So many students, so little time (Part 1)

Image from  http://flic.kr/p/mPJCv   

by Beverly Brehl, PhD

For a variety of reasons, many college instructors are finding themselves faced with the daunting task of teaching larger classes with fewer resources. At the same time, we are also expected to maintain or increase productivity in other areas, especially research. So how do we do this, while maintaining high academic standards and providing our students with a meaningful learning experience?

In this blog series I will be exploring some of the ways that this can be done. This summer, I am teaching over 160 students in two fully-online courses*, without the help of a TA. I am trying to view this as an opportunity to try out some of the tricks of the trade that I have shared with others in my time as an instructional consultant, and perhaps invent a few of my own. I don't promise to have all of the answers, but I intend to share resources I have found useful as well examples from my own experience.

To get started, I think it would be helpful if I outline the basic structure of my courses. One course is an introductory survey course in Human Development (clicking the link will bring you to the course syllabus), and the other is a senior-level course in Adolescence. Each week, students in both courses have assigned readings from a textbook, online lectures to review, supplementary materials as appropriate (e.g., video clips, external websites), and a discussion forum to participate in (more on this in subsequent posts). In the lower-level Human Development class, I am using a portal created by the textbook publishers to assign homework and exams. (I've been very impressed by the quality of activities provided in this resource, so I will likely discuss this further in an upcoming post.) In the upper-level Adolescence course, students take weekly quizzes and submit a final paper.

Yes, a final paper in an upper-level course with 75 students and no TA support.   

In the next installment of this series, I will outline how I have adapted the final paper in this course to allow me to continue to complete all of my responsibilities, as well as maintain my personal life and sanity (what's left of it!).

*Although both of my courses this summer happen to be fully online, most (if not all) of the approaches I will discuss can be used or modified for use in a face-to-face (F2F) classroom.

Teaching and Learning Online series - Part 6

by Dr. Vanae E. Morris

As I have been writing this series about teaching and learning online, I have constantly reviewed and reflected upon my own experiences as both a student and an instructor in various online teaching and learning environments at different institutions.  I started with Outlook Express newsgroups, then into a web-based online learning system, then Blackboard, moved to WebCT, Angel, e-learning by Pearson, and finally Canvas by Instructure.  In each of these online learning environments, I created materials that students could interact with, provided ways for me to interact with the students (f2f or online), and finally ways that students could interact with each other. 

Most of that interaction was asynchronous with few (actually quite minimal) synchronous activities included in the process. Working within Canvas for the past few months, I have discovered many more opportunities for interactions that could occur synchronously; however, what I have also discovered is the limitations of students (and myself) to meet all together at a specific time and place. After all, isn’t the flexibility of the asynchronous classroom one of the reasons we teach and learn online?   

So, what exactly does the online teaching and learning environment look like that promotes active learning and critical thinking?  Can this be done? My response is, yes and no! The reason that I respond with both a positive and negative is because the outcome depends on both the instructor and each individual student in the course. Is the instructor an active, but not intrusive, participant in the course? Are the students engaged with all three aspects of the course (content, instructor, and learning community)? According to Tan, Wang, and Xiao (2010), the instructor should:

a) encourage contact between students and instructor (e.g. encouraging students to use the online communication tools within the course, soliciting input from all students through specific questions, and asking for feedback on interaction-related course conduct), b) develop reciprocity and cooperation among students (e.g. group projects, group discussions, establishing learning communities,  peer reviews), and finally c) use active learning techniques (e.g. reflective and open-ended tasks to encourage application of theory to practice and apply what they have learned, and locating and sharing relevant online resources), (pp. 122-125).

As part of the ongoing mission of the Center for Teaching & Learning Excellence (CTLE) and the Technology Assisted Curriculum Center (TACC) at the University of Utah, a course has been developed to assist instructors with quality course design that encourages instructors to use six elements of excellent course design:

1.     Course and lesson outcomes in the form of measurable objective statements

2.     A course organization and structure that facilitates student learning

3.     Teaching and learning activities that engage students in the process of learning

4.     A Variety of course content, media, and materials in appropriate web formats

5.     A sense of learning community, communication, and student support

6.     Assessment, feedback, and evaluation strategies that measure student learning outcomes as well as overall course quality

In order to promote active learning and critical thinking in an online teaching and learning environment, an instructor should examine these six elements and design a course, which has  assignments that require students to substantiate their ideas, invite responses, ask questions, and discuss and reflect upon the content.  Will this encourage the adult learner’s approach to learning and provide opportunities for self-direction?  Yes! By designing a course that encourages the three types of interaction (content, instructor, learning community), and assignments that require students to participate and substantiate their learning, will encourage and promote active learning and critical thinking in the online learning environment! 

References

Boettcher, J.V. & Conrad, R. (2010). The online teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2011). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (7^th ed.). New York: Elsevier.

Ko, S. (2005). Student-centered online teaching: Best practices. Retrieved from http://www.powershow.com

Moore, M.G. (1989). Editorial: Three Types of Interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education (3)2.

Tan, L., Wang, M., & Xiao, J. (2010). Best Practices in Teaching Online or Hybrid Courses: A Synthesis of Principles.  Hybrid Learning, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (6248)2010, pp. 117-126. 

SMALL GROUPS, LARGE CLASS SERIES (PART V)

Since I last updated this series (see Part IV), a lot has happened. The teams have completed and presented their posters, they have given one another feedback, and grading has been completed for another year. So how did things turn out?

In general, the posters were pretty good, and students seemed to be fair in both the peer reviews of fellow group members, as well as in their assessments of the posters created by other groups. Students for the most part provided both positive and critical feedback (thanks, in part, to the prompts on peer evaluation rubrics asking them to do so). There were some students who didn't pull their weight, and the scores and comments they received reflected this. 

So what were the surprises? The two highest scoring posters (based both on my grading and the reviews from their peers) were from the two groups I had been most worried about. The first was the group who were placed together because none of them had submitted their topic preferences (see Part I in the series). I had been concerned that this was a red flag indicating that these may be students who were less committed to the class, and unlikely to show up or contribute. This turned out to be true for some members of this group, but the others pulled together and were determined to create a high quality project, despite their other group members (or the fact that I had, from their perspective, doomed them to failure). Several of these students demonstrated strong leadership skills, and their poster turned out wonderfully.

The other group that surprised me was a group that had been placed together based on a common interest in moral development, broadly speaking. Their first task was to decide what in particular they would focus on. I have to say I was quite shocked when they told me that they had chosen to investigate the development of serial killers. I had my doubts (as did another group member, who I allowed to switch groups), but ultimately decided to allow them to pursue this topic. And I am so glad that I did! Their poster was thoughtfully researched, had more connections to course material than some on topics I had actually taught and tested on, and was very professional. It just goes to show what can happen when you allow students to pursue their own interest, no matter how odd they may seem to be on the surface!

One other issue I encountered that I hadn't expected, and wasn't sure what to do with, was that one of the posters contained sections that were clearly plagiarized. It seemed obvious to me that this was a group who had worked individually and then slapped it all together, rather than truly collaborating. So this was likely the handiwork of only one student. Yet, this was a group project, and thus in some senses this was the responsibility of the team as a whole. Ultimately, rather than asking the team to identify the student who had contributed the plagiarized sections, I chose to severely dock the team (but chose not to fail them) and explain to them my reasoning. None of them has yet responded, so although they may not be happy with my decision, they don't seem to feel that it is one that deserves to be challenged.

In all, this was a great semester, and having the poster session on the last day of class allowed all of the students to show off their hard work and learn from the projects presented by their classmates. Certainly I would do some things differently next time around, but I can assure you that this will not be the last time I incorporate group work into my large classes.

Ah, the end of another semester. No more classrooms, no more books! (At least until next week!)