Lawrence C. Ragan ICDE 2001

Lawrence C. Ragan Director of Instructional Design & Development Bridging the Perception Gap: Preparing Students & Faculty for Online Success in the World Campus

By Way of Introduction Director of Instructional Design & Development for World Campus ID&D responsible for producing instructional materials for Penn State’s World Campus Faculty Development Coordinator

Program Objectives Identify “Perception Gaps” (PG) among various stakeholders Identify consequences/realities of uncorrected perceptions Identify potential methods/strategies for bridging the gap

Perceptional Gap (PG) Flexibility Preparedness Ease of use Potential Income Costs Time (development and on task) Materials distribution Students’ perception of work load and experience Expectations Roles and responsibilities

Students Faculty Staff Administrative Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

Students Faculty Staff Administrative Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

Administrators Defined University Leadership Initiative Leadership College Deans/Campus CEOs Department Head/Chairs

Administrative Perceptional Gaps Faculty Readiness PG –Over commit faculty resources –Presume skills that are not there Students Readiness PG –Over anticipate enrollment projections –Belief that technology is of interest to students

Administrative Perceptional Gaps Time to Market PG (Academic) –Ability of academic unit to respond Time to Market PG (Product) –Stress on development system Institutional Flexibility PG –Canoe/Carrier

Administrative Perceptional Gaps Media Costs PG –Underestimate development costs Lower Operational Costs PG –Increase enrollments without increase in physical space/costs Reuse of Materials PG –Copyright/royalty

Administrative Perceptional Gaps Technology Expectations PG (Use/role of technology) –Admin disappointment The Revenue Stream PG (Quick money-to-be-had) –Looking for unrealistic payback models

Students Administration Staff Faculty Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

Faculty Perceptional Gap eClassnotes = eCourse PG –Underestimate work/effort Amount of time it takes to develop an on-line course –Underestimate work/effort Team Concept PG –Misunderstanding of R&Rs

Faculty Perceptional Gap What’s It Going to Be Like PG –Difficulty/frustration in adjustment in style (faculty-centered => student-centered) –Confusion of roles & responsibilities (who’s the boss) –Level of intimacy

Faculty Perceptional Gap Logistics PG –Where instruction occurs –When instructions occur –Time commitment High Tech = High Quality PG –Use of bells and whistles

Faculty Perceptional Gap Flexibility PG –Easy way to update course content –Easy way to distribute content –Off-load instruction to “system” –Can have dialog with everyone/all the time

Faculty Perceptional Gap Interactions PG –Students will participate equally –Students will participate at all Replacement PG –Administration wants to replace faculty

Faculty Perceptional Gap Develop & Deliver PG –Increased stress Asynchronous = Infinite Time PG –Cover all possible content –Students will be interested

Faculty Perceptional Gap If a Little is Good... PG 1 Resident-education Model On-line Model

Students Administration Staff Faculty Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

Student’s Perception Gap “Easier on line” PG –Frustration with instructional demands Time-on-task PG –underestimate time required –overwhelmed

Student’s Perceptional Gap What’s It Going to Be Like PG –Difficulty/frustration in adjustment in style (faculty-centered => student-centered) –Confusion of roles & responsibilities (who’s the boss) –Student responsible

Student’s Perceptional Gap Logistics PG –Where instruction occurs –When instructions occur Immediacy of Response PG –7 x 24 access Who’s Watching PG –Admin systems

Student’s Perceptional Gap Team Orientation PG –Nature of team structures –Timing of activities Everything’s Digital PG –Mixed media

Students Administration Staff Faculty Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

Staff’s Perceptional Gaps It’s a Digital World PG –Everything need not be digital Time to Market PG –“Can’t do it in that timeframe” –All must be done

Staff’s Perceptional Gaps Faculty Skills PG –More faculty development required Content Will Come...PG –Deal with erratic input Faculty Motivation PG –Misunderstand what drives faculty

Staff’s Perceptional Gaps Pedagogy PG –Faculty may not understand High Tech = High Quality PG –Bells and whistles

Gap Strata Potential Solutions

Administration Solutions Benchmark w/other institutions Demonstrations of existing systems Faculty presentations Student/market feedback Budget/costs feedback

Faculty Solutions Faculty-to-faculty interactions Demonstrations Faculty Development workshops/seminars –FacDev 101 –Team process –Systems orientation

Faculty Solutions “Program Launch” meetings Student feedback Peer-to-peer assessment –Content check –Team development Beta test Program team feedback

Student Solutions Student training materials –WC 101 –WC Demo Orientation letter/information “First lesson” Focus Groups

Staff Solutions Professional development –Seminars –Workshops –Meetings Participate as student/instructors Participate in faculty training