I’d like to let you know about the first edition of Universal Access Through Inclusive Instructional Design: International Perspectives on UDL from Routledge. It’s co-edited by the Society of Information Technology and Teacher Educations’s Universal Design for Learning (UDL) special interest group Co-chairs, Drs. Susie Gronseth (University of Houston) and Elizabeth Dalton (University of Rhode Island).
This book “explores the ways that educators around the world reduce barriers for students with disabilities and other challenges by planning and implementing accessible, equitable, high-quality curricula. Incorporating key frameworks such as Universal Design for Learning, these dynamic contributions highlight essential supports for flexibility in student engagement, representation of content, and learner action and expression.”
I wrote a 1-page snapshot for this book on the following: Using the YouTube Automated Captioning Tool for Video Lectures. It’s based on my work at Spring Hill College in designing its new online Theology program. See my abstract below.
“This snapshot describes the use of the YouTube automated captioning tool as a low-cost means for do-it-yourself captioning of video lectures to meet the federal guidelines for distance education. A graduate program took this approach when adapting their courses to the online environment, even though they had no prior experience with YouTube channels or captioning. With technical support from their instructional designer, they successfully launched their unlisted YouTube channels with their video lectures. In the process, they noticed how they optimized the course environment in accordance with the Universal Design of Learning (UDL) framework.”
There are many more instructional design snapshots for each chapter. Check it out! Pre-order is available at 20% discount through September 22. Free review in eBook format available for instructors considering this book for course adoption.
Gronseth, S. L., & Dalton, E. M. (Eds.). (in press). Universal access through inclusive instructional design: International perspectives on UDL. New York, NY: Routledge.
Rogers, S. (in press). Snapshot – Using the YouTube automated captioning tool for video lectures. In S. L. Gronseth & E. M. Dalton (Eds.), Universal access through inclusive instructional design: International perspectives on UDL. New York, NY: Routledge.
Association for Educational Communications and Technology
The Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) is a fantastic professional organization for instructional designers, instructional technologists, educational technology support staff, instructors, and education researchers. Why? Because they do fun stuff like ‘Breakfast with Champions’ and ‘Game Night.’ I learned about it from my professors in my doctoral program who promoted AECT and their educational technology standards to their students. AECT’s 2019 international convention will be held in Las Vegas, NV from October 21st-25th at the Convention Center. This year’s convention theme is Inspired Professional Learning. Inspired Learning Professionals. Let me know if you plan to attend so we can network and attend sessions and events together.
I’m excited to share that the following three presentations were accepted! I’m really happy to be able to lead an Inspire! session, which is a new format to provide 50-minute professional development without the extra cost. I invite you to attend my sessions below.
Host: Design and Development (D&D) Division
Magis Instructional Design Model for Transformative Teaching, Dr. Rogers
Wed, Oct 23, 10:00 to 10:20am, Convention Center, Pavilion 6 (Note: I’m first in this concurrent session.)
Description. The Magis Instructional Design Model endeavors to transform teaching online through the lens of critical pedagogy to place the human in a real-world context as much as possible through learning experiences and reflection. The goal being transformative learning experiences instead of transmissive ones that use the antiquated banking model of education. The model includes instructional strategies from the cognitive and affective domains. The Author asks for input and feedback on this model.
Host: D&D: Instructional Design in Context – Service
Roadmap to Reentry Resources in Mobile County to Prevent Recidivism Service Project, Dr. Sandra Rogers, Dr. Demetrius Semien, & Aubrey Whitten
Wed, Oct 23, 2:20 to 2:50pm, Convention Center, Ballroom C (Note: We go second in this session.)
Description. Would you like to start a service project? Consider creating a Google Map of service providers that meet a strong need in your community (food deserts, homeless shelters, or the previously incarcerated). Presenters will share their service project developing a reentry map of service providers to combat recidivism in their community. Learn to plot locations, draw pathways, and add information to a Google Map. Participants will also share what they are doing in their communities.
Host: Culture, Learning, and Technology (CLT) Inspire!
Safeguard Your Online Persona by Using Various Techniques and Technologies, Dr. Sandra Rogers
Oct 25, 9:00 to 9:50am, Convention Center, Conference Rm 1 (Note: Workshop format so bring your devices!)
Description. Have you googled yourself lately? What does the Internet search reveal about you? With each hashtag, blog post, tweet, and online project, you are building your online reputation whether you want to or not. In the absence of professional branding, your online persona brands you. Learn to curate your online personal data (e.g., Google Alert for keywords & reverse search images) and leave with an action plan.
For AECT members, I’ll place my presentation and paper on the conference online portal. For my blog readers, I’ll post my presentations to SlideShare and then embed them here once their finalized. (Forthcoming!)
In closing, the sessions at AECT are really good. The organization’s special interest groups are dynamic. Conference-goers are very open to making new friends and learning, and this includes the big names in the field. You may find yourself sitting beside David Wiley, Curt Bonk, Lloyd Rieber, Amy Bradshaw, or George Veletsianos!
The work and the placement of instructional designers vary from institution to institution. For instance, my former position was with the Library and Instructional Resources Services. My new position is with a Chancellor’s initiative for online teaching and learning. As for job tasks, if you’re the only designer on campus, you wear many hats. Conversely, you could be a part of a team with several designers. Most of the designers I know are mostly focused on designing and developing online courses, but this is not always the case. Course developers are generally instructional technologists or media specialists.
To illustrate specifically the work of an instructional designer, here are the activities listed from my resume:
Collaborated with faculty to develop 25 new hybrid and online courses for Theology and MBA graduate programs;
Conducted quality assurance reviews of all (80) online courses;
Wrote the Online Course Design Guide for faculty that addresses accessibility and copyright requirements, research-based practices for teaching and learning, and the collaboration process with the instructional designer;
Trained faculty on educational technologies, andragogy, and how to make their online courses accessible;
Supported the Schoology learning management system (LMS) administrator with troubleshooting issues, developing supporting documentation and video tutorials, and LMS adoption (Previously served as LMS administrator for eCollege);
Participated in the development of the College’s Quality Enhancement Plan;
Wrote documentation for the College’s accreditation process for distance education, conducted quality assurance checks of reports in Compliance Assist, and served on the Strategic Planning Software Support Team with IT to develop methods and identify platforms for the interchange of input from all stakeholders; and
Served on the Educational Technology Committee and co-wrote the draft Educational Technology Framework and Distance Education Policy.
Sometimes instructional designers also teach, mentor, and provide service to the community even though it is not required for staff. Here’s a list of my activities:
Co-taught undergraduate interdisciplinary course (IDS394) on digital citizenship and fact-checking online data at my college;
Co-coordinator of theNew Day Experience reentry project to reduce recidivism in Mobile County for which I supervised three undergraduate students for sociology internship course (SOC299) in 2018-2019 and mentored six student volunteers from 2015-2017;
Educause Games and Learning Steering Committee;
Board Member of Emerald Coast TESOL & professional development officer;
Mentor for Foley Center- Mentored 40 student volunteer English language teachers for the College’s migrant education night program; and
Board Member of college’s Friends of the Library.
Last, some instructional designers are also involved in research. Read my Research Statement to learn about my activities.
What about you? If you’re an instructional designer, share how this differs or relates to your work.
Active learning engages students directly in the learning process through instructional activities with differing degrees of interaction that is student-centered, whereas passive learning occurs indirectly and without interaction. The latter is often, but not always, teacher-centered. Student-centered learning emphasizes learner control and manipulation of information, so students can actively use what is learned. Students respond well when they have a participatory voice in their learning. Additionally, active learning is preferred because it triggers cognitive functioning. This is based on the cognitivist (with constructivism as a subset) educational learning paradigm.
Examples of active learning include the following:
Studio model with a teacher or student observations and feedback (e.g., writer’s workshop, art production, portfolios)
Group work (e.g., business proposals, case studies, mixed media presentations)
Gaming and simulations,
Metacognitive strategies to monitor self-learning,
Transference of knowledge to new problems and situations, and
Assessments that require analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
These can be configured to the hybrid and online environments via videoconferencing tool for synchronous conversations, forum tool for asynchronous discussions, shared drive and collaborative documents, media hosting platform, and portfolio or other platforms to share student work. Besides the general activity description and assessment piece, these digital activities require clear guidelines for interacting with each other, the content, the teacher, and the tools (e.g., group roles, peer review criteria, schedule, samples, tool guides).
What does active learning look like online?
Active learning can take on different formats, levels of engagement, and levels of complexity in setup. For example, active learning can be individually or collaboratively assigned. Online educators use the community of inquiry (COI) framework to ensure students are engaged with the content, each other, and the instructor to maximize learning. Social presence (SP), cognitive presence (CP), and teaching presence (TP) are the essential elements to the communication loop for an online COI (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). This means that online learners are involved in cognitively challenging activities for CP (i.e., analysis, synthesis, evaluation), are able to interact with classmates for SP (e.g., discussions and projects), and that the teacher or student moderator is present in some way through communication, guidance, and feedback for TP. This document covers various instructional strategies and the digital tools to engage students online through active learning as structured through the course’s primary interactions (e.g., lecture, discussions, assignments, assessments, feedback, and guidance).
Set the Stage for Active Learning
Tell your students what you expect of them in the online course. A best practice is to provide a ‘Getting Started’ folder with your syllabus, schedule, pertinent documents, and protocol for interactions (Quality Matters, 2014). For example, share course requirements for the online environment and address learning values such as the growth mindset versus the fixed mindset.
Dweck (2009) described those who underestimate their ability to learn as possibly having a fixed mindset, while those who believe that they can learn by establishing attainable goals and applying effort to learn as having a growth mindset. Students with a growth mindset want to be corrected; their ego is not tied to learning. Conversely, those with a fixed mindset do not pay attention to corrective feedback. They believe that learning should not take any effort because it is tied to their intelligence; their ego influences how they learn. Students with a fixed mindset may be resistant to active learning. See the blog post to Focus on the Process to Support the Growth Mindset of Students.
Make sure students know how to use the learning management system (LMS) prior to high-stakes assignments to reduce anxiety and to reduce the cognitive load for the overall task. Here are some useful tasks to help familiarize students with the LMS:
Student acknowledgment form submission/assignment (i.e.,, course expectations),
‘Getting Acquainted’ discussion,
Syllabus quiz to ensure students have read it, and
Poll practical experience on the course topic to better understand students’ prior knowledge on the subject and drive instruction to meet students’ needs.
The lecture, demonstration, or direct instruction of a skill is a passive learning event unless students are provided ways to interact with the content. Consider using EdPuzzle,PlayPosit, or Camtasia Studio to engage learners while watching a video lecture or demonstration with questions to answer before preceding to the next segment; these third-party premium tools provide instructors with learner analytics.
Instructional strategies. Strategy election depends on various affordances and constraints such as time and resources. For example, an activity-centered lesson is based on an interactive task and requires collaborative tools and student groupings. Content-centered lessons are passive tasks where the student generally only interacts with the content, the exception being discussions of content. Experience-centered activities require a hands-on approach to developing something or serving/working with others. The learner-centered activity provides the learner with more autonomy over their pursuit of knowledge and includes metacognitive actions for self-regulation of learning; the affordances and constraints for this type of activity are highly dependent on the task. Overall, the best practice is to utilize a variety of instructional strategies to address learner preferences. Here is a list of online instructional strategies for each type.
· Analysis of case studies
· Critically review an article
· HyperInquiry* team project
· Academic controversy** assignment
· Develop a book trailer on topic
· Write a literature review
· Complete modules on topic in computer-adapted lab/program
· Write essay
· Make a presentation
· Discuss content with peers and instructor
· Develop questionnaires
· Develop a personal model of topic
· Participate in a simulation
· Develop a workshop
· Develop a wiki on topic
· Produce a podcast on topic
· Develop a how-to guide on a procedure
· Write a blog post on topic
· Serve others as a mentor, tutor, or volunteer on topic
· Curate an art exhibit
· Peer-review of papers or projects
· Students create m/c questions for review
· Design a project
· Evaluate a program
· Write an autobiography of your interaction with topic
· Complete self-evaluation
· Develop a personal learning network
· Capture reflections in journal, audio, or video
· Curate digital books and articles on topic for lifelong learning
Notes. *HyperInquiry is like a Webquest but at a deeper level of inquiry (Dempsey & Litchfield, 2001). **Academic controversy is a debate where students eventually take on both sides of an argument.
Learning strategies. Learning strategies are ways students can engage with the course readings and other content to monitor their learning. Cognitive learning strategies include concept mapping, mnemonics, overlearning, metaphors, and similes. Embed these learning strategies into your instructional activities to build students’ brain schema on the topic and its relation to other subjects for long-term memory. Share this list of cognitive strategies with students. The difference between cognitive and metacognitive being concreteness versus meta-awareness respectively. Most students are likely familiar with the structurally cognitive ones such as concept maps but may not be familiar with the others. Share this Student Learning Organizer of Metacognitive Strategies. Tying learner strategies to your instruction will make it more inclusive.
Discussions can have well thought out open-ended questions provided by the instructor, student-generated questions, or no questions at all. For example, one instructor has had great success without providing questions in his online discussions. Instead, he tells students the purpose of discussions and that they will find suggestions for these by listening to his podcast or video lecture for that unit.
Roles. Provide structure and student agency to discussions by assigning roles (e.g., starter, responder, wrapper) and rotating those roles during the course. Additionally, this will prevent the same students posting first and everyone else waiting to reply. Student-moderated discussions provide social presence to the online community of inquiry (COI). See blog post on how to plan for an online COI.
Media. Use the audio or video recording features to share responses besides the text-based option to provide novelty and multiple means of representation. Ask students to provide a visual created by the student that illustrates their learning along with their reflection. See Google Drawing illustrating a students’ understanding of reading regarding semiotic domains. This provides both teaching presence and social presence for the online COI. The exchange of media will close the psychological distance between you and your students.
Monitor. For equity, a best practice is to create a matrix of teacher-student interactions to track your response efforts over the course of the semester. Monitoring your discussion posts will curtail various biases and ensure consistency. Set up a spreadsheet to do this and include personal information shared in the ‘Getting Acquainted’ discussion to provide a more personalized context to interactions with each student.
Highly effective tasks are those which are situated within the actual task (authentic or simulated) or end goal for your course for near transfer of information to long-term memory. This is in contrast to far transfer tasks that are related but not exact. Situated learning occurs through different modes of co-participation based on situational factors (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Learning in one situational context may not transfer to another unless it closely mirrors it and the learner is properly prepared; therefore, authenticity is crucial to the learning situation (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989).
Groupwork. Student-led projects provide student agency in the design of their own learning. Provide the parameters, team roles (e.g., team leader/organizer, researcher, writer, & presenter), and peer evaluation forms to ensure everyone participates fully. Include expectations for group grade such as everyone provides proofreading of assignment prior to submission. Encourage student groups to set up their own ground rules for group meetings and task sharing. Monitor group work by asking to be added to the document workspace such as a shared Google folder.
Presentations. As for hybrid courses, maximize the face-to-face meeting by asking students to present their work to each other during seminar sessions in their level one courses. This is referred to as flipped learning when you use class time for student activities instead of teacher-centered activities. For fully online courses, students can share their media presentations (e.g., narrated PowerPoints saved as MP4 files, podcasts, video projects) with other students in a media hosting site that allows students and teachers to provide feedback, as well as tags, titles, and captions.
How can students demonstrate mastery besides multiple-choice tests? These are still useful for testing recall. However, to engage the learner in higher-order thinking skills, we should provide alternative assessments such as project-based learning, essays, portfolios, performance, products, and presentations. These do not need to be end-of-term projects. Formative assessments can be formal or informal (practice tests, digital exit tickets, polls), which serve as comprehension checks and subsequent student feedback during the course. This is in contrast to summative assessments that test your cumulative knowledge on a topic at the end of the term. Formative assessments promote fairness by gathering evidence of students’ understanding throughout the course, which can be used to better inform/modify your instructional practices to meet students’ needs.
Testing is a learning event. Consider setting tests for multiple attempts to help students achieve mastery. This triggers new learning and/or review of content, as student revisit content for answers. Tolerance for error in course assignments also makes it more inclusionary. To prepare for a test, ask students to use the free tool PeerWise to create questions on the topic of study for each other to answer. Some instructors ask their students to submit questions for actual tests. In this scenario, students develop questions from the content according to its structure and importance.
Feedback & Guidance
Learning requires differing feedback loops offered at intervals throughout the course, hopefully, with just-in-time guidance. Feedback can come from intelligent tutors through computer adaptive programs, instructors, teaching assistants, peers, and subject matter experts from the professional field. Formats for feedback loops vary from discussions, recommended edits on a paper, rubrics, and assessments.
Rubrics. Rubrics establish the criteria and scale for various tasks such as discussions and assignments and make the expectations explicit. Rubrics provide consistency and speed with grading. Some electronic rubric features allow you to provide feedback at the criterion level and for overall performance. Additionally, you can tag your departmental student learning outcomes to these rubrics to help students understand why the task is important.
Scaffolded instructional feedback. Scaffolding instruction provides content in meaningful and manageable chunks of information. This entails providing visuals for structure, context, direction, and just-in-time definitions. For example, segment a lecture at viable points and ask reflective questions. For writing, break large tasks such as research papers into point-based phases of the writing process (e.g., outline, literature review with five citations, rough draft, final paper). Consider the universal design for learning and design for tolerance for error by providing space to practice (e.g., mock interviews/comps/presentations, tutorials, simulations).
Peer feedback. It is critical to provide guidelines and criteria for peer feedback tasks. This involves establishing roles, a clear project description, rubric, and instructions for tools used. For writing, assign a peer review of draft papers utilizing MS Word tracked changes or Google Docs suggested edits. Instructors can request access to the documents for review.
In summary, for active learning, students need the following:
Preparation for learning events,
Situated learning environments for near transfer,
Planned multimodal interactions that are cognitively challenging,
Feedback loops, and
Metacognitive strategies to monitor their learning.
Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
Dempsey, J. V., & Litchfield, B. C. (2001). Surfing below the surface of the Web: HyperInquiry. In B. H. Kahn (Ed.), Web-Based Training (pp. 229-234). Englewood Cliffs, NY: Educational Technology Publications.
Dweck, C. (2009). Developing Growth Mindsets: How Praise Can Harm, and How To Use it Well. [Presentation]. Paper presented at the Scottish Learning Festival, Glasgow. Retrieved from http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/video/c/video_tcm4565678.asp
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 2(2-3), 87-105.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Quality Matters™ Rubric Standards. (2014). Higher education rubric, fifth edition. Quality Matters Program (QM). MarylandOnline, Inc. Retrieved from https://www.qualitymatters.org/rubric
I’ll be attending my second conference of the American Educational Research Association (#AERA19) this year. The theme is ‘Leveraging Education Research in a Post-Truth Era: Multimodal Narratives to Democratize Evidence.’ It will be held in Toronto, Canada from April 5-9th at the Metro Toronto Conference Centre. I was impressed with last year’s conference but a bit overwhelmed. Hopefully, with the help of their conference app, I’ll find the sessions I need.
View this link to see the poster for Dr. Khoury and my session: Rubric to Analyze Online Course Syllabi Plan for Engendering a Community of Inquiry: Round II. Come join me on Saturday morning, April 6, from 8:00 to 9:30am in the Metro Toronto Convention Centre, 300 Level, Hall C. It’s hosted by the Division C – Section 3b: Technology-Based Environments in the subunit for Distance and Online Education. I’ll be sharing copies of my Online Community of Inquiry Syllabus Rubric.
I’ve shared our research paper on the AERA online Repository. Read this blog page to learn more about our study. My hope is that it will be replicated to validate the rubric and improve not only instructors’ syllabi but teaching and learning in distance education. Let me know if you’re interested in replicating our study.
The Association for Educational Communications & Technology (AECT) is, in my humble opinion, the premier association for instructional designers. My professors in my doctoral studies had been promoting this professional organization and their educational technology standards to their students. I finally attended the AECT conference last year and was blown away by the professional level of everyone I met and how cordial they were to newcomers. This year, their 2018 conference will be held in Kansas City, MO from October 23-27 at the Kansas City Marriott Downtown. I’ll be there, so let me know if you plan to attend. For AECT members, I placed my slides and research paper on the new conference online portal.
This time around, I’ll be presenting on my latest research and giving a workshop on the Online Community of Inquiry Syllabus Rubric that I co-developed with Dr. Van Haneghan. It serves as a great collaboration tool to provide feedback to instructors and for syllabi content analysis for action research. Here’s my schedule:
Wed, Oct 24, 9:00am to 12:00pm, Marriott, Room-Bennie Morten B
Use of Online Community of Inquiry Syllabus Rubric for Course Developers and Collaborators, Drs. Rogers & Khalsa
Remember the human is something we intuitively do in traditional face-to-face classrooms, but somehow this gets lost in distance education. If it’s only a text-based independent study, then we’ve silenced our students and treated them as mutes by not providing communication platforms that are supported in the grading criteria. Virginia Shea (1994) asks us to remember the human in the impersonal cyberspace, as part of her Core Rules of Netiquette. She was referencing politeness. I, on the other hand, am referencing the instructional goal of teaching to the whole student.
This blog focuses on the basics of computer-mediated instruction in terms of the dichotomy of transmissive (authoritarian) education versus that of a transformative one (democratic). Whenever I present on this topic at conferences, participants share that they or their peers have also encountered and endured transmissive online courses. I wonder how big the problem really is. Since first encountering this problem in 2012 as a doctoral student, I’ve dedicated my research efforts on addressing it.
Transmissive vs. Transformative
Critical pedagogies (e.g., Ignatian pedagogy and Freirean praxis) place the human in a real-world context as much as possible through learning experiences, questioning norms, and reflection. The goal being transformative learning experiences instead of transmissive ones that use the antiquated banking model of education where the teacher deposits knowledge for the student to withdraw (Bradshaw, 2017). An example of transformative learning is Ignatian pedagogy that advocates for context, experience, action, reflection, and evaluation (Korth, 1993).
Classroom interactions for transformative learning align with constructivism. “Meaningful learning, as opposed to reproductive learning, is active, constructive, intentional, authentic, and collaborative” (Jonassen, 2009, p.49). Hooks (1994) called this humanity-affirming location of possibility. The design of interaction treatments online doesn’t rely solely on synchronous sessions through web hosting with everyone present. Instead, the goal of high-quality online instruction is to avoid passive learning that requires little cognitive engagement. A good example of a transformative learning activity would be a student (or group) project where students provide each other with authentic feedback.
Interaction treatments are any direct or indirect action between and among students, teachers, and content. Besides written and spoken word, this includes nonverbal immediacy behaviors such as an instructor’s response time. The alternative, a transmissive education of information dumping, is unethical. Freire (1970) called it a corpse of knowledge. Nowadays, this is delivered by the uninformed online instructor through text-based study devoid of interactions with other students (e.g., read-write-submit). The lack of contact with others in the class is not only isolating, shielding us from social learning, but can be frustrating for some students.
Are we teaching machines to learn better than we teach humans?
I recently read an introductory book about artificial intelligence (AI) and was struck how even the old AI addressed the environment of the robot, as this is something online instructors sometimes overlook for humans. If we want to come away as winners in the man vs machine competition, when humanoids such as Erica the robot have complete human feelings and singularity occurs in 2045, we should focus on providing human interactions in online courses.
Through trial and error, AI has developed heuristics to address robots’ interaction with the environment such as the symbol grounding problem, where symbols are meaningless unless they’re grounded within a real-world context. For example, the Skydio R1 drone may become the ultimate selfie as it maps its environment using GPS, cameras, and other sensors. How often are instructors grounding the instructional content into the lifeworld of human learners?
What are the heuristics for effective human interaction in distance education?
Provide an online community of inquiry (COI) to dispel the perceived psychological distance between students and teachers in distance education to improve student learning outcomes and student satisfaction. An online COI, a sublime goal, requires consideration of the types of interaction treatments that could engender social, teaching, and cognitive presence for going beyond generative learning. These presences are the key elements for the COI loop (Garrison, Anderson, and Archer, 2000).
Technological affordances can provide humans with multimodal instruction such as narrated PowerPoints or audio feedback for teaching presence for an online COI. For example, podcasts increase student achievement and student satisfaction because they can listen to them over and over (Beylefeld, Hugo & Geyer, 2008; McKinney, Dyck & Luber, 2009; Seed, Yang & Sinnappan, 2009). Learning management systems allow for student-student discussions and the sharing of projects with opportunities for peer feedback to engender social presence in a COI. For example, Schoology’s Media Album allows students to upload their media projects for peer feedback. Projects also provide student agency in the design of their own learning.
Cognitive presence is the other component in the COI triad. Instructors generally provide this with interesting and challenging activities online that they’ve honed over the years from their F2F courses. In my two research studies (Rogers & Van Haneghan, 2016; Rogers & Khoury, 2018), the potential plans for cognitive presence have been high at the institutions; however, social presence has been average and teaching presence below average.
Designing interaction treatments (e.g., student-student, student-teacher, and student-content) will help address the psychologically perceived distance in computer-mediated courses (Bernard et al., 2009). These designed interactions need to focus on meaningful activities for the students’ lifeworld to aid their learning. Remember the human as you plan your online course; otherwise, the robots will overtake us.
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of ITs in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1243-1288. doi:10.3102/0034654309333844
Beylefeld, A. A., Hugo, A. P., & Geyer, H. J. (2008). More learning and less teaching? Students’ perceptions of a histology podcast. South African Journal of Higher Education, 22(5), 948-956. doi:10.4314/sajhe.v22i5.42914
Bradshaw, A. C. (2017). Critical pedagogy and educational technology, in A.D. Benson, R. Joseph, & J.L. Moore (eds.) Culture, Learning and Technology: Research and Practice (pp. 8-27). New York, NY: Routledge.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 2(2-3), 87-105. doi:10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6
Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York, NY: Routledge.
Jonassen, D.H. (2009). Externally modeling mental models. In L. Moller et al. (eds.), Learning and Instructional Technologies for the 21st Century; Visions of the Future (pp. 49-74). New York, NY: Springer.
Korth, S. J. (1993). Precis of Ignatian pedagogy: A practical approach. International Center for Jesuit Education, Rome, Italy.
McKinney, D., Dyck, J. L., & Luber, E. S. (2009). iTunes university and the classroom: Can podcasts replace professors? Computers & Education, 52, 617-623. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.004
Rogers, S., & Van Haneghan, J. (2016). Rubric to evaluate online course syllabi plans for engendering a community of inquiry. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 349-357. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Shea, V. (1994). Netiquette. San Francisco, CA: Albion Books.
“The more radical the person is, the more fully he or she enters into reality so that, knowing it better, he or she can transform it. This individual is not afraid to confront, to listen, to see the world unveiled.― Paulo Freire