1. Finding the Good Fit: Faculty Members, Instruction, Evidence, and Technology Patricia A. McGee, PhD Patricia.mcgee@utsa.edu Associate Professor/2003 NLII Fellow Instructional Technology Department of Educational Psychology University of Texas at San Antonio Veronica M. Diaz, PhD drvdiaz@gmail.com Instructional Technology Manager Maricopa Center for Learning and Instruction Maricopa Community Colleges Adjunct Professor, Northern Arizona University

2. Welcome Introductions Materials –Binder –CD –Presentation materials available at http://elearning- design.pbwiki.com/http://elearning- design.pbwiki.com/

3. Seminar Overview Web 2.0: Diffusion, Instructional Development and Support Understanding Faculty Members and Learners and Web 2.0 Content, Pedagogy, Assessment, and Tools

4. Part I Web 2.0: Diffusion, Instructional Development and Support

5. Web 2.0 (Twitter) and the World Simulation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgbfMY-6giY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgbfMY-6giY

6. WEB 2.0 Model of Diffusion and Other Considerations

7. 1.Blogs 2.Wikis 3.Social bookmarking 4.Document sharing 5.Social networking

8. 1.1-2% 2.2-5% 3.5-10% 4.10-15% 5.15% +

9. Sources: http://www.jeffro2pt0.com/images/web1_0-vs-web2_0.png and ttp://jensthraenhart.com/cblog/uploads/web20.jpghttp://www.jeffro2pt0.com/images/web1_0-vs-web2_0.pngttp://jensthraenhart.com/cblog/uploads/web20.jpg

10. Technology Adoption Lifecycle http://techticker.net/2008/06/06/technology-adoption-lifecycle/

11. Web 2.0 Tools and Distributed Learning Models

12. Delivery Models Proportion of Content Delivered Online Type of CourseTypical Description 0% Traditional Course with no online technology used — content is delivered in writing or orally. 1 to 29% Web Enhanced Course which uses web-based technology to facilitate what is essentially a face-to-face course. Uses a course management system (CMS) or web pages to post the syllabus and assignments, for example. 30 to 79% Blended/Hybrid Distributed Engagement Course that blends online and face-to-face delivery. Substantial proportion of the content is delivered online, typically uses online discussions, and typically has some face-to-face meetings. 80% + Online A course where most or all of the content is delivered online. Typically have no face-to-face meetings. Sloan-C, 2007 The Models

13. Buffet Model Allows the learner to complete instructional sequences at their own pace Various learning environments Various supports On-campus and distributed environments Allows students to progress through material in the way and speed that is most appropriate for them Example: Foothill College, Math My WayFoothill College, Math My Way

14. Blended/Hybrid (Replacement) Blended learning courses combine online and classroom learning activities and resources in an optimal way to improve student learning outcomes and to address important institutional issues Classroom attendance (“seat time”) is reduced Example: Estrella Mountain Community College, Learning CollegeEstrella Mountain Community College, Learning College

15. 100% Online All course activities, resources, interactions, and communications occur online, typically through an institutional learning/course management system Example: Rio Salado College OnlineRio Salado College Online

16. Models and Web 2.0 The containers Redesign approach Pedagogy Discipline

17. What models are you most active in? 1.Web enhanced (F2F) 2.Buffet 3.Blended/Hybrid 4.Online

18. INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT MODELS AND SUPPORT

19. Macro: developing national curriculum, specifying qualification standards = societal or system Micro: preparing course materials, designing learning environment = classroom Meso: designing an educational program or a course on institutional level = campus Akker, 1998; Goodlad, 1994; Romiszowski,1981

20. Program and Course Levels Inputs Goals Objectives Standards Institutional mission Goals Objectives Constituents Administrators Faculty members Staff Students Faculty members Students Program Level Course Level

21. Object (Module or Unit) and Individual Levels Inputs Objectives Technology selection Development team Designers Media specialists Technologists Granular, at course level Constituents Faculty members Students Faculty members Students Object Level Individual Level

22. Delivery models, instructional development models, and support Supporting Web 2.0 Innovation Delivery Models Instructional Development Models Support

23. Diffusion of Innovation ?

24. Experimentational Transitions Stages 1.Experimentation 2.Extension and transition 3.Standardization of support 4.Integration into curriculum 5.Diffusion Characteristics Data collection throughout Communication with campus community Innovative culture Strong connection to curriculum and disciplines Robust support for the faculty and students

25. Support Models & Innovation Relationship to development models Relationship to innovation and diffusion Centralized Experimental/pilot Decentralized None

26. WEB 2.0 AND INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES/CONSIDERATIONS

27. Quality Assurance and Web 2.0

28. Peer Course Review Feedback Course Course Meets Quality Expectations Course Revision Instructional Designers Institutions Faculty Course Developers National Standards & Research Literature Rubric Faculty Reviewers Training Quality Matters Course Peer Review Process

29. QM Certified Peer Reviewers Peer Reviewers receive full-day training to learn –How to interpret the standards (with examples and annotations) –How to evaluate a course (hands-on with sample course) Reviews are conducted by teams of three peer reviewers –Chair –Peer reviewer (external) –Peer reviewer (SME)

30. More about Quality Matters Quality Matters (QM) is a faculty-centered, peer review process designed to certify the quality of online and hybrid courses and online components A faculty-driven, collaborative peer review process Committed to continuous quality improvement Based in national standards of best practice, the research literature and instructional design principles Designed to promote student learning and success

31. The Rubric is the Core of Quality Matters 40 specific elements across 8 broad areas (general standards) of course quality Detailed annotations and examples of good practice for all 40 standards

32. Quality Matters & Alignment

33. Essential Standards that Relate to Alignment A statement introduces the student to the course and learning Navigational instructions Learning activities foster interaction: Instructor-student Content-student Student-student Clear standards are set for instructor response and availability Assessment strategies provide feedback Grading policy is transparent and easy to understand Implemented tools and media support learning objectives and integrate with texts and lesson assignments The course acknowledges the importance of ADA compliance

34. Other QM Uses College quality assurance review processes Guidelines for online/hybrid course development Faculty development/training programs Checklist for improvement of existing online courses An element in regional and professional accreditation

35. Intellectual Property & Web 2.0 How broad or inclusive? What tools or learning environments should be addressed? How is maintenance of instructional products and systems addressed? Employees or units involved in the production process, work time/course of employment issues, resources expended, or units involved? Innovation within or outside established, controlled university-owned systems?

36. Copyright Connection to models Open tools –YouTube –Wikis Faculty perceptions of copyright and fair use Liability issues Student education Best practices

37. Three Questions 1.Describe existing instructional delivery and development models for integrating technology into instruction. 2.What are your teaching and learning goals for Web 2.0 tools? 3.What are the support issues that will need to be addressed to achieve your Web 2.0 goals?