share your learning story. When you write your "Best Learning Experience" story, don’t editorialize or try to explain why you think it was your best learning experience, just tell the story. After everyone shares her or his story, we will analyze the stories.

2) Analyze each person's "Best Learning Experience" story. Take time to dig deep to discover why each particular learning experience was so special. This will probably require you to ask probing questions of each person. The goal of this analysis is to uncover a set of underlying strategies or strategic themes that seem to be at work behind the scenes in these stories.

3) Compile strategies and themes into a list of Common Instructional Values. When you design learning experiences and opportunities for others it is very important to consider what you instructionally value as a learner and educator. Your values -- based on your experience in the world and on what you know about how people think and learn (from the study of conceptual, theoretical, and empirical literature) -- should be reflected in your design and selection of instructional approaches and strategies. For example, if you believe that people learn best in collaborative settings, then your instructional design should include opportunities for collaborative learning. So, let's get our values about these things out on the table -- they will provide us with a foundation for the rest of the work we do in this course.

Using the story analyses that you did last week, work together to derive a list of common instructional values that seem to be in use throughout most of the learning experiences. For example, do each (or most) of the stories involve a hands-on component? If so, it is a common instructional value...part of the learning experience that made that experience so valuable and effective. Note: assessment of your instructional design projects throughout the course and program will include an examination of the effective incorporation of these values.

What I have found interesting is how consistent the types of stories are, and the resulting lists are. Here is an example of a "common instructional values" list:


Learner-centered --
Learning activities: are relevant, meaningful, personal, and motivating; require learners to be self-directed, self-regulating, autonomous, intentional, and metacognitively aware; and develop skills and disposition needed for lifelong learning.

Educators: facilitate and guide learning; support students in taking ownership, responsibility, and control over their learning; help students with prior knowledge activation, goal setting, action planning, and reflection; and are culturally-responsive, honoring diversity.

Learning environments include: flexible physical structures, access to a variety of resources, and tools and rubrics that encourage self-assessment and process/goal-achievement monitoring.


Contextual --
Learning activities are: authentic, real world, challenging, relevant, context-specific, complex, ill-structured, project-based, problem-based, enculturation, situated, and anchored.

Educators are: focused on professional preparation and identity; and attentive to the development of students’ confidence and self-efficacy to participate in the professional community of practice.

Learning environments include: simulations, immersion, problems, projects, case studies, service, communities of practice, enculturation.


Active --
Learning activities: are hands-on, generative, dynamic, exploratory, experiential, engaging; involve students in inquiry, discovery, problem solving, decision making, and expression; and culminate in the creation, construction, and building of products, or a performance.

Educators: provide opportunities for questioning, knowledge building, practice, and experimentation; conduct demonstrations; model performance; and engage in think-alouds.

Learning environments include: materials, labs, simulations, case studies, role-playing, and projects.


Social --
Learning activities involve: collaboration, teamwork, group work, cooperation, discourse, discussion, negotiation, debate, conversation, communication, sharing, storytelling, working together, reciprocal teaching, peer teaching/mentoring/coaching, peer review, and co-creation.

Educators: establish teacher and social presence, participate, facilitate discussions and community building, provide coaching and mentoring, and cultivate the social context.

Learning environments include: space for small group work, communication and collaboration tools, rubrics that encourage balanced voices and contributions, and access to external communities.


Supportive --
Learning activities are: culturally responsive, differentiated, fun, entertaining, and scaffolded.

Educators: are humanistic, caring, non-judgmental, competent, credible, well-organized, passionate, inspirational, enthusiastic, and attentive; minimize frustration; provide clear and complete directions/information, constructive feedback, coaching, and mentoring; and honor diversity and creativity.

Learning environments are: safe, non-threatening, celebratory, accommodating, flexible, equitable, resource rich, and multimodal.


So, my thinking is that an "engaging" learning experience requires the experience to be learner-centered, contextual, active, social, and supportive. However, I think you can have all of those things going on and still not create an engaging learning experience (although you have a better chance of it). I think about all of the students' stories over the years, and there is something more that just doesn't seem to be completely captured in the resulting lists of common instructional values. The students' learning experiences (which they might describe as "engaging") seem to be comprised of happenings/occurrences that reflect both an episodic uniqueness and a structured order...there is an ineffable qualitative character that is enjoyed, providing the basis for experienced value and aesthetic appreciation. [Note: My digital story describing my best learning experience is an example of this sort of experience.]

So, how do we engage the learner? A learning experience should be learner-centered, contextual, active, social, and supportive...but we (educators, instructional designers) also need to look at what is experienced by learners and think about how to enhance that (and I can't help but think that we can be helped a lot in this quest by considering what we know about the experience of art, music, theatre, and literature...the emotional and cognitive journey those experiences can take us on).

For a much more in-depth exploration and explanation of these ideas, please visit Pat Parrish's website -- I consider him to be an expert in the area of aesthetic principles for instructional design, and you will be able to access some of his writings via his site. (Or Google him...he has articles published on this topic.)

Problems of Practice approach

For the last several years, I have spent a lot of my consulting efforts working with higher education faculty and corporate instructional designers on appropriate instructional strategies for new and repurposed online learning opportunities (e.g., courses, tutorials, modules). Consistently, the tendency has been to start with what has already been done in the past, especially in a repurposing situation: “This has always worked in the face-to-face course, so why change it?” and “I have all the PowerPoint presentations I use in the classroom ready…can’t we just upload those to the server and call it an online course?” However, from my own experience (as well as from the literature), a problem-centered instructional approach is much more effective. Unfortunately, it isn't easy to develop authentic problems that represent the workplace and/or profession to focus and drive learning. So, over the years, I have developed a simple approach -- very similar to a backwards engineering approach to design -- to help myself, colleagues and clients create problems for problem-centered instruction (for face-to-face or online courses and workshops). I refer to this approach as the Problems of Practice (PoP) approach. The four supporting matrices -- with guided, reflective questions -- provide a roadmap for creating authentic problems.

For more information, please see two articles that describe the PoP approach in detail:

Dunlap, J.C. (2008). Getting to the heart of the problem: Using the Problems of Practice approach as a starting place for creating problem-centered instruction. Performance Improvement, 47(8), 26-34.

Dunlap, J.C., Sobel, D.M., & Sands, D. (2007). Supporting students’ cognitive processing in online courses: Designing for deep and meaningful student-to-content interactions. TechTrends, 51(4), 20-31.