|
Jacqueline Moloney and
Steven Tello
Our
studies proved that we achieved the “no significant
difference” benchmark in grades and final course evaluations
between students in face-to-face and online/distance education
courses, consistent with the literature on this topic.
What was
surprising was that, given our “novice” status as online
providers in the 1996 – 1997 period, both online students and
faculty expressed such high levels of satisfaction with our
online program. Despite the limitations of the technology and
our crude learning management system, on average, 77% of
online students indicated a high to very high degree of
satisfaction with their course and 95% of the online faculty,
asked to continue to teach online in future semesters.
These
findings exceeded our expectations, and we began to wonder
why.
While
flexibility and convenience were obvious explanations, we were
also hearing faculty and students talk about increased
interaction in their online courses; and faculty began
questioning traditional assumptions about seat-time, their
roles as instructors (lecturer versus facilitator) and the
evaluation of student learning. For example, knowing that
online multiple choice exams could be taken by anyone at the
other end of the computer terminal, some faculty began to
wonder about their true value in assessing student
performance. While faculty were reportedly pleasantly
surprised by the amount of interaction in their online
courses, they wondered how much of it was improving their
students’ learning and expressed concerns about the
limitations of the course management system.
We knew we
had access to a wealth of data to assist in the study of these
dynamics such as online lecture notes, PowerPoint
presentations and student communication archives, yet we
needed faculty input to frame the questions and guide the
process in a meaningful way. As a result, consistent with the
TAP/NCA recommendations, we greatly expanded faculty
participation in the assessment process.
An
analysis of the data collected in relationship to Learning
Effectiveness resulted in changes in our online course design
and in our faculty development efforts. The data indicated
that a positive relationship exists: a) between student
attitudes to interaction and student persistence; and b)
between student perceptions regarding the use of the
discussion forum, the frequency of discussion forum use and
student persistence (Tello, 2002).
These
findings helped to support a program emphasis on asynchronous
communication between faculty and students. Changes to our
course and faculty development efforts increased our emphasis
on the effective use of the asynchronous discussion forum in
all online courses. Related data examined multiple dimensions
of communication and interaction between instructor and
students which supported student persistence and satisfaction.
Frequent feedback, prompt feedback, communication of clear
expectations were all factors identified as important in
supporting student success and participation in online
courses, consistent with Chickering and Gamson’s Seven
Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education
(1987).
Improvements reflecting these findings included the
introduction of a “Start Here” section in every online course,
to help communicate clear expectations, as well as introduce
communication and response guidelines for faculty and
students. During this period we also initiated changes in both
the content and delivery of our faculty training. We began to
pilot online training programs blended with face-to-face
workshops.
Satisfaction surveys and training program evaluations from
online faculty indicated that participation in an online
course as a student was important in helping them to
understand the necessity of clear course communications and
the challenges of taking an online course. These and other
pedagogical changes that placed greater emphasis on student
learning were integrated into our training curriculum. Through
the assistance of a training grant from the Sloan Foundation,
we expanded our faculty development effort to primarily an 10
online experience, which now requires that all faculty
interested in teaching in our online program must participate
in two online, four week development courses.
Excerpted from
Moloney, J. &
Tello, S. (In Press). Achieving Quality and Scale in Online
Education through Transformative Assessment: A Case Study.
Elements of Quality in Online Education. John Bourne and
Janet Moore, (Eds.). Sloan-C and the Sloan Center for Online
Education. (16 pp). For full article,
click here |
