Attachment C

 

Teaching at an Internet Distance: the Pedagogy of Online Teaching and Learning

 

The Report of a 1998-1999

University of Illinois Faculty Seminar

December 7, 1999

 

Table of Contents

1) Origin and Objectives of Seminar.......................................................................................... 5

2) The Present Status of Online Instruction................................................................................ 9

A Survey of Online Programs and Resources........................................................................... 10

Adverse Faculty Reaction....................................................................................................... 16

3) An Overview of Online Teaching and Learning....................................................................... 20

Types of Online Education...................................................................................................... 20

Types of Online Students....................................................................................................... 22

4) Elements of Good Teaching................................................................................................ 24

Traditional Classroom Teaching.............................................................................................. 24

Online Pedagogy................................................................................................................... 27

5) Teaching Evaluation........................................................................................................... 34

A Survey of Online Evaluation Literature................................................................................... 34

Critical Questions for Evaluation.............................................................................................. 37

6) Ancillary Concerns............................................................................................................. 43

7) Conclusions and Recommendations.................................................................................... 49

Footnote............................................................................................................................... 52

Bibliography.......................................................................................................................... 53

Appendix ˆ TID Seminar Syllabus............................................................................................ 58

 

 

Summary

 

In response to faculty concern about the implementation of technology for teaching, a year-long faculty seminar was convened during the 1998-99 academic year at the University of Illinois. The seminar consisted of 16 members from all three University of Illinois campuses (Chicago, Springfield, and Urbana-Champaign) and was evenly split, for the sake of scholarly integrity, between "skeptical" and "converted" faculty.

 

The seminar focussed almost entirely on pedagogy. It did not evaluate hardware or software, nor did it discuss how to provide access to online courses or how to keep them secure. Rather, the seminar sought to identify what made teaching to be good teaching, whether in the classroom or online. External speakers at the leading edge of this discussion also provided pro and con views.

 

The seminar concluded that online teaching and learning can be done with high quality if new approaches are employed which compensate for the limitations of technology, and if professors make the effort to create and maintain the human touch of attentiveness to their students. Online courses may be appropriate for both traditional and non-traditional students; they can be used in undergraduate education, continuing education, and in advanced degree programs. The seminar participants thought, however, that it would be inappropriate to provide an entire undergraduate degree program online.

 

Participants concluded that the ongoing face-to-face interaction between teacher and students, and among students themselves, was an integral part of a university education. Because high quality online teaching is time and labor intensive, it is not likely to be the income source envisioned by some administrators. Teaching the same number of students online at the same level of quality as in the classroom requires more time and money.

 

From our fundamental considerations of pedagogy we have prepared a list of practice-oriented considerations for professors who might be interested in teaching online, and another list for administrators considering expanding online course offerings.

 

Practical Considerations for Faculty:

 

i) Whom do I teach? (Sections 2,3)  The fraction of „non-traditional students is not as high as some make it out to be, but is still significant. Stemming from the baby boomlet, the number of young, „traditional students will be as high or higher than ever through the next decade. Many contexts of online course delivery, for professional training/continuing education, undergraduate education, and graduate education for both traditional and nontraditional students, are viable. There are several exceptions: first, certain types of advanced graduate work cannot be performed online, and second, traditional students benefit from the maturing, socializing component of an undergraduate college education and this requires an on-campus presence.

 

ii) How do I teach? (Sections 4,5)  Attempts are being made to use instructional technology such as real-time two-way videoconferencing in efforts to simulate the traditional classroom. With improvements in technology this mode may yet succeed, but from what we have seen, the leaders in this area recommend shifts from „traditional teaching paradigms. Two new online paradigms that appear to work well are text-based computer mediated communication (CMC) for courses that are traditionally taught in the discussion or seminar mode, and interactive, graphically based material for courses that are traditionally taught in the lecture mode. Methods are by no means limited to these two.

 

iii) How many do I teach? (Section 5)  High quality teaching online requires smaller student/faculty ratios. The shift from the classroom to online has been described as a shift from „efficiency to quality. We also believe a motivational human touch must come into play as well in the online environment, as it does in the traditional classroom. Students should feel they are members of a learning community and derive motivation to engage in the material at hand from the attentiveness of the instructor.

 

iv) How do I ensure high quality of online teaching? (Sections 2, 6, 7)  Quality is best assured when ownership of developed materials remains in the hands of faculty members. The University of Illinois‚ Intellectual Property Subcommittee Report on Courseware Development and Distribution recommends that written agreement between the courseware creator and the administration be made in advance of any work performed. Evaluation of learning effectiveness is also a means to ensure high quality. We suggest a broad array of evaluation areas that includes, but is not limited to, a comparison of learning competence with the traditional  classroom.

 

Policy Issues for Administrators:

 

i) How do I determine the worth of teaching technology? (Sections 1, 2)  On any issue involving pedagogy, faculty members committed to teaching should have the first and last say. On the other hand, faculty must be held responsible for good teaching. Online courses should not be motivated by poor instructor performance in large classes.

 

ii) How do I encourage faculty to implement technology in their teaching? (Section 7)  Teaching innovation should be expected, respected, and rewarded as an important scholarly activity. At the same time, not all classes are amenable to online delivery. To ensure the quality of a course, it is essential that knowledgeable, committed faculty members continue to have responsibility for course content and delivery. Therefore, intellectual property policies should allow for faculty ownership of online courseware. The commissioning of courses from temporary instructors should be avoided, and the university should be wary of partnerships with education providers in which faculty member have commercial interests.

 

iii) Will I make money with online teaching? (Sections 3, 5)  The scenario of hundreds or thousands of students enrolling in a well developed, essentially instructor-free online course does not appear realistic, and efforts to do so will result in wasted time, effort, and expense. With rare exceptions, the successful online courses we have seen feature low student to faculty ratios. Quality usually doesn’t come cheaply: sound online instruction is likely to cost more than traditional instruction. Some students may be willing to pay more for the flexibility and perhaps better instruction of high quality online courses. This appears to be the case for a number of graduate level business-related schools. However, it is likely that a high number of „traditional students, will continue to want to pay for a directly attentive professor and the on-campus social experience.

 

iv) How do I determine if online teaching is successful? (Sections 5, 6)  We think that a rigorous comparison of learning competence with traditional classrooms can and should be done. High quality online teaching is not just a matter of transferring class notes or a videotaped lecture to the Internet; new paradigms of content delivery are needed. Particular features to look for in new courses are the strength of professor-student and student-student interactions, the depth at which students engage in the material, and the professor‚s and students‚ access to technical support. Evidence of academic maturity, such as critical thinking and synthesis of different areas of knowledge should be present in more extensive online programs.