Creating Student-Centered Online Courses
Anita Samuel
University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee Enderis 644
P.O.Box 413
Milwaukee – WI 53201, USA ajsamuel@uwm.edu
ABSTRACT
As universities reach out to global audiences with online courses, it is crucial to create online courses that will ensure student success and student retention.
Successful courses are not merely content rich. They need to be structured and presented appropriately for the online environment. Course design needs to incorporate content diversity, provide support services, and create a welcoming and immersive experience for students. This presentation considers how these various factors come together and are implemented in designing an online course.
KEYWORDS
Presence; learner-centered; online courses; support;
diversity
1 INTRODUCTION
With advances in technology, the landscape of distance education has changed dramatically. The number of students taking at least one online course in fall 2011 stood at 6.7 million, which represents 32% of the student population [1]. This is an increase of over 570,000 from the previous year [1]. Furthermore, 69.1% of chief academic leaders say online learning is critical to their long- term strategy. Students are embracing online course offerings and institutions, recognizing this, are offering more options for students.
Online courses are defined as those that offer more than 80% of their content in the online platform and have no physical face-to-face meetings [2, 3].
These courses are characterized by separated learning groups that utilize interactive technology to connect “learners, resources and instructors”
[4].
The move to online education has been accompanied by challenges unique to the online environment. While students are appreciative of the flexibility of the online learning environment and the freedom it provides, they also simultaneously experience technical challenges, lack of access to support services, a sense of physical distance, and alienation.
In online environments, the contradicting paradigm is that learners appreciate the asynchronous environment and the freedom it provides and simultaneously experience a sense of isolation as a result of the lack of face-to-face interaction [5]. Online education is characterized by transactional distance [6], which encompasses distances of space and time, as well as psychological and communication space between the learner and the instructor. This sense of alienation has the potential to hamper the learning process [7].
While synchronous technologies such as e- conferencing help to alleviate the sense of alienation, technology by itself cannot assure learning, as it is only a tool to facilitate learning [8]. Another way to address the feelings of isolation is by creating a sense of presence for students. Designing courses with a focus on
“presence” engages students in the online course environment and puts the student at the center of the design process.
The purpose of this study was to consider how students respond to a course designed with a focus on presence.
2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Presence refers to the experience of a student of
being in a real classroom, in real time, with a real
person managing the learning experience [9]. It is what Lehman and Conceição [10] call, “being there” and “being together.” Students step beyond the virtual aspect of the online environment and become so immersed in it that the virtual technology is abstracted and learners experience a sense of being present in the learning environment.
When social presence is successfully created, learners feel that they are interacting with real people in the online environment and do not feel disconnected or alienated [11].
Garrison, Anderson, and Archer [12] presented the framework for a Community of Inquiry (CoI), which brings together the overlapping of cognitive presence, teaching presence, and social presence and a number of research studies have been conducted using the CoI framework. Shea, Li, and Pickett [13] in their research used the CoI model and validated the connection between teaching presence and students’ sense of learning community wherein, increased teaching presence was reflected in an increase in students’ sense of community. This reflected the same results obtained from a large-scale study of more than 2000 students in 32 institutions [14].
Zhang and Zigurs [15] in their research discovered that students’ perception of social presence was related to their perceived interaction and learning satisfaction. Bulu [16] studied presence, co- presence, and social presence in the virtual 3D environment of Second Life and also found that social presence was the best predictor of learner satisfaction. Hassell, Goyal, Limayem, &
Boughzala [17] conducted an empirical study on presence in 3D virtual worlds and found that presence increased satisfaction while interaction improved learning effectiveness.
In contrast to Garrison et al. [12], Lehman and Conceição [10] propose a comprehensive and perceptual approach to the sense of presence. They bring together types of experience, modes of interaction, and the learner dimension into creating presence. Their model of “Being There for the Online Learner” [10] puts the learner at the center of the learning process taking into account the thoughts, emotions, and behaviors of the learner which affect the learners’ experience of presence in the online environment. Lehman and Conceição [10] also extend their model to an instructional
design framework for designing courses with a sense of presence. Shin [18] postulates that perceptions of presence should not be limited to a sense of presence through time and place but should also reflect a “connection with learning resources and sources of support.” It is these various elements that are brought together into one comprehensive construct in the Lehman and Conceição [10] framework. While the CoI model has been extensively researched, the Lehman and Conceição [10] framework has not. In this study, the course was designed based on the
“Framework for Designing Online Courses with a Sense of Presence” proposed by Lehman and Conceição [10].
3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Conceptual Framework
This study was based on the developmental research framework. Developmental research is defined as “the systematic study of designing, developing and evaluating instructional programs, processes and products that must meet the criteria of internal consistency and effectiveness” [19].
Richey, Klein, and Nelson [20] identify two categories of developmental research – Type 1 and Type 2. Type 1 studies focus on an instructional product or program and address not only product design and development, but evaluation as well.
Type 2 studies focus on a particular design, development, or evaluation model and involve constructing and validating design models and processes [21]. In this Type 2 developmental research study, a course was developed based on the “Framework for Designing Online Courses with a Sense of Presence” [10]. The course was then evaluated by the students.
3.2 Sample
This study was conducted on a 16-week course at
the School of Education of a four-year university
in Midwest United States. It was a Master’s level
course; conducted completely online and contact
with the professor was established only through
emails, phone calls, or video-conferencing
technologies. The course was offered through the
university’s learning management system (LMS), Desire2Learn. In total, fifteen students enrolled for the course. Nine students had taken online courses prior to this one and were familiar with the LMS.
For the other six students, this was their first online course. At the university, faculty are given autonomous control over their course design and delivery. Hence, every online course is unique and all students were experiencing this course format for the first time.
Student response to the course was assessed at two points during the course. Mid-term and post- course evaluations were conducted. The evaluations focused on how engaged students felt in the online course, the methods employed within the course, the instructor’s role, and the content itself.
4 COURSE DESIGN
The online course was developed through a systematic process. The course was being conducted in an online format. Hence, course materials and lesson plans were already in existence. Yet, approaching the course from the
“sense of presence” perspective required a fresh perspective. The following steps were employed in developing the course.
1. Review existing material for strengths and weaknesses.
2. Convert course chapters into learning module chunks
3. Create bridges between the chunks
4. Identify the learning outcomes for each module
5. Identify activities and strategies for the modules based on the learning outcomes 6. Include elements to create a sense of
presence for learners
Ensure that support services are present
4.1 Content
When creating an online course, mere transfer of content is insufficient. Content needs to be reorganized and presented in accessible chunks and cross-platform to ensure accessibility by all students [22]. When working with an existing course that has specific associated materials, it was
necessary to review the content and identify revisions that could improve the content. The content was then translated into modules that spanned a week. The modules could not be too long in order to avoid overwhelming students.
Modules were also presented in a flexible manner so that they could be accessed at the learners’
discretion. This enabled progression through the course based on the proficiency level of each individual student. It was also important to include appropriate transitions between modules, which looked back at the previous module and ahead at what lay in the new module. This provided learners with a reference point and a sense of direction and progress.
The modules and the readings within them were not too long. The content chunks were interspersed with short quizzes and projects as an evaluative strategy by the instructor and these regular evaluations enabled the instructor to assess the progress and engagement of the learners.
4.2 Format
The content within modules was presented in a variety of mediums including videos and text files.
This was a conscious effort to appeal to the different learning styles of students. The modules were also backward designed placing the focus clearly on the outcomes that were desired in the learners. Once tangible outcomes were identified, the instructional strategies for the modules were developed. The instructional strategies were chosen on the basis of how well they facilitated attaining the module outcomes and how effectively they engaged the learner in the learning process.
The course was founded on a social constructivist framework. Students were given control over their learning process and were encouraged to share and learn from each other.
4.3 Strategies
At the beginning of the course, learners were
provided with a detailed syllabus. The syllabus
listed not only the objectives of the course and
required readings but also provided a detailed
breakdown of the modules, the readings associated
with each module, and the assessments for each module in addition to a clearly specified time frame for each module. The specific requirements for each assignment were also clearly stated so that learners were well aware of the requirements of the course before the course started. This was an important consideration, as learners tend to feel stressed as they enter the online environment.
Once learners know what is expected of them, they feel more comfortable and having time to contact the instructor and clarify doubts right at the beginning of the course is also reassuring for learners.
Wiesenberg and Willment [23], identifying factors for the success of online programs, assert that collaborative learning objectives and experiential practices assist learners who prefer relevant and immediately applicable knowledge. The activities chosen for the course were a blend of individual and collaborative activities. This provided opportunities for interaction and also the flexibility that learners prefer in an online course.
Furthermore, learners were encouraged to choose projects that were most relevant to their lives.
An extensive survey of undergraduate students conducted in 2009 [24] found that while these students who were part of the Net Generation were comfortable using technology and using it extensively, they still wanted “IT balanced with the human touch in their academic environment.”
So while students appreciate the flexibility of the online environment, they still need to be provided with opportunities for interaction. In the online environment, interaction exists between students and between students and instructor.
The course was overall, based largely on group work and group discussions. This was enabled through discussion forums where students facilitated and participated in discussions. Students were encouraged to relate readings to personal experiences.
4.4 Instructor role
The instructor is key to making students feel as if they are part of the course and to creating a sense of “being there.” For this course, the instructor began by providing students with a personal video introduction. She also created an area in the
discussion board where students could introduce themselves including sharing pictures and videos.
The instructor also made herself available through a variety of modalities through which learners could use to access her.
The students facilitated group discussions though the instructor stepped in to facilitate and guide discussions when necessary. The instructor was unobtrusively present to offer timely feedback, encouragement, and support as needed.
Within the online environment there are some students who do not participate as enthusiastically as others. If these students are not engaged in the process, their disengagement can lead to attrition.
The instructor in this course took a proactive stance and reached out to students through emails and Skype meetings and encouraged and assisted them to participate more fully in the course.
4.5 Technology
The flexibility of interaction and diversity of presentation styles was also important in consideration of technological challenges. Given the various time zones students were located in, synchronous delivery could not be mandatory.
Synchronous meetings were recorded and available asynchronously as well. Other restrictions such as lack of access to certain services such as Skype needed to be considered and accounted for. Hence, the instructor ensured that she was available to students across various media.
4.6 Support
Offering a course online also requires robust support services. Perdue and Valentine [25]
identify concerns about electronically mediated
communication and unfamiliarity with technology,
which act as deterrents to online success. Given
the multi-generational demographic of online
programs, instructors need to provide access to
technological software and hardware support. This
course was designed with an introductory module
that included specifically tailored activities that
allowed learners to familiarize themselves with the
online learning environment and the various
technologies they would use through the course. In
addition, students were provided access to a technical support line.
Support also includes assisting learners with frameworks for online interactions, public spaces for networking, library services, etc. The online course had a variety of learners, from first time online learners to learners more experienced with the environment. Therefore, clear guidelines for online interactions including discussion posts, responding to emails, and Skype sessions were provided at the beginning of the course and revisited by the instructor as necessary.
Learners enroll for an online course for various reasons including the flexibility of time and place that an online course offers. Whatever the reason, it has been recognized that online learners need the same support services provided to on-campus students [26]. Instructors, therefore, need to give students access to online administrative resources, student communities, personal services, in addition to academic services [26]. Furthermore, learners need some guidance on how to use these services effectively. In this course, the learners were given some helpful links that they could access and were then encouraged to identify other resources by themselves. This scaffolding process enabled learners to familiarize themselves with the process of locating support and resources online.
5 STUDENT RESPONSES 5.1 Content
Overall, students found the course “extremely well organized” and the content, “very useful.” The syllabus and clear instructions removed ambiguities and students reported that they felt
“very good about the course content”. As one student noted, “I don’t feel a need for more clarification.” This sentiment was echoed by others as well.
5.2 Format
Students viewed the broad scope of their assignments positively. One student commented that the “broad requirements do not set the student up for failure.” Lectures by the instructor were avoided though one student voiced that
“Some lectures by the instructor would be very helpful. These lectures can be uploaded through D2L. One lecture for each module, so 5 in total. These lectures also do not need to be long.”
This feedback highlighted the need for more variety in delivery further than what the videos provided. It was also clear that some students value direct content delivery from the instructor.
Students viewed the collaborative group project as a “weakness” of the course. They felt that there was a heavy reliance on group work which hampered their learning process. “I think the dependence on group work was a weakness”, was one response. A few students found the group project a “distancing” experience where one felt
“disconnected from the class during the group project” and the other “felt most distanced during the second module, because our group sort of disappeared for a week and a half.” Another student reported, “ I am very comfortable with the group dynamics and our interactions together.”
One student mentioned that, “it has been rewarding to feel unity with my teammates who have had similar reactions to the text.” One student astutely observed that, “My group interacts well together and I believe we keep each other up to date on group requirements.” The negative responses were related to the individual group dynamics.
5.3 Strategies
The detailed syllabus proved very successful.
Students reported that everything was “clarified in the syllabus”. They found that the “syllabus does a great job at outlining the course requirements” and
“everything has been communicated very well through the content page, examples and syllabus.”
While the group project was not received favorably by students, the group discussions had positive responses from students with 90% of students feeling that class discussions were useful and contributed to the course.
“I feel the most affirming
moments when the group
discussions are taking place and
other group members and the instructor are commenting on my input.”
Another student commented,
“I feel the small group discussions are the most engaging aspect of this course. I enjoy reading classmates interpretations of the readings and personal experiences associated with the readings.”
Students also appreciated the positive disagreement that occurred within their group discussions. They were challenged by these different ideas and felt that it helped them synthesize their learning in a more meaningful way.
5.4 Instructor role
The instructor’s role in the course and the strategies employed by the instructor were noticed and acknowledged by the students. Some student responses were as follows –
“I feel most affirmed through instructor feedback on discussions and the group project.”
“I felt most affirmed when I received private email correspondences from group members and the instructor. This made it feel like people really cared about my input and well-being.”
“The instructor was very knowledgeable and available.”
“The instructor was excellent at communication and sharing her knowledge.”
The instructor’s presence was acknowledged by all students as helping them engage with the environment.
6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
This study was conducted with a small sample. As part of developmental research, the course needs to be revised based on the feedback from students and re-tested with larger samples. A more effective assessment of the technologies used and the support services provided also needs to be
included to address the lack of feedback in these areas.
This model was tested with a course in the Humanities. This style of course further needs to be tested within disciplines in the hard sciences.
7 CONCLUSION
This course was developed prioritizing the students’ need for the sense of presence. The framework for designing online courses with a sense of presence [10] enabled us to create a course that addressed the various elements of an online course that interact to make the student feel engaged.
The flexibility of the course made it successful.
The flexibility was recognized by students to be one of the strengths of the course. Flexibility acknowledged the unique individual needs of students and makes them feel appreciated. The ability of students to utilize a variety of technologies including synchronous and asynchronous technologies enabled them to stay in contact in spite of any technological challenges they faced. The proactive stance of the instructor and the students’ ability to contact their instructor through email or telephone ensured that all students felt connected to the course and the instructor.
A combination of specifically planning content, format, and strategies for the online environment, providing robust support services, and having an involved instructor presence all enabled the success of the program.
1. Allen, I. E., Seaman, J.: Online Nation: Five years of growth in online learning, Sloan-C (2007).
2. Allen, I. E., Seaman, J.: Changing Course: Ten years of tracking online education http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/chang ingcourse.pdf (2013)
3. Simonson, M., Smaldino, S. E., Albright, M., Zvacek, S.: Teaching and Learning at a Distance:
Foundations of Distance Education, Pearson (2011).
4. Schlosser, L., Simonson, M.: Distance education:
Definition and glossary of terms (3rd Ed.), Information Age Publishing (2009).
5. Donavant, B.: The New, Modern Practice of Adult Education: Online Instruction in a Continuing Professional Education Setting, Adult Education Quarterly, 59(3), 227-245 (2009).
6. Moore, M. G.: Independent study. In Boyd R. D., Apps J. (Eds.), Redefining the discipline of adult education, pp. 16-31, Jossey Bass (1980).
7. Moore, M. G.: Theory of transactional distance. In Keegan D. (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education, pp.22-38, Routledge (1993).
8. Clark, R.: Media will never influence learning, Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29 (1994).
9. Koen, B. V.: Creating a Sense of Presence, Education, IEEE Transactions on, 48(4), 599-604 (2005).
10. Lehman, R. M., Conceição, S. C. O.: Creating a sense of presence in online teaching: How to" be there" for distance learners, Jossey-Bass (2010).
11. Sung, E., Mayer, R. E.: Five facets of social presence in online distance education, Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1738-1747 (2012).
12. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., Archer, W.: Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education, The internet and higher education, 2(2), 87-105 (1999).
13. Shea, P., Li, C. S., Pickett, A.: A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses, The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175-190 (2006).
14. Shea, P., Li, C. S., Swan, K., Pickett, A.:
Developing learning community in online asynchronous college courses: The role of teaching presence, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(4), 59-82 (2005).
15. Zhang, C., Zigurs, I.: An exploratory study of the impact of a virtual world learning environment on student interaction and learning satisfaction (2009).
16. Bulu, S. T.: Place presence, social presence, co- presence, and satisfaction in virtual worlds, Computers & Education, 58(1), 154-161 (2012).
17. Hassell, M., Goyal, S., Limayem, M., Boughzala, I.:
Being there: An empirical look at learning outcomes in 3D virtual worlds. In Americas Conference on Information Systems (2009).
18. Shin, N.: Beyond interaction: the relational construct of 'transactional presence', Open Learning, 17(2), 121-137 (2002).
19. Seels, B.B., Richey, R. C.: Instructional technology:
The definition and domains of the field, Association for Educational Communications and Technology (1994).
20. Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D., Nelson, W.:
Developmental research: Studies of instructional design and development. In Jonassen, D. (Ed.) Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (2nd ed.), pp.
1099-1130, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (2004).
21. Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D.: Developmental Research Methods: cReating Knowledge from Instructional Design and Development Practice,
Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 23-38 (2005).
22. Smith, R. M.: Conquering the Content: A Step-by- Step Guide to Online Course Design, Jossey-Bass (2008).
23. Wiesenberg, F. P., Willment, J. H.: Creating Continuing Professional Online Learning Communities, Adult Learning, 12, 5-6 (2001).
24. Smith, S., Salaway, G., Caruso, J. B.: The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology (2009).
25. Perdue, K. J., Valentine, T.: Deterrents to Participation in Web-Based Continuing
Professional Education, The American Journal of Distance Education, 14(1), 7-26 (2000).
26. Crawley, A. Fetzner, M.: Providing service innovations to students inside and outside of the online classroom: Focusing on student success, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 17(1), 7-12 (2013).
