Throughout my doctoral study and in my work as an instructor in the Integration of Technology in Schools graduate cohort program, I have concentrated on learning about, designing for, and instructing in online environments. I believe that faculty who have the knowledge and experience in developing online learning environments that result in successful student learning need to take the lead in not only researching the use of online learning environments but also in educating colleagues in best practices of online course design and instruction.The issue that I would like to focus on for this study is quality in online learning environments used in higher education and specifically here at George Mason University.
I believe this topic is an important issure for several reasons. First, online education is no longer an emerging trend in U.S. higher education. With 65% of graduate programs in the U.S. offering online options and 56% of U.S. universities and colleges indicating online education is a critical long-term strategy (Allen & Seaman, 2005), online education plays a formidable role in U.S. higher education today. It is therefore likely that educators who offer only traditional approaches will come face to face with decisions about offering online options, joining the ranks of online educators who provided online learning experiences to the 2.35 million online students enrolled in 2004 (Allen & Seaman, 2005).
Second, students are the driving force behind this increase use of online and many are entering the higher education scene as digital natives (Prensky, 2005). Through their early experiences with various online technology tools, digital natives have the understanding about how these tools impact their life and research suggests that they have developed different thinking patterns (Prensky, 2005). Are the university digital immigrants, faculty who generally create and instruct online courses, developing online learning experiences that challenge the digital native? Higher education institutes risk declining enrollment in online courses should students perceive online courses as not meeting learning needs.
Third, there is a concern about the quality of online learning currently offered in higher education. The literature suggests that most online learning environments are simply frameworks to impart inert knowledge rather than promote learning and active knowledge (Herrington, Reeves, & Oliver, 2005). This concern necessitates an investigation of available online learning environments and the impact of design on the learning experience of students.
Fourth, we do not know what the state of online learning is here at the University. Some courses are not published as online courses in the course catalogs because instructors may opt to offer a particular face to face course in online form for various reasons. Also there is not a systematic, University-wide student evaluation form designed for online courses and therefore, no official assessment of these courses or the online instructor.
Finally, my experiences as an online instructor and a PhD. student have both influenced my beliefs about online learning. I have had conversations with students who have expressed negative comments specifically related to their learning experiences within the course management system (CMS) framework (i.e. Blackboard and WebCT). Through informal conversation, I have detected a frustration with online learning environments that do not provide meaningful experiences. It is my belief that online courses offered by the University are not promoting active knowledge and are simply used as a means for students to acquire information.
As an instructor of online courses, I know the amount of time and knowledge it takes to design an online course, including making decisions about content, the pedagogical model in which the course will framed, the instructional strategies to support that model, and the best tools for the job, the delivery methods, my role as instructor, and my students. The process of implementing online coursework is far from simply transferring a traditional face to face course to an online environment.
What is online learning and what is "Quality" online learning?
Dabbagh and Bannan-Ritland (2005) define online learning as "an open and distributed learning environment that uses pedagogical tool, enabled by the Internet and Web-based technologies, to facilitate learning and knowledge building through meaningful action and interaction" (p. 164). Online learning holds the promise of "a highly interactive medium of learning that institutions can customize to meet the individual needs of students" (Levine & Sun, 2003, p.21). Online learning environments are characteristically different from traditional learning environments. A traditional learning environment tends to be constrained by place and real time, instructor controlled, linear, use of juried, edited sources delivered by the instructor, static information, and the use of familiar technology. By contrast, online learning environments are characterized by unconstrained places, shifts in time, learner controlled, non-linear and multidimensional space, unfiltered sources and unlimited searchability, dynamic, real-time information and the use of continuously evolving technology (Chambers, 1997). By nature, online learning environments align well with pedagogical constructs, instructional and learning strategies, and learning technologies which are grounded in constructivist perspectives (Dabbagh, 2005) and it is these perspectives which are most able to capitalize on the affordances of online learning tools to build meaningful interactions and customized learning. Therefore, many of the theoretical frameworks emerging for online learning design and implementation are grounded in constructivist beliefs (Jonassen, 1995; Norton, 2003;Dabbagh & Bannan-Ritland, 2005).
Unfortunately, the traditional approach to course design in higher education is “a faculty-centered approach: faculty design, faculty select, faculty present” (Twigg, 1994, n.p.) and may present a mismatch with the affordances of online learning environments. Most online learning environments found in higher education use course management systems (CMSs) as the design framework. CMS frameworks offer the promise that any faculty member or adjunct can upload their courses to the Web and in a few steps, have a ready- to- use online course. Recent research indicates that most uses of CMS frameworks result in objectivist teaching behaviors rather than constructivist teaching behaviors and therefore the imparting of information rather than the building and application of knowledge.
A number of studies in recent years has focused on the features, strategies, and delivery options that foster successful student learning in online environments and thus, the elements deemed essential to implementing quality online courses (Swan, Shea, Fredericksen, Pickett, & Maher, 2000; Smith & Rose, 2002; Singleton, Quilter & Weber, 2004; Song, 2005). Many of these studies focus on student’s perception of their own learning to determine which features of online courses are most important to their learning experience. As a result, instructional quality of online courses can be assessed in terms of design, content and objectives, and the presence of elements which support collaboration, higher order thinking, articulation of expectations, and evaluation. A number of quality rubrics and evaluation criteria have been developed (Herrington,2001; California State University, Chico, 2002;Fovai, 2003; Bourne & Moore, 2004). The use of these quality rubrics and evaluations, however, are intended for use by faculty to evaluate their own courses and to date there is not an instrument available which assesses students' perceptions about the use of online course quality features and the impact of the absence or presence of these quality features on student learning.
Song (2005) investigated the perceptions of college students regarding the instructional quality of online courses delivered via WebCT, a course management system. Song’s (2005) study not only excludes alternative online course designs and delivery methods but also relies on just four critical elements of instructional quality of online courses: the use of multimedia, the visual design of the course, the content and objectives, and the assessments. The instructional strategies and the role of the instructor are not considered in this study. It is not the tool that influences the learning but the pedagogical methods embedded into the design (Sunal, Sunal, Odell, & Sundberg, 2003).
Statement of the problem and Research Questions
This research aims to understand the state of online learning at the University and its impact on student learning by capturing students ’ perceptions about the influence different online tools, quality features and instructional strategies have on the quality of their learning in these online environments.
To achieve these goals, four questions will be explored:
1. How is online learning used in the University setting?
2. What features of quality online courses are recognized as present or absent by students?
3. What are students' perceptions about the effectiveness of these features in their learning?
4. What are students' perceptions about the quality of their learning in online environments at this University?
Methodology
In order to answer these questions, I would like to design a survey to administer to students enrolled in online courses across the University. The survey would be administered at the conclusion of a specified semester. My plan is to use the quality elements reported in the literature and design a survey which asks students to identify the presence or absence of these elements in the online course and then to indicate the effectiveness of the use of this element on their own learning in a series of close-ended survey questions. In addition, they would be asked to describe the overall quality of their learning in an open-ended question. Initially, online courses would need to be identified through a survey administered to all faculty to determine how online learning is used at the University as well as to identify participants for the study.
Conceptual Framework and Narrative for Study Proposal
Matrix
Initial References |
