Main Nav

Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Hi, On Monday next I take up a new role at my university to provide professional development / training to help build our capacity and capability to use technology to enhance learning and the student experience. It is an exciting opportunity but also a challenge! I'm currently working on developing resources but wondered what sort of training other institutions offered staff/faculty - especially for those planning to deliver courses at distance, on-line. For example: Does your institution insist on training before anyone can deliver a programme on-line Do you provide e-moderation training? If so, how? What other training / resources do you provide. To share what we are planning to do. We are a small institution (student number about 7 000). Currently there is no requirement to have been trained before a person can deliver on-line. We provide some training on the use of the VLE (Moodle) and I will be delivering workshops on best pedagogic practice but these will not be mandatory. We have a dedicated web space to share resources. I also provide a credit carrying (postgraduate certificate) in e-learning which takes 3 semesters to complete but in-house numbers taking the course are small. In my dreams (!) I would insist that anyone from our university considering developing an on-line course take my programme first - but that is just a dream. I'd appreciate any feedback. Regards Clive Clive Buckley PhD Programme Leader: Postgraduate Certificate in E-learning (http://www.glyndwr.ac.uk/en/Postgraduatecourses/PostgraduateCertificatei...) Ysgol Iechyd,Gofal Cymdeithasol,Gwyddorau Chwaraeon ac Ymarfer School of Health, Social Care, Sport and Exercise Sciences Prifysgol Glyndwr/ Glyndwr University Ffon/ Tel: +44 (0)1978 293284 Ffacs/Fax: +44(0)1978 290008 ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

Comments

I bet you'd get more people taking your programme if it took one semester, instead of three. Do you have them do course design? They might join up if they knew they would get help with design, as well as advice on how to manage the course. Emily
Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Thanks Emily One option I thought of was to condense the course from 60 credits to 20 = 1 semester. Trouble is I think it is all important (I guess us educators prefer putting 'stuff' in than taking it out). But you are right - 3 semesters is a big commitment - I have to maybe bite the bullet. Clive ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of Springfield, Emily Sent: Fri 06/01/2012 14:41 To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training I bet you'd get more people taking your programme if it took one semester, instead of three. Do you have them do course design? They might join up if they knew they would get help with design, as well as advice on how to manage the course. Emily
Clive - We have a similar challenge, Clive. We're taking more of "slow heat" approach - improving one semester at a time, though the pathway and targeted goals are rather broad at this stage. At Granite State College, over 50% of enrollment is for online classes, mostly adult learners. All of our faculty are part-time adjunct, mostly professionals who are teaching on the side. Thus, we have a unique challenge to drive advancement in teaching/learning online with a staff that is, for the most part, beholden to other commitments. Not that they are disinterested in their craft or lack motivation to teach well. Quite the opposite. However, it's simply unrealistic to expect that a majority will prioritize PD at the expense of other commitments, especially when it comes to wholesale changes in the way they might teach (classroom => online, in some cases). Rich media skills are new to the vast majority of our faculty, and enrolling in a 3-semester PD program would be unlikely. Yet proficiency in online teaching is precisely what our president has challenged us to address. For the past year, Ed Tech and Academic Affairs have been brought together once a month to set goals and develop a set of credentialing criteria for faculty's course design/development, using a non-binding grading system (meaning not tied directly to performance evaluation). Areas include standard syllabus development and instructional soundness, but also use of rich media as learning strategies. This, at least, gives faculty a snapshot of where they are with respect to expectations. (There has been discussion about how faculty might feel about being graded, though it hasn't emerged as an issue yet). In support of this, we have initiated several support systems to utilize non-text and web-based learning activities. Each summer, we hold a 3-day workshop for PD in rich media skills, we have just begun a WordPress-based online Faculty Resource Center for publishing content in response to incidental needs and situations (composed by both Ed Tech and AA), and push engagement with the FRC through regular branded HTML email in Constant Contact. All of this is concurrent with traditional 1:1 and asynchronous faculty support. We will be promoting more workshops in the following year, publishing video profiles of exemplary teaching techniques, promoting a P2P forum in the FRC, and launching a Center for Excellence website to showcase our best work to internal and external audiences as we come along. Much has been discussed about whether participation in online teaching workshops in this area should be mandatory. So far, the sentiment has been to emphasize to faculty what is expected from them based on the new credentialing criteria and to build support systems to enable instructors to achieve greater proficiency rather than try to force the issue. Our faculty relationships do not have the same leverage as would be in a situation with fulltime or tenure-track staff, though this is not the only factor in using this approach. Our longterm goals are still formative, given that we just switched to Moodle this past Fall, too. - Steve -- Steve Covello Rich Media Specialist Granite State College 8 Old Suncook Road Concord, NH 03301 603-513-1346 Skype: steve.granitestate Scheduling: tungle.me/steve.granitestate so that faculty can have an easy to understand profile of what is expected
Good point Emily. Clive, I've found that at a public university with a heavily unionized faculty that online teaching is optional and so putting up barriers to online teaching would be counterproductive. So what we do is offer training in Moodle with pedagogy heavily embedded that is not required but heavily promoted. There are plenty of alternatives--talking with me about online course design, online handouts at: http://www2.oakland.edu/elis/moodlehelp.cfm, one-on-one technology/pedgagogy sessions with instructional designers, a faculty lab, open weekdays 8-5, staffed by students knowledgable in Moodle and other technology we have, informal brown bag Lunch Bytes sessions, mentor program, and special department sessions for any group that wants one. The key to a good workshop is to make it enjoyable and don't try to teach everything you know. Focus instead on what the participants want to know. Start out with what they have already done. Participants love to talk. You will definitely get more participants by offering technology help with pedagogy thrown in than by just offering pedagogy alone. You'll get better morale if nothing is required and your role is kept to mentoring rather than gatekeeping. This has worked for us at any rate. Cathy Catheryn Cheal, Ph.D. Assistant Vice President e-Learning and Instructional Support Suite 430 Kresge Library Oakland University cheal@oakland.edu 248-370-4566 fax: 248-370-3628
Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Thank you Steve - that is incredibly helpful and it sounds as if you have an even greater challenge than me. I was also interested that you just moved to Moodle. We did that for this current academic year - that was Moodle 1.9. For next academic year we move to Moodle 2.x and really pushing e-submission / e-assessment. This will mean upskilling with regard to the technology - my fear is we will lose sight of the pedagogy. Add to that there will be mandatory requirements for Moodle sites - they MUST have x, y, z. We have not gone down the route of rich media as essential - in our case that would simply not work yet. We also considered a 'traffic light' or 'gold, silver, bronze' standard for on-line provision - but sometimes that becomes a tick box approach - simply having multi-media does not, in my opinion, mean it is pedagogically sound. I see rich media / multi-media as the seasoning; keep the basic ingredients simple. Thanks again for taking the time to share. Clive ________________________________
I wonder if it could be feasible to offer different compensation to adjunct faculty based on having/not having a certificate in online ed? If you offer the course w/o tuition for your own faculty, then compensate them at a slightly higher rate for subsequent courses taught online, would people beat a path to your virtual classroom door? Emily
Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Many thanks Cathy - some great advice. I agree - using the technology to obvious benefit (if only small gains) works well but my remit is to really push the pedagogy - we have a learning technologist that will deliver the 'how to'; my role will be the 'why to'. To give you an example of the challenge, here is a response from a colleague when I put forward the idea of e-submission and e-marking of assignments: I still find it cumbersome and irksome to use reviewing/commenting on MS Word docs "online" and I much prefer to pencil mark on paper scripts, as I know, do most of my colleagues. I can mark paper scripts anywhere, on the bus, train, bed, sofa, at home away, and all I need is a pen. I don't want to me "plugged" in to a computer any more than I already am I do understand but e-feedback (including audio) can be so much richer that pencil comments.... Clive ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of Cathy Cheal Sent: Fri 06/01/2012 15:35 To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training Good point Emily. Clive, I've found that at a public university with a heavily unionized faculty that online teaching is optional and so putting up barriers to online teaching would be counterproductive. So what we do is offer training in Moodle with pedagogy heavily embedded that is not required but heavily promoted. There are plenty of alternatives--talking with me about online course design, online handouts at: http://www2.oakland.edu/elis/moodlehelp.cfm, one-on-one technology/pedgagogy sessions with instructional designers, a faculty lab, open weekdays 8-5, staffed by students knowledgable in Moodle and other technology we have, informal brown bag Lunch Bytes sessions, mentor program, and special department sessions for any group that wants one. The key to a good workshop is to make it enjoyable and don't try to teach everything you know. Focus instead on what the participants want to know. Start out with what they have already done. Participants love to talk. You will definitely get more participants by offering technology help with pedagogy thrown in than by just offering pedagogy alone. You'll get better morale if nothing is required and your role is kept to mentoring rather than gatekeeping. This has worked for us at any rate. Cathy Catheryn Cheal, Ph.D. Assistant Vice President e-Learning and Instructional Support Suite 430 Kresge Library Oakland University cheal@oakland.edu 248-370-4566 fax: 248-370-3628
Oh I know--I have that same challenge. Lately, with accreditation emphasis on online student identity, I'm having to repudiate the idea of the "cheating" online student that I keep hearing from the business and engineering faculty. But I've found over the past 12 years that there are so many different entries into using technology in teaching, that the instructor who said that about using pencil may well find some other online tool that they end up really liking. All best with your role change! Cathy
Clive - We started on 2.x rather than 1.9, and have had to endure some surprising obstacles. We are also contracted through Remote Learner rather than on-site, so that has limited our choices in certain features as well. Overall, it is working well, with some transition struggles from both students and faculty who liked certain Bb ways and means. As Cathy Cheal just posted a moment ago, our goal in the rich media aspect has been focused on its pedagogical value rather than its glossy appearance. The instructional design value of these efforts are front and center in any proposition to use them. I am teaching a Presentation Communication course online, which presents many challenges to create an equivalent experience to practicing public speaking in front of a classroom audience. This could not be achieved without rich media components to it - it is the primary platform for practice and peer review. We had a civil argument about the use of the term "best practice" in the context of mandatories vs. allowing instructors to teach the way they see fit. We resolved, instead, to setup Moodle shells with about 4-5 required blocks under the term "recommended practice", and then let faculty add anything else they prefer - a bit of a compromise. I will say that I am biased in the value of rich media since that's my job ;-) But your concern is valid. Instead, my pitch to faculty in any given instructional problem solving situation is to first clarify the type of learning being addressed, i.e. declarative, discernment, principles, concepts, etc., and then brainstorm about what kind of activity would support it. Text options are among them, but there are so many incredible non-text tools that are actually FUN to use that it doesn't feel like a compromise. So far, faculty have been very responsive to having a new (easy) way for students to engage with instructional content. For example, we have found several uses for xtranormal.com (scripting avatars to speak in an animated movie) that support project management, interpersonal communication, foreign language, etc. Super cheap, fun to use, fresh. Last, from an institutional perspective, it may not be sufficient enough in a competitive environment to stick solely with basic ingredients. Students are becoming savvy enough to distinguish the difference between schools that are on-point with what appeals to them, and schools who are laggards. We risk being perceived as a commodity if we do not present a distinction. The tough part is in being true to our pedagogical "Hippocratic Oath" in the process! - Steve On 1/6/12 10:38 AM, "Clive Buckley" wrote: >Thank you Steve - that is incredibly helpful and it sounds as if you have >an even greater challenge than me. > >I was also interested that you just moved to Moodle. We did that for this >current academic year - that was Moodle 1.9. For next academic year we >move to Moodle 2.x and really pushing e-submission / e-assessment. This >will mean upskilling with regard to the technology - my fear is we will >lose sight of the pedagogy. Add to that there will be mandatory >requirements for Moodle sites - they MUST have x, y, z. We have not gone >down the route of rich media as essential - in our case that would simply >not work yet. We also considered a 'traffic light' or 'gold, silver, >bronze' standard for on-line provision - but sometimes that becomes a >tick box approach - simply having multi-media does not, in my opinion, >mean it is pedagogically sound. I see rich media / multi-media as the >seasoning; keep the basic ingredients simple. > >Thanks again for taking the time to share. > >Clive > > > >________________________________ > >
Clive,

We have faculty that still prefer the paper marking so there is a solution that makes everyone happy. Have the instructor print the e-submissions, grade them with pencil/pen, then scan the marked up versions which can be returned to the student electronically.

Surprisingly faculty have a happy with the solution although scanning and uploading the marked up version is additional work. Faculty are happy by providing the personal touch to students with their handwriting. The downsides are the additional steps of printing and scanning on the faculty side and illegible faculty handwriting on the student side.

-Nan
Nan Klenk, MSET | Instructional Designer | Blackboard Administrator
Lakeland Community College | 7700 Clocktower Drive | Kirtland, OH 44094
email: nklenk@lakelandcc.edu | phone: (440) 525-7450 | room: A2112 (Center for Learning Innovation)





From:        Clive Buckley <c.buckley@GLYNDWR.AC.UK>
To:        INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Date:        01/06/2012 10:49 AM
Subject:        Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training
Sent by:        The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv <INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>



Many thanks Cathy - some great advice.

I agree - using the technology to obvious benefit (if only small gains) works well but my remit is to really push the pedagogy - we have a learning technologist that will deliver the 'how to'; my role will be the 'why to'.  To give you an example of the challenge, here is a response from a colleague when I put forward the idea of e-submission and e-marking of assignments:

I still find it cumbersome and irksome to use reviewing/commenting on MS Word docs "online" and I much prefer to pencil mark on paper scripts, as I know, do most of my colleagues. I can mark paper scripts anywhere, on the bus, train, bed, sofa, at home away, and all I need is a pen. I don't want to me "plugged" in to a computer any more than I already am

I do understand but e-feedback (including audio) can be so much richer that pencil comments....

Clive




________________________________

From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of Cathy Cheal
Sent: Fri 06/01/2012 15:35
To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training



Good point Emily.

Clive, I've found that at a public university with a heavily unionized faculty that online teaching is optional and so putting up barriers to online teaching would be counterproductive. So what we do is offer training in Moodle with pedagogy heavily embedded that is not required but heavily promoted. There are plenty of alternatives--talking with me about online course design, online handouts at: http://www2.oakland.edu/elis/moodlehelp.cfm, one-on-one technology/pedgagogy sessions with instructional designers, a faculty lab, open weekdays 8-5, staffed by students knowledgable in Moodle and other technology we have, informal brown bag Lunch Bytes sessions, mentor program, and special department sessions for any group that wants one.

The key to a good workshop is to make it enjoyable and don't try to teach everything you know. Focus instead on what the participants want to know. Start out with what they have already done. Participants love to talk. You will definitely get more participants by offering technology help with pedagogy thrown in than by just offering pedagogy alone. You'll get better morale if nothing is required and your role is kept to mentoring rather than gatekeeping.

This has worked for us at any rate.
Cathy


Catheryn Cheal, Ph.D.
Assistant Vice President
e-Learning and Instructional Support
Suite 430 Kresge Library
Oakland University
cheal@oakland.edu
248-370-4566
fax: 248-370-3628

Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Steve - what a great final paragraph: "Last, from an institutional perspective, it may not be sufficient enough in a competitive environment to stick solely with basic ingredients. Students are becoming savvy enough to distinguish the difference between schools that are on-point with what appeals to them, and schools who are laggards. We risk being perceived as a commodity if we do not present a distinction. The tough part is in being true to our pedagogical "Hippocratic Oath" in the process!" I think we could have a interesting debate about this! And I totally agree with your comment about our pedagogic 'oath'. Do they [the students] know what's best for them - even more - do we know? Thanks everyone for your replies - they have me thinking which is no bad thing... Clive ________________________________
Clive, It's always a challenge to provide professional development for faculty on technology issues. My first suggestion is to be mindful of the fact that professors are very busy people. They're teaching, conducting research, mentoring students, providing service to the university, staying current in their fields, looking for funding, and so on. During a session at the Educause annual conference, a CIO and a professor recounted their first encounter. When the CIO asked why professors didn't use technology more, the professor replied, "It's one more thing." One more thing to take my time and distract me from my "real work." The same might be said of many professional development programs. It's comforting to think that if you could mandate the training, everyone would come, get trained, and the outcome of that would be professors who would use the technology elegantly and impactfully on the student experience. However, when I think of the mandatory training I've attended, it's rarely been elegant or impactful; rather it's more like being processed as a widget on an assembly line. So I submit for your consideration the idea that non-mandatory training is an opportunity for you, rather than a limitation. It will require you to take your time to craft learning experiences that will have significance for the faculty. Perhaps workshops for small faculty groups that truly engage them in using the technology and in the process of reinventing their instructional methods in response to the new modality. I would presume that the reason you want people to come is so their instruction will be engaging, meaningful, and lasting. The best way to make sure that happens is for you to lead by example and apply the same craft and dedication to the training efforts as you hope they will for their students. You are blessed with the opportunity to do this from the start in your new role. I applaud you decision to reach out to the group and hope these suggestions might be of use. Good luck in your new position! Steven Endres Senior Academic Technology Specialist 21st Century Learning DeVry University 3005 Highland Parkway Downers Grove, Illinois 60515 (630) 353-3950  direct (630) 353-9903  dept. fax sendres@devry.edu
Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Thanks Nan You know - I see the point about the 'personal touch' with hand written comments. I know of colleagues that have a database of comments that they just add to their feedback - copy and paste, hardly personal. But to scan and then uploading does seem wasteful. I love the way this discussion has moved on.... ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of Nan Klenk Sent: Fri 06/01/2012 16:09 To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training Clive, We have faculty that still prefer the paper marking so there is a solution that makes everyone happy. Have the instructor print the e-submissions, grade them with pencil/pen, then scan the marked up versions which can be returned to the student electronically. Surprisingly faculty have a happy with the solution although scanning and uploading the marked up version is additional work. Faculty are happy by providing the personal touch to students with their handwriting. The downsides are the additional steps of printing and scanning on the faculty side and illegible faculty handwriting on the student side. -Nan Nan Klenk, MSET | Instructional Designer | Blackboard Administrator Lakeland Community College | 7700 Clocktower Drive | Kirtland, OH 44094 email: nklenk@lakelandcc.edu | phone: (440) 525-7450 | room: A2112 (Center for Learning Innovation) From: Clive Buckley To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Date: 01/06/2012 10:49 AM Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training Sent by: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv ________________________________ Many thanks Cathy - some great advice. I agree - using the technology to obvious benefit (if only small gains) works well but my remit is to really push the pedagogy - we have a learning technologist that will deliver the 'how to'; my role will be the 'why to'. To give you an example of the challenge, here is a response from a colleague when I put forward the idea of e-submission and e-marking of assignments: I still find it cumbersome and irksome to use reviewing/commenting on MS Word docs "online" and I much prefer to pencil mark on paper scripts, as I know, do most of my colleagues. I can mark paper scripts anywhere, on the bus, train, bed, sofa, at home away, and all I need is a pen. I don't want to me "plugged" in to a computer any more than I already am I do understand but e-feedback (including audio) can be so much richer that pencil comments.... Clive ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of Cathy Cheal Sent: Fri 06/01/2012 15:35 To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training Good point Emily. Clive, I've found that at a public university with a heavily unionized faculty that online teaching is optional and so putting up barriers to online teaching would be counterproductive. So what we do is offer training in Moodle with pedagogy heavily embedded that is not required but heavily promoted. There are plenty of alternatives--talking with me about online course design, online handouts at: http://www2.oakland.edu/elis/moodlehelp.cfm , one-on-one technology/pedgagogy sessions with instructional designers, a faculty lab, open weekdays 8-5, staffed by students knowledgable in Moodle and other technology we have, informal brown bag Lunch Bytes sessions, mentor program, and special department sessions for any group that wants one. The key to a good workshop is to make it enjoyable and don't try to teach everything you know. Focus instead on what the participants want to know. Start out with what they have already done. Participants love to talk. You will definitely get more participants by offering technology help with pedagogy thrown in than by just offering pedagogy alone. You'll get better morale if nothing is required and your role is kept to mentoring rather than gatekeeping. This has worked for us at any rate. Cathy Catheryn Cheal, Ph.D. Assistant Vice President e-Learning and Instructional Support Suite 430 Kresge Library Oakland University cheal@oakland.edu 248-370-4566 fax: 248-370-3628
Here at Wichita State University, we have a program in which approximately 12 faculty members in January and 12 in May go through what we call, "Reboot Camp." The faculty who participate are nominated by the dean of their college and have to teach an online course within six months of completing the workshop. We have 4 1/2 days of training in which another staff member and I cover the pedagogical aspects and our 4 educational technologists cover the "how to," as you put it. None of the faculty at our campus are compelled to complete any kind of training to teach online. Each college has control over what courses are to taught online, so some courses are put online with no training whatsoever. However, the faculty who go through Reboot Camp do receive an incentive to participate (stipend plus a university-issued laptop). Unfortunately, at this point, there is no quality control in place. I am effectively the only person "managing" online here (15,000 student body, urban-serving institution), although there is no formal office for online learning. If faculty are interested, I can review their courses, but only IF they request it. Our department (Media Resources Center) does offer scheduled and individual training on software (lecture capture, LMS, etc.), and I consult with faculty every now and then on pedagogy and course design, but besides Reboot Camp, we don't offer any formal training for teaching online. Feel free to check out our schedule for Reboot Camp. https://docs.google.com/document/d/116nFAHnhY0F100YxK9DbsDrq6LsWVTIY_dinnBS arpU/edit?authkey=CPy736MP Mark Porcaro, Ph.D. Instructional Designer Media Resources Center Wichita State University 1845 Fairmount Street Wichita, KS 67260-0057 316-978-7787 mark.porcaro@wichita.edu
Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Thanks for sharing your experience Mark. You say that faculty are 'nominated' - does that mean they must do 'reboot camp'? I see also there is a 'financial' incentive - nice but I do not see that happening where I teach. (I know the Open University in the UK also give payment for such courses). As for reviewing on-line courses - I share your pain. I reviewed one recently, my offer to help was politely declined.... I shall say no more. ________________________________
Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Steven Thank you for that uplifting reply. I agree mandatory staff development is rarely successful and your response has given me encouragement - I do have an opportunity and it is up to me to seize it. Thanks again - now smiling and looking forward Clive ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of Endres, Steven Sent: Fri 06/01/2012 16:23 To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training Clive, It's always a challenge to provide professional development for faculty on technology issues. My first suggestion is to be mindful of the fact that professors are very busy people. They're teaching, conducting research, mentoring students, providing service to the university, staying current in their fields, looking for funding, and so on. During a session at the Educause annual conference, a CIO and a professor recounted their first encounter. When the CIO asked why professors didn't use technology more, the professor replied, "It's one more thing." One more thing to take my time and distract me from my "real work." The same might be said of many professional development programs. It's comforting to think that if you could mandate the training, everyone would come, get trained, and the outcome of that would be professors who would use the technology elegantly and impactfully on the student experience. However, when I think of the mandatory training I've attended, it's rarely been elegant or impactful; rather it's more like being processed as a widget on an assembly line. So I submit for your consideration the idea that non-mandatory training is an opportunity for you, rather than a limitation. It will require you to take your time to craft learning experiences that will have significance for the faculty. Perhaps workshops for small faculty groups that truly engage them in using the technology and in the process of reinventing their instructional methods in response to the new modality. I would presume that the reason you want people to come is so their instruction will be engaging, meaningful, and lasting. The best way to make sure that happens is for you to lead by example and apply the same craft and dedication to the training efforts as you hope they will for their students. You are blessed with the opportunity to do this from the start in your new role. I applaud you decision to reach out to the group and hope these suggestions might be of use. Good luck in your new position! Steven Endres Senior Academic Technology Specialist 21st Century Learning DeVry University 3005 Highland Parkway Downers Grove, Illinois 60515 (630) 353-3950 direct (630) 353-9903 dept. fax sendres@devry.edu
Message from larcaram@canisius.edu

Clive, We have a seven week, intense training which is not mandatory but strongly encouraged. We also run workshops regularly and have a site with short how- to and best practice videos. We are currently running a committee on policy where mandatory training has come up, as well as issues of compensation for instructors, ownership rights, etc. All the hot topics. :) In my humble opinion, a short, mandatory training, which experienced online instructors could opt out of with Dean approval, with a menu option of continuing education on technologies and pedagogical best practices, would be the ideal way to go. Some incentive (policy? stipend?) for continuing to grow might also break the problem of instructors "learning to teach" online once, then never expanding their tool box. My dissertation touched a bit upon this, and I've been teaching online for some time, so the choice of different trainings is important to me. Marie Larcara, Ed.D. (716) 206-4160
Clive, The faculty can decline the nomination, but in my short experience here (1 1/2 years), I have found that the faculty usually want to teach online and ask to be nominated. My biggest concern is that we are at the point where our online offerings are what I call, "Educational Kudzu." Like the invasive plant that was brought into the Southern U.S. as a "good thing" (to curb erosion), it is growing out of control in ways it probably shouldn't have. Without a central oversight with online learning, courses are developed in a scatter-shot approach that doesn't benefit the student body or the teaching faculty. It is important to note that we have no online programs, just courses. Most of our online students also take face-to-face courses on campus. For our students taking courses online is for their convenience - so they can work during the day, take care of family, etc. Good luck with your new venture. Mark Porcaro, Ph.D. Instructional Designer Wichita State University 1845 Fairmount Street Wichita, KS 67260-0057 316-978-7787 mark.porcaro@wichita.edu On 1/6/12 10:51 AM, "Clive Buckley" wrote: >Thanks for sharing your experience Mark. > >You say that faculty are 'nominated' - does that mean they must do >'reboot camp'? I see also there is a 'financial' incentive - nice but I >do not see that happening where I teach. (I know the Open University in >the UK also give payment for such courses). > >As for reviewing on-line courses - I share your pain. I reviewed one >recently, my offer to help was politely declined.... I shall say no more. > > > > >________________________________ > >
Message from orwinr@uw.edu

Very interesting conversation. I am new to my position as the Online Learning Administrator here in the Information School at the University of Washington. My experience is, and has already been pointed out, that faculty are very busy people. We have a fully online Masters in Library and Information Science and want to provide the best experience for students. We are trying something different in that knowing our faculty are busy, we have just started offering 60 minute sessions, all taught via Adobe Connect. Faculty and staff can attend from wherever they are as long as they have good Internet access and we are offering the same sessions multiple times on different days and at different times. We will be recording the sessions and plan to build a library of those recordings for staff that can't attend one of the synchronous sessions. So far, in the short time that we have tried this strategy, the results have been very positive. We hope to see similar results as we ramp up more sessions over the rest of the year. On a different note, we can't require faculty to attend any kind of training but we do offer lots of support as they develop their online courses and we are available to give them one on one help as needed. Randy ******************************************* Randy Orwin Online Learning Administrator University of Washington Information School http://ischool.uw.edu Box 352840 Mary Gates Hall, Ste 370 Seattle, WA 98195-2840 Phone: 206.616.0879 | orwinr@uw.edu
Randy - Would you please outline the goals and scope of your presentations? I'd be interested to know what the subject matter and activities in your presentation are intended to achieve. We will likely be attempting the same, and I'd hope to gain the same results. What would you say is the proportion of content, such as nuts-and-bolt orientation, instructional strategies, rich media, webtools, indicators of student stress, analytics, etc.? Thx - Steve -- Steve Covello Rich Media Specialist Granite State College 8 Old Suncook Road Concord, NH 03301 603-513-1346 Skype: steve.granitestate Scheduling: tungle.me/steve.granitestate On 1/6/12 1:13 PM, "Randy Orwin" wrote: >Very interesting conversation. I am new to my position as the Online >Learning Administrator here in the Information School at the University >of Washington. My experience is, and has already been pointed out, that >faculty are very busy people. We have a fully online Masters in Library >and Information Science and want to provide the best experience for >students. We are trying something different in that knowing our faculty >are busy, we have just started offering 60 minute sessions, all taught >via Adobe Connect. Faculty and staff can attend from wherever they are as >long as they have good Internet access and we are offering the same >sessions multiple times on different days and at different times. We will >be recording the sessions and plan to build a library of those recordings >for staff that can't attend one of the synchronous sessions. So far, in >the short time that we have tried this strategy, the results have been >very positive. We hope to see similar results as we ramp up more sessions >over the rest of the year. > >On a different note, we can't require faculty to attend any kind of >training but we do offer lots of support as they develop their online >courses and we are available to give them one on one help as needed. >Randy > >******************************************* >Randy Orwin >Online Learning Administrator >University of Washington Information School >http://ischool.uw.edu >Box 352840 >Mary Gates Hall, Ste 370 >Seattle, WA 98195-2840 >Phone: 206.616.0879 | orwinr@uw.edu > >
We have developed a face-to-face instruction training program and a video conference certification program for the faculty. We are in the process of developing a distance learning certification program. The faculty assembly voted that everyone who plans to teach in either video conference or distance learning modalities must take respective certification programs. God bless, Sam Young Chief Information Officer Point Loma Nazarene University Individualization ~ Achiever ~ Learner ~ Belief ~ Activator On 1/6/12 7:05 AM, "Clive Buckley" wrote: >Thanks Emily > >One option I thought of was to condense the course from 60 credits to 20 >= 1 semester. Trouble is I think it is all important (I guess us >educators prefer putting 'stuff' in than taking it out). But you are >right - 3 semesters is a big commitment - I have to maybe bite the bullet. > >Clive > > >________________________________ > >From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv >on behalf of Springfield, Emily >Sent: Fri 06/01/2012 14:41 >To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU >Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training > > > >I bet you'd get more people taking your programme if it took one >semester, instead of three. Do you have them do course design? They >might join up if they knew they would get help with design, as well as >advice on how to manage the course. > >Emily > >
>> On a different note, we can't require faculty to attend any kind of training but we do offer lots of support as they develop their online courses and we are available to give them one on one help as needed.<< Excellent point, Randy. Since many of us cannot mandate technology training, making it happen in a supportive and engaging way is often the right game plan. Steven Endres Senior Academic Technology Specialist 21st Century Learning DeVry University 3005 Highland Parkway Downers Grove, Illinois 60515 (630) 353-3950  direct (630) 353-9903  dept. fax sendres@devry.edu
Message from larcaram@canisius.edu

Emily, We just developed and got NYS approval for two four course certificates: Certificate in Online Teaching and Training and Ed Technologies and Emerging Media. The intent is for graduate students, but some courses may end up as part of our faculty training at some point. If anyone is interested, check out http://www.canisius.edu/education-technologies/. They are 8-week courses and fully online. Marie Larcara, Ed.D. (716) 206-4160
Message from orwinr@uw.edu

Steve, We are currently focusing on the use of synchronous communication tools, Adobe Connect in particular. Our online program is all asynchronous and we are trying to find ways to throw in little snippets of synchronous to help build the relationships student to student and student to instructor. With this in mind we are promoting the idea of virtual office hours using Connect. Initially we are doing an introduction to the tool and talking about virtual meetings and the Connect components that can be used in this type of setting. We have conversations about potential uses of Connect and give participants an opportunity to explore and experience some of the tools via the breakout rooms option. We plan on moving in to all of the things you mention as we flesh out the system. Our goal is to make sure that as we focus on some of the available technologies that instructional strategies are embedded into the instruction. The program is in it's infancy but we are very pleased with the results that we have seen so far. Randy ******************************************* Randy Orwin Online Learning Administrator University of Washington Information School http://ischool.uw.edu Box 352840 Mary Gates Hall, Ste 370 Seattle, WA 98195-2840 Phone: 206.616.0879 | orwinr@uw.edu
Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Many thanks everyone for your great advice and for sharing your experiences. It has given me food for thought. Now I have to that thought in to action. Thanks again Clive Clive Buckley BSc., MA., MEd., PhD Programme Leader: Postgraduate Certificate in E-learning (http://www.glyndwr.ac.uk/en/Postgraduatecourses/PostgraduateCertificatei...) Ysgol Iechyd,Gofal Cymdeithasol,Gwyddorau Chwaraeon ac Ymarfer School of Health, Social Care, Sport and Exercise Sciences Prifysgol Glyndwr/ Glyndwr University Ffon/ Tel: +44 (0)1978 293284 Ffacs/Fax: +44(0)1978 290008 ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of Sam Young Sent: Fri 06/01/2012 19:47 To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training We have developed a face-to-face instruction training program and a video conference certification program for the faculty. We are in the process of developing a distance learning certification program. The faculty assembly voted that everyone who plans to teach in either video conference or distance learning modalities must take respective certification programs. God bless, Sam Young Chief Information Officer Point Loma Nazarene University Individualization ~ Achiever ~ Learner ~ Belief ~ Activator On 1/6/12 7:05 AM, "Clive Buckley" wrote: >Thanks Emily > >One option I thought of was to condense the course from 60 credits to 20 >= 1 semester. Trouble is I think it is all important (I guess us >educators prefer putting 'stuff' in than taking it out). But you are >right - 3 semesters is a big commitment - I have to maybe bite the bullet. > >Clive > > >________________________________ > >From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv >on behalf of Springfield, Emily >Sent: Fri 06/01/2012 14:41 >To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU >Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training > > > >I bet you'd get more people taking your programme if it took one >semester, instead of three. Do you have them do course design? They >might join up if they knew they would get help with design, as well as >advice on how to manage the course. > >Emily > >
Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Thanks Mark Your comments: "My biggest concern is that we are at the point where our online offerings are what I call, "Educational Kudzu." Like the invasive plant that was brought into the Southern U.S. as a "good thing" (to curb erosion), it is growing out of control in ways it probably shouldn't have. Without a central oversight with online learning, courses are developed in a scatter-shot approach that doesn't benefit the student body or the teaching faculty." This is a concern I share and I like your analogy. We operate a system whereby any on-line course must have at least 25% of the on-line provision ready for review prior to validation. This is fine provided those judging the quality of that provision actually know what constitutes quality for the on-line environment. At a recent validation I attended one of the adjudicators commented that the on-line provision looked great because 'there is awful lot of it'. :-( We have an expression in the UK 'never mind the quality, feel the width'. Clive ________________________________
I'm a little disturbed to see the emphasis in this thread on getting faculty to more thoroughly use the technology.  Shouldn't the priority be, instead, on improving the student learning experience, and making it easier for the faculty member to do that?

For example: every writing teacher has had the experience of returning carefully marked-up papers to students, only to see them flip to the bottom of the last page, look at the grade, groan, and toss the paper into the trash.  So much for the time you spent on comments.  The art of paper-grading is to figure out what kind of comments will be useful to the student.  The rich user experience you mention--audio comments, etc.--is a waste of time if it is too much trouble or of too little interest for the student.  Faculty use "a database of comments" because paper grading is immensely time-consuming, and the paths to improvement are pretty familiar (I'm trying to avoid saying that we've seen most of the errors before).

A couple of suggestions about faculty development workshops: (1) find the faculty who are most successful using the mode that you are promoting, and ask them to present in your workshop.  Faculty respond to faculty better than to trainers.  (2) Note the items in such rubrics as Quality Matters which make life easier for faculty.  Much about online teaching is not obvious at the outset, and may look like extraneous, unnecessary work, but will save the instructor many headaches in the long run.

Finally: take a look at the Professional and Organizational Development (POD) list.  The PODers have been talking about faculty development for decades.
(For information about the Professional and Organizational Development (POD) Network in Higher Education visit http://podnetwork.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your subscription options, or access list archives, visit http://listserv.nd.edu/archives/pod.html Hosted by the John A. Kaneb Center for Teaching and Learning and the Office of Information Technologies at the University of Notre Dame.)
Glenn Everett, PhD
Pembroke, MA
gseverett1@gmail.com
781-293-5857
617-688-2102
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/geverett
Blog:  http://gseverett1.wordpress.com/


********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

Tom -

Your response gives me a chance to take another crack at this area.  I wasn't really happy with what I posted last time

The point I was trying to make is that this is a complex relationship.  In the F2F classroom, it's just instructor-student, and as you say, there's room for confusion in THAT dialogue.  The technology-mediated environment adds the instructional technologist and perhaps the instructional designer into the mix.  Now we have FOUR points of view about what kind of exchange should be taking place, and it's kind of a three against one situation.  Your suggested audio/ video experience represents one ideal; but the instructor may not feel that it's the best option, or that constructing it is worth the effort in that particular case; and there's still the difference between what the instructor intends and what the student chooses to take away.

I think the reference point we must all come back to is the real-world learning experience for the student.

Glenn Everett, PhD
Pembroke, MA
gseverett1@gmail.com
781-293-5857
617-688-2102
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/geverett
Blog:  http://gseverett1.wordpress.com/


Message from c.buckley@glyndwr.ac.uk

Great discussions - I am really enjoying the exchanges. To put the cat amongst the pigeons. Glenn said: The point I was trying to make is that this is a complex relationship. In the F2F classroom, it's just instructor-student, and as you say, there's room for confusion in THAT dialogue. The technology-mediated environment adds the instructional technologist and perhaps the instructional designer into the mix. Now we have FOUR points of view about what kind of exchange should be taking place, and it's kind of a three against one situation. Here is something I wrote to generate internal (Glyndwr) debate - "It seems that simply applying technology, 'because we can', does not, in itself, aid learning. Many of the 'whistles and bells' web sites that were developed to promote learning actually failed because they were technology-driven not pedagogically-driven. Teachers were guilty of handing over responsibility for the production of learning resources to the technologists; beguiled by technology, teachers forgot the central premise of learning, which is, at its core, a social experience. This dichotomy and the failure to appreciate the significance of communication held back the development of 'a single dominant learning and teaching paradigm'. Teachers, afraid of the emerging technologies, relinquished the very thing they were good at, teaching. That is not to say that new technologies do not have a role to play but we need a better understanding of how to apply these to best effect." I appreciate that the technologists out there will beg to differ... and I am looking forward to hearing your views. Regards Clive ________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE Instructional Technologies Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of G Everett Sent: Tue 10/01/2012 14:07 To: INSTTECH@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [INSTTECH] Professional Development / Training Tom - Your response gives me a chance to take another crack at this area. I wasn't really happy with what I posted last time The point I was trying to make is that this is a complex relationship. In the F2F classroom, it's just instructor-student, and as you say, there's room for confusion in THAT dialogue. The technology-mediated environment adds the instructional technologist and perhaps the instructional designer into the mix. Now we have FOUR points of view about what kind of exchange should be taking place, and it's kind of a three against one situation. Your suggested audio/ video experience represents one ideal; but the instructor may not feel that it's the best option, or that constructing it is worth the effort in that particular case; and there's still the difference between what the instructor intends and what the student chooses to take away. I think the reference point we must all come back to is the real-world learning experience for the student. Glenn Everett, PhD Pembroke, MA gseverett1@gmail.com 781-293-5857 617-688-2102 LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/geverett Blog: http://gseverett1.wordpress.com/
Close
Close


Annual Conference
September 29–October 2
View Proceedings

Events for all Levels and Interests

Whether you're looking for a conference to attend face-to-face to connect with peers, or for an online event for team professional development, see what's upcoming.

Close

Digital Badges
Member recognition effort
Earn yours >

Career Center


Leadership and Management Programs

EDUCAUSE Institute
Project Management

 

 

Jump Start Your Career Growth

Explore EDUCAUSE professional development opportunities that match your career aspirations and desired level of time investment through our interactive online guide.

 

Close
EDUCAUSE organizes its efforts around three IT Focus Areas

 

 

Join These Programs If Your Focus Is

Close

Get on the Higher Ed IT Map

Employees of EDUCAUSE member institutions and organizations are invited to create individual profiles.
 

 

Close

2014 Strategic Priorities

  • Building the Profession
  • IT as a Game Changer
  • Foundations


Learn More >

Uncommon Thinking for the Common Good™

EDUCAUSE is the foremost community of higher education IT leaders and professionals.