The Blended Learning Toolkit: A DIY Platform for Blended Learning Faculty Development Kelvin Thompson, Ed.D. University of Central Florida #slnsolsummit #blendkit @kthompso This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial - ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
119
Embed
The Blended Learning Toolkit: A DIY Platform for Blended Learning Faculty Development
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
The Blended Learning Toolkit: A DIY Platform for Blended Learning Faculty Development
Kelvin Thompson, Ed.D.University of Central Florida
#slnsolsummit #blendkit
@kthompso
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
Caveats• No widely accepted definition of blended learning• Blended = “best/worst of both worlds”• Blended learning best conceptualized as f2f-enhanced web
course• Integration of f2f and online is perhaps the most elusive of
concepts for blended instructors• Materials shared here are targeted at those transitioning
from f2f-only experience but may be applicable to those with prior online or blended experience
• No one-size-fits-all answers• Goal: Provide resources you can include in faculty
development for blended learning
3
Caveats
• Please follow along! (short urls throughout)• Polls interspersed throughout
– Text messaging (send to 37607)– Twitter (tweet to @poll)– Web site (go to http://PollEv.com/blendkit)
• Specific codes to use for each response option on each poll
• A LOT to introduce, so please jot down thoughts for the end
Student Satisfaction in Fully Online and Blended Courses
39%
Fully online (N = 1,526)Blended (N = 485)
41%
11% 9%
Very SatisfiedUnsatisfiedSatisfied
Neutral
38%44%
9%
Very Unsatisfied
3%5%
1%
Per
cent
Faculty Willingness to Teach Web/Blended Courses in the Future
Positive
Neutralor
negativeOnlinen=71
BlendedN=53
Modality
81%
16%
2%
69%
13%
10%6% 4%
DefinitelyProbablyProbably notDefinitely not
OVERVIEWThe Blended Learning Toolkit
16
UCF/AASCU NGLC Project Overview
• Scale the proven UCF Blended Learning model via the national AASCU network of more than 420 institutions and systems
• Starting with 20 targeted schools selected for their alignment with NGLC objectives (under 26, low income)
17
Scale UCF Model of Blended Learning
• Across 20 AASCU institutions and 11 states
18
PartnersIndividual Institutions State Coordinating Institutions State Participating Institutions
Columbus State University Missouri Harris-Stowe State University
Fayetteville State University
Southeast Missouri State University
Lincoln University of Missouri
Grambling State University Missouri Southern State University
Northwestern State University (LA) Missouri State University
Indiana University Kokomo University of Missouri-St. Louis
Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Alabama University of North Alabama
The College at Brockport, State University of New York
Troy University University of South Alabama
Thomas Edison State College Minnesota St. Cloud State University
University of Maine at Fort Kent Winona State University
19
20
Project Overview• An open educational resource (OER) Blended
Learning Toolkit containing:– Best practices, strategies, models, and course
design principles.– Two OER prototype courses in Composition and
Algebra. – Faculty development resources– Assessment and data collection protocols, including
survey instruments and standards.
21
Goals for BlendKit Course
• Design and develop your blended learning course
• Consideration of key issues related to blended learning and practical guidance in helping you produce actual materials for your blended course (i.e., from design documents through creating content pages to peer review feedback at your own institutions).
22
BlendKit Course Materials
• Instructional modules• BlendKit Reader• Do-It-Yourself design tasks• Recordings of interdisciplinary faculty interviews• Recordings of online webinar discussions with
Task 01: Conceptualize Your Blended Learning CourseTask 02: Design for Interaction in Your Blended Learning CourseTask 03: Decide Upon Assessments of Learning in Your Blended Learning CourseTask 04: Develop Content/Assignment Pages for Your Blended Learning CourseTask 05: Assure Quality in Your Blended Learning Course
COURSE BLUEPRINTTask 01: Conceptualize Your Blended Course
40
41
42
43
44
45
Course Blueprint
• Easily by-passed, but don’t!• High level overview mapping course goals to
assignments• Use electronic version or just do it on a piece of paper
– Word template looks cool but doc versions may cause problems
• May be “in your head,” but get it out on paper• Ignore delivery mode (f2f v. online) initially
– Focus on identifying the best activities to achieve the course goals
46
MIX MAPTask 01: Conceptualize Your Blended Course
47
48
49
50
Mix Map• Identify a mode (f2f, online, both) for all components• Suggested approach – online course with face-to-face
enhancements• How to decide on delivery mode:
– Start with your absolutes - What has to be delivered face-to-face or online? What works best in one environment v. the other?
– Next – What will work in either environment?– Note: You may need to modify an existing activity to fit a new
delivery mode. (See Task 3)
• Map out your overall strategy paying particular attention to how the two environments integrate– Integration is the single most challenging issue in blended learning!
51
CREATE COURSE DOCUMENT DRAFTS
Task 02: Design for Interaction
52
53
54
55
56
Create Course Documents
• Emphasis on single-purpose online documents (Neidorf, 2006)
• Making the formerly implicit (f2f) explicit (online)
• Clear articulation of student expectations• Some people prefer “print-friendly”
versions (e.g., pdf) over HTML – TIP: See accessibility guidelines!
57
USING ZAPTTask 02: Design for Interaction
58
59
60
61
62
Using Zapt
• HTML is truly cross-platform (all can view)• Accessible HTML avoids weird code• Zapt tool is very easy if initial set-up doesn’t
scare you away!• Note: Formatting instructions (CSS files) are
housed on UCF servers– Pro: Immediate set-up– Con: Must upload to preview
Trusting that we’ll keep them online63
MODULE INTERACTION WORKSHEET
Task 02: Design for Interaction
64
65
66
67
68
Module Interaction Worksheet
• Builds upon Blueprint and Mix Map tasks• Sets the stage for Creating Module Pages• Assumes that one will be developing
online modules– Several questions useful for designing
interaction independent of module– Possibly think “weeks” instead of modules
• Another opportunity to consider integration of f2f and online
69
ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONSTask 03: Decide Upon Assessments of Learning
70
71
72
73
Assignment Instructions• Remember to revise Blueprint and Course Docs as ideas evolve!
• Goal: Standalone documents with perfect clarity of expectations• The clearer the written communication, the more time is freed for f2f activities.
• Goal: Make the formerly implicit explicit– However, written instructions could be distributed f2f or online.
• Make sure students understand how each assignment links online and f2f • Do not duplicate assignments or content between f2f and online
– Ex: Reading assignments as homework and then cover content in class. Make sure class discussion covers items subject to confusion and expands on reading through examples, case studies, etc.
– If online assignment is an extension of f2f discussion/activity, ensure students understand what needs to be added or expanded in the online assignment.
74
CONFIGURE ONLINE QUIZ SETTINGSTask 03: Decide Upon Assessments of Learning
75
76
77
Configure Online Quiz Settings
• A primer for online assessment– Minimize motivation for cheating– Examine biases for assessment in one mode
over another– Make assumptions explicit (e.g., collaboration,
etc.)– Opportunity to review cognitive level of existing
assessments
• Specifics will be determined by your CMS/testing software