Online Teaching & Learning: It’s harder than it looks

It has been said that no plan survives first contact and that has certainly been my experience teaching online this semester.  I thought I was well prepared to teach this course, as well prepared as anyone can be who has never taught a fully online course before.  I have explored teaching with different digital technologies in my otherwise face-to-face courses since about 1992.  I have used groupware, discussion boards, wikis, blogs, and other tools.  Admittedly, I am writing this during final exam week, so I may not have enough distance yet for an objective look, but looking back it appears that many/most of the components of my course that were intended to differentiate it and make it a genuinely liberal arts & sciences experience were ultimately jettisoned in an effort to save time and cover the content.

Let’s start with my plan to use twitter to create social context for the course.  I figured this would be easier than my earlier experiments with twitter since Millenials have now “discovered” twitter, but that didn’t seem to be the case.  Early on it seemed clear that my students didn’t really want to use twitter.  Some even told me so.

Most students tweeted using the class hashtag no more than five times over the course of the semester.   Only one student really used twitter daily while a few more did weekly.   That doesn’t seem like much of a social presence to me.   After a couple of weeks, I became worried that my students were not getting the basic communications about the course.   This inference could have been unwarranted, since posting tweets is neither necessary nor sufficient to guarantee following twitter.  In any case, I began to follow important tweets (after a couple of hours) with duplicate email messages. Then I stopped the tweets pretty much altogether.

I had great hopes for using an online discussion board to take the place of class sessions.  It didn’t work out well in practice.  I never got the majority of the students to participate in the online discussions we had.  Most students seemed unable to do the type of critical thinking necessary for using the schema to categorize content in each topic—perhaps the approach was too abstract for them.   I never got a majority of students to participate, even when I changed the task to asking them to “summarize” a reading for the course.  They appeared to see the discussion board as something extra, not something central to the course.  This could have been because, though I gave students credit for participating, I gave no explicit grades on the participation.  I made note of the quantity and quality of student posts, but I didn’t provide that to students.  This is something I could improve on in the future.  It’s also possible I needed to spend (more) time training the students in what I wanted them to do with the discussion board.  The students seemed to want me to “give them” what they needed to know, rather than asking them to dig it out for themselves.

Finally, the macromooc was a fail.  I think the concept had legs, but the timing didn’t work out.  By the time we had covered the course content needed to evaluate the presidential candidates’ economic policies, the election was upon us so we had no time to do what I had planned.  I think I will try something more limited next year.

What was left to distinguish the course was the writing assignments which worked fairly well at getting the students to explore the content in more detail than they would in a lecture-course.  Some students, though, seemed to see them as independent of the course content.  Several asked, “Will what we did on the essays be on the midterm?”

The online class ran consistently about a week behind the face-to-face class.  This lag was due to the first week in which we spent team-building and getting used to the online features.  Note that I tried to do this before the “first” day of class but didn’t get enough participation.  It was fortunate that the final exam for the online course was the last day of the exam period.

Students didn’t do a good enough job of “following” the course.  A number missed Essay 5, which was given around the same time as Essay 4.  Essay 5 was announced via an all-class email.  One student emailed me, “How did you notify us that it was due? I was talking to some classmates and none of us had any clue that there was an essay due.”  Eight students had already turned the assignment in at that point.

I knew coming in to this course that there were certain analytical topics that students have traditionally had difficulty learning on their own.  I planned to video my in-class lectures on those topics and edit the videos down to bite-sized chunks for the online course.  The first of these topics, Supply & Demand, occurred early in the term.  I found it difficult to come up with the video equipment by the time the lectures started, so I didn’t video this topic.  The online students did noticeably worse than the f2f students on the first exam questions involving S&D.  They also did very poorly on the second exam, which prompted me to find a friend from whom to borrow the video equipment.  From that point on, I lugged the camera, tripod and power cords to and from class each session.  I had to arrive early to set everything up, and depart later to break everything down.  This was tedious.  I learned that video editing can take *hours and hours*, though I did get better at it by the end of the semester.  I did find it very interesting to see myself lecture.  I also got a good sense of how my interactive lecture style is very different (less efficient, time-wise perhaps) than a direct content delivery lecture would be.  In some cases, the pared down videos were only 10 minutes in length for a 50 minute lecture.  I did make sure that none of the clips were longer than 10 minutes and most were closer to 5 minutes.  They are all up on YouTube if you’d like to look at them.  A number of students told me they used the videos to study for the final and that they were very useful, but I think by that point it may have been too late.  I need to think more about how to build the interactive elements of my face-to-face course (e.g. small group problems to work out and present) into the online version.

In retrospect, the students never seemed to buy in to my vision for the course, but neither did they seem to have the self-discipline and metacognition to do the work, and thus the learning, on their own.  Perhaps undergraduates (first and second years and upper level students with other majors) do not have what it takes to be successful in an online course.  Or perhaps the failure was due to my inexperience as an online teacher.

In sum, I found this online course a tremendous amount of work and more than once asked myself why I was killing myself to do this when teaching face-to-face is so much easier and fun.  Nonetheless, I think I should teach online at least once more, since there clearly is a learning curve.

I have two more tasks to do to complete the evaluation of this course.  I asked students in both my face-to-face and online sections to do a course evaluation that I designed.  I need to review and reflect on those evaluations.   I also plan to do a careful statistical analysis of exam grades in the two sections, controlling for student ability, credit hours completed and a couple of other standard variables.  To get that data I need to talk to the Registrar, so both of these tasks will have to wait until I return to school next week.

 

Photo Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ladybugblue/295252840/sizes/m/ “Harder than it looks”

Posted in Teaching and Learning, The Experiment | 2 Comments

Video Clips for the Online Course

The online course seemed to do worse again on the second midterm, especially on the analytical parts. I decided that I really needed to video record my class lectures on analytical topics.  I tracked down the equipment and recorded nearly all the subsequent class sessions.  This was tedious since it involved carrying the video camera and tripod to and from class each day.  There was not really any place I could store them in the building in which I teach.

I took the raw video and cut it down to bite-sized chunks, never more than 10 minutes long.  It was genuinely interesting to see myself “in action.”  I discovered that video-editing takes a tremendous amount of time.  I cut out my jokes, and other digressions such as wrong answers by students.  A video/lecture which simply presents content is tighter and shorter than the sort of interactive lecture I typically give to draw out the content from my students.  The video of the latter is probably a waste of time for online, since I don’t think that viewers would appreciate the pauses and digressions, which were important to the students in my classroom (e.g. my responding to questions that were off the topic of the day), but not to those viewing it after the fact.

Posted in Teaching and Learning, The Experiment | Leave a comment

Reflection at Midterm Time

[The following are late posts from this past semester]

At mid-semester after I’ve returned the first exam I feel more disconnected from my online students than my face-to-face ones.  The online class seemed to do worse on the exam; many didn’t learn the analytical parts of the material.

I don’t *know* that the outcomes are worse in my online course, but if they are, I can’t rule out the possibility that the fault is mine as an inexperienced instructor.  Still, my course design is pretty solid, much better than just moving lectures online.

Doing test corrections via skype is in many ways easier than doing them in my office.  Skype is more portable and it’s really one-to-one which my office isn’t always.

An observation from both sections, online & F2F:  Students aren’t learning except at a superficial level.  They are learning the symptoms but not the causes.

“Researchers know a lot about how the brain learns, and it’s shocking how rarely that knowledge influences our education system. Studies of physics classes in particular have shown that after completing a traditional class, students can recite Newton’s laws and maybe even do some calculations, but they cannot apply the laws to problems they haven’t seen before. They’ve memorized the information, but they haven’t learned it — much to their teachers’ surprise.”

http://www.readability.com/articles/wiht9pgm

This is analogous to how my middle-school son Scott does his math sheets, which offer multiple choice answers (for ease of grading, I assume).  He looks for the multiple choice answer which is right, rather than solving the problem and then selecting the right multiple choice item.  This isn’t merely reversing the order.  When you start from the answer, the problem solving is very different, more mechanical and less learning occurs.  No wonder kids don’t like math any more.

It may be only a perception, but I feel connected to my f2f students.  I can see their body language in class; I can tell when they’re getting something or not.  Not so with my online students.

At the UNC-Wilmington Teaching Economics workshop I attended in early October, I spoke with Pete Schuhmann, a colleague who told me he’s taught online for years (as well as f2f) and that his online courses are *never* as good as f2f.   That made me wonder how his online courses were structured.

When people describe online courses as “lower quality,” what do they mean exactly?  From my perspective, it may mean that (many) online courses provide an inferior learning environment in the sense that it takes more student effort to learn the same content.  If so, perhaps it would be more accurate to describe such courses as *harder*.

Can you learn to dance from a book?  Can you learn to computer program from a lecture?  Perhaps some people can, but for most of us, no.  You have to *do* those things, practice those things to learn them well.  This may be one thing that tends to be missing from online courses.

Even if online courses do provide an inferior learning environment that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t offer them, as long as we assess them the same way as our f2f courses and as long as students know what they’re in for.   In other words, students in online courses shouldn’t be graded more leniently than in the comparable face-to-face course.  I teach the same class f2f and online.  I don’t teach them the same way, but the content, the learning objectives are identical.

The online course is harder for the average student, for most students.  Why?  Because I’m not there to explain things since there is no class sessions.

This isn’t a radical finding.  Some teachers are harder than others teaching the same section.  Some courses are harder than others.  we think nothing of allowing students to take GenEd courses with the goal of passing them for credit, rather than mastering the material (as we would like them to for a course in the major). Students take a mix of classes/difficulties to complete their degree.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Addendum

After I wrote the last post, I found I keep thinking about some of the concerns I raised there.

The advantage of presenting analytic material in class (in my interactive lecture sort of way) is that I get a read on student comprehension as I present the material.  Additionally, after my part when I ask them to do problems either individually (first) or in groups (second) and then present their work, I can tell who gets it and who doesn’t.  I keep iterating through the process (explain/try more problems) until everyone (or nearly everyone) gets it.  In other words, the act of presentation, problem-solving and recitation face-to-face is simultaneously an act of formative assessment.

How can I do that online when I ask them to read, post their thinking, and work in groups to refine that thinking?  For one thing, I can’t see their faces or body language.  So far, most students aren’t posting very much information on the discussion board and some aren’t participating at all.  Admittedly, it’s early days since the students have only had two opportunities with the discussion board, and most are clearly still trying to figure out what is expected.  Which reminds me that I haven’t given any direct feedback about that.  Okay, that’s easy to fix.  [I wish there was a way when I broadcast a video to know if students were even watching it.]

Even at its best, I suspect the discussion board doesn’t lend itself well to providing nearly as much information about student thinking as watching and listening to students talk in groups.  I suppose I could skype with individuals who identified themselves as having problems, but that isn’t necessarily the most efficient way to go, since it makes no sense to do the same thing multiple times with different students, and there’s a limit to the number of folks you can include in a conference video chat on skype.

Next topic.  I added four YouTube videos describing how to use demand and supply analysis to the Topic 2 resources page.  I found it more challenging to select those videos than I expected, given that there may be hundreds of videos on the topic.  The experience, though, helped me answer a question I raised in my last post:  Why go thru the trouble of creating your own video?  [Answer below.]   The process of choosing the right video for my students reminds me of selecting the right textbook.  No matter how good the book, it doesn’t present the material in quite the same way that you do.  It may use slightly different terminology or present things in different order.  While there’s something to be said about making students figure out the translation between the author and you, if the difference is too great, some students, perhaps many, will be confused.  The exception, of course, is if, you wrote the book.  So after reviewing perhaps a dozen of the hundreds of videos out there, I choose four that seem closest to my presentation.  Now they won’t have my lectures to compare against, but they will have the textbook with offers similar challenges in comparison.  I will ask the students what they thought of the videos, and think about how they do on the relevant questions on the upcoming midterm exam.  If they don’t do as well as they should, I guess I’ll have to make my own videos next time.

 

Posted in The Experiment | Leave a comment

Week 4 Report on my online course

Last week I was distracted by other things, so it was ironic that we began the first seriously analytical topic in my course: the theory of supply & demand.  This was one of the two topics I knew in advance I needed to provide more scaffolding for with my online students.  As I met my students in the face-to-face section and walked them through this material, I was aware of what I wasn’t doing with my online section.  I also had the students work through sample problems in small groups during class time.  I’ve always found this the best way for students to learn the material.  I was very conscious that the online students were *not* getting this experience.  I had planned to videotape at least parts of my class sections on this topic, but that didn’t happen.  In part, this was due to my wondering why I needed to go through the effort of getting the equipment, making and editing the videos when there’s so much content about this online, and in part it was due to my simply not getting around to it.  As a wise friend said, “No plan survives first contact” (i.e. with the enemy).  This offers another example of how preparation is more important when teaching an online course than a face-to-face one.

I now plan to offer the online section the best online video presentations I can find to make up for my fumble.  It will be interesting to see how well the online students do on this compared to the face-to-face group.  I’m not optimistic, but I don’t actually know yet.

The online section is now one week behind the face-to-face section, which means we’ve made up some lost time, but not enough to get done before the first exam.  As a result, I’ve pushed the exam back one week so both sections will have completed the material.

Postscript from Last Week: I was talking to my friend Amyaz Moledina from the College of Wooster about participating in the MacroMOOC (which will be beginning shortly), when I mentioned my commuter student without internet access at home.  Amyaz, since he is brighter than I, asked if the student would be able to borrow an iPad from the university to help solve her problem?  I asked around and found that our library offers that service.  The student was very appreciative!

Posted in The Experiment, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Week 3 Report on my online course

This was a transition week as wrapped up Topic 1 and moved on to Topic 2.  The last step for Topic 1 was that I divided the class into groups of three students, and each group had the responsibility of cleaning up one part of our online discussion. Four of the five groups turned in their submissions on time, with the fifth a day late.  Several groups expressed problems connecting up all their members.  I intentionally didn’t circulate contact information, hoping that students would use the tools they had (for example, twitter with the class hashtag) to connect with each other.   Some students apparently aren’t checking twitter or the emails daily.  One very engaged student lost her internet access for four key days.  She lives in Richmond, VA so that was kind of unexpected.

I reviewed each group’s submission and gave suggestions for revision.  I could have done this more effectively synchronously, but I didn’t have that option or think to use skype for that purpose.  Next time!  Some of the rewrites were less than perfect, but this is only an introductory level course, so perhaps I was expecting too much.  I decided to declare victory, edit the submissions to make the main points clear, as I would have done in a  lecture.  Then I posted them on the course website as “Class Notes for Topic 1.”

The class seems to have sorted themselves into three groups:  a small number of students who jump on each assignment and got it done before the deadline, a large number of students who turn in most of the assignments mostly on time, and a small tail who may or may not still be taking the course.

This week I began one-on-one appointments with each student using skype just to check in and see how they were faring and to ask them they needed help in any way.  The scheduling has proven more complicated than the appointments themselves, with the latter lasting only a couple minutes each.  A few students ran into fairly minor problems with the technology, but we got it worked out, so next time should be easier.  One student’s webcam “didn’t work” so we did the appointment by voice only.  The excuse was ironic since usually that’s my problem.

I had a revealing conversation with one student who told me ““I’m not used to all this technology. I’ve never used twitter or skype before.”  I know that the Digital Native myth is overblown, but I’m still surprised to find young people who aren’t digitally savvy.  I asked her how the class was going for her and she replied, “Not so well; I’m not used to teaching myself!”  Fail, I thought to myself about my course design.  She clearly didn’t understand the way the online discussions are supposed to replace the lectures.  I guess no matter how much you try to explain in advance, sometimes a student won’t get it.  Then she told me something more startling:  “We don’t have internet access at our house (which is more than an hour away from school).  I have to go to my dad’s office to use the internet, like today.”   While initially I thought that the course designer was at fault, the more I thought about it, the more I wondered why a student would choose an online course when they lack internet access?

One final point:  Three students in the course have revealed themselves as history majors, and there may be more in the class.  That’s nearly 20% of my students.  Our History & American Studies department offers the most digitally-inflected courses of any department at our school.  Are their majors more likely then, to take online courses?

On to Week 4.

Posted in The Experiment | 3 Comments

Second Week Report on my online course

This week was harder than week one.  I’m still spending as much as twice the time in prepping and teaching my face-to-face section in my online section.  I’m hoping this will diminish once we get up to speed.

One lesson I’ve learned (which I thought I already knew, but didn’t):  I need to be more intentional about communicating with students.  There’s a lot that face-to-face students pick up just from attending class that doesn’t work online.  It’s hard to figure out what stuff is transparent face-to-face, but which I need to be explicit about online.  Work in progress, I guess.  Few to none of my online students have had an online course before, so they don’t know what to ask.

The week started badly when my last two unacccounted-for students showed up last weekend, missing the first week of class.  This was not ideal either for them or their classmates, since we’ve been doing group activities and their presence has messed those up, or more precisely, adding them in in mid-stream won’t work well.

I began to feel overwhelmed Monday.  I think I need to be active in the course every day, at least in the beginning of the term when students need constant reinforcement.  I really needed to sketch out the next few tasks of our class discussion, but I simply wasn’t able to get to it Monday due to the press of other classes and other professional obligations.  Tuesday I wrote a detailed post of what students needed to do.  This assignment shouldn’t have been that difficult, since it simply asked them to choose one of the things they did for last Friday’s assignment and post it publicly on our discussion page.  In incredibly bad timing, we suffered a problem with the software, really a switch turned off which should have been turned on.  @Timmmmyboy bailed me out on that, but it cost us 12 hours (overnight when students tend to work) to get it right.

A few students did the task right away as soon as the software was working.  The rest lagged and a handful still haven’t done it.  Two students dropped the course, in response to the assignment, I suspect.  I told the class the task wasn’t easy and that it would take a few tries to get it right.  I sent an email Friday telling the students what a good start it was for the first assignment and setting up the next steps, basically asking students to consolidate posts and draw a few conclusions that I basically framed for them.  I’ve only received one consolidation post over the weekend.

We are almost done with one cycle of analyzing a course topic.  We’re a week behind the face-to-face course, but hopefully we can catch up when we get used to the methodology.

This week has given me some thoughts about the well-known finding that online courses have a lower completion rate than face-to-face courses.  Imagine a student takes an intro-level large lecture course.  Their assessment is based on one or two mid-term exams and a final exam.  The student may or may not read the text.  They may or may not take good class notes.  Heck, they may or may not attend lectures regularly.  At what point do they decide they can’t do the work and must drop the course?  Probably not before the (first) midterm, at which point they may well decide it’s too late to drop the course.

My online course is different.  Their first deliverable is due within the first two days of class.  The first substantive assignment is due before the end of the first week.  The cognitive load ratchets up at the beginning of week 2.  Given this scenario and comparing it to students’ other face-to-face courses, some probably decide this is too much work.  So they drop.  I can’t worry about that now, but perhaps next time, it would be helpful to present the approach we’re using synchronously the first time so I can handle questions in real time.  If we used something like Adobe Connect, we could record the session for the students who can’t make the live one.  Something to think about for next year.

Posted in The Experiment, Uncategorized | 4 Comments

First Reflections about ECON 201, the Online Version

I just finished the first week in my first fully online course, which I’m teaching in parallel with the same course in a traditional, face-to-face environment.  I blogged about the planning process intermittently, but I want to be more systematic at reflecting on how the course plays out.  I will attempt to polish the notes I jotted down over the week, but I think it’s more important to get them out than sit on them to make them pretty.

As usual, the first day in F2F was exciting and fun.  If anything, this group was more exciting to me than normal.  Maybe it’s because I was aware I wouldn’t have this experience with my online course.  I usually prep well for the first day and I had a couple of new wrinkles to present.  Several students attended who wanted to force-add.  I don’t know if it’s my class which is drawing them (since we have aggregate excess demand), the specific time slot (10am MWF), or what the reason might be for these students.

The online course had a different feel, of course, since we didn’t “meet” per se.  I spent the day waiting for students to “check in” online per my instructions.  I was acutely aware of the students who didn’t check in.  This struck me as very different from F2F, where I’m excited about the students who show up, but don’t really think about those who don’t.  Out of sight, out of mind, I guess.  I ran into a little technology problem:  the list of students who checked in via twitter pulled in to the course website with an RSS feed was completely different from the list appearing when I searched for the class hashtag on twitter.com.  (The class hashtag is #econ201online.  Feel free to tune in.)  This was very strange, and last night, worrisome since Twitter was to be the main means of daily communication in the course.  Martha solved the mystery for me–apparently the generic search on twitter is only of “top rated posts.” Martha gave me a search string that searches *all* tweets for the hashtag I now have slightly more than half the students checked in after 24 hours.  Don’t know if this is good or bad, but it’s better than I felt yesterday.  One student asked a mechanical question via Skype, though not during my virtual office hours so I didn’t see it until this morning.  One student has posted her intro video on the course website—this first assignment is due by tomorrow.

I think I’m going to follow my students on twitter and invite them to follow me to try to build a little more community.

One other issue arose:  What do I do about students who don’t want to use some of the software in the course?  One student told me she didn’t want to get “another” email account which she needed in order to access a google form-based pre-course survey.  Another said she really didn’t want to use twitter and asked if it was absolutely necessary?  Here was my response to the latter:

Hi [ name ],

You’ve asked a good question so let me try to answer it. Twitter is the way we will communicate in class on a daily basis.  If you don’t follow along, you’ll miss important information.  For example, that’s how I’ll announce a new post on the website.  Each post provides important information about assignments and stuff.  You don’t have to participate in twitter if you don’t want to, but you really need to tune in to the class conversation by searching for the class hashtag #econ201online.  If you just open www.twitter.com, click on the # Discover tab, and then type “#econ201online” into the search box, you can leave that window open and it will show all communications from students in the class or me.  It’s actually pretty easy.

I hope it’s normal to spend the first week trying to corral the students and get them to check in to the course.  By Day 4, I  had one drop and one add and I’ve had 17/20 students checked in (plus the student who dropped).  I sent a “Contact me or I will drop you from the course” email to the two no shows, and a Welcome/let me help you get caught up email to the new student.

After trading emails and tweets with the online students, I felt really excited when they started posting their intro videos.  I found it rewarding to be able to match names with faces (and voices).  The next step (this weekend) will be to ask them to review five other videos and tweet @other-student what they liked and what additional information they would like to have heard (or heard more about).  So far the conversation in the course has been students to me.  I’m hoping this will start student-to-student conversation, and also get students more willing to use twitter in the class.

I learned a lot more about these students from their intro video than I do from having my F2F students in class the first week.  Every student had to speak in their video so I got a sense of who they are—not true in F2F, where students rarely talk about anything other than course work.  Another thing I noticed was that I subconsciously profile students based on what they look like in class, but the videos often upended those profiles with respect to my online students.

I found it interesting to compare the self-introductory videos of my online students with what I did independently in my F2F class—I asked students to do a economic concept exercise, an idea I got from Thomas Angelo who gave a pre-conference workshop at the 2011 Educause Learning Initiative meetings.   The exercise gives a list of a dozen important concepts and asks if the students know them, maybe know them, or don’t know them at all.  It also asks them to enter a definition if they can.  The students do this exercise first individually; then they form groups of exactly three students to discuss their responses and develop a consensus view.  Part of the group work is introducing themselves, and a key part of the exercise is beginning to develop community in the course.  I’ll be interested to see if the video approach and twitter follow-up works better.

After the video assignment, I gave my students the beginning of the first online discussion exercise.  I asked them to identify the key concepts, theories, and institutional facts & findings from the Readings in Topic 1 and email me their responses.   I learned from the course review panel that I haven’t explained this well enough, so I’ll need to do a better job with explaining it my students.  Perhaps an explanatory post is in order.

As I lectured on Friday, I realized that in the lecture I’m giving my F2F class the boiled down version of the content, that I expect my online students to create with my help through online discussion.  The former is clearly more efficient but which group will actually learn better?

Two students dropped at the last possible minute.  I’m guessing this was in response to the deadline for the first online discussion assignment, something that requires analytical thought.

I don’t do that much the first week in a F2Fcourse, but I feel like I’m already behind in the online due to the community building we’ve done.  Hopefully, we’ll be able to catch up over the course of the semester.

Students haven’t really bought into using twitter yet.  There’ve been very few messages using the course hashtag.

While all my online students are traditional in the sense that the attend the rest of their courses at UMW face-to-face, at least three students (15%) mentioned explicitly that they commute to school from more than an hour away, so online courses are a real draw for them.  I’ve heard this story before from DS106 students, too.  I wonder if our administration is aware there’s a need here we can address through our Online Learning Initiative.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 3 Comments

Response to the Reviewers of My Online Course Proposal

This summer I’ve put a great deal of time into developing my first online course, which is part of the UMW Online Learning Initiative.  The Initiative is among the most extraordinary faculty development opportunities I’ve participated in.  The last step in the process is to invite a number of reviewers from both inside and outside of UMW to examine the course, “kick the tires” so to speak, and identify flaws before I teach the course.  This post is a response to my reviewers from whom I learned a great deal.  It makes me wonder what a better teacher I could have been if all of my courses had been so reviewed.

Thanks to my reviewers:

  • Steve Deloach, Elon University
  • Paul Latreille, Swansea University (in the U.K.)
  • Bob Rycroft, UMW
  • Jeff McClurken, UMW
  • Becky Conway, a student who previously took my face-to-face course at UMW
  • Wendy Drexler, Brown University, and
  • Bryan Alexander, NITLE

The feedback you provided was extremely helpful!  I very much appreciate it, especially the many points I didn’t think of.  I really am a newbie here with respect to online teaching.  Here is my response:

@Steve @Paul  I wrote the course description for the reviewers, most of whom are not economists.  It’s not the course description my students see.

@Multiple Reviewers  With respect to the expressed Course Learning Objectives, I agree that they are fairly abstract, but the operational ones, listed 0n each Topic page they both concrete and quantifiable.

@BryanAlexander  A class release for developing and teaching an online course?  Ha ha!  This is a public university.  They think I’m underworked as it is.   I did receive a small stipend, but only because of the work done during the summer.  The face-to-face section is parallel, but entirely independent from the online section.  I did that in part because I want to assess the outcomes in the two approaches.

@Becky  The online section has assignments the face-to-face doesn’t have, like the intro video and twitter.

@Paul  You can see the “product” by looking at the course website!

@Paul  Good idea about linking the sections, but see my comment above to Bryan.

Wendy:  Thanks for the reference to brainshark video.  I wasn’t familiar with it but will have to give it a try. http://www.brainshark.com

@Wendy  Both discussion fora are accessible from the tabs on the header on any page of the website.

@Paul  I definitely need to do a better job of explaining the various spaces in the course website.

SG: The main website is econ201online.  The purpose of the Discussion site is to flesh out our understanding of the content of each topic.  The purpose of the MOOC is…

@Bryan  The discussion pages are threaded;  I thought I put the norms on the directions page.  I’ll add to this as things come up.

@Jeff “Useful, but is it something [ Final class notes on a topic ] you can replicate in future iterations?  ANS: Yes, I’ve done this before in seminars.  I simply make those notes disappear for the next class.

@Bryan @Jeff  Re: MacroMOOC “Will you require a baseline of quantitative work for each module?”  I think it will depend on the question being discussed.

@Jeff  Why are  the essays listed as Essays 1,2,3, … 6?    ANS: Because those are the only ones I’ve put up yet.

@Jeff  For this iteration, the exams will be the same as my f2f section: Multiple Choice.  For future, perhaps I’ll do it differently.

@Jeff  The Course Website doesn’t provide enough info for a student to know where the class is and what they should be doing.  SG: That’s because the site isn’t live yet.  It will develop more as the course plays out.  Also, and perhaps more importantly, because you can’t see the twitter discussion yet which is where the day-to-day communication will take place.

@Jeff: “Do you think people will actually watch these videos (from you and from their classmates)? Does it matter if they don’t?”  SG: Jeez, I hope so!

Re: Daily Tweets – Perhaps I need to go to MWF or something.  I’ll see.

@Bryan – Yes, I’ve built up a list of tweet prompts.

@Jeff – The tweets represent the daily discussions about everything in the course.  I expect some tweets will prompt a discussion on what we’re currently studying since I’ll choose my prompts that way.

@Paul  Yes, I plan to give general feedback on the essays, good features, common problems, etc.  I’d like to do so peer review as well, but not until at least a few weeks into the course.

@Bryan Re: twitter use, yes we will use the hashtag “#econ201online” and all such tweets will be archived for review.

@Becky: “If no one responds to other students’ questions and both the question poser and the classmates get used to the Prof. eventually answering them by the next day, how does that encourage other students to step up? It seems too easy for students to sit back and only check in on conversations without playing an active role themselves.”

SG: Good questions, but we’ll have to see how it goes.  I can be pretty persuasive about getting students to respond.

@Paul, Yes, I generally plan to answer questions with other questions, rather than providing “the” answer unless it’s a factual/mechanical question (“How do I find the Topic 3 page?”

@Paul  Class size is capped at 20, though I’ve given some thought to running larger sizes.

@Paul: “All good stuff, and you ask students to do an essay of their own, but then retreat to more orthodox essays. I’m wondering if you could get students to do something a bit more imaginative for another assignment as an alternative to an essay – a video, poster or photo collage for example?”  SG: Possibly, but this is a Writing Intensive course so we need written work as well.  Perhaps there’s a work around here.

@Bryan: “Will you identify useful and relevant social media sites? I’m thinking of various econbloggers, the EconTalk podcast, etc. “  Yes, I will have students track down the ones I know, and any others similar that they find.

@Steve: “Another interesting thing you might try — I am thinking for potential paper/assessment — would be to ask a series of agree/disagree statements at the beginning of the course. Think likert scale stuff. Then at the end, ask the same ones. This would allow you to quantify the extent to which their views have changed. Theoretically, the strength to which they agree or disagree with simple dualistic statements should decrease after the course. e.g., “tax cuts are beneficial to economic growth.” If you get a lot of 4s and 5s on that early, you hopefully would get a lot of 3s and 4s afterwards, right?”

SG: Great ideas, though I may have run out of time.

@Paul: “I’m wondering whether there is scope for students to reflect on their own learning in a more metacognitive sense, i.e. not simply in terms of the meaning, but reflecting on their own learning?”  SG: Yes, that’s the final, final essay for the course (w/maybe a midterm draft).

@Jeff: “How would you identify such students? Would this be ad-hoc? Poor performance on an exam or essay?”  SG: Poor performance on exams and essays, but also (and sooner) on twitter and the discussion pages.  For the latter, I’ll be on the lookout for non-participation or perfunctory posts.

 

Thanks also go to Jim Groom, Martha Burtis, Andy Rush, Tim Owen and Alan Levine from our Division of Teaching & Learning Technologies, as well as the faculty who made up the first cohort of the UMW Online Learning Initiative from whom I learned a great deal.

If the course is successful, the credit belongs to the people I’ve mentioned in this post.  I simply followed their advice.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The “Game” of School

The “game” of school played by faculty and students claims to be about learning, but in truth it’s about grades, credits and filtering.  The students fully understand this; that’s why they behave as they do in our courses.  (Sannier made this point early in the ELI Conference, but it’s not unique to him.)  School works well as a screening device to identify individuals with the intelligence or other abilities necessary to be successful in the working world.  Or at least it used to, before widespread grade inflation and No Child Left Behind, but those issues deserve a separate post.

If school is about learning, what is it exactly that your students are learning?  Where’s the proof that learning is even occurring?

Do faculty believe that every (or nearly every) student is capable of mastery of the subjects they teach?  What grade corresponds to mastery of a subject?  Is that a C?  If so, do faculty in your department think of C as a good grade, a grade indicating quality (mastery implies quality doesn’t it?)?  Does mastery imply a grade of A?  What would your department chair or dean say if everyone got an A?  What if nearly everyone did?   If nearly every student is achieving mastery, does that mean that we’ve set the bar too low?

Is a student who earns a teaching certificate at Longwood University (what many at my institution, UMW, would consider a “lesser quality school”) a weaker teacher than a student who earns a teaching certificate from UMW?

Is a student who earns an economics degree at Longwood a weaker economist?  I want to say yes, but the truth to both these questions is I do not know.  I don’t know their curriculum.  I don’t know their program objectives or how well they achieve them.  I don’t know much about the faculty, certainly nothing about their teaching effectiveness.  I don’t know how successful their alumni become.

What makes a better quality school better?

  • Is it that it admits students with better academic backgrounds: advanced courses, grades, SATs?
  • Is it that students learn more when working with other bright students?
  • Is it that it has better faculty (i.e. faculty with better records of scholarship)?
  • Is it that it has more resources?

What about undergraduates at Research 1 universities, which tend to have many of the above qualities, but who often are taught, at least at the lower levels, by graduate students?  Is their learning experience better than that provided by tenured faculty at UMW?

Better scholarship doesn’t imply better teaching, especially in an R1 where scholarship is king and teaching largely doesn’t matter.  A close friend who teaches at a prestigious R1 once told me “I wouldn’t let my kids come to school here because they’d get a much better education at a liberal arts school like yours.”

If a “better” school, admits “better” students, and produces “better” graduates, where’s the surprise in that.  More importantly, where’s the evidence of learning?  Food for thought.

Returning to my original point, education as a sieve makes sense in a world where students don’t really want to learn what faculty have to offer.  But if students do want to learn, a mastery approach should work better than the current system.  How would students’ expectations be different if they believed school were really about learning, if students thought that teachers believed they all could learn to a mastery level.

How can we make higher education not a sieve, but rather a learning machine that can equip all students with what they need to succeed in life (both in terms of vocation and more broadly)?  I think the first step would be to radically rethink how we teach. We have a lot of work to do.  Do we have the leadership to guide us in that direction?

Photo Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/daveparker/1298526567/sizes/m/in/photostream/

Posted in Assessment & Grading, Teaching and Learning | Leave a comment