Universal Design for Learning

Universal design (UD) refers to the consideration of the needs for persons with disabilities in regards to physical spaces and objects.  The Principles of Universal Design (1997) are equitable use, flexibility of use, simple and intuitive use, perceptible information, tolerance for error, low physical effort, and size and space for appropriate use. See the UD poster. The Center for Universal Design described UD as a design that does not need adaption for persons with disabilities in perceiving the content or operating the program. The word ‘content’ is key to education. This means equal access to information because you don’t want someone to wait weeks while you provide a specific accommodation like closed captioning to a video lecture.

There are several efforts to design education with UD in mind. Palmer and Caputo (2003) proposed seven principles for universal instructional design (UID): accessibility, consistency, explicitness, flexibility, accommodating learning spaces, minimization of effort, and supportive learning environments. The UID model recognizes those needs for course design. Its main premise is equal access to education and extends this to all types of learners and not just those with disabilities. For example, all learners can benefit from multi-modal lessons.

I recently attended a webinar by Dr. Tobin in which he recommended these instructional strategies for UDL: 1) Start with the text. It can serve as the script. 2) Make alternatives available such as a PDF instead of Microsoft Word, so they can use the feature in Adobe products to read aloud the text. 3) Allow students to select their type of assessment choice. 4) Go step by step to break information into small chunks and provide still images for illustration when possible. 5) Set content free. By this he means to make sure it’s sharable and not tied to your choice of tool/software. Ex. MP3 audio file as output instead of the Audacity file, which students would have to know how to use to open/play. The benefits of these strategies reduce cognitive load for all learners.

UD for the web is not only for education. Legal aspects include the web design standards created by the the WWW Consortium (W3C). They produced the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG), which are promoted globally.  I use their Web Accessibility Initiative website, as a reference at work: http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.   Additionally, US federal laws include policies for equal access to Web-based information and technologies such as Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Access Board standards.  The Access Board standards are based on the WC3’s priority checklist.

Here are a few resources on UD:

References

Palmer, J., & Caputo, A. (2003). Universal instructional design: Implementation guide. Guelph, Ontario: University of Guelph.

The Center for Universal Design (1997). The Principles of Universal Design, Version 2.0. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University.

Gagne’s Instructional Sequence for Podcast Learning Module

Title page to tech project

The following instructional design strategy is based on Gagné’s (1985) nine events of instruction in which he provided a format for designing effective training by correlating internal cognitive processes with that of external instructional activities. Many K-12 school systems utilize his sequence of instructional events as a framework for lesson planning. I have previously blogged about Gagné’s work.

These are the instructional events adapted from Gagné to teach k-12 students how to upload an audio file to publish a podcast channel on Podbean.com:

1. Gain attention by first showing a short video of the purpose and meaning of podcasting by Lee LeFever.

2. Inform student of the learning objective(s).

3. Stimulate recall of prior learning by reminding them of the images and vocabulary for technical terminology. Use a KWL chart to make meaningful connections to the sample podcast and informational video with their personal experiences. Have them share these experiences with their peers.

4. Present the content in a demonstration screencast depicting examples from the actual Podbean site to enhance the retention of information. In this way, learners will be more likely to apply the information to their
own project and internalize the content.

5. Provide learner guidance by utilizing callouts (arrows, highlights, & focused lightening), labels, and screenshots in the demonstration or recorded presentation. Use a how-to guide to support the presentation and provide for students with different learning preferences scaffolded instruction. These components will help students stay on track.

6. Elicit performance by having students follow the instructions in the how-to guide and/or presentation.

7. Provide feedback by having students conduct a self-assessment or peer-assessment of their performance with a checklist. Students can read each other’s user profiles and hear the final audio products when they share the links among themselves via email.

8. Assess performance by having students submit final project link to an instructor via email.

9. Enhance retention and transfer to the task by having them send their podcast to another student and have each of them upload it to their own, therefore, replicating the process again. The teacher could also send them an audio file to upload after a week has passed to have them revisit the steps. Encourage students to upload podcasts on a monthly basis in order to rehearse the skill, and therefore, submit to long-term memory.

The complete learning module (teacher guide, CCSS, pretest, KWL chart, student checklist, rubrics, vocabulary PowerPoint, how-to guide, & posttest)  is available for sale in my TeachersPayTeachers store, Teacherrogers.

(Note. Gagné’s 9 events of instruction are italicized. These do not need to be done in this exact sequence, as this is an iterative process.)

Reference

Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Elements of Cooperative Learning and Their Application to Distance Ed

Embed from Getty Images

 

According to Wikipedia, the cooperative learning theory has been around since the 1930s and discussed by researchers from diverse fields such as philosophy and psychology. Cooperative learning involves strategic group practices and elements to aid critical thinking.  As an educator, I’m most familiar with Kagan’s (1985) approach to cooperative learning. Additionally, I learned about Palinscar and Brown’s reciprocal teaching method; their article on Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-fostering and Comprehension-monitoring Activities (1984) predates that of Kagan’s work.  Johnson and Johnson researched and wrote about cooperative learning activities in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. I learned about their work in my doctoral coursework on instructional strategies.

Johnson and Johnson (1994) were the first to describe the following five essential elements of cooperative learning: positive interdepence, face-to-face (F2F) promotive action, individual & group accountability, social skills, and group processing.  The following lists their elements and how they can be implemented in online courses.

  1. Element of Cooperative Learning: Positive Interdependence

Course Design– A) Provide example of project team roles. B) Another layer to this is to then divide the content assignment into specific components and assign them to team members.

Resources–  I modified the list that Dr. Dempsey shared in our doctoral course on instructional strategies at the University of South Alabama: team leader, timekeeper, idea monitor, QA monitor, and Wild Card (for the extra item that varies according to the content or situation).

Difference from F2F Instruction: A) Not all students will be able to meet F2F on campus due to geographic distances. B) Not all students will see information (login) at the same time. Delays can cause emotional distress to team members and create psychological distance.

2. Element of Cooperative Learning: F2F Promotive Interaction

Course Design- Include synchronous sessions with live audiovisual possibilities.

Resources– Use virtual meeting spaces such as BigBlueButton, Skype, Google+ Hangout, & Second Life

Difference from F2F Instruction: A) Students can discuss items freely without being in earshot of the teacher or other teams. B) Students need technical skills to be able to participate online. C) Meetings can easily be recorded for review.

3. Element of Cooperative Learning: Individual & Group Accountability

Course Design– Create rubric for individual and group tasks explicitly described.  Ask student to complete a peer evaluation of team members according to their assigned components.

Resources- Teacher asks students to create this for greater understanding of the requirements.

Difference from F2F Instruction- No real difference except for no F2F lecture mode to explain rubric.

4. Element of Cooperative Learning: Social Skills

Course Design– Teachers model social skills with teacher talk.  They shape students’ behavior by providing praise when appropriate actions are taken.  They provide rubrics that describe the actions such as how many times to post in forums and to whom.  Students set up their own agreed upon ground rules.

Resources– Netiquette: There are several versions out there.  There’s even a multiple-choice test that scores a students’ netiquette knowledge automatically.

Difference from F2F Instruction– A) Etiquette rules differ. B) In OL, every student gets the opportunity to respond. C) For OL, there’s a larger chance of procrastination due to the “absence” of the traditional classroom routine, physical building, seeing friends in the hallway to remind you, etc.

5. Element of Cooperative Learning: Group Processing

Course Design– Ask students to create their own set of group rules and definitions. (This was another Dr. Dempsey idea.) Monitor group work by asking to be added to their collaborative project sites.

Resources– Use Web 2.0 tools like wiki, clog, and/or Google Drive to collaborate.

Difference from F2F Instruction- A) Must decide on which synchronous and Web 2.0 tools to use and create accounts. B) Meetings include the World Map for time and date. C) May be grouped with someone that you will never meet F2F (I’m unsure of the psychological ramifications but certain this plays a role in online behavior).

References

Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1994). Learning together and alone, cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Needham Heights, MA: Prentice-Hall.

Kagan, S. (1985). Cooperative learning. San Clemente, CA: Resources for Teachers, Inc.

Palinscar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities.  Cognition and Instruction, I(2), 117-175.

Gagné’s 9 Events of Instruction for English Language Lessons

Embed from Getty Images

Note: Gagné’s instructional events have been widely adopted for instructional design purposes in multiple disciplines.  For example, K-12 school systems utilize his instructional events as a framework for lesson planning and evaluation. See my blog post on Gagné to learn more.

Teacher Preparation: Review lesson and consider content that requires scaffolding (support) such as bringing in realia or images of uncommon words, prepping for reviewing grammar or pronunciation rules, or considering practice activities and resources. These 9 events are iterative meaning you can jump around. For example, you might need to gain attention or provide feedback at different moments in a lesson. Also, ongoing assessment should occur for formative assessment checks in addition to summative assessment (test of everything they learned) at the conclusion.

  1. Gain Attention: (Simple strategies) Show images or items you plan to discuss in lesson. Practice pronouncing them. Ask if they are familiar with them. (Complex strategy) Role-play activity with ESL teachers to demonstrate situation.
  2. State Objective: Write the objectives on the board and check them off as you cover them. This helps the learner know what has been covered. Simplify the language of the objectives, so students will understand them. Use drawings for beginning levels. See list of verbs for language objectives below.*
  3. Stimulate recall of prior learning: Have you ever_____? Share experience. Tell me about ____.  Use brainstorming to illustrate information on white board. This will tap into their prior knowledge and ready their brain to receive related information for enhanced storage and retrieval.
  4. Present content: Direct instruction of lesson. Provide examples and nonexamples.
  5. Provide learner guidance: Accommodate learners as needed. Answer questions (consider ‘wait time’ across cultures may from a few seconds to minutes before a response). Guidance can be as simple as a head nod for accuracy or other total physical responses such as going up on your toes when a syllable is emphasized in a word.
  6. Elicit performance: Participants do the task individually, pairs, or whole group. Use gaming activities to make learning interactive (e.g., Hangman, Spelling Race, Mime for Guessing Game).
  7. Provide Feedback: Answer questions and assist participants one-on-one. Provide clarification verbally and in writing. Check workbook. Provide answer key and let them check their own answers in pairs.
  8. Assessment: Ask some basic recall and application questions. Ask higher order questions for analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Assessment can be as simple as raising hands for polling questions. Alternative assessments include performance or production of artifact (drawing, essay, pamphlet).
  9. Enhance retention and transfer: 1) In one word, how can you use what you learned today in your life/work? 2) Use language strategies to practice what you learned today. Which strategies will you use? Recommend appropriate strategies listed in my blog post. 3) Review newly learned material at start of next class for retention.

I prepared this instructional sequence for novice ESL teachers to prepare their lessons. I’ll definitely be adding to it. I’d love feedback/input from my ESL/EFL peers!

*Language objective verbs (Excerpted from Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2012) focus on the language functions.

Listening – tell, role play, identify, review, label, describe, define, name, match listen, recognize, pint, show, follow

Speaking – name, discuss, rephrase, summarize, explain, tell, use

Reading – preview, read aloud, find compose, construct, create, design, elaborate, specific information, identify, skim, test, infer, predict, hypothesize, invent, design explore Evaluation – choose, decide, recommend, select,

Writing – list, summarize, ask and justify, defend, support answer questions, create sentences, state and justify opinions, write, contrast, classify, record

Vocabulary Development – define isolated words, define words in context, find words and construct meaning

References

Echevarria, J., Vogt. M., & Short, D. J. (2012) Making Content Comprehensible for English Language Learners: The SIOP® Model. Pearson Education, Inc.

Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Magis Instructional Design Model for Ignatian Pedagogy

Saint Ignatius of Loyola. Engraving by C. Klauber. Wellcome M0005653

The Magis Instructional Design (ID) Model for online courses was developed by Sandra Rogers (2015) with input from the Jesuits at Spring Hill College, as subject matter experts, and her professor in instructional design, Dr. Davidson-Shivers. It’s unique in that it addresses religion, spirituality, and social justice in addition to intellectual growth.

Jesuit school educators include techniques for reflection within their units of study in order to challenge students to serve others (Korth, 1993). According to one theology professor, Jesuit educators focus instructional activities on experiential learning to engender the cycle of experience leading to reflection and further action. This is based on the dynamics of Saint Ignatius’ Spiritual Exercises from which Ignatian pedagogy is derived.

The principles of Ignatian pedagogy include context, experience, reflection, action, and evaluation (Korth, 1993). Further action and service to others is for the “greater glory of God”. Magis means doing more for God’s Kingdom (Ad majorem Dei gloriam).  The Magis ID Model is an alternative to existing ones in that it embeds the following Ignatian pedagogical layers into the systematic design of instruction to develop learners into caring leaders by addressing the whole person:

  1. Analyze Human Learning Experience Online/Offline
  2. Establish Relationships of Mutual Respect Online/Offline
  3. Tap into Learner’s Prior Knowledge & Experience
  4. Design Optimal Learning Experience for Whole Person
  5. Assimilate New Information
  6. Transfer Learning into Lifeworld
  7. Encourage Lifelong Learning & Reflections Beyond Self-Interest
  8. Learners Become Contemplatives in Action

Online Community of Inquiry

Designing for a community of inquiry (COI) loop will address the Ignatian principles of teaching to the whole person. A  COI exists when you have social presence, cognitive presence, and teacher presence. These are essential elements to the communication loop for an online COI (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). This means that learners in an online environment are involved in activities that are cognitively challenging, are able to interact with their classmates, and that the teacher is present in some way through words (e.g., text-based discussion), voice (e.g., podcasts), or person (e.g., webcast).

Bernard et al. (2009) conducted a meta-analysis of 74 online course interactions and found substantive research outcomes indicating the positive effect on learning when online educators build these types of interactions into their courses: student-student, student-teacher, and student-content. These interaction treatments (ITs) were defined as the environments and not the actual behaviors that occur within them. Through ID processes, one can design and develop these types of environments for distance education. Table 1 displays the main components of a Jesuit education, COI, and ITs, and their interrelationships.

Table 1

Comparison of Jesuit Education and Research-Based Best Practices

Jesuit Education of the Whole Person Mind Body Spirit
Necessary Elements for an Online Community of Inquiry Intellectual Presence Social Presence Teacher Presence
Research-based Best Practices for Interaction Treatments Student-content interactions Student-student interactions Student-teacher interactions

Designing Optimal Learning Experiences for the Whole Person

The Magis ID Model analyzes the type of instructional strategies used in distance education to ensure they address the whole person through cura personalis (mind, body, & spirt). Strategy selection should vary to meet the needs of diverse learners and engender higher-order thinking for cognitive presence. Selection 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. Ideally, online educators should provide active learning activities to enhance cognitive transfer of new information and skills learned to long-term memory.

Contact Dr. Rogers (srogers@shc.edu) at Spring Hill College to learn more about this ID model and how it is being used to develop distance education courses.

Application of Gagne’s 9 Events of Instruction to WDE Gaming

Application of Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction to Well Designed Educational (WDE) Gaming 

(This chart was published in my dissertation. See references below.)

Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction (1985) Comparison to WDE Gaming (Adapted from Becker, 2008 and Van Eck, 2006) Mental Processes (Gagné & Driscoll, 1988)
Gain attention Capture attention with movement, scenes, sounds, speech, and health status updates Reception
State the learning objectives Inform learner of quest and related game documentation to include limitations and cutscenes (e.g., set mood) Expectancy
Stimulate recall of prior learning Present stimulus through environmental structures that provide familiarity with obstacles or behaviors of characters Retrieval to working memory
Present content Present content according to the objectives of the game such as storyline embedded within the virtual environment Selective perception
Provide guidance Guide users with storylines, profiles, help section, map, sale of higher-level gear as you level up, hint books, friendly gamers’ verbal and nonverbal input, NPCs’ model language, and partial clues for quests found in gameplay Semantic encoding
Elicit performance Require adequate knowledge to advance to next level Responding
Provide feedback Provide feedback via speech, sounds, visuals, text, or motion directives including no motion Reinforcement
Assess performance Assess users’ performance as they progress to end goal and achieve reward for knowledge and skill Retrieval and reinforcement
Enhance retention Interweave past learning experience with new challenges; otherwise, repeat prior mistakes Retrieval and Generalization

References

Becker, K. (2008). Video game pedagogy: Good games = Good pedagogy. In C. T. Miller (Ed.), Games: Purpose and potential in education (pp. 73-122). New York, NY: Springer.

Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Gagné, R. M., & Driscoll, M. P. (1988). Essentials of learning for instruction (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Rogers, S. A. (2017). A MMORPG with language learning strategic activities to improve English grammar, listening, reading, and vocabulary (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 10265484)

Van Eck, R. (2006). Building artificially intelligent learning games. In D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning research & development frameworks (pp. 271–307). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.

5 Pitfalls of Online Teaching

Female student looking frustrated with books and computer

I took my first series of online courses for professional development in 2009. The courses were highly interactively and well-designed because they were taught by experts in the field of computer-assisted language learning. A shout-out to my professors in the Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) certificate program, Principles and Practices of Online Teaching! (See blog on this topic). Ever since then, I’ve compared online courses to those.

As a working instructional designer and current PhD student enrolled in online courses, I bring a well-rounded perspective to the topic of distance education. I’ve researched and written about how to develop an online community of inquiry. It has become my personal agenda to ensure that students taking online courses don’t get frustrated from the course design and lack of social presence and teacher presence.

Here’s a list of what I consider the top 5 pitfalls that will surely decrease student learning outcomes and student satisfaction:

  1. Lack of pattern in weekly assignments will cause confusion, especially in a hybrid (blended) course. For example, as you plan threaded discussions, quizzes, and assignments, make sure they follow a pattern. Otherwise, indicate on your syllabus any gaps in the established pattern of assignments.
  2. Numerous clicks to find content leads to frustration. To increase findability, use clear navigation practices to reduce time lost on task and frustration levels (Simunich, Robins, & Kelly, 2012).
  3. Lack of synchronous sessions to connect with the human leads to reduced achievement. To increase student achievement, include synchronous sessions (Bernard et al., 2009). Arbaugh and Hornik (2006) suggested video conferencing, voice messaging, or some other types of multimedia.
  4. Instructors not responding to students’ discussions in a timely manner could cause missed learning opportunities. There are several theories on human learning about delivering targeted instruction at the right time such as Vygotsky’s (1978) zone of proximal development that posits that a student can only attain so much without the assistance from others. Students need prompt feedback that targets their instructional needs (Arbaugh, 2001). See my blog post on instructor feedback for online courses.
  5. Lack of student-student interactions may decrease student satisfaction and student achievement (Bernard et al., 2004). Make sure students can talk to one another and share their finished projects.

Do you agree with my top 5?

References

Arbaugh, J. B. (2001). How instructor immediacy behaviors affect student satisfaction and learning in web-based courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 30, 42-54.

Arbaugh, J. B., & Hornik, S. (2006). Do Chickering and Gamson’s seven principles also apply to online MBAs? The Journal of Educators Online, 3(2), 1-18.

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.

Simunich, B., Robins, D., & Kelly, V. (2012). Does findability matter? Findability, student motivation, and self-efficacy in online courses.  Quality Matters (QM) Research Grant, Kent State University.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.