next »

[temporaryname]

<snip>

2. The lack of immediacy in communication is maddening.

This one hits a huge chord with me.  Dragging a discussion out over a week is a huge frustration with online communication.  We're in the heat of a discussion and you just wander away from the computer for a day?!  How can that possibly be the same as spending an interesting half hour on a tangent that is relevant, but wasn't the scheduled topic for the day? 

<snip>

I'm having this problem right now. I've been assigned an online graduate seminar this term (the whole issue of moving graduate seminars online is a rant for another day)--how am I supposed to run a seminar within a system that, by university policy, must be run asynchronously?

So I end up with "discussions" that would have taken a single class session spread out over a week or two. There is one advantage in that responses tend to be more reasoned-out, but you lose too many of the thinking-out-loud a-ha moments that make a seminar class so useful.

I know, I know, stop trying to port face-to-face methods directly into the online world. But should we have to lose what's good about face-to-face teaching to so completely accommodate online teaching?

[tallenc]

I have taught one class totally online (and will be teaching a couple more soon) and a couple of classes in a hybrid online/face-to-face mode.  In my experience, teaching online is more work and less fun than teaching face-to-face, but I have found little difference in the quality of student work, and sometimes discussion actually works better online because there's less wasted time and students are generally more prepared for making comments.  I think the quality of general human interaction is lower with online classes than with face-to-face ones, but I don't think the quality of education about the subject matter is necessarily lower; student performance in the online class I just finished teaching was, overall, stronger than student performance in the face-to-face section of the the same course that I taught a couple of semesters earlier.

As for as the hybrid (my college uses the term "blended") sections I've taught, though, I'd have to say that my experience with them has been much like the experience of the "I'll Never Do It Again" author's experience with online teaching.  I've had success with both totally face-to-face and totally online courses, but with the hybrid ones, my students just couldn't adjust to the variation in modes.  Their general attitude seemed to be that they didn't really have to do the online part of the course because it wasn't "the real class."  I haven't run into that attitude at all with students in the totally online format.

[dept_geek]

I have taught quite a bit online, and my experiences run hot & cold. Some terms, it is great, others - it stinks. Just like the classroom. Like tallenc says, teaching online is more work. I feel like I am missing something by not being in the classroom. Since I teach required courses (and therefore, by definition, "boring"), a majority of my students just want a box checked on the graduation form, and they are happy just to get the class over with. The good students do well online, the poor students don't.  (the spread is more noticeable online - last term I had a section with As and Fs. Nothing in the middle) 

Many of my students (regardless of age & background) are not ready for the online experience.

I will be cutting back my online sections so I can catch more of the under-performers. None of my students are grad students, a significant majority never will be grad students.

[bwatwood]

Some good discussion here!  I have to agree with tallenc, given a choice, hybrid is my last choice.  A hybrid course has to be radically redesigned for what works online and what works face to face, and of the three choice (F2F, online, or blended), blended courses are the most work.  When I tried Chapter One F2F, Chapter 2 online, Chapter 3 F2f, etc., I had the same student experience that tallenc had.  So I shifted so that my "lectures" (which were not really lectures per se) were the online component covering 2 weeks worth of material and we did group activities in the F2F portion.  That worked better.

And if nothing else, seeing dept_geek's signature line made all this discussion worthwhile!  Loved it!

(I also find it interesting that the Chronicle's spell check thinks "online" is a misspelled word!  Is that symptomatic of this whole issue?)

[polly_mer]

In only complementing the traditional classroom, does that not dismiss out of hand totally online learning as a valid practice?  But I agree with polly mer that online interactions can indeed enhance traditional classrooms.  I encourage my face-to-face students to bring their laptops to class and use techniques such as web-based polling and student-generated backchannel to engage my students.

I am dismissive of complete online classes for the areas that I teach.  I don't see how one can teach physical science and engineering online because virtual labs (even though I am a simulationist myself) just don't provide the complete experience. 

Read the material and then discuss the major points?  Sure, I can see how that could translate to an online venue.

Read/watch the lecture, do the problems on your own, and then take the test?  That can be done online, but, for many people for some topics, a biweekly visit to the professor's office hours would make the class much easier.  Scanning or typesetting equations to pass back and forth is a big pain compared to standing next to each other at the board and asking leading questions.

Having a small group work the problems together and then present to the class?  That's tough to do online.

Soldering together that circuit to hook up the strain gauge to measure deformation in the beam?  Can't be done online.

In terms of complements, I was thinking more of the continuing asynchronous discussion rather than bringing the computers to class.  Being able to play with the simulations to investigate phenomena at the student's pace, replay the demonstrations at will, and look at supplementary material are wonderful educational activities.  Posting comments and questions to the bulletin board to continue the discussion away from class has value.

However, if we're in the classroom together, talk or answer the poll using the clickers.  The only time I want to see computers in class is if I'm teaching the use of a program so that we're in a computer lab for the hands-on experience.  Of course, I teach equation-intensive subjects with diagrams.  I can see a tablet being used for notes, but anyone typing will be missing material.

[ianative]

So glad to hear the author won't teach online again!

Do we need yet another person teaching online who is convinced that his/her value lies in disseminating information?  (No.)  Do we need yet another person teaching online who doesn't look for ways to improve his/her instruction, such as learning to choose the appropriate communication tools for the kind of learning that's desired?  (No.)  Do we need yet another person teaching online who can't tell the difference between problems created by institutional policy, such as inappropriate class sizes, and those created by the online environment?  (No.)

It continues to amaze me that the face-to-face classroom is some kind of gold standard by which we measure everything else.  Since when is it an ideal learning environment?  Along similar lines, do you teach the same way whether you're in a seminar class of 15 or in a lecture hall with 350?  You don't?  So why would you whine about not being able to teach the same way online as you do in person?  Large classes don't work for every content area, or every student, or every teacher.  Same way with online classes, but this doesn't mean that online coursework is ineffective in general.

Yes, teaching online can be harder but not because it's online, typically. The online environment isn't conducive to lecturing, so you need to move past the kind of teaching that focuses on telling/showing people things and into the kind that focuses on learning.  This requires creativity, effort, and adaptability.  I have taught face-to-face, online, on cable television, on video by satellite, and in hybrid modes and it's still a challenge to think FIRST about what needs to happen between learner and content, THEN to think about what to do as a teacher. 

So, to all those who are more interested in teaching than in learning, please please please do not teach online! 

[hmaria1609]

Thought I bring this up.

Are grad students with disabilities, who are taking online classes at a distance ed center or from home, told up front about notifying the ADA office on campus and having those accomodations carried out?  I'm thinking of those distance ed/online grad students will who never go to the university during their program. 
One of my classmates in library school had a medical disability which limited her time on the computer.

[dept_geek]

Are grad students with disabilities, who are taking online classes at a distance ed center or from home, told up front about notifying the ADA office on campus and having those accomodations carried out?  ...

I don't teach grad students, so I can't speak to that. But I can say that every fac member in my dept has boilerplate ADA/Disabled Student Services language on their syllabus. Any student who contacts me about that para is walked thru the process. I will introduce them to the right people. I'm pretty sure that everyone else in my dept will do much the same thing.

Next term, I have several disabled students. The wheels are already in motion to insure their accommodations are met.

[temporaryname]

<snip>

It continues to amaze me that the face-to-face classroom is some kind of gold standard by which we measure everything else.  Since when is it an ideal learning environment?...

<snip>

It isn't an ideal learning environment, but neither is anything else, including online. I don't think that it's so much that face-to-face instruction is held up as a "gold standard" so much as that most people in this business have experience with the face-to-face classroom (even if they haven't taught in one, nearly all have been a student in one), and so it's a convenient baseline.

[spork]

[. . .]
MIT has put all of its content online, but that does not mean one can get a MIT degree simply by viewing it. 

MIT has not put all of its content online.  Syllabi, reading lists, some videos of lectures, some problems sets, yes.  But as Polly points out, not everyone has a cyclotron or mass spectrometer in their basement.

By learning to learn, I am really suggesting that our role has shifted to teaching critical analysis of that vast array of information so that it is relevant and meaningful to our students.

Why do I get the feeling this thread is an advertisement for someone's blog?

[inthelab]

So, to all those who are more interested in teaching than in learning, please please please do not teach online! 

When I teach a class, I'm teaching and not learning.
When I do my research, I'm learning.

[haslentz]

Having taught business and law courses in a traditional classroom since 1970, and online courses since 2001, I've had the opportunity to participate in class dynamics for more than a while.  I've taught courses in associate through doctoral programs, and constructed both ground and online classes.  My associations with universities have included traditional state U, with football teams and all, private universities, military-based courses, and for-profit universities.  I think there are a few observations that may be helpful.

1.  Online or Traditional is just the media or channel. 

Whether we call it 'teaching' or 'facilitation' or something else, the role of faculty is to enable learning, and that can occur in any media or channel.  We can present information in lectures, or employ cases, simiulations or other vehicles for learning, but it boils down to enabling and motivating students.  We'll have the same debate when we shift from paper-based books to laptops, Ipods, or even Amazon's Kindle.  Even then, that's only the hardware, not the learning.

2.  Ground and online classes have different strengths and weaknesses.

Obviously, any discussion in an asynchronous online classroom will be measured in days, not minutes like we see in traditional classrooms.  There have been times in traditional classrooms when I wished the students had to stop and think a bit before responding about a legal principle or case.  Sometimes online, I'd like to get a topic wrapped up, but there are students who still want to discuss it.

In a traditional classroom, I have to be on the lookout for those students who will sit there and let others participate in the discussion.  When I try to draw them into the discussion, they are embarassed or otherwise don't want to get in.  There may be a few doing texting or other things in the classroom. At the same time, there are others who are interacting with blazing speed and really burn through a topic. 

In an online classroom, I can spot who is not partipating quite readily and get with that student privately to discuss how we can get the person more engaged in the talk. I might not notice that student in a traditional classroom, and he or she may get by with little interaction. Not so online.

Both classrooms - the one on the campus and the one online - have certain student learning activities that work best in a traditional classroom, and other things that work best when the ideas can marinate in discussion over a period of days.  My goal as a faculty member is to understand which techniques work best in which environment, and construct my lesson plans accordingly.

3.  Some classes will never work well online, while other classes that would not have been feasible in a traditional classroom can flourish online. 

Having had Organic Chemistry in college, I'd prefer that my children and grandchildren not attempt to distill flammable, caustic materials in the kitchen while pounding away on their laptops.  This course needs to be conducted on a campus under careful supervision so that the tradition of stinking everyone out of the chemistry building can be preserved. 

On the other hand, a course that can't get enough students on the local campus to make it a viable offering will have sufficient numbers of students available online, especially when the students can be drawn from just about anywhere on our planet.  That course you've always wanted to offer in "History of the U.S. During the Garfield Administration"?  You'll find your opportunity online.

4.  Online and Onground can coexist and be symbiotic.

I really enjoy teaching my 'law and ethics' course.  It only has 3 hours per week in the ground classroom, and I used to hate taking up precious class time for mundane matters.  Now, we have discussions, exams and other online-suitable conversations in the online course management system, and the 3 hours each week are focused on the rich, interactive back and forth that makes learning interesting and exciting.  The online work and the classroom work feed off each other.

About a hundred years ago, transportation began a revolution as technology provided cars and airplanes. The reasons for transport didn't go away, but new ones were found.  I often wonder what would have happened if the railroads had embraced the new technologies and integrated the capabilities of autos and aircraft into their transportation strategies.  My query is best summed up by the line uttered by the head Morlock in the movie "The Time Machine", when he said that the most haunting two words in all language are "What If."Having taught business and law courses in a traditional classroom since 1970, and online courses since 2001, I've had the opportunity to participate in class dynamics for more than a while.  I've taught courses in associate through doctoral programs, and constructed both ground and online classes.  My associations with universities have included traditional state U, with football teams and all, private universities, military-based courses, and for-profit universities.  I think there are a few observations that may be helpful.

1.  Online or Traditional is just the media or channel. 

Whether we call it 'teaching' or 'facilitation' or something else, the role of faculty is to enable learning, and that can occur in any media or channel.  We can present information in lectures, or employ cases, simiulations or other vehicles for learning, but it boils down to enabling and motivating students.  We'll have the same debate when we shift from paper-based books to laptops, Ipods, or even Amazon's Kindle.  Even then, that's only the hardware, not the learning.

2.  Ground and online classes have different strengths and weaknesses.

Obviously, any discussion in an asynchronous online classroom will be measured in days, not minutes like we see in traditional classrooms.  There have been times in traditional classrooms when I wished the students had to stop and think a bit before responding about a legal principle or case.  Sometimes online, I'd like to get a topic wrapped up, but there are students who still want to discuss it.

In a traditional classroom, I have to be on the lookout for those students who will sit there and let others participate in the discussion.  When I try to draw them into the discussion, they are embarassed or otherwise don't want to get in.  There may be a few doing texting or other things in the classroom. At the same time, there are others who are interacting with blazing speed and really burn through a topic. 

In an online classroom, I can spot who is not partipating quite readily and get with that student privately to discuss how we can get the person more engaged in the talk. I might not notice that student in a traditional classroom, and he or she may get by with little interaction. Not so online.

Both classrooms - the one on the campus and the one online - have certain student learning activities that work best in a traditional classroom, and other things that work best when the ideas can marinate in discussion over a period of days.  My goal as a faculty member is to understand which techniques work best in which environment, and construct my lesson plans accordingly.

3.  Some classes will never work well online, while other classes that would not have been feasible in a traditional classroom can flourish online. 

Having had Organic Chemistry in college, I'd prefer that my children and grandchildren not attempt to distill flammable, caustic materials in the kitchen while pounding away on their laptops.  This course needs to be conducted on a campus under careful supervision so that the tradition of stinking everyone out of the chemistry building can be preserved. 

On the other hand, a course that can't get enough students on the local campus to make it a viable offering will have sufficient numbers of students available online, especially when the students can be drawn from just about anywhere on our planet.  That course you've always wanted to offer in "History of the U.S. During the Garfield Administration"?  You'll find your opportunity online.

4.  Online and Onground can coexist and be symbiotic.

I really enjoy teaching my 'law and ethics' course.  It only has 3 hours per week in the ground classroom, and I used to hate taking up precious class time for mundane matters.  Now, we have discussions, exams and other online-suitable conversations in the online course management system, and the 3 hours each week are focused on the rich, interactive back and forth that makes learning interesting and exciting.  The online work and the classroom work feed off each other.

About a hundred years ago, transportation began a revolution as technology provided cars and airplanes. The reasons for transport didn't go away, but new ones were found.  I often wonder what would have happened if the railroads had embraced the new technologies and integrated the capabilities of autos and aircraft into their transportation strategies.  My query is best summed up by the line uttered by the head Morlock in the movie "The Time Machine", when he said that the most haunting two words in all language are "What If."

[zuzu_]

I started teaching online at a for-profit when I was desperate for work. It was horrible. The courses were pre-designed, and I was the "facilitator/grader" rather than an actual teacher. After that experience, I might have agreed with many of you who dislike/deride online education.

A few years ago, I landed a TT job that allowed me to create and teach my own online courses. I quickly learned from my mistakes implemented strategies (which is a subject for another thread or ten) to enhance the educational experience for my students.

I currently teach a few sections of composition and/or literature online every semester and in summer. For motivated students, the educational experience is equal to and sometimes greater than what they might gain in the "regular" classroom.

I realize that my methods won't apply to all disciplines, but I absolutely must say that you CAN have rich, dynamic, educational discussions in an asynchronous online environment. This CHE FORUM is an example of that. You CAN create a similar environment in your online course. There can be "A HA" moments online. People CAN form relationships. You can have an energetic "collaborative learning" environment in the online classroom.

[desert_rat]

I have a very serious question:  It seems from the above discussion that there is fairly general agreement that some students can do well online, others do better F2F. 

Why can not the same be said for professors?  I KNOW I am a better teacher face to face than I am online.

Yet, I am FORCED to teach an online class, and I hate it!  I KNOW I don't do well.  Why can we not all play to our strengths?

Oh well...  I'll keep trying to improve my online class, I suppose...

[hotrod]

<snip>

2. The lack of immediacy in communication is maddening.

This one hits a huge chord with me.  Dragging a discussion out over a week is a huge frustration with online communication.  We're in the heat of a discussion and you just wander away from the computer for a day?!  How can that possibly be the same as spending an interesting half hour on a tangent that is relevant, but wasn't the scheduled topic for the day? 

<snip>

I'm having this problem right now. I've been assigned an online graduate seminar this term (the whole issue of moving graduate seminars online is a rant for another day)--how am I supposed to run a seminar within a system that, by university policy, must be run asynchronously?

So I end up with "discussions" that would have taken a single class session spread out over a week or two. There is one advantage in that responses tend to be more reasoned-out, but you lose too many of the thinking-out-loud a-ha moments that make a seminar class so useful.

I know, I know, stop trying to port face-to-face methods directly into the online world. But should we have to lose what's good about face-to-face teaching to so completely accommodate online teaching?

As a student, I find that I usually learn more in online discussions than I do in face-to-face discussions.  While it is true the discussions can take much long online, it gives me a chance to look up new information to enter into the discussion.  For example, I can look up journal articles and cite new information that may not be mentioned in the textbook and sometimes not known by the professor.