Skip to content

Search results for 'direct instruction'

Do You Have Direct Instruction in Your Online Class?

Direct instruction is a teaching method that emphasizes the delivery of clear and explicit information, instructions, and explanations by the instructor. This method has been widely used in traditional classroom settings and has been adapted for use in online learning environments. This post will explore the research on direct instruction in online teaching and learning, including its advantages and limitations.

One of the main advantages of direct instruction is that it provides a consistent and structured approach to teaching. This can be especially beneficial for students who may struggle with self-directed learning. Research has shown that students who receive direct instruction perform better on assessments of content knowledge compared to students who receive less direct instruction (Rosenshine, 2012). Additionally, direct instruction can provide clear explanations of complex concepts, which can be especially helpful for students who are struggling to understand the material.

Another advantage of direct instruction is that it can be easily adapted for use in online learning environments. For example, pre-recorded video lectures, slide presentations, or written resources can be provided by the instructor for students to watch or read at their own pace. This allows for flexibility and convenience for students who may have busy schedules or live in different time zones. Additionally, assessments or quizzes can be used to check for understanding and provide feedback to students.

However, direct instruction also has some limitations. One limitation is that it can lead to a lack of student engagement. When the instructor is the primary source of information and students are expected to listen and follow along, there may be less opportunity for students to actively participate in the learning process. Additionally, direct instruction can limit opportunities for students to apply what they have learned. Research has shown that students who have opportunities to apply their knowledge perform better on assessments of content knowledge compared to students who do not have those opportunities (Bransford, et al., 2000).

To overcome these limitations, online teachers should consider using various methods in addition to direct instruction. For example, problem-based learning, discussions, interactive activities, and self-reflection opportunities can be incorporated to promote student engagement and application of knowledge. Additionally, online teachers should provide opportunities for students to interact with their peers and instructors, as research has shown that social interactions can lead to improved learning outcomes (Garrison & Cleveland-Innes, 2005).

In conclusion, direct instruction is a teaching method that has been widely used in traditional classroom settings and has been adapted for use in online learning environments. While it has some advantages, such as providing a consistent and structured approach to teaching and being easily adapted for use in online learning environments, it also has some limitations, such as a lack of student engagement and limited opportunities for application of knowledge. To overcome these limitations, online teachers should consider using various methods in addition to direct instruction and provide opportunities for social interactions.

The following is a list of examples of “direct instruction” in online teaching and learning

  1. Pre-recorded video lectures: The instructor records a lecture on a specific topic and posts it for students to watch at their own pace.
  2. Slide presentations: The instructor creates a slide presentation with information and explanations on a specific topic and posts it for students to view.
  3. Written resources: The instructor provides written resources, such as a reading assignment or a textbook, for students to read and study.
  4. Online quizzes and assessments: The instructor creates online quizzes and assessments to check for understanding and provide feedback to students.
  5. Online discussions: The instructor provides a forum for students to discuss the material and ask questions.
  6. Interactive activities: The instructor creates interactive activities, such as simulations or games, to help students better understand the material.
  7. Self-reflection opportunities: The instructor provides opportunities for students to reflect on what they have learned and how they can apply it.
  8. Live online lectures: The instructor conducts live online lectures, providing explanations and answering questions in real time.
  9. Office hour: The instructor hold office hour sessions where students can ask questions and receive feedback.
  10. Feedback on assignments: The instructor provides feedback on assignments to guide students’ understanding and progress.

These examples illustrate how direct instruction can be adapted to an online teaching setting, but it’s important to remember that direct instruction methods should be used in conjunction with other methods to enhance students’ engagement and apply the knowledge acquired.

References

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 133-148.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2

Rosenshine. (2012, Spring). Principles of Instruction: Research-Based Strategies That All Teachers Should Know. American Educator, 12–39.

Direction Instruction Examples in an Online Course

So last week I posted about direct instruction in online teaching and learning. You can read that post here: Do You Have Direct Instruction in Your Online Class?

In this post let’s explore what the list of examples of direct instruction looks like in a real online course. I’ll go through the list, posted below, in order, and show you options for how this might look in a course. Keep in mind there are “many different ways to skin a cat.” That is such a weird saying. Time out: Okay, I admit to wasting at least 15 minutes researching where that phrase originated. You too can waste some time if you like. Okay, time in.

The following video shows the example and provides some suggested tools and implementation practices you can use if you want to try the strategy yourself. These are all pretty basic, so I’ll try to spice it up a bit for you, so you can maybe try something new. If you see anything you want to try, send me a message or contact the CTLE.

The following is a list of examples of “direct instruction” in online teaching and learning

  1. Pre-recorded video lectures: The instructor records a lecture on a specific topic and posts it for students to watch at their own pace.
  2. Slide presentations: The instructor creates a slide presentation with information and explanations on a specific topic and posts it for students to view.
  3. Written resources: The instructor provides written resources, such as a reading assignment or a textbook, for students to read and study.
  4. Online quizzes and assessments: The instructor creates online quizzes and assessments to check for understanding and provide feedback to students.
  5. Online discussions: The instructor provides a forum for students to discuss the material and ask questions.
  6. Interactive activities: The instructor creates interactive activities, such as simulations or games, to help students better understand the material.
  7. Self-reflection opportunities: The instructor provides opportunities for students to reflect on what they have learned and how they can apply it.
  8. Live online lectures: The instructor conducts live online lectures, providing explanations and answering questions in real-time.
  9. Office hour: The instructor holds office hour sessions where students can ask questions and receive feedback.
  10. Feedback on assignments: The instructor provides feedback on assignments to guide students’ understanding and progress.

FEP 2018: Instructional Delivery & Design Thoughts

To complete an FEP each faculty member must engage in a self-examination of “THREE REQUIRED AREAS”:

  • TEACHING (OR OTHER PRIMARY DUTIES).  For example, instructional or service delivery, content expertise, classroom or program management, instruction/program design. This year I decided to focus on instructional delivery and design.

I’ve written previously about a redesign of my hybrid ENG102 course, so I’m going to continue that discussion here with a focus on instructional delivery and design. One of the many things I wanted to focus on this semester was better instruction for my hybrid students. The current instruction and design wasn’t bad, but I wanted to see if I could make changes to improve it. With this in mind, I decided to focus on feedback in grading, more one-to-one interactions, and more engaging in-class instruction.

In the past I’ve always graded student work in a digital format, mostly using a tool built into the publisher software I’ve used for 8 years, Connect Composition. Connect is great in that it makes it easy for the instructor to type feedback on the essay, and it saves the responses so if you have to say the same thing (think: Run-on sentence) over and over again on every student’s paper, you only have to type the R and the phrase just pops up, you select it, and you’re good to go. It saves a lot of time when grading. However, this semester I wanted to try some different technology tools, so I didn’t use Connect.

After trying to grade papers in Canvas one time, I gave up on that idea. Instead I decided to try grading using my Samsung Galaxy book. It’s a 2 in 1 PC that runs Windows and Office. It comes with an S pen and you can write right on the documents using Ink in Word. It was really easy to do and I quickly resorted back to my 1990’s self and began scribbling all over my students papers. I scribbled circles and boxes, arrows, lines and words. It was fun.

But I quickly realized that after several emails and texts asking what a particular scribble meant, that maybe this new (archaic) method of providing feedback was not as successful as I’d hoped. I mean the technology was great, but the practicality of it was not. And I have to give credit to my students who were very creative in their methods for asking for help. I got phone images of my scribbles, screenshots of them and even the scribbles written out using the letters they could recognize. “Dr. Cooper. What does frog mean?” Ha! Okay, okay, I can admit failure.

student conferencesWhat this failure transcended into was a bunch of one on one webinar conferences with me explaining all of my scribbles on the graded paper. If I got a message saying they didn’t understand something, I’d quickly send a Google Meet (Hangout) invite to the student and we’d go over it. I share my desktop, pull up their graded paper, and discuss. They loved it. So now I just set up that option after each paper is returned. I use Calendly to set up appointments. Students click the link to sign-up. The appointments get added directly to my Google calendar. Once I get an appointment, I edit the calendar event and add the Google Hangout and the student to the event. They get an invite, and when the time comes, we meet online.

This is an instructional strategy that has worked well. I still need to work on my scribbles, but students like the one on one interaction as we talk over their paper, and they can hear what I was thinking when I go over the marks on their papers. This is nothing revolutionary by any means, but it’s something I hope to continue. Although it might be tough when I’m teaching a full load (5 classes) in the future.

This strategy also helped with my goal to engage more with each student individually. I’m part of a MCLI Learning Grant this year with a group of other GCC ENG/RDG faculty who teach hybrid and online. Our project, Using Data to Improve Student Success in eCourses, involves sending personalized messages to students who fall into several categories: doing well, maintaining, improved, deteriorated, average maintaining, danger (red flag). After we send the messages, we take note of any changes in the students’ grade/behavior, and we’re surveying them to see how they felt about the messages. That might be a blog post soon.

I used the commenting feature in Canvas assignments to leave most of my messages. I usually use rubrics for grading assignments, and only occasionally will I throw in a “Good job” or “You need to redo this assignment.” My messages this semester were more personalized based on the category the student fell in. I wanted the student to feel as if I was talking just to him/her. I also used Remind to text my students. Each week I’d pick 3-4 students and send them a personal text. I’d text things like “Nice job on your last paper. You’re doing a great job in this class.” This was really easy because luckily all my students are doing well (C or better). Most of the texts for negative behaviors were for missing an assignment. “You didn’t submit your paper last night. Make sure you get that in right away. I’d hate for this to affect your grade. Let know if you need help.”

Lastly, I improved my in-class instruction by adding in more student interactions. We played Kahoot! games at the beginning of each Tuesday class session. The games covered the material in their online lessons. The students worked in teams early on to write a group argument paper on Net Neutrality, so we spent more time doing group activities, and last we shared more student work during class and talked about how the work was good or how it could be improved. With these in-class additions, we spent less time going over the online work, which in the past I felt was needed. Turns out I didn’t need to waste class time on reading directions for students.

Do Your Students Have More Skin in the Game Than You Do?

Have you really thought about that as an online instructor? Do your students have more skin in the game than you do? What in the world am I getting at with that question? Well, there’s been lots of discussion around direct instruction and regular and substantive interaction in online learning. If you don’t remember, I shared about: New federal US Department of Education (DoE) regulatory definitions of distance education require that institutions ensure regular and substantive interaction (RSI) between a student and an instructor(s). And I also wrote about direct instruction in online learning here. Read those to better understand where I’m going here.

The amount of time an online faculty professor should spend teaching an online class can vary depending on various factors, such as the course’s level, complexity, and the number of students enrolled. However, in general, faculty members should expect to spend a comparable amount of time teaching and preparing for an online course as they would expect a student to spend learning in the course. Now is that a bold statement, a personal opinion? Let’s see. The official credit hour definition states:

A credit hour is an amount of student work defined by an institution, as approved by the institution’s accrediting agency, that is consistent with commonly accepted practice in postsecondary education and that reasonably approximates no less than
-One hour of classroom or direct faculty instruction and a minimum of two hours of out-of-class student work each week for approximately fifteen weeks for one semester or trimester hour of credit, or ten to twelve weeks for one quarter hour of credit, or the equivalent amount of work over a different period of time;

HEA Definitions – Distance Education (GCC Institutional Effectiveness Office of Compliance Regulatory Reference Series

So basically that means we’re required by HLC to deliver 3 hours of direct instruction and a minimum of six hours of out-of-class work (homework) each week. That’s nine hours for each course. If they are a full-time student taking 5 classes, their skin in the game is that this is a full-time job at 45 hours per week. That’s probably why they call it full-time.

Now for faculty, according to the Quality Matters Program, an organization that provides standards for online course design and delivery, a rule of thumb for the amount of time needed to design and teach an online course is 8-12 hours per week for a 3-credit course. This time includes developing course content, facilitating discussions, providing feedback on assignments, and grading. But let’s break that apart because we’re not always designing and teaching at the same time. And let’s use direct instruction (DI) and regular and substantive interaction (RSI) as our baseline. Much of our DI can be done during the course development phase. We create videos, caption them and sometimes create quizzes to go along with them. No doubt this is time consuming, but once it’s done, often there’s not much design work to do once the class begins. There’s also lots of other engaging content that we develop and provide in an online course that doesn’t require weekly work once the course begins. So we can’t always factor in time for that for time needed to teach an online course.

Now let’s consider the RSI factor. Faculty members should also consider the time they spend communicating with students and providing support outside of class time. This may include answering emails, hosting virtual office hours, posting announcements, and responding to questions on discussion boards or via email. And we have to add in the time spent grading student work. Grading student work is a fundamental component of the teaching and learning process in a college course, and it is critical to assessing student progress and achievement. Providing clear feedback on student work is essential as it provides students with feedback on their progress and helps to guide their future studies in the course and beyond. The best type of feedback for student assessments is one that is specific, timely, and constructive. Specific feedback is clear and detailed, highlighting particular aspects of a student’s work that are well done or require improvement. And it should also be timely. That all takes time.

One major way to ensure RSI is happening in your online course is to make sure you are providing feedback that is specific, timely, and constructive. Auto-graded assessments are not the best example of that if that is all you provide. So would you say you spend at least 2 hours per credit hour or 6 hours a week doing RSI for your online course? Just one course? Well, that is the expectation we have for our students. Nine hours each week. And that should be the expectation for faculty as well. That would mean that your minimum load of 5 courses each semester would require you to spend 45 hours each week. That’s something to consider, but let’s pretend you say, I’m not doing that much RSI in my online courses. Okay, but you are spending that time in other ways that support students and the college. We have required office hours, committee assignments, department meetings, and 4Dx. All of that supports students in some way either directly or indirectly.

So, do you have more skin in the game than your students? Or are you dialing it in? Setting it and forgetting it? Here are some characteristics of bad online teachers: lack of organization, poor communication, limited engagement, inadequate feedback, unavailability, and technical difficulties. Overall, a bad online teacher can negatively impact the learning experience for their students and hinder their academic progress. Don’t be that guy. Get engaged in your own online course.

Open Pedagogy & Authentic Assessments

I’ve been thinking a lot about assessment lately much to my dismay. It’s probably because I’m working on a workgroup for testing services at the college. There appears to be a need for more testing services for online courses, but it got me thinking about how some of our assessments are the same types of assessments we got when we were in college years ago. Can’t they change? Can’t they be different now since education has changed so much? It’s just a thought, but here I am thinking about assessment.

Now is a good time to be thinking about how you can or may need to change your assessments for the next semester. Whether things went well or they didn’t, or you’re worried about students finding ways to cheat on your online assessments, it’s always good to evaluate how things are going and make adjustments. One thing to consider is open pedagogy and authentic assessments. Authentic assessments are usually designed by teachers to gauge students’ understanding of the material. They are tied directly to the learning objectives of a course, program, or discipline. Some examples of authentic assessments include open-ended questions, written compositions, oral presentations, projects, experiments, and portfolios of student work.

Open pedagogy is an approach to teaching and learning that emphasizes collaboration and sharing. It is based on the idea that knowledge should be freely available to everyone. Some examples of open pedagogy include students creating and sharing video-based learning objects for their classes, engineering students creating an open online textbook, forestry students creating open conservation case studies, and physics students creating course learning resources.

Here are some practical tips to help you get started with implementing authentic assessments in your classroom:

  • Align assessments with learning objectives. When designing authentic assessments, it is essential to ensure that they align with the learning objectives of your course or unit.
  • Design the curriculum backward from the assessment. This means that you should start by identifying what you want students to learn and then design assessments that will measure their understanding of those concepts.
  • Evaluate along the way using benchmarks. Use benchmarks to evaluate student progress throughout the course or unit.
  • Give students time to revise after self-assessment and peer assessment. This will help them improve their work and deepen their understanding of the material.
  • Continually adjust your assessment tools. Be willing to make changes to your assessments as you learn more about what works best for your students.
  • Be innovative to improve assessment. Use technology, games, simulations, and other innovative approaches to make assessments more engaging and effective.

I hope these tips help you implement authentic assessments in your class!

Resources:

3 Discussion Tools for Engaging Students in Online Courses

Last year I participated in a district pilot of a new discussion tool – Packback. It took a whole year to stop calling it backpack. 🙂 But I was initially intrigued by Packback because of its built-in AI moderation which meant less grading for me, but more meaningful participation from students. It took a bit to wrap my head around using it in ENG101, but it fit well with my literature course this summer, and students really like it. Check this video out to see what the concept behind Packback is: https://vimeo.com/163888277

They offer a consultant to each faculty using Packback, so you have someone who will work with you to get it set up and learn how to best utilize the tool. I found that very helpful. We already have the LTI integration in Canvas so set up and use is pretty easy. For more information on how Packback works, watch this “Engaging Students with Packback” video. The district has paid for a license, so it’s free to use with in MCCCD.

This next tool was introduced to me by Dr. Jennifer Lane, our CTLE Faculty Director.  Perusall is a social annotation tool that integrates with Canvas via LTI assignments. Perusall allows students and their instructors to collaboratively markup documents. Instead of reading a document and discussing it in person, Perusall brings the discussion to the text online. Learn more about how it works by watching this video: https://youtu.be/ODE6v4YOo0E And… wait for it… Perusall auto-grades effort and engagement with the text and scores are added to your Canvas grade book automatically. This frees up time for you to analyze the discussion students are having around the document and where you can help clarify or provide more instruction. It’s really cool and students actually like it (after they figure out how to score full points). It takes a few assignments before they figure it out, so it’s best to use it often and not as a one-off. This tool is also free.

Lastly, I’ve already introduced you to FlipGrid. See my last post. I’ll be doing two workshops for the CTLE in the next few weeks. They should be sending out information soon. Join me if you want to learn how to get set up and use video discussions this fall. My workshops are scheduled for next Thursday, August 13th at 1 pm and Tuesday, August 18th at 1 pm.

Sabbatical 2018 Week 5: Not All Work and No Play

If you’ve never taken an extended sabbatical from your job, you’re really missing out. It’s a great experience that I’m grateful to have taken advantage of twice in my 20 years in Maricopa. I really think I’ve worked hard enough to deserve it, and you probably have too. According to the MCLI website,

“A sabbatical leave is an opportunity to broaden or deepen educational interests, to explore new areas, or examine instructional methods to enhance the mission of the college. A sabbatical leave gives faculty a respite from their normal duties in order to provide them an opportunity to grow professionally. The goal of a sabbatical leave project is to engage faculty in the areas of study, research, travel, work experience, or other creative activity, and to contribute to the institution as a whole upon his/her return to the college.”

If you’re into learning new things then a sabbatical in Maricopa is for you. However, in the more generic sense the word sabbatical, which can be a noun or an adjective, comes from the Greek word sabatikos, which means “of the Sabbath,” the day of rest that happens every seventh day. Most teaching jobs come with the promise of a sabbatical, which is a year of not having to teach, though you still get paid. It’s also interesting to know that only 5% of US companies offer paid sabbaticals. So I’m not complaining that I still have to work during my sabbatical. At least it’s something I’m interested in learning and doesn’t involve grading hundreds of essay. It’s definitely a respite from the norm.

The challenging part for me is getting used to doing less. Many faculty do more than just teach a 15 hours schedule, and Maricopa is good about providing opportunities and compensating those of us who do more. For the past 4 years, I’ve been wrapped up in the world of professional development, online learning and OER. I’ve taught very little, but worked more than I have in previous years collaborating, coordinating, and strategizing with our Instructional Designer, CTLE Staff, eCourses faculty lead and faculty developers. My involvement also included working district wide with other CTL directors, elearning and OER leaders. It’s hard to just go cold turkey and not talk to or work with any of those people anymore. My only saving grace is that many of those people are personal friends and we still chat when I sneak on campus to visit or attend a planned happy hour. Shout out to Meghan, my better half for the last 4 years.

One major plus is that my other partner in crime for the past 4 years, Dr. Lisa Young, is also on sabbatical this year, and her sabbatical proposal is similar to mine – Big Data. And as the Faculty Director of SCC’s CTL and Co-Tri-Chair of the Maricopa Millions project, she’s been involved in all the same things I have. So she can relate. Part of our sabbatical plan is to hike every other week to discuss our projects and other stuff. It’s comforting to know she’s learning the same things and good to have someone to bounce ideas off of. And it doesn’t hurt to get some exercise in on a regular basis. Below is evidence of our endeavors.

The best part of a sabbatical is you get to determine your schedule, so there’s a lot of flexibility in there for doing the things you never seem to have time for. The reality is that many of the people you’d like to do those things with are still working hard and stressed out. Ha! (Sorry Beth! Thanks for visiting me yesterday)

And one more for the road. So far we’ve hiked Holbert and Mormon Trails on South Mountain, Cholla Trail on Camelback, and Trail 100 in Dreamy Draw followed by breakfast at Dick’s Hideaway, Scramble, and First Watch. Breakfast is an added bonus. What is up with my hair?! Anyway, I’m looking forward to it cooling off so we don’t have to hike so early. Then sabbatical life will be truly perfect. Well, if they can figure out how to pay me correctly then it will be truly perfect.

Sabbatical 2018 Week 2: Big Data Modeling

I survived week 2 of my sabbatical. I spent a good portion of time learning about big data modeling. I learned a few things including how to identify the major components in semi-structured data from a weather station and how to create plots of weather station data. I’m not confident I really learned how to do this; however, I was able to follow directions and type in the correct commands to get the desired results.

VMVirtualBoxThe challenge is that we’re using this Oracle VM VirtualBox, and I’m not certain why. For instance, one of the first steps was to open a spreadsheet application in the terminal shell. All was fine until I got an error message when running command “oocalc”. No spreadsheet application for me. I checked the discussion forum and found others have had this same error, but all the suggested fixes didn’t work for me. I posted my problem and have not yet received any help. Now I understand why so few people complete MOOCs. You’re on your own.

Oh well. Screw the terminal. I just downloaded a LibreOffice spreadsheet application to my computer and loaded up the CSV file and everything worked fine. I did try to use Microsoft Excel at first, but the instructions didn’t match up.

Later in the week I had to go back to the dreaded VirtualBox to learn how to display the nested structure of a JSON file and to extract data from a JSON file. This time we were playing around with some Twitter data and everything was fine. My confidence was boosted although temporarily. I had some challenges in the terminal shell in the next lesson trying to view the dimensions and pixel values in a image. It didn’t work at all for me. So I rolled my eyes and sent a silent prayer that that knowledge would never be necessary. I’m starting to get a feel for how some of my students might feel when learning new concepts in Comp I and II. They’re probably praying that I never ask them to demonstrate certain skills ever. I feel your pain.

I ended the week with a few more mishaps in the VirtualBox. I’m really hoping the tool is not a standard tool for data analysis and something that’s related to how Coursera works. I’m getting a little tired of watching a video of the tool working great, but when I try it – FAIL! It’s really not good for my ego or my confidence. But I will persist.

sarcasticUp next I’ll be finishing up the first course: Intro to Big Data and moving on to Week 3 of 6 in the Big Data Modeling and Management Systems course. Can’t wait to use the VirtualBox!

I also need to set up a meeting with district Canvas support to discuss the Canvas Data Portal. They’re going to turn that right on once I ask.

FEP 2018: Hybrid Course Redesign, Part 1

To complete an FEP each faculty member must engage in a self-examination of “THREE REQUIRED AREAS”:

  • COURSE OR PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT/REVISION.  For example, a review of syllabi, tests, and course or program content, including competencies and objectives. I decided to redesign my hybrid ENG102 course this semester.

It has been a while since I’ve stepped back and taken a look at my hybrid ENG102 course. Teaching this course has always been somewhat of a struggle, as many students just don’t understand the hybrid concept and don’t do well in the class. To teach a hybrid, you need to have a lot of digital content to teach concepts because in-class time is limited, but it’s difficult to get students engaged in this content or to even know if they are looking at it. So my redesign was focused partly on developing good digital content that I could then track student engagement.

There were three general areas I worked on: Course Orientation, Digital Lessons and adding a Team Based Learning (TBL) project to the course. In addition to these three major areas, I made some other changes here and there throughout the course, but I’ll focus mainly on the major three for this post.

I’ve always had a course orientation that I required students to complete before continuing on in the course. I open the course a week early and start sending students message to get them started early. This year, in addition to my course orientation, I required that they all take the  GCC eCourses Student Orientation, which is a 4-module orientation created to help student get familiar with taking online/hybrid courses. It answers all the basic questions about what online and hybrid learning is, how it works, what to expect. Below are the key topics:

The GCC eCourses Student Orientation is designed to:

  • Help you determine if online/hybrid learning is right for you.
  • Give you tips and tricks to be successful in an online/hybrid environment. To explore these topics further, enroll in CPD150, Strategies for College Success.
  • Acquaint you with the Canvas Learning Management System and other learning technologies.
  • Provide you with quick access to help and support with your ecourses.

With this new requirement I’m assured that every student at least knows what a hybrid course is and has some idea of how to be successful before we even start. Online learning is not for everyone, so the purpose of the course orientation for my class is to fully inform students of what they signed up for and see if they are prepared for online learning. If they’re not, I suggest they quickly make a change to a more traditional F2F class. In the regular course orientation I created a list of things to do.

The list is designed to give students a glimpse at the types of activities they will be doing in the online environment of the hybrid course. They are asked to check their school email, fill out a form, participate in an asynchronous discussion, set up their Remind texting and NoodleTools accounts. These are all simple tasks and really just require students to follow directions.

Surprisingly some students have trouble following written instructions, and so discovering this early is a plus for the student. If you’re struggling with the orientation, online learning is probably not a good fit.

I also created three video lessons that walk students through the syllabus, course overview, and Canvas. The lessons require that students have speakers so they can hear audio or video in the lesson, and answer questions along the way to check for engagement. I created the lessons so students are required to listen to the audio or videos before gaining access to the quick check quizzes, and then those are set up so that the students can’t move forward until they’ve attempted them. All the lessons are captioned.

The goal is not to weed out students who struggle out the gate although that does happen. The goal is to have student self identify that the course format may cause some trouble for them, but if they utilize the resources available, they can still be successful. There aren’t any surprises at this point. We both know after week 1 who will do well and who needs extra help. Many students choose to drop and take a different course. This semester nine students opted out of hybrid ENG102 by Wednesday of the first week either by their own choice or by not completing the orientation, not asking for help, and not replying to my offers of help. In the latter, I dropped the student so he/she could get a full refund and take another course.

In Part 2, I’ll continue the discuss on the creation of digital lessons for the hybrid redesign and discuss the new TBL project I created. Check back soon for that.

FEP 2018: Self Examination of Committee Participation

To complete an FEP each faculty member must engage in a self-examination of “THREE REQUIRED AREAS”:

  • GOVERNANCE AND/OR COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION AT THE COLLEGE AND/OR DISTRICT LEVELS

I was just chatting recently with our interim Dean of Instruction about a new process for committee selection for faculty. Apparently it’s not just a pain in the butt for faculty, but also for the deans in trying to insure all faculty get their requested committee picks. Well, I can verify that for two years in a row (2015-16 & 2016-17) I didn’t get any of the committees I requested. The second year it happened to me, I was seriously pissed off upset. My solution was to not participate on those randomly assigned committees and instead serve where I thought I could best serve the college. To be honest, I don’t think anyone even noticed. No one came knocking. Instead I chaired or co-chaired four different committees over the last three years and participated in several more.

This academic year on campus I serve on the Technology Alliance Committee, the CTLE Advisory Committee, GCC OER Committee, Learning Communities Committee (LCAC), PAR Committee, and the President’s Completion Task Force. I’m happy to report that two of those I actually requested and received as my assignment. I also serve on a district committee for OER, Maricopa Millions, Faculty Developers Committee, and the unofficial CTL Faculty Directors Committee. That’s 9 committee assignments. I’d complain but Meghan has more than I do, so it seems pointless to complain.

So where do I start? I’ll focus on OER. After five years of being involved with OER, I have plenty to share about my committee participation. As chair of the GCC OER Committee, in our first year as a committee, we participated in a district wide OER Student Awareness Campaign. Our 5 person committee did the following last fall.

GCC participated in the Student OER Awareness Campaign planned by the Maricopa Millions Steering team the week of September 25th. Our OER Committee organized events at both North and Main on Tuesday and Wednesday of that week. Faculty and volunteer students used laptops/tablets to showcase Maricopa Millions OER Student website and to show students how to find OER courses in “Find a Class” with the No Cost/Low Cost filter. Additionally, on the main campus, we used a camera and whiteboard for the “How Much Did You Pay?” student pictures, which were posted to social media with hashtags #OER, #textbookbroke, #maricopamillions and @MaricopaOER. At North two faculty were able to talk one on one with about 110 students, and on Main, a crew of two faculty and 6 students took 20 photos, and spoke with well over 150 students. Our photos and talent release forms can be found in this drive folder. Our social media can be found on this page.

In addition to my on campus OER participation, I continue to co-chair the district OER committee, Maricopa Millions. Lisa and I were a little overwhelmed with some new responsibilities with the new OER fee, so we added a third chair, Angela Christiano (PV Math). We spent what seemed like endless hours working on the OER Enhancement Fee RFP, and then after it was approved, we had to deal with vendors calling us and trying to sell us on their products.

The following is a list of some of the many to-do items we covered over the last year. Lisa and I presented on MM at NISOD last May in Austin. We wrote a proposal and was accepted to present at Educause in October, but declined the invitation. The team planned another successful OER Dialogue Day this spring and had about 80 participants. We completed another call for proposals (Phase 8) for MM grants and provided support for existing Maricopa Millions grantees. And we planned a successful Maricopa Millions $10M celebration that was held at Gateway last fall.

In addition to all that, we supported a new Maricopa Remix project to increase adoption, maintained the OER Canvas site, helped create a Canvas Commons Implementation Plan, worked with business offices to create materials on how to enter OER Enhancement fee into FMS, SIS and coordinate census dates for reporting to vendors, and developed a plan to institutionalize OER in the district. The plan was to appoint a faculty in residence to coordinate OER efforts, chair OER Steering Team, etc.; provide budget for outreach, professional development, incentivizing OER, and coordinating OER Degree. This plan was adopted this spring, and we are in our last semester as tri-chairs.

I’m really excited to be at the end of a great ride with OER in Maricopa. It has been a rewarding experience to work with some wonderful colleagues, Lisa, Angela and now Matthew, as well as all the other OER champions on the steering team. I don’t think I can find another opportunity as grand as this, although I am looking forward to a time when I won’t be in the middle of so much action.