Distance Learning: Contextual Issues Cheryl M. Miller, RN BC MSN University of Phoenix

Objectives: At the completion of this course the new facilitator or instructional designer will be able to:  Apply the AT A DISTANCE instructional design framework in creating courses  Verbalize the importance of evaluation in instructional design  Verbalize the importance of maintaining academic integrity in distance learning opportunities.

Goals of Distance Learning- Student Success Roadmap  Instructor is #1  Instructors Need Training  Course Objectives Meaningful  Killer Presentation  Learn by Seeing and Doing  Real World Applications  Put Students through Paces  Promote Communication (Drummond, 2008)

Instructional Design/ Development  Instructional Design must be different for distance education learning opportunities. Challenges arise in distance education involving technology, length of course, learner characteristics, and synchronous vs. asynchronous environments.  Distance Education focuses on Learner-Centered Pedagogy  Distance learning is not just loading the lecture from the traditional classroom for students to read for themselves.

AT A DISTANCE  AT A DISTANCE combines components of ADDIE, ARCS, and is an Instructional Design framework for distance education.  Systematic planning and implementation of distance learning requires a team.  The team should include content expert, instructional designer, technology designer and/or expert, and others with a vested interest in transforming learning.  Use of scaffolding into modules and units.

Analysis  Important for engagement.  Learner characteristics  Special consideration for classroom without boundaries (age, experience, geographic location).  Prior knowledge, skills, abilities, attitudes  Instructional analysis  Scaffolding  Where will information learned be implemented?  Learning engagement and transfer  Learning policies of the organization

Technologies  Knowing what technologies can do.  What tools are available?  How do I use the technology available in the learning environment?  Which method or media will best meet the needs of learning outcomes?  Align the tool with the material, objectives, and instructor.

Affective Domain (Keller’s ARCS)  Role is to engage and empowering learners.  Attention  Relevance  Confidence  Satisfaction

Design/Develop  Design overarching plan/blueprint  Build modules  Repurpose some material  More suitable formats for student understanding

Implement  Sample instruction created  Not intended to be the full product.  Revision from experts feedback  Multiple tries until perfection  Performance objectives

Sample – Try Out- Adjustments  This stage identifies a functional draft, prototype, or deliverable to be tested in a realistic setting.  Small-scale testing, feedback from students, revisions  Try Out, Adjustment, Sample, Try Out, Adjustment, Sample until ready for roll out.

Negative Consequences  Performance Improvement Process  Is learning a punishment?  Tool testing  Frustrations for learners  Hopefully, short stage should have been found out in Try Out stage.  Time Zone differences, language differences, network connectivity issues

Completion  Functional, engaging product developed for roll out  All modules are put together to be rolled out at this stage  Syllabus formation, roll out  Update all reference texts, links, seek new additions

Evaluation/Endorse  Evaluation data is collected.  Levels of evaluation.  Different ways of evaluating? Develop 4 ways to evaluate so that the facilitator can use and re-use material without redesigning each time.  Revisions made.  Feedback from students, content experts, designers important for 360 view  All outcomes/objectives addressed  Instruction is ready for endorsement

Evaluation in Distance Learning  When one hears evaluation in distance learning they might think:  Evaluation of the student’s learning  Evaluation of the facilitator  Evaluation of the actual course  We will review today the evaluation of the student’s learning and how to evaluate learning in the distance learning setting.

Kirkpatrick’s 4 Levels of Evaluation  Level One  Reaction/Satisfaction  Level Two  Learning  Level Three  Behavior  Level Four  Results

Evaluations Possible in Distance Learning  Quizzes  Papers  Journal Entries  Second Life  Simulations  Portfolio Development  Learning Team Projects  Real Life Case Scenarios  Power Point Presentations

Evaluation and Academic Integrity  Evaluation levels affect the academic integrity of the course.  Evaluations should be meaningful, apply to the work environment, and engage the learners.  Evaluations can occur with collaboration, teamwork, and communication are essential parts of the assignment completion to help facilitate these skills in the work force.  Evaluations can be formative or informal.  Over the course of the education or in the beginning, middle, and end of the course.  What is the reason for the evaluation? Should be to verify the obtaining of performance objectives and document growth in learning.

Academic Integrity  Evaluations should also allow for academic integrity to be maintained.  If the course doesn’t change up evaluation types from time to time, academic dishonesty can be achieved.  Evaluations should engage learners, empower them to use skills and attitudes obtained in the course in a meaningful way.  Evaluations can be varied so that evaluation offers personal choice to the learner, allowing the student to use different learning methods such as verbal, kinesthetic, artistic, and reading assessments. Choice over assessment type allows for engagement, empowerment, and taking personal responsibility for life long learning.  Allowing for a choice over assessment type allows for engagement, empowerment, and taking personal responsibility for life long learning.  There is a link between academic dishonesty and professional dishonesty.

Conclusions: Distance learning is a different learning environment. Instructional Designers need to use unconventional frameworks for designing curriculum for the DL environment. AT A DISTANCE Framework Kirkpatrick’s 4 Levels of Evaluation The role of evaluation in maintaining academic integrity.

References: Bailey, W. C., & Bailey, S. (2011). Do online and lecture students view cheating differently? Review of Business Research, 11(5), Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), Retrieved from Drummond, G. (2008). Success in online education: Creating a roadmap for student success. Distance Learning, 5(4), Retrieved from Evans, A. D., & Lockee, B. B. (2008). AT A DISTANCE: An instructional design framework for distance education. Distance Learning, 5(3), Retrieved from Galloway, D. L. (2005). Evaluating distance delivery and E-learning: Is Kirkpatrick's model relevant? Performance Improvement, 44(4), Retrieved from Guzic, B., McIlhenny, C. V., Knee, D., LeMoine, J. K., Wendekier, C. M., & Demuth, B. R. (2012). Distance learning and clinical simulation in senior baccalaureate nursing education. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 2012(8), e459-e467. doi: /j.ecns Harper, M. G. (2006). High tech cheating. «Nurse Education in Practice, 6(6), doi: /j.nepr Moscato, D. R., & Moscato, E. D. (2009). A case study in implementing second life in a graduate distance learning E- commerce class. Communications of the IIMA, 9(1), Retrieved from Okomkwo, C. (2010). Sustainable assessment and evaluation strategies for open and distance learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE), 11(4), Ricci, F. A. (2013). Encouraging critical thinking in distance learning: Ensuring challenging intellectual programs. Distance Learning, 10(1), Retrieved from Small, R. V., Arnone, M. P., Stripling, B. K., Hill, R. F., & Bennett, B. (2012). The three C's of distance education: Competence, creativity and community. School Libraries Worldwide, 18(2), Retrieved from Styron, J., & Styron,R. (2010). Student cheating and alternative web-based assessment. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(5), Retrieved from Yardley, S., & Dornan, T. (2012). Kirkpatrick's levels and education 'evidence'. Medical Education, 46(1), doi: /j x