“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 Universities investing in distance learning off- and on-campus Effective instructors and course design needed Staff assigned to train and support instructors, create or convert course materials or develop entire courses
Are distance learning support staff professionally prepared? Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
3
Purpose of Grant To better prepare support staff at landgrant universities to support distance learning and teaching programs To provide staff with resources (new skills, pdf’s, Web sites, videos) to use in their faculty development efforts To develop a database of exemplary distance education examples
Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
4
Collaborators U.S. Department of Agriculture Challenge Grant -$250,000 for two years Six collaborating universities University of Florida Iowa State University Texas A&M University University of Idaho University of Missouri-St. Louis Texas Tech University Association for Communication Excellence (ACE) American Distance Education Consortium (ADEC) Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
5
Course Design Parameters
Course Design Parameters “Roadmap” theme Iowa State provided graphic designers
Six content modules or “destinations” Iowa State provided ID Based on core DE competencies from preassessment No more then two screens/page Self tests Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
7
Course Design Parameters Orientation session Microproject Short assignment required for each destination
One month schedule for each destination
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 Asynchronous delivery Multiple medium delivery WebCT CMS Streaming RealMedia video Interviews w/national experts 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 Text, photos, illustrations and diagrams 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 Marketing
Listservs Web site Brochure 2003 ACE/NETC Conf. Word of mouth
Participant limits 75 initial target 106 registered
“Reserved seats” 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 Communicated often with collaborators E-mail / phone Desktop videoconferencing F 2 F meetings at conferences
Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
16
Project Timetable & Delivery A long time frame... January 2002, proposal developed June 2002, grant awarded July 2002 – Sept. 2003, content development 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 Needs assessment
Delivery methods Time/location Content needed How long to complete Potential participants’ reasons Professionals as potential participants
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 Needs assessment Competencies (pre- & post-) Microprojects
Course Design Formative Focus groups Midterm-evaluation Summative evaluation (in progress)
6-month follow-up (planned)
Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
20
Results: Formative Evaluation 80 responded (78%) Flashlight Online Survey Various job functions/titled identified 95% taking the program to improve skills and develop professionally Wanted to apply to real-world situations Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
21
Ingredients for Project Success Unified vision of project goals “Immersion in all aspects” Group consensus Clear division of responsibilities Agreed upon deliverables and deadlines Leadership and project management Frequent communication 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 WebCT 4.1 CE server
Dell PowerEdge 6600, quad 1.4GHz Xeon 4GB memory 255GB RAID5 disk array Redhat Linux 24/7 support w/nightly backup
National access Managed non-Iowa State student ID’s WebDAV support Phone / email support for instructors and students Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
24
Real Server Multimedia Support RealNetworks Helix Server 9.0 Media conversion to streaming RealMedia
QuickTime TIFF (Uncompressed are needed to see
MiniDV, 8mm DV BetacamSP SVHS Windows media files
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 Multipoint Control Unit FVC Conference Server 7.1
Callout meeting setup Multiple systems
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 51 responded Similar demographics to formative evaluation (gender, position) 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 Focus groups conducted with course participants at three of the participating institutions Formative Recommendations from Focus Groups
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 50 completed all six destinations and microprojects in June (some still working) Received a certificate of CEUs from Texas A&M
Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
34
Lessons Learned
Lessons Learned Start early Communicate frequently Hire a project coordinator Start small, if you’ve not done a big project before Improve the project Go beyond the agreed-upon deliverables Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
36
Lessons Learned Know your audience Make explicit the tie between learning objectives and assignments Foster interaction Consider the length of the training Consider the audience’s motivational goals Iowa State University, Center for Excellence in Learning & Teaching
37
Conclusions Met a professional development need Collaboration between universities strengthened Interest beyond expectations Will continue to make a difference at universities and for students 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: Allan Schmidt
[email protected] 515-294-6087 Travis Kramer
[email protected] 515-294-5451