When we first started in 1999, we included ~10 questions in addition to our standard questions that were different for online courses. This information was particularly useful as we grew our online offerings (i.e. Would you take another online course. 93-5% answered yes consistently. How would you rate the level of interactivity between you and the instructor? Between you and the other students?) These were administered via SurveyMonkey because there were no online evaluation services back then.
Now we have a single evaluation that is administered to all students regardless of the delivery format (online, hybrid, blended, F2F or intensive) The questions were designed to be relevant regardless of the delivery format. All of these evaluations are administered online…which has its downsides (e.g. response rate is less especially compared to what was captured in F2F classes in the past.) We continue to explore ways to increase the response rate.
Reta Chaffee Director of Educational Technology-Academic Affairs Granite State College 25 Hall Street Concord, NH 03301 (603) 513-1350
+++++++++++++++++++++
On Behalf Of Krajewski, Scott Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 1:00 PM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Course Evaluations
Hi Hala, We have a standard online evaluation form for all courses. We do add 3 questions to the sports courses but otherwise we’re 100% standardized. We have a ton of info at
Patrick Patrick R. Lowenthal | Associate Professor Educational Technology, Boise State University http://www.patricklowenthal.com
+++++++++++++++++++++++
On Behalf Of Rob Gibson Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 8:39 AM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Course Evaluations
We use the IDEA evaluation framework combined with CampusLabs as the delivery engine.
IDEA is a well-established evaluation process dating back to the 1970s.
The CampusLabs delivery process (new as of about 2 years ago) provides students with a single URL to complete their evaluations – on-campus or on-line. Mobile friendly.
It uses the same base evaluation criteria across the university. (That’s how IDEA is able to substantiate reliability and validity.) IDEA is matched against a national database using a CIP code. Hence, faculty can gather comparative data of their course against other similar courses in the university, or at the national level.
While each department uses the same basic framework, there are modification that can be made. For example, custom questions can be added to the eval (these fall outside the scope of the comparative data) and the learning objectives can be modified by course, department, school, college. We have one School that has custom learning objectives for each course in their program. Objectives are set using a 3 point Likert scale.
NOTE: This webinar will be recorded and everyone who registers will receive a link after the event; in other words, for our Australian and New Zealand colleagues, no need to get up in the wee hours of the morning to participate!
Following substantial discussions with colleagues in the US and UK, we are pleased to announce our first collaborative event: Recognising and presenting student learning in the 21st century’: An international webinar on emerging practice in higher education. This session is co-sponsored by the Association for Authentic, Experiential Evidence-Based Learning (AAEEBL), Centre for Recording Achievement (CRA), and the EPAC ePortfolio Community of Practice.
Description: It is increasingly recognised that:
the learning and achievement of our students is not limited to their academic studies;
institutions need to make decisions about the extent to which they wish to recognise and value such ‘lifewide learning’ and achievements as part of the statements they make about the achievements of their graduates;
the use of ‘richer records’ of student achievements formatively can support processes of reviewing and planning, and help students set targets and take increasing responsibility for their own development;
students may need support in making use of such records with third parties such as potential employers;
in a digital world the digital presentation of such records, and the supporting evidence for these, will be increasingly important.
‘Work in progress’ on this agenda is occurring in multiple locations, including the USA (the Comprehensive Student Record project), the UK (the Higher Education Achievement Report), and Australia and New Zealand (the Graduation Statement).
Key contributors to the webinar will be:
Cathy Buyarski, IUPUI (Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis) and Helen L. Chen, Stanford University, AAEEBL and EPAC representing their institutional work and that of the broader AACRAO/NASPA Comprehensive Student Record project and national initiatives around emerging credentials in the USA.
Rob Ward, Centre for Recording Achievement on the national picture in the UK, with Trish Lunt, University of Liverpool and David Stanbury, University of Essex presenting perspectives on institutional practice.
Each will respond to questions and issues raised, and the webinar will explicitly seek to:
identify an agenda for further online discussion if appropriate.
stimulate a collection of resources, questions for future exploration, examples, case studies, and also contacts for possible collaboration and networking.
Anyone who is interested in joining this jointly sponsored webinar is welcome to join by pre-registering for the session so that we can send you a participation link. As we look to new ways to innovate and encourage greater engagement and opportunities for networking for AAEEBL members, we welcome both your enthusiasm and patience!
1. They have self- awareness. Emotionally intelligent leaders understand their own emotions and know how to manage them. They don’t speak out of frustration or anger; they control their emotions and wait to speak up until their feelings have settled and they have processed their thoughts. They don’t react in the heat of the moment but wait to respond.
2. They respond to criticism and feedback. Every leader faces feedback, some of it negative. Emotionally intelligent leaders don’t become defensive or take it personally. They listen, process, and genuinely consider other points of view, and because they’re always looking to improve, they know how to accept sincere critiques.
3. They know how to generate self-confidence. Emotionally intelligent leaders share a healthy dose of confidence but never cross the line into arrogance. When they don’t understand something, they ask open-ended questions that aim to gather information, not challenge or argue. They know how to give and take in a way that generates confidence.
4. They know the importance of checking their ego.Leaders who have to demonstrate their own importance or value are not yet connected to true leadership or emotional intelligence. Those who are know how to speak and act out of concern of others. They don’t always have to be the center of attention, and they would never take credit for the work of others. Secure in their own abilities, they’re generous and gracious to others.
5. They know how to embody empathy. Leaders with emotional intelligence can put themselves in others’ shoes. They listen with genuine interest and attention and make it a point to understand, then give back in a way that benefits themselves and others. They know how to create win-win situations.
6. They know how to engage with empowerment. The best leaders–the ones with the highest EQs–make it their mission to believe in others and empower them to believe in themselves. Instead of focusing on themselves they know it’s the power of the people that makes leadership successful, so that’s where they focus their efforts.
An article in The Conversation recently argued universities should ban PowerPoint because it makes students stupid and professors boring.
Originally for Macintosh, the company that designed it was bought by Microsoft. After its launch the software was increasingly targeted at business professionals, especially consultants and busy salespeople.
As it turns out, PowerPoint has not empowered academia. The basic problem is that a lecturer isn’t intended to be selling bullet point knowledge to students, rather they should be making the students encounter problems. Such a learning process is slow and arduous, and cannot be summed up neatly. PowerPoint produces stupidity, which is why some, such as American statistician Edward Tufte have said it is “evil”.
Of course, new presentation technologies like Prezi, SlideRocket or Impress add a lot of new features and 3D animation, yet I’d argue they only make things worse. A moot point doesn’t become relevant by moving in mysterious ways. The truth is that PowerPoints actually are hard to follow and if you miss one point you are often lost.
While successfully banning Facebook and other use of social media in our masters programme in philosophy and business at Copenhagen Business School, we have also recently banned teachers using PowerPoint. Here we are in sync with the US armed forces, where Brigadier-General Herbert McMaster banned it because it was regarded as a poor tool for decision-making.
Courses designed around slides therefore propagate the myth that students can become skilled and knowledgeable without working through dozens of books, hundreds of articles and thousands of problems.
A review of research on PowerPoint found that while students liked PowerPoint better than overhead transparencies, PowerPoint did not increase learning or grades
Research comparing teaching based on slides against other methods such as problem-based learning – where students develop knowledge and skills by confronting realistic, challenging problems – predominantly supports alternative methods.
PowerPoint slides are toxic to education for three main reasons:
students come to think of a course as a set of slides. Good teachers who present realistic complexity and ambiguity are criticised for being unclear. Teachers who eschew bullet points for graphical slides are criticised for not providing proper notes.
Slides discourage reasonable expectations
Measuring the wrong things
If slide shows are so bad, why are they so popular?
Exams, term papers and group projects ostensibly measure knowledge or ability. Learning is the change in knowledge and skills and therefore must be measured over time.
When we do attempt to measure learning, the results are not pretty. US researchers found that a third of American undergraduates demonstrated no significant improvement in learning over their four-year degree programs.
They tested students in the beginning, middle and end of their degrees using the Collegiate Learning Assessment, an instrument that tests skills any degree should improve – analytic reasoning, critical thinking, problem solving and writing.
“Framework and Terminology for Understanding Cyber-Enabled Economic Warfare,” a new report by Samantha F. Ravich and Annie Fixler for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
Cyber-enabled economic warfare is a “hostile strategy involving attack(s) against a nation using cyber technology with the intent to weaken its economy and thereby reduce its political and military power.”
For example, China’s economic theft of intellectual property from the U.S. is considered CEEW, along with Russia’s cyberattack on Estonia and Iran’s Saudi Aramco attack. The authors also contend that the U.S. sanctions on Iran using cyber means to cut off Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication access also falls under CEEW.
vlog is simply a blog in video form. In a vlog, you can share anything you might do in a blog post, such as a tutorial or a story from your life.
Consistency is best for vlogging. If you post a vlog here and there, you won’t gain much traction.
the purpose of a vlog is to help people discover you. Videos that may be suitable for YouTube but that don’t help people discover you, such as a product commercial or an introduction to your company, don’t make great vlog posts. To be discovered, think of the users who are searching for a concern, a specialty, or the answer to a question. Think about what a potential customer or audience member might want to know, create a video about the topic, and upload it to YouTube.
What It Takes to Vlog
develop a strong message before you begin your video.
the camera is a vehicle delivering your message to people. When you talk to viewers the way you talk to another person, you do much better on camera.
ROI on Vlogging
the return on investment for vlogging, you need to focus on your goals. Don’t worry about vanity metrics such as followers, likes, and subscribers. Instead, measure what actually matters for your goals. For example, if your goal is to get clients, consider how many clients you need to acquire to make the hours you put into vlogging worthwhile.
goals and milestones are important for determining your ROI.
Consistency is another element for raising your channel’s profile on YouTube. If you post a video only here and there, you don’t consistently bring traffic and grow.
‘Alternative’ Education: Using Charter Schools to Hide Dropouts and Game the System
School officials nationwide dodge accountability ratings by steering low achievers to alternative programs. In Orlando, Florida, the nation’s tenth-largest district, thousands of students who leave alternative charters run by a for-profit company aren’t counted as dropouts.
Accelerated Learning Solutions (ALS), a more than $1.5 million-a-year “management fee,” 2015 financial records show — more than what the school spends on instruction.
alternative schools at times become warehouses where regular schools stow poor performers to avoid being held accountable.
Concerns that schools artificially boosted test scores by dumping low achievers into alternative programs have surfaced in connection with ongoing litigation in Louisiana and Pennsylvania, and echo findings from a legislative report a decade ago in California. The phenomenon is borne out by national data: While the number of students in alternative schools grew moderately over the past 15 years, upticks occurred as new national mandates kicked in on standardized testing and graduation rates.
The role of charter alternative schools like Sunshine — publicly funded but managed by for-profit companies — is likely to grow under the new U.S. Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, an ardent supporter of school choice. In her home state of Michigan, charter schools have been responsible in part for a steep rise in the alternative school population. She recently portrayed Florida as a national model for charters and choice.
No Child Left Behind was supposed to improve educational outcomes for students long overlooked — including those who were black, Hispanic and low-income.
Nationwide, nearly a third of the alternative-school population attends a school that spends at least $500 less per pupil than regular schools do in the same district. Forty percent of school districts with alternative schools provide counseling services only in regular schools. Charter alternative schools — both virtual and bricks-and-mortar — in Ohio, Georgia and Florida have been accused of collecting public money for students who weren’t in classes.
Orlando schools are not unique in using alternative programs to remove struggling students from traditional classrooms. As far back as 2007, a legislative report in California warned that the state’s accountability system allowed traditional schools to shirk responsibility for low-performing students by referring them to alternative schools. The state is currently reviewing its standards for alternative schools.
Companies running schools in this niche often save costs by relying on computer programs that reduce the need for credentialed teachers. The market can be lucrative: As enrollment grew, ALS’ management fees from the schools it operates in Orange County more than doubled from $2.5 million in the 2012 school year to $5.4 million in 2015. The company says the fees pay for back-office services, such as human resources, as well as school-based support for areas such as curriculum, reading, math, security, and professional development.
The company’s affiliate — the controversial Nashville-based Community Education Partners, or CEP — contracted with school districts to serve students with behavior problems. The company, founded by a lawyer and Republican Party operative named Randle Richardson, ran schools for students who had committed disciplinary violations in cities such as Atlanta, Philadelphia, Houston and Orlando for more than a decade. Critics called CEP’s schools prison-like and dangerous, and charged that their academics were sub-par.
Join the Blended Librarians Online Learning Community for the second webcast in a series of conversations with Blended Librarians. This session explores the role of Blended Librarians by discussing with our panel how they developed their skills, how they obtained their positions, what their work is like, what their challenges are and what they enjoy about being a Blended Librarian. This panel conversation takes place on Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 3 p.m. EST with our guests J. Lindsay O’Neill, Francesca Marineo, Kristin (Miller) Woodward, Julie Hartwell, and Amanda Clossen.
Panelists
Lindsay O’Neill is the Instructional Design Librarian at California State University, Fullerton’s Pollak Library, where she designs and develops tutorials related to information literacy and library research using Articulate Storyline, Adobe Captivate, and Camtasia. She is also a faculty member in CSUF’s Master of Science in Instructional Design and Technology program. Lindsay regularly consults on effective pedagogy, instructional design, educational technology, open licensing, and accessibility. Lindsay holds a Master in Education, specializing in Educational Technology/Instructional Design, as well as a Master of Library and Information Science.
Francesca Marineo is an instructional design librarian at Nevada State College. She received her MLIS from the University of California, Los Angeles, where she discovered her profound passion for information literacy instruction. Currently pursuing a Master in Educational Psychology, she focuses on improving teaching and learning in higher education through innovative pedagogy and data-driven design.
Kristin Woodward is Online Programs and Instructional Design Coordinator at UWM Libraries. In this role Kristin consults with faculty and teaching staff to build information competencies and library resources into the framework of online, hybrid and competency based courses. Kristin also serves as the campus lead for the student-funded Open Textbook and OER Project as well as the library team lead for Scholarly Communication.
Julie Hartwell is an Instructional Design Librarian at the University of Missouri-Kansas City’s Miller Nichols Library. She serves as liaison to the Sociology, Criminal Justice, and Instructional Design departments. She contributes to the creation of library learning objects and instruction for the library’s Research Essentials program. She is a content creator and instructional designer for the New Literacies Alliance, an inter-institutional information literacy consortium. Julie is a Quality Matters Peer Reviewer. She received her masters of library and information science from the University of Iowa.
Amanda Clossen has been working as the Learning Design Librarian at Penn State University Libraries for the past five years. In this position, she has worked on projects spanning the micro to macro aspects of learning design. She has created award-winning videos, overseen Penn State’s transition from an in-house guide product to LibGuides, and was deeply involved in integrating the Libraries in the new LMS, Canvas. Her research interests include accessibility, video usability, and concept based teaching.