DISTANCE LEARNING ADMINISTRATION 2009

MARIA PUZZIFERRO, CSU GLOBAL CAMPUS

KAYE SHELTON, DALLAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY

THIS PRESENTATION IS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD ON SLIDESHARE.NET

CHALLENGING OUR ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT ONLINE LEARNING: A VISION

FOR THE NEXT GENERATION OF ONLINE HIGHER EDUCATION

ONLINE LEARNING

We have just completed the first generation of online learning…

What’s in store for the next generation?

GUIDING QUESTIONS

Are our online learning environments really student-centered and interactive?

Which theories really apply to online learning and are they accurate?

Do we understand what quality is, and do our policies and practices support quality?

GUIDING QUESTIONS

What is the real role of faculty in the online learning environment?

Is there such a thing as a profile of the ideal online student?

Will online learning transform the academy?

ONLINE LEARNING IS “STUDENT-CENTERED,” AND STUDENTS ARE IN

CONTROL OF THEIR OWN LEARNING

ASSUMPTION 1

TOP CONCERNS OF ACADEMIC LEADERS

Lack of control over student learning (foundational, content knowledge)

Concerns regarding students cheating

Distracted students

A lack of faith in student ability to learn independently

(Sloan-C, 2007; New Media Consortium, 2008)

STUDENT CENTERED? WHO’S REALLY IN CONTROL?

Is our course design for learner control?

Learning Management Systems

No learner control

Standard assessments and discussion activities

ONLINE LEARNING IS INTERACTIVE,

COLLABORATIVE, AND ENGAGING

ASSUMPTION 2

WHAT IS INTERACTION?

Interaction is defined as: Number of discussion postings Group projects Number of contacts

“Engagement” vs. “Interaction” vs. “Participation”

How do we define and measure engagement?

TOWARD A NEW DEFINTION OF INERACTION

Do our students log into their Facebook page more or less often than their online course?

Do students have more interaction within Facebook, or within their online course?

“Authentic interaction” Spontaneous Situational Physical Qualitatively measured

ONE LEARNING APPROACH FITS ALL

ASSUMPTION 3

BASIC APPROACH TO ONLINE COURSE DESIGN

Courses as discrete, narrow, sequenced, linear collection of units

Compartmentalization of faculty and disciplines

Constructivism Learning is an active (rather than passive) process

of creating knowledge. Instruction is the process of supporting and

facilitating knowledge construction.

CONNECTIVISM?

Learning and knowledge are best attained by exposure to numerous and diverse opinions

Learning is a process of connecting nodes of information from multiple sources

The ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill

Currency of knowledge is the goal of learning activities

Decision making itself is a learning process…decisions may be altered and/or new decisions made

(Siemans, 2004)

WHERE DO WE START?

Universities begin to “let go” of their content and not see it as a proprietary product

Stop “shutting off access” to previously completed online courses

Find ways to utilize technology to enable students to save content that they may want to use again

Creating more collaboration and connection between discrete courses in degree programs and faculty teaching those courses

STANDARDIZED COURSE SHELLS CONTROL

QUALITY

ASSUMPTION 4

STANDARDIZED COURSE SHELLS

Is it similar to Marx’ Theory of Alienation?

McDonald’s approach or routinization

Is there a better way?

COMPARING F-2-F AND ONLINE COURSES

SHOULD DETERMINE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ONLINE LEARNING

ASSUMPTION 5

NO SIGNIFICANCT DIFFERENCE

Is classroom superior? 44% of respondents surveyed on how to assess quality

responded that a comparison of f-2-f and online student outcomes is necessary (Kim & Bonk, 2006)

Classroom Benchmarks Interaction = measured by

discussion/participation Critical thinking = measured by case studies,

papers, and reflective essays Comprehension of content = measured by online

quizzes and exams Synthesis = measured by research papers

POSSIBLE NEW BENCHMARKS

Student ability to spontaneously and intuitively apply course material in real-contexts

Interaction that is motivated by interest, rather than quantitative participation requirements

Interaction beyond the discussion board and beyond the course

POSSIBLE NEW BENCHMARKS

Collaboration that is individually-driven and comfortable; rather than forced groupwork with assigned groups that hasn’t worked in the f-2-f classroom, and is even worse in the online classroom

More emphasis on student-created content, and less on static, instructor-developed, or “canned” content

Student ability to make connections between disciplines and knowledge domains

ONLINE INSTRUCTORS SHOULD BE

THE “GUIDE ON THE SIDE” NOT THE

“SAGE ON THE STAGE”

ASSUMPTION 6

INSTRUCTOR ROLE

One of the most significant complaints of students in the online environment is not receiving enough direction from the instructor, a lack of responsiveness of the instructor, and a lack of feedback

When teaching presence is high, students are more successful, feel more connected, and learning outcomes are improved

(Shea, Li and Pickett, 2006)

FACULTY DEVELOPMENT

There is no single role of the instructor

Cultivate an environment of shared and collaborative decision making

Focus on developing faculty, not training faculty

Develop faculty skill and ability to know when to be a leader, a guide, an authority, a scholar, a manager, and an advisor

FACULTY WORKLOAD ISSUES DO NOT APPLY

TO ADJUNCTS

ASSUMPTION 7

WORKLOAD OR OVERLOAD?

Consider a typical 25-student class with a weekly student workload of two short papers, and discussion participation with a minimum of 2 posts per week per student. This translates a single week of work into 50 papers, a minimum of 50 discussion postings to read and respond to at least half of them, and 25 discussion postings to grade!

FACULTY WORKLOAD

How do online adjunct faculty manage the workload; many of whom are “professional adjuncts” teaching as many as 10 courses concurrently?

Do faculty cut corners?

If we know it takes more time, then why do we continue to raise class size?

WHAT TO DO?

Review workload and faculty issues as institutional issues, not just faculty performance issues

Do more to understand the impact of workload issues on adjunct faculty, their professional lives, and their instructional practices

Do online courses contain “busywork” for students, which translates to “busywork” for faculty?

Are our teaching expectations reasonable, and accomplish the learning goals we intend?

THERE IS A TYPICAL “PROFILE” OF THE ONLINE LEARNER

ASSUMPTION 8

IS THIS FOR REAL?

TODAY’S ONLINE LEARNERS

73 percent of all undergraduate students are nontraditional students

39 percent of all undergraduate students are 25 years or older

(NCES, 2000)

TYPICAL ASSUMPTIONS

Delayed entrance or later return to higher education

Attends school part time and works full time

Is considered financially independent

Has dependents other than self

Is a single parent

Has a GED

NO HOMOGENOUS PROFILE

Don’t allow marketing materials to influence our assumptions…students are not stress free

How do we meet diverse educational needs?

Diversity should be leveraged

THOSE WHO OPPOSE, DOUBT, OR RESIST ONLINE LEARNING ARE AFRAID OF

TECHNOLOGY

ASSUMPTION 9

THOSE WHO DO AND DON’T

Resistor conversion necessary?

It’s not about technology but learning

Still about learning which can promote unity, shared visions, and shared goals

ONLINE LEARNING WILL TRANSFORM THE TRADITIONAL

ACADEMY

ASSUMPTION 10

CAN IT CAUSE TRANSFORMATION?

The online education revolution represents the changing landscape of the global economy and the impact on higher education

New values for new learners are necessary

New definitions are emerging of education, quality, access, learning, and relationships

Can higher education adapt…?

OR IS IT TOO LATE FOR PUBLIC HIGHER EDUCATION?

Online education is still not mission-critical at many public higher education institutions

Private, for-profit schools continue to experience the highest percentage of growth among nontraditional students

University of Phoenix was reported to enroll more students than any other university in America

US News and World Report (2009) reported that the largest Business program in the U.S. is offered by the University of Phoenix. Top 5 Largest: Walden University, University of Phoenix, National

University, Nova Southeastern University and Capella University

Shift in Higher Education Values

Quality

Quality is indicated in the process

Endeavors that take a long time, go through a difficult process, with multiple gatekeepers

equals a high-quality product

Quality is indicated by the outcome

A high quality product is a high-quality product,

despite the process

Traditional Higher Education

Next Generation Higher Education

Shift in Higher Education Values

The Nature of “Learnin

g”

“Contact hours”

Learning is structured into sequenced, discrete “courses” which are the

property of the university

Learning is something that is done to students

“Learning hours”

Learning is a structured, but

synergistic connection between disciplines

and knowledge domains, which

generate ideas with individual ownership

Learning is something that students

experience

Traditional Higher Education

Next Generation Higher Education

Shift in Higher Education Values

Role of Faculty

Faculty vs. administrators

Faculty personal and professional satisfaction

and tenure systems form the collective

heart of the university

Faculty as part of the organization

The personal and professional

satisfaction of faculty, students,

staff, and community stakeholders form

the collective heart of the university

Traditional Higher Education

Next Generation Higher Education

Shift in Higher Education Values

Role of Students

Students as consumers and products

Students are a homogenous group that can be served

with the same class formats, instructors, and

support services

Students as customers and key stakeholders

Students are a highly diverse group that need more personalization of

and within class formats, instructor styles, and

support services

Traditional Higher Education

Next Generation Higher Education

Shift in Higher Education Values

Role of Institution

Institution of higher learning

Traditions provide the organizational

foundation

Organization of higher learning

Change and innovation provide the organizational

foundation

Traditional Higher Education

Next Generation Higher Education

Shift in Higher Education Values

Nature of Authority

Authority is established by position and title

Influence, impact and inspiration replace authority and are established by an

individual’s actions and ability to inspire others for the greater good of

the organization

Traditional Higher Education

Next Generation Higher Education

How can we make online learning more student centered?

Is this the end of the “learning management system” and the rise of the “personalized learning environment?”

What new assessment measures are needed to assess engagement, interaction, self-directed learning, and learner control?

What new theories of learning are needed to propel us to the next generation of online learning?

Have we boxed the definition of quality into only the things we can measure?

Is there no significant difference between f-2-f and online learning because there is no significant difference?

How can we best support faculty in moving toward a less defined and more dynamic role in the online classroom?

What is the future of online learning for traditional higher education?

Should traditional universities just step aside and leave it to the for-profits to step in and serve nontraditional students?

WILL TECHNOLOGY PUSH US THERE?

Pew Foundation (2008) predicts that by the year 2020, most people across the world will be using a mobile device as their PRIMARY means to connect to the Internet

The potential for education is largely untapped!

ShazamSpaceTime for IphoneSlideshareMobile FotosGeocaching Flat World Knowledge

ZoteroSmARThistoryTrueKnowledgeSemantiFindTikitag

TECHNOLOGY and THE FUTURE:KEY TRENDS

Globalization and the connection of learnersCollective intelligence with multiple answers,

grassroots intelligence and learners controlling their learning environments

Games as social interaction, civic engagement and engaged learning

Visualization literacy and toolsMobile devices

(The Horizon Report, 2009)

TECHNOLOGY and THE FUTURE:KEY TECHNOLOGIES

MobilesCloud ComputingGeo-everythingThe Personal WebSemantic-Aware ApplicationsSmart Objects

(The Horizon Report, 2009)

TECHNOLOGY and THE FUTURE: CRITICAL CHALLENGES

Growing need for formal instruction in visual literacy, information literacy, and technological literacy

Students are different, but educational materials are notStudents who are living and learning with technologies

that generate dynamic content may find the current formalism and structure of the academy “dead”

Current assessment systems are not equipped to measure learning that occurs in real-time, authentic ways

Higher education is obligated to reach its constituents in new and compelling ways

(The Horizon Report, 2009)

MAR I A PU ZZI FER R ODEAN, ACADEMI C AF FAI R S

CSU GLOBAL CAM PU SMAR I A .PU ZZI FER R O@CSU GLOBAL .OR G

KAYE SHELTONDEAN, ON LI N E EDU CATI ON

DALLAS BAPTI ST U N I VER SI TYKAYE@DBU.EDU

Questions…

RESOURCES

Allen, E., and Seaman J. (2007). Online Nation: Five Years of Growth in Online Learning. Available online: http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/online_nation.pdf

Findings from the Condition of Education 2002: Nontraditional Undergraduates. (2002). http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2002012

Horizon Report. (2009). http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2009-Horizon-Report.pdf Kim, K., and Bonk, C. (2006). The Future of Online Teaching and Learning

in Higher Education: The Survey Says. Educause Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 22–30.

New Media Consortium Report. (2008). http://www.nmc.org/pdf/Future-of-Higher-Ed-(NMC).pdf

Shea, P., Li, C.S., and Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175-190.

Siemens, George (2004). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Retrieved February 14, 2008 from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm