IDEAS: Instructional Design for Elearning ApproacheS

Introduction: Empowering Online Teaching through Faculty Development

Rogers (1995) defined innovation as, “an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption.” The articles in this collection have been selected to address the question, how can we promote innovation in teaching? The important distinction for the context of our discussion is that ‘perceived as new’ is relative to the traditional educational practices of a University which consist largely of face to face, lecture style classes. If web-based delivery is adopted and used with the existing instructional paradigms, the effect on learning will be negligible and will therefore not represent an innovation in teaching. Ultimately, it is not the technology that matters, but how we design the learning through the technology (Miller, 1996). Advances in teaching may result when technology is used as an opportunity discover new ways for achieving learning outcomes. Web-based education can represent both a pedagogical innovation and a channel of communication capable of engaging the learner. Technology enables the instructor to create a different kind of curriculum and to establish a different relationship with the student. The virtual classroom provides a new environment for human interaction and allows the teacher to design learning which can be more student-centred and collaborative.

According to Rogers (1995), innovation is adopted by members within society at different times and at different rates. A steep learning curve is overcome quickly by early adopters who absorb the new skills and instructional paradigms quickly while late adopters acquire this knowledge over a longer time span. Information seems to flow easily from innovators to early adopters. The barrier for diffusion is identified by the gap that occurs between early adopters and early main-stream faculty. The size of this gap can be attributed to the level of the interconnectedness between departments at a university. Often faculty have connections that do not extend beyond their department. This limits the reciprocal exchange of teaching methods and content. The number of nodes and connections between departments determines the complexity and richness of the network (Rueter, 1997).

Faculty development is often seen as a key enabler of innovation in teaching as it may serve to link successful teaching initiatives and the broad expertise available throughout a university. Such a network would facilitate the sharing of innovative teaching strategies and encourage the exchange of best practices in the development and delivery of online education. These types of initiatives also help to raise the profile of innovative teaching practices, and foster communication and collaboration between developers and programs.

Each of the following article summaries will examine a different aspect of faculty development and outline the strategies or considerations for promoting innovation in teaching. Together they provide the foundation for the design of the teaching online workshop I deliver at the University of Toronto.

Chapter 1: Online Course Design and Faculty Development

Brown, G., Meyers, C.B., Roy, S. (2003). Formal course design and the student experience. JALN 7(3), 66-77. http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v7n3/v7n3_myers.asp

The authors examine the collaboration between faculty and professional course designers at Washington State University and the impact that this work had on the student learning experience. The purpose of this study was to examine whether instructors exposed to the faculty development process were more likely to create technology-mediated learning environments which reflected effective teaching principles. Brown et al. (2003) go on to outline which principles of teaching have the greatest impact on learning. Based on their research they determined that the most important quality of good teaching practice is faculty-student interaction. This type of communication is also the basis for employing other principles of good practice. It is essential in facilitating the exchange of diverse points of view, for providing feedback on performance and for communicating high expectations. Regular interaction also provides the structure necessary so that students’ continue to focus their efforts on required tasks. A series of faculty and student surveys focusing on teaching and learning goals, activities and processes was used to systematically evaluate the use and impact of innovative teaching practices. The research findings suggest that faculty development programs which include pedagogical and technology training enhances the opportunities for interactions which lead to improved student learning outcomes.

This article was chosen because it demonstrates that systematic course design improves students’ opportunities for faculty-student interaction, student-student interaction, and other elements associated with best practice. It provides the rationale for why we employ an instructional design template to help faculty clearly articulate the strategies and technologies for online instruction. Engaging in this exercise gives them an opportunity to identify the types and frequency of communication they would like to occur and how these activities help them to achieve the learning outcomes.

Chapter 2: Constructivist training for Online Teachers

Gold, S. (2001). A constructivist approach to online training for online teachers. JALN, (5)1, 36-57. http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v5n1/v5n1_gold.asp

Gold examines the pedagogical role of the teacher in web-based learning, focusing on the training required to make the transition from in-class room education to online instruction. The article focuses on a two-week faculty development workshop aimed at preparing educators to effectively teach online. Participants were engaged in different types of collaborative exercises ranging from virtual field trips, to online evaluations, interactive essays, and group projects. To promote innovation in teaching faculty experienced constructivist approaches first-hand in order to better understand the value of learner-centred instruction. Gold also outlines the case for constructivist online education. As knowledge is based on different experiences and interpretations by the learner, technology can be used to help them make meaning of their environment by providing the tools by which they communicate their understanding of the world. Gold ties Piaget's processes for knowledge construction to the affordances of online learning networks. For example, the online curriculum can be used to solicit problems from students to act as a stimulus for learning activities. The content can be modularized so as to scaffold learning. Collaborative projects can engage students in designing authentic tasks and case studies can be presented to challenge misconceptions of particular theories. Gold tested several research hypotheses to determine the effect of the training on the instructors, most specifically their perceptions of what online teaching involved and concluded that workshop was successful in getting educators to re-examine their current methods of instruction. He also found that, the participants shifted towards a more constructivist orientation, seeing online courses as offering more opportunities for student participation. Of interest is the description and findings of the culminating activity where groups of participants wrote an interactive essay.

I have included this article, because I agree with the author that in order to effectively teach online instructors should experience it from a student perspective, otherwise the tendency is for them to map their existing practice onto the web-based medium. These experiences also help to inform them about the potential benefits and drawbacks of this delivery medium. The design of the course exposed faculty to a variety of instructional strategies and technologies and was the same approach and organizational structure we used in the development of our own web-based workshop at UofT.

Chapter 3: Faculty Development that Works

Morrison, J.L., & Brown, D.G. (2002) Faculty Development That Works: An Interview with David G. Brown. The Technology Source, July/Aug. Available online http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=997

Morrison and Brown discuss initiatives they have implemented at their institution to promote innovation in teaching. Brown suggests that the necessary pre-conditions for increasing the use of technology in teaching is to provide ubiquitous, reliable access, and providing the time for instructors to learn how to use the different tools for teaching. Faculty will be driven to adopt more effective methods of teaching using technology if they determine that there will be a corresponding enhancement in student learning outcomes. Specific recommendations include a laptop program for faculty and students and an environment which encourages instructors to experiment with technology. Recognizing the enormous time commitment that integrating instructional technology takes is a necessary precondition for a successful faculty development program. The authors also suggest that the focus should be placed on effective teaching practices as opposed to learning how to use the technology in order to encourage faculty to seek opportunities for accomplishing new ways of achieving learning outcomes. The article also addresses issue of rewards for faculty and how to provide incentives for educators to learn about technology. They include, “special stipends, hand-written notes from deans, discretionary spending accounts, priority in the receipt of new technology, the capacity to acquire needed computer peripherals and software, distinguished teaching awards, citation in presidential speeches, travel support to share teaching experiences at professional meetings, and additional salary increases.” Most importantly they share the lessons they have learned in fostering faculty development initiatives. One promising idea that failed to work was purchasing release time for faculty. They found that, “if teaching a three-course load takes 70 hours a week, teaching two courses also demands 70 hours a week. In other words, teaching will always take all the time available.” Their greatest successes in faculty development have come in employing students and professional staff to assist faculty members.

I chose this article because it offers a lot of practical suggestions that can be implemented at an institutional level in order to promote the wide-spread adoption of instructional technology. Some of these initiatives are underway at UofT including; wireless networks, individual web space for faculty and students (UTORweb), a laptop program for Art & Science students and pedagogical and technical workshops for teaching online. The current reward structure is in the form of grants which are provided by the Provost's office (with matching funds from the department) to provide the resources and expertise necessary to develop educational resources that integrate technology.

Chapter 4: Creating Online Lessons

Sleight, D., Reznich, C., Yelon, S., & Williamson, J. (2003) Creating online lessons: A faculty development seminar series. Med Educ Online 8(7), 1-7. http://www.med-ed-online.org/f0000061.htm

The authors describe a seminar series developed and implemented to teach medical faculty to create educationally sound, well-designed online instruction. Medical students in family and community practice are often geographically dispersed for their clinical placements. Online education is a valuable tool for bridging the distance between their placements and their academic center. Participants in the workshop were taught basic instructional design concepts and focused on developing a complete online lesson to develop skills which could later be applied to the design of an entire course. Similar to the UofT workshop, faculty were provided with learning design templates based on the skills and knowledge to be developed. Contrary to the Gold article, this workshop did not attempt to expose faculty to different theories of learning. Rather the content focused on the principles of instruction and the conditions required to elicit certain kinds of performance. What differs from the approach taken at UofT, is that this group of educators also included training in administering the technical aspects of web site and course shell development. This aspect of the course focused on content layout, navigational and compatibility issues using commercial webpage design software. Of particular importance is the changes that were proposed as a result of the course evaluation. Based on the feedback obtained from participants, the authors decided future iterations of the workshop would concentrate on pedagogical issues and that it would be better for support staff to attend to the technical issues of online course development. They also determined that the structure and timeline for the workshop and senior administrative support were important considerations in undertaking such training.

This article serves as a valuable resource as it describes a faculty development program delivered in a medical education context (same participants as the UofT workshop) and provides an alternative method for delivering this type of training. The lessons that were shared by the authors convinced us not to include technical training as part of our online workshop.

Chapter 5: Exemplary Faculty Development Program

Varvel, V., Lindeman. M., & Stovall, I. (2003). The Illinois online network is making the virtual classroom a reality: Study of an Exemplary Faculty Development Program. JALN 7(2), 81-95. http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v7n2/v7n2_varvel.asp

The Illinois Online Network (ION) is a faculty development partnership between all forty-eight community colleges in the state of Illinois and the University of Illinois. The network was established to help faculty to develop and deliver web-based courses that reflect best practices and engage students in higher order cognition. The authors outline the programs and resources that ION provides, the effectiveness of the program as a whole, and the lessons ION has learned about providing a large-scale faculty development program. Each partner is represented by a member on the Steering Committee which oversees the direction and scope of the projects implemented by the network. Liaisons at each of the colleges also help to ensure the quality of program delivery. ION uses a multi-faceted approach to achieve its objectives;

• The Making the Virtual Classroom a Reality (MCVR) series of online courses for faculty, aimed at developing an understanding of online pedagogies and technologies
• A Master Online Teacher certificate program
• On-site campus visits, involving a combination of faculty workshops, private consulting, and meetings with faculty, administrators, and technical personnel
• An annual faculty development institute, involving over 170 faculty from ION member institutions
• A Resource-rich website

Source: Varvel et al (2003)

Participants in the MCVR series are assigned a coach who works closely with faculty to develop or enhance an existing course. The practical exercises require faculty to demonstrate the knowledge they have gained by articulating learning goals, role of the instructor, student exercises, assessment and feedback strategies and selecting appropriate technologies to enable those outcomes. Faculty are also given an opportunity to practice facilitating online discussion. The evaluation surveys indicate that ION activities have had a very positive impact on the satisfaction and confidence of faculty teaching online courses with, "91% of respondents strongly agreeing or agreeing that the course gave them skills and techniques directly applicable to their jobs" (Varvel et al., 2003).

This article was selected because is provides an exemplary model for the implementation of a faculty development program for online teaching. What is particularly valuable is the practical approach they have adopted and the level of collaboration which exists between partnering institutions. Participants in the UofT workshop are also engaged in the practical exercise of course development as they learn about the pedagogy of online teaching. We hope to extend our partnerships to other institutions like the University of Waterloo, Ryerson and Georgian College who have all expressed interest in sharing best practices and resources.

Conclusion: Faculty Development and Online Teaching

What each of the articles in this collection represent are practical real-world examples of faculty development programs directed at improving online teaching. All of the authors were forthright in sharing their experiences of initiatives that were both successful and unsuccessful. This is a tremendous benefit to those who subsequently undertake similar initiatives, as they can devote their time and energy building on an existing knowledge base as opposed to creating a new one. Each of these studies has at least in some way informed the design of the teaching online workshop at UofT. As with the other studies the purpose of our training is to provide faculty with the experience of an online learner while completing steps towards the development and delivery of their own course. Similar approaches in the design of the courses was also used. Generally, a well-circumscribed body of information was examined within a structured learning environment. The common themes that were explored included; effective practices for teaching and learning, choosing instructional technologies, instructional design methodology, and cooperative learning strategies. Activities were associated with specific material presented to the learner in each unit. For example, upon reviewing material on “How Instructional Technologies Help Learning” the participants are required to complete the corresponding section in their design template.

An additional aspect of the workshops that were cited was the first-hand exposure to a wide variety of educational theories and practices. Participants were actively engaged and given the opportunity to individually reflect on their experiences in order to build upon their prior knowledge of teaching. Collaborative learning exercises provided the social construct for participants to negotiate understanding by exposing them to multiple perspectives and interpretations. This took a variety of forms. Through group discussion, learners worked towards a common understanding of best practices for teaching and then collectively applied the criteria for evaluating web-based courses. In some cases, the instructional design templates developed by faculty were peer reviewed. This kind of exposure lead to Gold's conclusion that, “teachers exposed to the course significantly changed their attitudes towards online instruction, seeing it is as more participatory, and interactive than face-to-face instruction”. The contextual setting for many of the workshops was authentic in that instructors were learning in the same environment they would be required to use for teaching. Experiencing web-based learning from a student perspective helps instructors to become effective online teachers. Being exposed to the strategies and dynamics of online learning seemed to be the best way to inform instructors about the benefits and challenges of this mode of delivery.

A combination of delivery strategies were employed and ranged from blended to fully online sessions. Many began with some type of in-class session and included an orientation to online learning in specific web-based environments. Faculty mentoring and group activities were a common theme throughout making use of asynchronous and synchronous technologies to complete the required learning activities. The main advantage of providing the workshops online seemed to be the degree of flexibility it offered faculty to work around their teaching and research commitments. They were able to access the material from home and a variety of work locations. Although the timelines and the structure of the content were provided by the instructors, the progression through the learning content was self-directed. This was an important delivery strategy as not all of the material was equally relevant to each of the participants. The learners were able to customize the learning by selecting the resources applicable to their specific course. This approach also allowed the instructors to focus their attention on the individual learners and address specific questions or challenges related to the development of each course. To deal with the workload of this approach, team teaching was often implemented to enable a high level of service to faculty. Many of the workshop also served as models for the delivery of web-based education. The instructors used the technological features of the online environments to illustrate the effective online teaching practices articulated in their workshops. For example, email was used to provide individualized feedback, to communicate the expectations and timelines for the learning activities and to synthesize main points of discussion. The asynchronous discussion board reflected the diversity of perspectives and provided an authentic audience for participants to articulate their ideas. The groups section promoted the value of collaboration in the course design process. Multiple examples of online courses and instructional technology were also presented in the web-based materials.

The evaluation of these programs overwhelmingly indicated that faculty development programs aimed at improving online teaching were valued by participants and increased the range of instructional strategies and technologies that they were able to employ.

Additional Resources: Online Teaching

Banathy, B. (1995). Developing a systems view of education. Educational Technology, June, 53-57.

Barker, A. (2003). Faculty Development for Teaching Online: Educational and Technological Issues. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing 34(6), 273-278.

Bates, A.W., & Poole, G. (2003). Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Bates, A.W., (2000). Managing technological change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Braden, R. A. (1996). The case for linear instructional design and development: A commentary on models, challenges, and myths. Educational Technology, March-April, 5-20.

Clark, D. (1995). Introduction to Instructional System Design. [online]. Available: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/sat1.html.

Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Graham, C., Cagiltay, K., Lim, B., Craner, J., & Duffy, T. M. (2001). Seven principles of effective teaching: A practical lens for evaluating online courses. The Technology Source, March/April. [online ] Available: http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=839.

Jonassen, D.H. (1992). Evaluating constructivist learning. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen, Constructivism and the technology of Instruction, Educational Technology Publications, 137-148.

Merill, M.D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., Pratt, J. (1996). Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, September-October, 5-7.

Miller, G., (1996). ‘Technology, the curriculum and the learner: Opportunities for open and distance learning’, in R. Mills and A. Tait, (eds.) Supporting the Learner in Open and Distance Learning. London: Pitman Publishing, 34-42.

Oliver, K.M. (2000). Methods for developing constructivist learning on the web. Educational Technology, November-December, 5-18.

Parker, K. & Parikh, S. V. (2001). Applying Prochaska’s model of change to needs assessment, programme planning and outcome measurement. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 7(4), 365-371.

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Rueter, J. G., (1999). Faculty Development for Teaching and Learning with Technology: New Directions for PSU, [online]. Available: http://web.pdx.edu/~rueterj/rlw/facdev.

Rueter, J. G., (1997). A New Metaphor for the Spread of Innovation in Teaching and Learning, [online]. Available:
http://web.pdx.edu/~rueterj/rtw/new_metaphor.

Rutkowski, K (2001). The Diffusion of Web Technology in Education (Applications & Challenges), [online]. Available: http://www.netteach.com/courses/001/lectures/Unit9/lecture.htm.

Smith, P.L., & Ragan, T.J. (1999). Instructional design. (2nd ed.). Toronto: John Wiley & Sons. Inc.

Vannatta, R. & Beyerbach, B., (2000). Facilitating a Constructivist Vision of Technology Integration among Education Faculty and Preservice Teachers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2).

Lessons learned in Delivery of Teaching Online Workshop

We have learned three important lessons during the delivery of our workshop.

Some groups encountered problems with the cooperative activities. These difficulties ranged from very little collaboration to intense competition for leadership roles and personality conflicts (yes, this even occurred with faculty). We made a common mistake of believing that it was merely enough to assign members to work in groups on a common task. This experience reinforced the importance of applying a systematic methodology to the design of a learning strategy. Future iterations of the workshop will structure the learning to include the essential elements of cooperation; positive interdependence, face-to-face promotive interaction, individual and group accountability, interpersonal and small group skills, and group processing (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1993).

During the second part of one of the workshops we experimented with making the learning more self-directed to accommodate the busy schedules of the faculty. Participants were not instructed to interact with fellow participants through the discussion board or to review each other’s work. This approach contradicted Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning. As Vygotsky (1978) has suggested collaborative learning exercises provide the social construct for participants to negotiate understanding by exposing them to multiple perspectives and interpretations.The schedule for the learning activities was not firmly reinforced. Feedback was provided for the completed sections of the instructional design template and the instructional storyboard, but no other assessment strategies were used. As a consequence very few participants completed all of the required steps to prepare their course for online delivery. This experience clearly reinforced the notion that systematic instructional design provides for effective learning. The success of the first part of the workshop can be attributed to a method of design which combined the structured learning environment of an objectivist approach with the interactivity and authenticity of constructivist learning strategies.

The third lesson relates to the motivation of the learner. Most faculty who took this workshop were motivated by intrinsic factors like their desire to learn. The first few times we delivered this workshop, the extrinsic rewards for the learner were minimal as there was no formal recognition for completing the workshop. One could argue that the workshop was very practical in that it led participants through the actual steps of designing their course. However, we may have overstated the value of this workshop for faculty. Participants that completed the forty hours of learning activities deserve to receive some type of official recognition which could be applied to the promotion and tenure process. The next iteration of the course has been revised to meet the standards for accreditation as part of the Continuing Medical Education Certification Program offered by the Centre for Faculty Development in Medicine, at the University of Toronto.

References

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1993). Cooperation in the Classroom (6th ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: Development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Additional Resources

Faculty Development That Works - An Interview with David G. Brown

Centre for University Teaching, Ottawa

Gold, S. (2001). A constructivist approach to online training for online teachers. JALN, (5)1, 36-57

FacultyDevelopment.ca

Faculty Online Support Services

The New Classroom Faculty Series: Engaging Students with Online Activities, University of Waterloo

Creating Learner-Centred Instruction, Faculty Development Institute, Virginia Tech University

Rueter, J. G., (1999). Faculty Development for Teaching and Learning with Technology: New Directions for PSU

Rueter, J. G., (1997). A New Metaphor for the Spread of Innovation in Teaching and Learning

Rutkowski, K (2001). The Diffusion of Web Technology in Education (Applications & Challenges)

Instructional Design of Teaching Online Workshop

Some of the learning objectives for the teaching online workshop are listed below along with a description of what the learner is doing while operating in that level of cognitive domain. The learners are engaged in 4 different levels of cognition ranging from application to evaluation. They are analogous to Gagne’s intellectual skills outcomes.

Level of Cognition	Learning Objective - What will the learner do?
Application	select an appropriate instructional strategy and technology to use in your personal course delivery -Apply knowledge gained from readings to match strategies to a media
Analysis	Analyze an instructional design template by conducting a peer review. -what aspects of the instructional design plan have been clearly articulated -will the instructional technology support the learning goals? -is the role of the instructor appropriate for the instructional strategy? -are the student activities appropriate for the learning goals?
Synthesis	Create an instructional activity which uses technology to enhance learning -synthesize constituent parts; instructional strategy, learning goal, technology, teaching model
Evaluation	Evaluate web-based instruction according to the principles of effective teaching identified in Unit 1

Each unit is organized and sequenced according to Gagne’s (1972) nine events of instruction. An overview of the content to be examined is provided to gain the learners attention and to bring relevant prior knowledge about teaching into working memory. The learner is also informed of the goals to be achieved. This establishes expectancy in learners and arouses their interest. A unit schedule and activity checklist serves as a guideline to enable to the learner to complete the required activities within the scheduled timeframe. The content items within the unit are a series of linked web pages and are clearly labelled as learning activities or reading exercises. Each item of content is sequentially numbered so that the learner will know to proceed through the information in order. The purpose of each activity is provided in order to give learners a goal toward which to direct their cognitive energies (Smith & Ragan, 1999). Detailed instructions are numbered and explain the steps required to complete the activity.

The instructional strategies for problem solving learning are used to enhance instructional effectiveness and foster learning. In unit 2 learners identify an instructional challenge they are currently faced with in their class. They combine previously learned cognitive strategies and principles of teaching, along with newly acquired procedures for designing instruction to plan an instructional activity that uses technology to address this challenge. Examples of instructional challenges that other faculty are facing are provided. This is conistent with the approach used by Diane Salter and Les Richards in the Task-based approach for their "New Classroom" series. The examples of online learning at the University of Maryland's Teaching and Learning Resources website act as a catalyst to encourage faculty to think about how they will integrate technology within their own course. This discovery approach gives learners the primary responsibility for processing the information (Smith & Ragan, 1999). Subsequently the learners are directed to resources which will help guide their selection of instructional technologies and strategies. The instructional design template requires faculty to apply their newly acquired knowledge to articulate their plan for integrating an educational technology. The template ‘tests’ their knowledge of the material presented. The learner receives feedback from both the instructor and a colleague in order to revise and improve their instructional design template. This template enables the instructors to assess the degree to which the learners have internalized the new knowledge and skills they have developed. Exemplars are provided so that the faculty can see a sample of a completed instructional design template. A summary is provided at the end of the unit to enhance retention so that the information can be transferred to the next unit.