Look we have already done all this----

Format changes are NOT something faculty enjoy and eLearning is, even in its most rudamentary formats, format changes. BY the time you massage some ideas and exercises into the damn system, and massage parameters of those presences to operate with correct whoms in correct ways, WHEW, you have wasted the better part of what COULD have been 1000 new ideas in two new books---all for formatting stuff. What a royal waste.

What will make this e stuff take off is an input machine---
dump existing class notes and syllabuses into an input hopper,
turn a cranky crank
VOILA out comes a smartly operationalized, format-ized, e-enabled bunch of interactive communal lovey cognitive epitome slope climbing e-this-es and e-that-s.

So all these benefits and all that are real probably BUT if the cost is formatting work for hours and days, then VOILA it will all amount to much to do about nothing, all sound and fury signifying nothing, knave begger pander eater of broken meats,..... and other Shakespearean paroxysms of wording.

For richardtaborgreene. Two words. Instructional Designer.

At my institution, we don't have a lot of online programs (4-5 out of 45 or so). But we do have a fairly large adoption of our learning management system (70 percent of all course offerings). In the 10 years we've been supporting faculty, we generally see three evolving states of use:

1. User & Document management (Pulling students to the site through mandatory use)
- Password-protected class & group space
- Attach or copy/paste documents such as syllabi, presentations, notes.

2. Communications (Pushing content to them and facilitating interaction)
- Announcements
- Email
- Chat & Discussions (especially if "email subscription" of new posts is enabled)

3. Assessments (Pushing & Pulling to facilitate self-paced learning)
- Electronic assignment delivery & collection
- Quizzing, Surveys, use of Grade Book
- Adaptive release of content to structure student responsibility and self-awareness

To be sure, most faculty are doing #1 (maybe even #2), but students would really like to see more faculty doing #3. According to the annual Educause Center for Applied Research (ECAR) survey, "Undergraduates and IT," the function students value most in a learning management system (by far) is the ability to check grades, followed closely by access to practices quizzes and sample exams.

Nobody wants to look silly in a class, and online learning provides feedback and self-directed learning opportunities (practice) that most faculty aren't taking advantage of (less than half of all courses in our LMS use the grade book). However, I recently blogged about one prof who's students in online and hybrid versions of his introductory accounting class are consistently scoring 20 percent higher on his department's common final exam, compared to students in other sections of the same course. Yes, it might be the instructor quality, but in this case, the prof's course was the most active undergraduate course in terms of student activity for both fall and spring semester's last year. The students are learning, reviewing and applying course concepts because the prof has structured the site so they can't proceed without attaining mastery. By the time they hit the final exam, they say the hardest part of the course has already taken place.

While I do understand and sympathize with the time it takes to learn how to leverage an LMS (richardtaborgreene #1 above), I'd say it is a far more sophisticated and beneficial process than mere formatting.

John Fritz
Asst. VP, Instructional Technology & New Media
University of Maryland, Baltimore County

Despite the enormous growth of various on-line learning models, assessment of learning outcomes is almost non-existent. Most conclusions on these studies can be summarized as "the students really liked it!!".

Key is to identify those outcomes that may be enhanced by emerging technologies and structure rigorous control groups comparing outcomes.

#4 cmorrissey: Do you think there is a lot of learning outcome assessment in face-to-face (F2F) teaching now? More than there is online? If not, why does online learning shoulder more of the burden to "prove itself" than F2F does? In the end, ALL evidence of teaching delivery effectiveness should be evidence-based, but if there isn't really a strong culture of assessment in teaching & learning now, I think it takes some very intentional, institutional incentives to help faculty 1) overcome the learning curve challenges richardtaborgreene describes above, and 2) push further to build assessment of learning outcomes into their redesign of F2F courses for online or hybrid delivery.

Most faculty teach the way they were taught, but most weren't taught with technology. To learn how to do so requires time, incentives and support to go back to being a student of one's craft (teaching), preferably in an environment one will be asked to teach in. If more faculty could "lurk" in an experienced colleague's online or hybrid course, ask what pedagogical problem the experienced colleague solved with online/hybrid delivery, and apply these lessons learned to an initial course design of their own, I think the benefits would begin to justify the learning curve.

One matter still needs to be addressed: the ability or lack of ability that students possess to actually operate within the 'confines' of an online class. A lot of people think that, because today's generation does a lot of 'stuff' on the Internet, students will be able to take advantage of what online classes offer. My experience has been different; so many students don't have a clue on how to organize their time or actually engage in and with the simple tools we already provide. Access to the Internet is not consistent, especially with students from lower class areas. Until colleges and universities understand this, online ed. will be a great idea that will be stymied by frustration.

Recent studies indicate that a lot of the student population that we are trying to reach--those middle grounders (esp. young men) and many foreign (including ESL) students--do not do well online, yet. Older students do better except for the adult crowd that wasn't raised in advanced technology. So a significant amount of our student clientele is not, in fact, ready for such a move. I am for this advancement, but I believe these issues must be addressed in an effective manner.

John,
Could you please send me a link to the blog you mentioned in your first comment?
I'm at marc.parry@chronicle.com
Thanks,
Marc Parry

to john fritz

Making a case through empirical research would validate your point. It may bolster the elearning cause-and should be done to justify the investment. Instructional IT faculty and staff have to make a stronger case than those presented at the many national conferences on the topic. With the enormous budget pressure in higher ed they may also be an endangered species.

The Face to face traditional model is also under scrutiny in the "learning assessment" world, but that research also lacks rigorous evaluation.

I have found students to be more engaged with each other and the material in my one (out of ten courses I teach) online class. I use our LMS for all of my courses and agree that their grades have improved through practice quizzes and discussions that serve as 'practice' for organizing ideas that might appear in their paper or in an essay on an exam. Perhaps it is the 'teams' feature that allows me to assign different tasks to smaller groups within the online class: they have to collaborate and share with the entire community. This is just anecdotal, of course, but students I knew from previous face-to-face classes who were quite reserved became extremely active and took leadership when online.

To cmorrissey

I agree about the need for more empirical research. I'm on a group from Educause that is "seeking evidence of impact" for the use of information technology. Still early days following last week's announcement, but I know my other colleagues on the advisory board are very focused on trying to advance this cause, as am I. For what it's worth, here's the announcement link:

http://www.educause.edu/ELI/EDUCAUSELearningInitiative/SeekingEvidenceofImpact/206622

Also, the joint Educause and Gates Foundation "Next Generation Learning Challenges" identifies "Learning Analytics" as one of four key challenges will receive funding consideration:

http://www.nextgenlearning.com/the-challenges/learning-analytics

Here at UMBC, we've been pursuing academic analytics by looking at how strong and weak students using the LMS. We've been very much influenced by the fine work being done at Purdue University, the University of Georgia, and others. I think momentum is growing for more "impact evidence," but it is not an area that IT has traditionally focused on (nor has higher ed generally). The challenge is defining, identifying, studying and reporting "impact," such that a common practice (if not an effective one) emerges that can be replicated enough to gain critical mass. But if we become intentional about this process, invest in it, and highlight, I'm hopeful we'll get there eventually so that we can truly understand how IT is or is not effective in supporting successful student learning.

For benreynolds, two words: bloated administration.

Try and push this stuff on someone who has to manage a 7 figure grant, produce research from the grant, present it and get ready for the next one. Its all stuff to reach the attention deficit student population who want to get an education 30 seconds at a time. When these students graduate and have to attend to problems all day not 30 seconds at a time we will see who succeeds in the job market.

Finally there is no evidence to suggest that this medium of delivery is any better than traditional methods, classroom lecture, discussion, and examinations. We do this stuff on line and we will never really know who is getting the education.

In the private sector, we call the necessity "ROI" -- return on investment. Online learning at large global campus such as University of Maryland's University College (UMUC) has proven again and again that adult learners DO interact at much higher rates, in study groups, online forums and Conferences, than in large dull lecturehalls. In our company, E-Learning Experts LLC, (www.ELearningExpertsAtlanta.com) we are seeing an increase in clients seeing Instructional Design aide in all facets of 'improving participation' in learning vastly different subject matters. As Marshall McLuen quipped "It's not the medium, it's the message"!

I remember reading an online student's criticism of collaboration in online classes as ... 'one person doing the work of many'. So, if collaboration, and not individualism, becomes the norm in online education, I am hoping a system is worked out so that individual students receive accurate recognition for their true achievement and contributions in the class. I think that the application of educational technology to online classes will have to develop hand-in-hand with the application of educational technology in f2f classes. If there is a technology that can enhance learning online, it could also enhance it on campus. If the professor-base learns to use a software, or a technology application in the classroom, they will bring it along online ... and vice-versa.

Another factor in the application of advanced practices and technology in online and f2f classes is that sometimes instructional design and course development may be outsourced to specialists in developing technology driven or technology centered courses or modules. Local professors may eventually feel pressure to increase the educational technology in their courses to keep pace. With the advance of hybrid courses, the line between online and f2f could get blury.

Bernard Schuster
Arrive2.net

The same hand-wringing about online learning reminds me of the early days of computers. Then the designers got smart and designed computers that virtually installed themselves and voila! Today, a sizable percentage of American households has a PC or laptop.

The same thing eventually will happen with online teaching. Today, the set-up is often cumbersome and disruptive, but take heart! The quick-and-dirty method is sure to come...hopefully before too many colleges turn to the alternative: outsourcing.

You've convinced me of the merits of the online learning pedagogy.

In my next ground class I am going to give out a test and leave the classroom.

I am sure that my students will be as honest as online students and do the work themselves.

You say, I'm naive?

I'll agree that creating on-line courses is a "front-loaded" process, one that requires a lot of creativity even before the first student logs in.

It is very satisfying, however, to finally have a new course "in the can", because then the real fun can begin. The techno-glitches will come leaking up through the floorboards, of course, but the second round of editing and improving the product can be attended to in earnest, with the active cooperation of the on-line students.

I routinely ask my on-line students a question like the following: "Please identify what you think I am up to with this material and with these Discussion Questions, as phrased. Then, make believe you are visiting instructor with a grant from the Wannabee Foundation. Tell me how I could have done it better".

This invariaby works like a charm, beause it calls on them to role-play, to process the materials, and to articulate some in-your-face stuff.

I tell my students that all my on-line materials are a "Work-in-Progress", every semester, and that I appreciate their help.

The problem that I find with teaching online is that people, including myself as an "expert" often don't know what they don't know. Besides developing social skills, colleges and universities should be highlighting the dialogue - verbal and non-verbal - that occurs when learners are fully present. For some topics the client-server model is sufficient, but if we wish to have a society where people aren't just out for themselves and are competitive globally, we need to encourage stakeholders to remain engaged in getting young men and women out from behind the computer.