1. Lawrence C. Ragan ICDE 2001

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

3. 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

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

5. 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

6. Students Faculty Staff Administrative Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

7. Students Faculty Staff Administrative Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. Students Administration Staff Faculty Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

14. 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

15. 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

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

17. 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

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

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

20. Faculty Perceptional Gap If a Little is Good... PG 1 Resident-education Model 23456789101112131415 1 On-line Model 23456789101112131415

21. Students Administration Staff Faculty Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

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

23. 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

24. 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

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

26. Students Administration Staff Faculty Gap Strata ON-LINE EDUATION

27. 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

28. 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

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

30. Gap Strata Potential Solutions

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

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

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

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

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

36. www.worldcampus.psu.edu LCR1@PSU.EDU