Roadmap to Effective Distance Education Instructional Design

“Roadmap to Effective Distance Education Instructional Design” Allan Schmidt Assistant Director & Travis Kramer Instructional Development Specialist...
Author: Harry Wilcox
0 downloads 4 Views 2MB Size
“Roadmap to Effective Distance Education Instructional Design” Allan Schmidt Assistant Director &

Travis Kramer

Instructional Development Specialist

Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

Presentation Overview

1. Need & Purpose of Project 2. Course Design Parameters 3. Formative Evaluation and Course Development 4. Iowa State Project Responsibilities 5. Summative Evaluation 6. Lessons Learned 7. Questions and Discussion Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

2

Need for this Course ƒ Universities investing in distance learning off- and on-campus ƒ Effective instructors and course design needed ƒ Staff assigned to train and support instructors, create or convert course materials or develop entire courses

ƒ Are distance learning support staff professionally prepared? Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

3

Purpose of Grant ƒ To better prepare support staff at landgrant universities to support distance learning and teaching programs ƒ To provide staff with resources (new skills, pdf’s, Web sites, videos) to use in their faculty development efforts ƒ To develop a database of exemplary distance education examples

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

4

Collaborators ƒ U.S. Department of Agriculture Challenge Grant ƒ -$250,000 for two years ƒ Six collaborating universities ƒ University of Florida ƒ Iowa State University ƒ Texas A&M University ƒ University of Idaho ƒ University of Missouri-St. Louis ƒ Texas Tech University ƒ Association for Communication Excellence (ACE) ƒ American Distance Education Consortium (ADEC) Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

5

Course Design Parameters

Course Design Parameters ƒ “Roadmap” theme ƒ Iowa State provided graphic designers

ƒ Six content modules or “destinations” ƒ Iowa State provided ID ƒ Based on core DE competencies from preassessment ƒ No more then two screens/page ƒ Self tests Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

7

Course Design Parameters ƒ Orientation session ƒ Microproject ƒ Short assignment required for each destination

ƒ One month schedule for each destination ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ

Two weeks to complete content One week to complete microproject One week for instructor to review microproject Anticipated 4 to 6 hours to complete each module, including microproject

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

8

Course Design Parameters ƒ Asynchronous delivery ƒ Multiple medium delivery ƒ WebCT CMS ƒ Streaming RealMedia video ƒ Interviews w/national experts ƒ Discussion groups and email for communications – A few synchronous chat sessions optional

– Word, Excel and Acrobat Reader software Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

9

Course Design Parameters ƒ Text, photos, illustrations and diagrams ƒ Narrated PowerPoint lectures in RealMedia

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

10

Core Competencies w/Microprojects 1.

Effective Distance Education Teaching Principles –

2.

Learning philosophy

First-Time Course Development –

3.

Objective statements and ID plan

Technology Issues in Training –

4.

Determine your institution’s technology resources

Advanced Teaching Methods –

5.

Integrate interactive learning methods

Assessment and Evaluation –

6.

Develop an assessment tool

Program Management –

Identify effective components of distance courses

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

11

Course Enrollment ƒ Marketing ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ

Listservs Web site Brochure 2003 ACE/NETC Conf. Word of mouth

ƒ Participant limits ƒ 75 initial target ƒ 106 registered

ƒ “Reserved seats” ƒ Each collaborating institution received 10 slots Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

12

Institutions w/Students Enrolled Alabama A&M University Association of Southern Region Extension Directors Auburn University Cornell University Florida A&M University Indiana Higher Education Telecommunication System Iowa State University Kansas State University Mississippi State University New Mexico State University North Carolina State University North Dakota State University Ohio State University Oregon State University

Penn State University Texas A&M University Texas Tech University University of Arkansas University of Arizona University of California-Davis University of Florida University of Idaho University of Maine University of Maryland University of Minnesota University of Missouri University of WisconsinMadison West Virginia University

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

13

Course Tour

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

14

Formative Evaluation and Course Development

Project Collaboration Elements ƒ Communicated often with collaborators ƒ E-mail / phone ƒ Desktop videoconferencing ƒ F 2 F meetings at conferences

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

16

Project Timetable & Delivery ƒ A long time frame... ƒ January 2002, proposal developed ƒ June 2002, grant awarded ƒ July 2002 – Sept. 2003, content development ƒ Sept. 2003 – May 2004, content delivery

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

17

Module Timetable & Developers Destination

Timing/Lead Institution

Orientation

Sept. 2003, Florida

Adult Learning/DE Teaching Principles

Sept. 2003, Florida

First-Time Course Development

Oct. 2003, Florida

Technology Issues in Training

Nov. 2003, Iowa State

Advanced Teaching Methods

Feb. 2004, Idaho

Assessment/Evaluation

March 2004, Missouri-SL

Program Administration

April 2004, A&M & Tech

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

18

Research Design ƒ Needs assessment ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ

Delivery methods Time/location Content needed How long to complete Potential participants’ reasons Professionals as potential participants

ƒ Content and delivery were built around initial needs assessment and subsequent formative evaluation Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

19

Multiple Assessments Used Participant ƒ Needs assessment ƒ Competencies (pre- & post-) ƒ Microprojects

Course Design ƒ Formative ƒ Focus groups ƒ Midterm-evaluation ƒ Summative evaluation (in progress)

ƒ 6-month follow-up (planned)

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

20

Results: Formative Evaluation ƒ 80 responded (78%) ƒ Flashlight Online Survey ƒ Various job functions/titled identified ƒ 95% taking the program to improve skills and develop professionally ƒ Wanted to apply to real-world situations Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

21

Ingredients for Project Success ƒ Unified vision of project goals ƒ “Immersion in all aspects” ƒ Group consensus ƒ Clear division of responsibilities ƒ Agreed upon deliverables and deadlines ƒ Leadership and project management ƒ Frequent communication ƒ Enthusiasm Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

22

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

Project Responsibilities

WebCT Support ƒ WebCT 4.1 CE server ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ

Dell PowerEdge 6600, quad 1.4GHz Xeon 4GB memory 255GB RAID5 disk array Redhat Linux 24/7 support w/nightly backup

ƒ National access ƒ Managed non-Iowa State student ID’s ƒ WebDAV support ƒ Phone / email support for instructors and students Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

24

Real Server Multimedia Support ƒ RealNetworks Helix Server 9.0 ƒ Media conversion to streaming RealMedia

QuickTime TIFF (Uncompressed are needed to see

ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ

MiniDV, 8mm DV BetacamSP SVHS Windows media files

ƒ Linked from WebCT course Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) deco are needed to see this pi

QuickTime™ and a FF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

25

Collaboration Support ƒ Multipoint Control Unit ƒ FVC Conference Server 7.1

ƒ Callout meeting setup ƒ Multiple systems ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ

Tandberg Polycom VCON Netmeeting

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

26

Summative Evaluation

Results: Summative Evaluation ƒ 51 responded ƒ Similar demographics to formative evaluation (gender, position) ƒ Participants spent slightly more time than expected working through course materials

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

28

Results: Summative Evaluation Dealing with training and support issues Dealing with administrative issues

3.8 3.6 4.1

Planning and conducting evaluations Dealing with accessibility issues

3.88

Incorporating opportunities for interaction

4.18

Various delivery strategies and technologies

4.16

Instructional design Adult learning Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

4.27 4.18 29

Results: Summative Evaluation 4.19

The content in the Roadmap course was useful.

3.98

The content in the Roadmap course was stimulating. I was encouraged to use creativity in microprojects.

3.88

WebCT was an appropriate platform for delivering the course.

4.36

The content was relevant to my professional work.

4.34

I plan to teach others using what I learned in the course. I have used what I learned in the course in my job. I would recommend this course to others. Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

3.94 4.02 4.09 30

Results: Focus Groups ƒ Focus groups conducted with course participants at three of the participating institutions ƒ Formative Recommendations from Focus Groups ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ

Build up to the more difficult content More activities and less reading More interaction between participants Allow participants to work at their own pace

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

31

Competencies Evaluation

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

32

Results: Competencies Adult Learning

Before 3.43

After 5.20

t 5.95

Sig .000

Understanding Distance Teaching

3.43

5.39

7.03

.000

Instructional Design

3.50

4.98

4.57

.000

Course Development

3.00

5.07

6.85

.000

Delivery Strategies

3.82

5.41

3.89

.001

Instructional Technology

3.93

5.17

4.56

.000

Interaction Methods

3.07

5.34

6.49

.000

Accessibility

2.75

4.68

5.22

.000

Planning & Conducting Evaluation

2.93

5.12

5.70

.000

Evaluation Analysis & Reporting

3.25

4.76

3.85

.001

Administrative Issues

2.79

4.85

6.57

.000

Training and Support

4.07

5.17

3.71

.000

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

33

Completion Rate for CE Credits ƒ 50 completed all six destinations and microprojects in June (some still working) ƒ Received a certificate of CEUs from Texas A&M

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

34

Lessons Learned

Lessons Learned ƒ Start early ƒ Communicate frequently ƒ Hire a project coordinator ƒ Start small, if you’ve not done a big project before ƒ Improve the project ƒ Go beyond the agreed-upon deliverables Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

36

Lessons Learned ƒ Know your audience ƒ Make explicit the tie between learning objectives and assignments ƒ Foster interaction ƒ Consider the length of the training ƒ Consider the audience’s motivational goals Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

37

Conclusions ƒ Met a professional development need ƒ Collaboration between universities strengthened ƒ Interest beyond expectations ƒ Will continue to make a difference at universities and for students ƒ Future plans: content is being be repurposed for consistency and asynchronous, self-learning mode

Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching

38

Questions and Discussion Contact info: ƒAllan Schmidt ƒ [email protected] ƒ 515-294-6087 ƒTravis Kramer ƒ [email protected] ƒ 515-294-5451

Suggest Documents