more on remote teaching in this IMS blog
more on remote teaching in this IMS blog
By Dian Schaffhauser 05/22/17
a recent research project by Quality Matters and Eduventures, the “Changing Landscape of Online Education (CHLOE)” offers a “baseline” examination of program development, quality measures and other structural issues.
95 percent of larger programs (those with 2,500 or more online program students) are “wholly asynchronous” while 1.5 percent are mainly or completely synchronous. About three-quarters (73 percent) of mid-sized programs (schools with between 500 and 2,499 online program students) and 62 percent of smaller programs are fully asynchronous.
The asynchronous nature of this kind of education may explain why threaded discussions turned up as the most commonly named teaching and learning technique, mentioned by 27.4 percent of respondents, closely followed by practice-based learning, listed by 27.3 percent of survey participants.
Blackboard and Instructure Canvas dominated. Audio- and videoconferencing come in a “distant second,” according to the researchers. The primary brands that surfaced for those functions were Adobe Connect, Cisco WebEx, Zoom, Kaltura, Panopto, TechSmith Camtasia and Echo360.
While the LMS plays a significant role in online programming, the report pointed to a distinct lack of references to “much-hyped innovations,” such as adaptive learning, competency-based education systems, simulation or game-based learning tools. (my note: my mouth run dry of repeating every time people start becoming orgasmic about LMS, D2L in particular)
four in 10 require the use of instructional design support, three in 10 use a team approach for online course design and one in 10 outsources the work. Overall, some 80 percent of larger programs use instructional design expertise.
In the smallest programs, instructional design support is treated as a “faculty option” for 53 percent of institutions. Another 18 percent expect faculty to develop their online courses independently. For 13 percent of mid-sized programs, the faculty do their development work independently; another 64 percent may choose whether or not to bring in instructional design help. (my note: this is the SCSU ‘case’)
Among the many possible quality metrics suggested by the researchers, the five adopted most frequently for internal monitoring were:
From the The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv <BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Can you recommend a peer-reviewed research article that addresses the learning outcomes/learning effectiveness of asynchronous vs. synchronous teaching approaches in online courses?
We have a program that has required weekly synchronous sessions (held via Bb Collaborate) that support the otherwise asynchronous courses in the program. The department is considering making that requirement optional to accommodate worldwide learners, but there are faculty who are concerned about the impact to the learning and transfer of knowledge to the students.
Any research that addresses the differences in these teaching modalities when it comes to learning outcomes?
Thanks in advance, Kristen Kristen Brown Assistant Director, Online Learning Delphi Center for Teaching and Learning
I am happy to share my own dissertation research which specifically focused on this topic as well. Please email me and I will share. email@example.com
My note: I emailed Andy and will attach his dissertation to this blog, if interest
On Behalf Of Henri Moser
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 8:35 AM
Here is a link to my dissertation which centered on synchronous academic support for online graduate students.Best,Henri
more on synchronous online learning in this IMS blog
Special Interest Group: Learning Spaces and Instructional Technology (SIG) webinars are FREE and open to anyone. Please feel free to share this with others at your institution.
This session will describe an approach to online discussions that moves beyond the threaded message boards of D2L Brightspace, yet still maintained an asynchronous online delivery. Using teams, discussions were differentiated by product to allow students to turn in an artifact that represented their shared understanding during specific online course modules. Strategies, Technology guides, rubrics, and student feedback will be shared.
Presenter: Michael Manderfeld
Senior Instructional Designer
Minnesota State University Mankato
Notes from the previous session available here:
Active Learning Classrooms