Category Online Education

Speaking to my teacher colleagues about their first months of remote teaching brings me back to when I flipped a course and later taught it entirely online.

In the classroom

Imagine this; you teach science, anatomy and physiology to be exact. You have microscopes neatly lined up in the cabinets, slides labeled, organs properly stored, pencils and chalk in easily accessible places. You find yourself getting a little anxious. The students are due any minute now. What will your classroom look like at the end of the day?

Can you relate? It was hard to make a transition in the classroom from being the “sage on the stage” who shared my knowledge and my teaching supplies with students to a “guide on the side.” The parents and students seemed to think it was my responsibility to fill their brains with knowledge.

The flipped classroom

Using technology helped. I moved lectures to short 15-minute explanations and posted them online. This practice freed up all the classroom time for… Initially, that thought was a little scary. What am I going to do with 30 students for an hour each day?

I hoped to bring a sense of wonder back to my classroom. The initial phase of letting go was challenging. I had to trust the students to get what they needed out of the materials I supplied. To be completely honest, the classroom was messy some days. The noise could be deafening. Every student did not rise to the challenge.

However, most students stepped up remarkably. Students started coming after school to help set up labs and to design their own labs. One student volunteered to be a laboratory assistant. She came every day after school to organize and clean supplies.

Certainly, there were still students and parents who complained that because I did not lecture, I did not teach. However, as many students became more self-sufficient, I had more classroom time to help those who needed additional guidance. I watched and listened to the students in their groups every day. Identifying areas that required learner support and determining how best to build that support became my new role. Trying to be flexible, inclusive, and keep the learning focused on the students and their needs, I structured my evaluations on whether the objectives were met, not how they were met.

Online

The next step was to move to a completely online course. My panic grew as I realized how little of the educational process I would be able to control. How did I know if the students read the material, listened to the lectures, submitted their assignments, or took their tests without outside assistance?

I had a weekly synchronous session spent on discussing case studies and asking “what if” questions. These sessions were required unless you had an emergency. However, the students knew about the sessions when they signed up, in contrast to the students in the current emergency online courses.

The question of grades

It did not take long to get a sense of who knew and understood the material and who did not. I gradually moved all graded content to discussion boards, submitted case reports, and videos arguing points or outlining procedures. I found that this method correlated best with the grades I would have assigned based on the synchronous sessions. It also provided more ways for students to express their grasp and understanding of the subject content. It was an opportunity for me to see that if I got out of their way, the students would be creative, enthusiastic learners.

Not a complete break from tradition

To make sure that everyone came to the synchronous sessions prepared. I had a test bank of questions based on the reading. Students had to score 80% or higher before the online session. They could take it as many times as they wanted. I am sure some randomly guessed and then wrote down the answers. It does not matter as long as they knew these key points. Case studies and videos were also due before the session started.

What you did while remote teaching is amazing!

Many of you had to make your transition to remote teaching in days. You did not get the luxury of a gradual, well-thought-out transition. You had to divest from the need to control, amp up the use of technology, and design new ways to present and test in an unpredictable environment.

Please do not think that your experience is representative of online courses or online education. What we have experienced is unprecedented and hopefully will never reoccur. When you have time to breathe again, consider what aspects of teaching can best be done in the classroom and what parts can best be done online. If you do, your future students will benefit significantly from this experience born of necessity.

You were there for your students. You helped keep them safe. You used technology to establish a sense of community, a community of learners in a time of unexpected emergency remote teaching. You were creative problem solvers who improvised on the fly.

What is cognitive load?

Cognitive load describes the total amount of mental energy that is required to process new information with the rate-limiting step being working memory. Paas and Sweller (2014) compare knowledge that must be acquired to genetic knowledge obtained through evolution. They divide knowledge into primary and secondary information.

Biologically primary knowledge is the knowledge that we have been genetically programmed to acquire. It is usually easy to obtain, requires little to no effort, and can be assimilated subconsciously (Paas & Sweller, 2014). Biologically secondary knowledge usually involves the use of primary knowledge, it is more difficult to obtain, and energy must be expended to achieve it. As an example, listening and learning your native language is primary, and reading to learn is secondary knowledge.

According to Paas and Sweller (2014), biologically primary information is stored in independent modules in long-term memory, while secondary knowledge is organized into schemata. The more variations of a given related schema a person can process and store, the more fluent they will become in a given subject area or skill.

The architecture of cognitive load

According to Pass and Sweller (2014), biologically primary and secondary information enter working memory to be processed. Biologically primary information is quickly and unconsciously processed. Biologically secondary knowledge is the knowledge referred to in the principles below. Working memory integrates the various components of information into memory models or knowledge constructions. These new memory models are then organized and combined with knowledge in long-term memory to form schema. There are restrictions on the capacity for new information in working memory, but not for information drawn from long-term memory. 

Information Store Principle: Long-term memory provides the ability to store an almost unlimited amount of information in the human brain. This information is gathered over a lifetime. Learning something new results in an alteration in long-term memory. Learning results in altering the biologically secondary data that is already stored in long-term memory. As the store of biologically secondary information increases, the user gains fluency in the topic (Paas & Sweller, 2014).

Borrowing and Reorganizing Principle: If each person had to acquire information on their own, it would be difficult to impossible to make any progress in society. To facilitate increasing our secondary knowledge stores, we get it from other people, either by listening to them, reading what they write or by imitating them. Paas and Sweller’s (2014) Cognitive Load Theory assumes that the purpose of instruction then is to assist people in gaining information from other people and, just as importantly, aid them in organizing this knowledge in long-term memory. 

Randomness as Genesis Principle: If a learner is not guided when learning something new, then their only option is to make random choices and test them in much the same way that random genetic mutations occur and are tested by the environment (Paas & Sweller, 2014). Each time a learner makes a choice, as long as the options are limited, they could learn from their decisions and be more directed in their learning. Evolutionary unlimited choices could lead to the death of an organism due to indecision.

Narrow Limits of Change Principle: If there are an unlimited number of possibilities presented to a learner, it would be impossible to choose, test, and learn from the choice. Pattern recognition would be nearly impossible. Working memory has both a size limitation, about seven chunks of information, as well as a memory span limitation, 20 seconds without rehearsal, so it serves as a rate-limiting step. The added benefit of this rate-limiting step is that it makes it difficult for the learner to make substantial changes in long-term memory, possibly making it unusable (Paas & Sweller, 2014).

The Environmental Organizing and Linking Principle: Information stored in long-term memory would have little value if it were not correlated with environmental conditions to generate actions. New information entering working memory from the senses is subject to the limitations described above, but information coming from long-term memory is not (Paas & Sweller, 2014). 

Three types of cognitive load

Assumptions of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning

Dual Channels:  According to Paas and Sweller (2014), humans can process visually/spatially represented material, and auditorily/verbally expressed content in separate channels. If there is sufficient energy available, information entering one channel may be converted to a representation in the other channel (Mayer, 2014). 

Limited Capacity: Each of the two channels has a limit to the amount of information that it can process in a given period. A memory span test is one way to test an individual learner’s capacity. A vital function of the executive control part of the cerebral cortex is to allocate resources or determine processing priorities (Mayer, 2014).

Active Processing: Leaning is a dynamic process that requires the ability to select relevant information, organize the data into mental models, and then integrate it with information in long-term memory to form schemata (Mayer, 2014). 

Overall premises of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning

According to Mayer (2014), a multimedia design must not only have a coherent structure, but it must also guide the learner in how best to build a knowledge structure or mental model. The first step is guiding the learner while they select relevant words and images. Then they must help the learner organize the material by allowing them to see relationships between the components and recognize patterns. Finally, the designer must help them build connections between new knowledge and already learned knowledge stored in long-term memory (Mayer, 2014). 

​Comparing and Contrasting Cognitive Load Theory and the Cognitive ​Theory of Multimedia Learning

Both Paas and Sweller’s (2014) Cognitive Load Theory (CLT)  and Mayer’s Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (CTML) (2014) recognize that there are three types of processing demands or loads on working memory: intrinsic or essential, extraneous, and germane or generative.

In CLT, knowledge is defined as either primary biological knowledge or secondary biological knowledge. The transmission between generations, ease of acquiring the information, and the conscious effort required are used to define them (Pass & Sweller, 2014). Whereas, in CTML, the focus is on the channel that the information enters, whether visual or auditory.

CLT describes the processing of information in terms of cognitive architecture consisting of working memory and long-term memory and applies the following principles: linked to environmental demands, randomly generated, acquired from others, and limited by working memory processing and energy limits (Pass & Sweller, 2014). While Mayer (2014), in CTML, starts with sensory memory, which perceives information and holds it for a brief period to allow the selection of words and images, transduces it, and makes it available to working memory.  The information then moves to working memory where seven plus/minus two chunks of information are organized into mental models and integrated with previously learned information (Mayer, 2014).

Long-term memory in both CLT and CTML functions to store information in a highly structured manner. Schema is continually being reorganized and rebuilt into schemata, with the goal being automatic recall. 

Similarities Between the Two Models

Both CLT and CTML discuss the structure of human cognitive architecture with CTML adding the sensory phase to working memory and long-term memory (Mayer, 2014). Effective instructional design is used to minimize cognitive load to maximize the limited capacity of working memory. According to Mayer, the end goal is to decrease the amount of necessary extraneous processing so that generative processing can be increased or encouraged (Mayer, 2014).

​​Methods to Reduce Extraneous Cognitive Load

Redundancy Principle: The redundancy principle states that people learn more deeply when they have graphics and narration rather than graphics, narrative, and on-screen text. Requiring the learner to try to coordinate redundant information with essential information increases memory load and interferes with learning (Pass & Sweller, 2014). The cognitive theory of multimedia learning posits that there are two channels, each with limited processing power, to bring information into working memory. On-screen text and images or diagrams would both use the visual/spatial channel, whereas spoken narration would use the auditory/ verbal channel. Using spoken text and on-screen pictures or diagrams would make use of both channels without overloading either one.

The redundancy effect was not demonstrated when short segments of text were used (Kalyuga & Sweller, 2014). Redundancy may be beneficial for non-native speakers, learners with hearing disabilities, when there are no graphics, or when technical terms are used (Kalyuga & Sweller, 2014). An important caveat of the redundancy principle is that it does not apply when both spoken and written text are both needed for understanding.

Another example of redundancy presented by Kalyuga and Sweller (2014) is the redundancy of actual equipment. Having an instruction manual to read along with a computer may be redundant. Learners may learn more deeply with just the instruction manual. A possible explanation is that when an instructional manual is used along with the equipment, there may be a feeling that any needed instructions could be looked up on a just-in-time basis in the instruction manual instead of learning the content (Kalyuga & Sweller, 2014).

Coherence Principles: The coherence principle states that people learn more deeply from multimedia when extraneous material is excluded. It is tempting to include stories, videos, and random facts that would be interesting to the learner, but not necessary to understand the content. This extraneous information increases extraneous cognitive load, decreases available energy for essential processing, and can be confusing to the learner (Mayer & Fiorella, 2014).

The detrimental effect of adding extraneous information is even more significant in learners with low working memory capacity, the cognitive load imposed by the task, the interest level of the task, or when the content is presented using a systems-based method instead of a learner-based method. 

Signaling Principle: The signaling principle states that people learn more deeply when cues are added that highlight the organization of the essential material or to help them select the most relevant information (van Gog, 2014). These cues can be done textually, by adding underlining or bolding, by using imagery such as arrows or highlights, or auditorily by emphasizing certain words.

In the theory of multimedia learning, there are three steps:

• selecting images and text

• organizing images and text

• integrating the information to build connections or schema.

Signaling helps with selecting images and text. This selection process is necessary for the information to be available to working memory.

Research reviewed by Mayer and Fiorella (2014) showed that novice learners tend to attend first to the most salient features of the content. In addition, they showed that learners performed better on transfer tests after reading a summary of the required content instead of a full-length version. 

Effective signaling makes more processing power available to facilitate the germane cognitive load. Mayer and Fiorella (2014) also demonstrated that picture cuing had a significant effect on retention, but not on information transfer. Signaling seems to have a more substantial impact on low skill learners than on high skill learners.

Some research reviewed by Mayer and Fiorella (2014) showed that some learners did not perform better with signaling, even though eye-tracking showed that they responded to it. In contrast, learners with more knowledge of the task look faster and proportionately longer at relevant aspects of a task (van Gog, 2014). Signaling is most effective when used with learners who have less background knowledge, when it is used sparingly, and when the display is complex. ​

Using Refutation Text to Facilitate Conceptual Change

Conceptual change models emphasize the need to determine what the learner’s preconceived ideas are, show that how they are inconsistent or incorrect, and help them to develop a new mental model that is more consistent with scientific evidence. The first step for the learner is to uncover these inconsistencies (Sinatra, Kienhues & Hofer, 2014). If a learner has very little preexisting knowledge, it is relatively easy for them to develop mental models that assimilate the new information into their previous understandings (Posner, Strike, Hewson & Gertzog, 1982). 

On the other hand, if the learner has plenty of preexisting beliefs and perceptions, it may be much more difficult to get them to challenge these beliefs. Overcoming this challenge is called accommodation (Posner et al., 1982). 

Posner et al. (1982) describe four conditions that must be present for successful accommodation of new knowledge:

• the learner must be dissatisfied with their current understandings;
• they must be able to understand the new information;
• the new information that they have learned must make sense to the learner;
• the new explanation must be fruitful or explain concepts or inconsistencies that their current knowledge structure or schema is not able to (Pintrich et al., 1993). 

According to Tippett (2010), learners have three options when faced with scientific knowledge which runs counter to their current beliefs:

• they can reject the new knowledge
• they can memorize the new knowledge and have fragmented knowledge structures
• they can restructure their current schema to incorporate the new information (Pintrich et al., 1993).  

One way that conceptual change could be facilitated in the classroom is the use of refutation text. According to Tippett (2010), refutation text is intentionally structured to challenge the learner’s current beliefs. Refutation text starts with a statement of the misconception. It then goes on to state that this conception or belief is not valid. Finally, there is a refutation of the misunderstanding with a statement of the currently understood scientific explanation (Tippett, 2010). 

Learning Technologies Overview

Learning technologies have expanded in usage and availability, but may be limited in their application to developing a collaborative environment for a community of inquiry. At the origin of online learning was computer conferencing. It was quickly apparent that it had different properties and applications than face to face learning and would require a different approach. The two critical components to meaningful inquiry are feedback and discourse. Pioneering technologies did not readily provide this. Communication is key to learning, and technologies increase the ability to communicate, but this communication may be more social communication instead of collaborative communication (Garrison, 2017). 

Garrison explored several categories of technology and their contributions to eLearning in his book. Web 2.0 changed the internet from a text-based means of providing information to a multimedia source providing: videos, blogs, discussion forums, and wikis. Learning management systems offer technological ways to organize and deliver content in an online format. Social media provides the means to share snapshots of life, but this communication remains superficial due to text limitations and the lack of substantive conversation. Research has shown an inverse relationship between the use of social media and reflective thought.

Mobile learning or cell phones make content easily accessible, but it is difficult to type a lengthy response or paper on a cell phone. According to Garrison (2017), cell phones are ubiquitous, and instead of restricting their use in a classroom, they must be effectively incorporated into engaged learning. MOOCs are massive online classes that cost-effectively deliver content to large numbers of people. Garrison points out that very few MOOCs are given college credit because they do not represent engaged learning, and there is a lack of quality control.

Learning technologies have enormous potential to advance learning. How best to utilize them in collaborative work is still being determined. There is the risk that ready access may lead to more superficial content delivery instead of facilitating communication in a community of learners collaborating in productive discourse (Garrison, 2017).

Blended Learning Overview

According to Garrison, approximately 80% of US institutions of higher learning offer blended learning courses. Blended learning combines the benefits of face-to-face instruction and communication with the convenience of online activities. A blended learning class does not mean just adding online activities to an already established face-to-face class.

Blended learning can enhance a face-to-face classroom by allowing for more discourse through discussion posts and more reflection through written activities. The hope is that passive listening to lectures will be replaced with more engaging activities and collaborative inquiry. Blended learning may provide a solution for the large classes found in a university that must rely on lectures alone due to their large class size. If lectures and instructional materials were available online, then limited classroom time could be more effectively used for team projects, labs, and small group instruction (Garrison, 2017).

Blended learning has several advantages over either face to face or online learning by itself. Blended learning, by use of its online component, provides a means for communication outside of the classroom and has been found to contribute to greater group cohesiveness. Asynchronous writing communication allows time for deeper reflection and revision of student thoughts and frequently leads to more comfort with expressing opinions and ideas in the classroom.

Some studies cited by Garrison (2017) state that blended learning leads to learning the material better and in half the time. Students in blended learning environments express higher perceptions of learning, greater satisfaction, and higher completion rates. According to Garrison, the face-to-face environment is preferable for initiating the discussion; the online environment is ideal for exploration and continuing the debate, with the final resolution phase discussed in the face-to-face classroom (Garrison, 2017).

Guidelines for Practice Overview

Designing a curriculum requires identifying learning activities that are congruent with the intended outcomes of the course, but keep in mind the technical constraints, the learner abilities, and the subject matter. There are four main categories of learning activities: listening, talking, reading, and writing.

Talking and writing are both limited in face-to-face classrooms. Talking due to class size limitations and writing due to time constraints for in-depth grading and providing feedback. In an online classroom, students can listen by reading and talk by writing (Garrison, 2017). 

Garrison (2017) lists seven principles to follow for teaching and learning in the community of inquiry framework:
1. Plan for the creation of open communication and trust.
2. Plan for critical reflection and discourse.
3. Establish community and cohesion.
4. Establish inquiry dynamics.
5. Sustain respect and responsibility.
6. Sustain inquiry that moves to resolution.
7. Ensure assessment is congruent with intended processes and outcomes

Garrison (2017) provides several tips to teachers on the design and organization of the online classroom, including the following:

1. Work to balance facilitation with direct instruction to provide the greatest opportunity for student collaboration.
2. Present yourself as a guiding member in the community of inquiry and not as an authority figure.
3. Focus on using collaborative inquiry to make meaning, not in relaying information in a lecture-style or a self-instructional learning package.
4. Welcome each student and make them feel they are part of a cohesive group, but social interaction must be relegated to a chat board or coffee shop.
5. Set group sizes so they maximize the potential for reflective thinking and critical discourse.
6. Develop case studies and problem-based learning problems that mirror real-world issues and situations.
7. Develop content so it is not overwhelming.
8. Encourage dialogue and label discussion posts based on the phase of inquiry.
9. Provide feedback promptly and diagnose misconceptions to facilitate the learning process.
10. Design assessments that clearly align with the learning outcomes (Garrison, 2017). 

Assessment and Evaluation Overview

Assessments are necessary for any educational activity to determine the learner’s processes and outcomes, and should be in the form of both formative (throughout the course) and summative (at the end of the course). Students will tailor their efforts towards the assessment criteria if they feel they lack discretionary time. If​ collaborative learning and inquiry are meant to be the course outcomes, then the assessment must clearly show that.

Formative feedback must be designed to evaluate both the collaborative and individual efforts. Garrison (2017) suggests creating a comprehensive group project in which each member identifies their contribution. Assessments in the way of formative feedback allow students to compare their work to benchmarks in the activity rubric as well as keep them motivated to stay on course.

Since participation is such an integral part of an online course, it must also be assessed. Teachers should make sure that their assessments do not lead to overly structured discourse. Students must also have input into the assessment process. If they have no input, they will not buy into the community aspect of eLearning. For this reason, the assessment criteria for participation should be readily available to students and be easily understood. 

​One idea suggested was to have students submit a final paper in which they quote their discussion posts with the thought being that if they did not participate, they would not have anything to mention. Teaching is a fluid role. Students must assume some responsibility for it as a course develops to develop shared metacognition. Studies cited by Garrison (2017) showed that student’s perceived learning was directly correlated to the participation grade weight in the course. Course management systems can be used to track discussion posts and logins. New technologies are being developed to assess discussion post content better (Garrison, 2017).

Evaluation is a different process and results in determining the effectiveness of a particular course in both its delivery method and in fulfilling its stated intent. Course evaluation should assess the content delivered for both accuracy and biases, as well as the assessment methods used by the instructor. Surveys should be developed to determine how well the students felt supported. Finally, the course outcomes should be evaluated for effectiveness  ​(Garrison, 2017).

Organizational Issues Overview

There is a higher education movement away from lectures in large classes and towards online and blended learning. This movement will help alleviate both financial and large class size concerns. Campuses have always been the physical location for a scholarly community, but with the internet, that is no longer a requirement.

The first step in moving from the antiquated lecture-based delivery method is policy development. The institutional policy must be developed that is focused, endorsed by all, and provides necessary resources for real change. The goals and objectives must be attainable and clearly laid out.

A collaborative, not a hierarchical management structure, must be designed to be adaptive and willing to advocate for change. Just as the community of inquiry framework provides a method for collaborative inquiry in the classroom, this same collaborative community of inquiry should be utilized at the leadership level (Garrison, 2017). 

A major stumbling block to movement away from lecture-based curriculum delivery to a more collaborative inquiry-based curriculum using an online or blended delivery method is the faculty. Lecture-based curriculum delivery is all many of them have ever known. An intensive, longitudinal faculty development program will be needed to help with both understanding new curriculum methods as well as developing familiarity with technology.

The community of inquiry framework can be used in these sessions to familiarize faculty with the different critical elements of the framework in a trusting environment as well as begin to use the necessary technology. It will take time for all the faculty to learn and adopt new curriculum methods. They must be supported both in time and finances by leadership to allow this to occur successfully (Garrison, 2017).

Future Directions Overview

Garrison (2017) summarized his points in the final chapter of the book. He said that e-learning educators must be careful not to confuse either social media or the glitz of learning technologies with the utilization of technology for a collaborative blended learning experience. Early concerns that universities would outlive their usage have been unfounded.

Still, universities who do not move away from antiquated lecture-based education in large lecture halls will be left behind. The community of inquiry framework has been in place for 15 years and has undergone significant research as well as provided a platform for future research. A future area of research focuses on how to incorporate the community of inquiry framework into a vast array of disciplines, student levels, and technologies (Garrison, 2017). 

In one study on adaptation of a community of learning in a K12 setting, after weekly sessions, students were found to have a marked increase in cognitive abilities that were still present in follow-up two and three years later when compared to a control group. The community of learning survey was developed to provide a tool to quantitatively assess the utility of the framework (Garrison, 2017). 

Garrison (2017) points out that looking too far into the future has only shown a 10% success rate. Still, the marked contrast between the passive lecture-based curriculum method and the collaborative community of inquiry is stark. The movement from a competitive assessment method to a collective effort for inquiry and meaning-making is the only method that makes sense in the current world where people can get any information they want at any time. Creativity and innovation in a collaborative environment will continue to nurture further achievement (Garrison, 2017). 

A Community of Inquiry Survey Overview

The Community of Inquiry Survey Instrument is organized around three presences: teaching, social, and cognitive. In the teaching presence, the three main areas: design and organization, facilitation, and direct instruction, are all assessed. The teaching area of the survey is focused on the instructor and assesses their ability to design a clear and organized curriculum as well as balance facilitation with direct instruction. In the social presence section, affective expression, open communication, and the ability to develop group cohesion are evaluated. The final part of the survey assesses the cognitive presence. It asks learners about the four phases of curriculum development: triggering event, exploration, integration, and resolution. Learners are asked to evaluate the effectiveness and utility of each step in the process ​(Garrison, 2017).

Shared Metacognition Questionnaire

The shared metacognition questionnaire was developed to delineate the responsibilities of a student when they are engaged in the learning process as an individual and when engaged in the learning process as a member of the group. These strategies for maximizing shared metacognition can be utilized in an online classroom, blended classroom, or a face-to-face classroom (Garrison, 2017). 

​

A Community of Inquiry is an educational theory developed by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer and described in Garrison’s book E-learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice (2017)  that articulates how online classrooms and eLearning can utilize effective social, cognitive and teaching presences and provide a community atmosphere to enable participants to make meaning and integrate it into their personal knowledge base. This community of learners works together to achieve a deep understanding of a particular area of knowledge. They describe their framework as “collaborative constructivist” or the utilization of a group, social environment to make personal meaning. This meaning is constructed through repetitively sharing thoughts and ideas. They stress that it is collaboration, not cooperation that is required. Collaboration requires open communication to develop shared solutions to problems. Learning as an individual, even with reflection, generally results in seeking information to confirm already held beliefs. In a community of inquiry, all the learners assume the position of teacher and learner at various points in the learning (Garrison, 2017). 

A Community of Inquiry Overview

Garrison (2017) defines a community of learners as a group of participants who assume both teaching and learning roles. A back-and-forth discourse allows the participants to facilitate inquiry, construct meaning, and validate their understanding, Garrison feels that to best utilize online and blended learning effectively, roles should not be assigned to participants, but instead, a learning community model should be adopted to search for personal meaning and understanding through the process of active inquiry. The educational experience is made up of a social presence, a cognitive presence, and a teaching presence. Each member of the community will assume varying degrees of the teaching presence, with the students assuming a gradually increasing role. The learning should take place in an environment of trust, communication, and cohesion, which is defined as the social presence (Garrison, 2017). 

Social Presence

Social presence is the ability of all members to identify as part of a group. It leads to a feeling of group cohesiveness and a feeling of value for each group member. All members develop personal relationships over time and feel comfortable communicating openly in their group. A significant concern about communication in an eLearning environment is the lack of non-verbal cues and the fear about whether written communication can, in some measure, compensate for this. Written correspondence may help with the conundrum of trying to establish personal relationships in an academic environment while allowing participants the freedom and encouragement to be skeptical and critical of all new ideas (Garrison, 2017). Written communication may also allow for a greater period of reflection, as well as allow introverts time to express themselves.

Emotion

Several factors influence the social presence of a learning community, not the least of which is emotion. Garrison (2017) describes many studies arguing for the strong influence of emotion on a collaborative approach to both thinking and learning. Emotion can change throughout the class, but it is pervasive. Emotion plays a role in decision making and can often be the defining factor in determining whether a group can move forward. A second factor that influences social presence is interpersonal relationships. If the learning environment has too many strong interpersonal relationships, then group cohesiveness will decline. Garrison also feels that while communication tends to decline over time in a group, the cohesiveness increases. Teacher presence is also positively correlated with student social presence. Studies cited by Garrison have found a relationship between social presence, satisfaction, and perceived learning. Motivation is the last factor cited by Garrison. It is required to maintain interest and personal investment in the class. Feeling valued as a member of a group helps to maintain motivation (Garrison, 2017).

Categories of Social Presence

Garrison then goes on to describe the three broad categories of social presences: affective communication, open communication, and cohesive communication responses. Affective communication can be incorporated in an online class to show respect and welcome by the use of emoticons, capitalization, careful use of humor, and personal references. This communication should encourage a sense of belonging and allow participants the feeling of interaction with other participants. Open communication can be facilitated by maintaining an environment of respect while encouraging questioning and discourse. In the online classroom, the use of discussion boards and text chats can facilitate communication. Interpersonal and open communication can support group cohesiveness. Increased group cohesiveness will lead to better collaboration.  A balance of social cohesiveness must be maintained: too little will inhibit any meaningful discourse, and too much social presence can lead to inhibition of the inquiry process (Garrison, 2017). 

Cognitive Presence

Garrison describes the cognitive presence as the process that learners must go through to make meaning of the content. Making meaning requires both reflective thinking on the part of the individual and discourse within the group. Critical thinking and cognitive presence are closely related. Critical thinking is needed to both authenticate existing knowledge and to generate new knowledge. Critical thinking requires the ability to think independently, but also the willingness to be questioned. Critical thinking and creative thinking are both needed in the process of inquiry and to avoid confirmation bias or to look for evidence to support your current beliefs. Reflection and discourse are both required in thinking critically, and a text-based medium may facilitate, rather than inhibit, this process by allowing more time and more chances to edit your work (Garrison, 2017).

Practical Inquiry

Garrison offers the use of the Practical Inquiry model to operationalize cognitive presence. It requires a balance between the deliberation that occurs in your private world and involves reflection and discourse with the shared universe.

The Practical Inquiry model includes four distinct phases: a triggering event, exploration, integration, and resolution. The triggering event is a well-thought-out activity or question that engages the participants and gets them to buy-in to the value of the class. This activity should generate curiosity and questions. During this phase, the teacher can present the objectives and expectations of the class.

The second phase is exploration. This phase is the process of trying to understand the nature of the problem and seek the necessary background information. This process requires moving back and forth between a private reflection and public collaboration and could include brainstorming and literature searches. A proper balance must be maintained between seeking enough information to understand the “big idea” of the course without becoming overwhelmed with detail. 

Integration, the third phase, is focused on constructing meaning. Students continue to reflect and participate in collaborative discourse. This phase is where students integrate new knowledge into their previous understandings. They should examine different perspectives and explore their thinking as they confirm their new knowledge.

The fourth phase is the resolution phase. This phase frequently requires decreasing the complexity of the problem being studied or defining a specific part of the problem and seeking a solution for it. This phase is where students are required to demonstrate their understanding and be able to defend their thinking. This phase frequently generates new questions. The tendency in many classes is to spend much time on the first two phases and explore them very well, spend less time on the third phase, and very little time on the fourth (Garrison, 2017).

​Research has shown that in the online class environment, a natural decrease in participant involvement will occur during the integration and resolution phase as more reflection takes place. How learning outcomes will be measured is another concern and area of research. Assessments such as tests are frequently used, but they tend to measure superficial learning. Garrison advocates for the use of perceived learning as a proxy for learning outcomes. He feels that we must move beyond assessing the individual and move towards more of a shared and distributive learning environment. Instead of individual metacognition or monitoring of thinking and learning, shared metacognition should be utilized in a community of inquiry (Garrison, 2017). 

Teaching Presence

The responsibilities of the teacher are complex because they are responsible for creating and shaping the learning environment. They have the responsibility of defining the curriculum and designing educational activities. The teaching presence brings together all elements of the community and works to achieve a balance between meeting individual learner’s goals and encouraging active participation. Individual learners may use the internet and learn about whatever interests them, but the purpose of an academic course is to focus on learning that has societal value as well as helping the individual continue to learn and grow. To encourage active participation, the teacher must be knowledgeable about both content and pedagogy as well as set clear expectations for the course, expect critical discourse, and be willing to step in to clear up misconceptions. According to Garrison (2017), the teacher’s roles fall into three major categories: design and organization, facilitation, and direct instruction. As the class progresses, some of these teacher responsibilities should shift from the teacher to the students.

Design and Organization: Unlike a face-to-face class, an online class may take much more upfront organizational work. The structure of the entire course must be determined before the class begins, but it must retain enough flexibility that the students feel invested in determining the content. The content must be narrow enough to be discussed and evaluated effectively, but links and extra content must be provided for the exploration phase of learning. The teacher must instruct participants on how to best participate in the class as well as provide all relevant due dates and instructions for activities (Garrison, 2017). 

Facilitating Discourse: Teachers must be very active on the online discussion boards, clarifying areas of confusion, providing encouragement, and directing the discussion toward the education goals. 

Direct Instruction: Teachers must be present to diagnose misconceptions. They should act as the “guide on the side.” Garrison (2011) said that without a strong teacher presence, students tend to be polite, but show limited engagement in learning the content. To get higher-level thinking, teachers must be able to provide timely feedback to students. Teachers must also be present to act as a “sage on the stage” and provide accurate factual information.  In an ideal learning environment, there is a balance between the facilitation of discussion and direct instruction. 

Original post date on online education, June 2018

Whether you are a student or faculty member, you may be starting to consider taking or teaching an online course. Online education seems to be the trend in education, especially higher education, but it is filtering down to the K-12 environment as well. Online education is here to stay!

The move to online education

What are the drivers of this trend? In my opinion, the biggest driver was initially financial. As more and more schools are increasing their number of online courses and technology is catching up, other schools are seeing the benefit and feeling the pressure to add their own as well. Whether it is massive open online courses (MOOC) or full graduate degrees, learners have more options than ever before.

According to Allen and Seaman (2016), in 2014, there were 5.8 million distance education students with 2.85 million taking all of their coursework in a distance learning format. Approximately 70% of leaders of public institutions feel that investing in online education is critical to their strategic plan. You may ask, how do faculty feel about the value of online coursework? Allen and Seaman (2016) report that about 30% of faculty accept the importance of online education and feel it is a legitimate form of education, approximately 55-60% are neutral, and nearly 15% disagree with it being a legitimate form of education.

So, what makes a course online?

Traditional course                     No online content
Web Facilitated Course             1-29% online
Blended or Hybrid Course       30-79% online
Fully Online                                 80% or more

Do faculty like online education?

When talking with faculty members, you notice that, whether positive or negative, their opinion on online education is strong. As a faculty member who has taught online courses and as an M.B.A student who has recently completed an online program, I have some thoughts on why? There is such a wide range of teaching methods for online courses. Some courses are merely voice-over-PowerPoint with a 10-question set of recall questions at the end of each unit. Students in these courses quickly learn what they need to do to find the answers to the recall questions. There is little to no conversation between students or between students and faculty. Students achieve their desired grade after learning the requisite amount of work required and get little from the class. After the initial setup time, the course can run on autopilot semester after semester, with no faculty involvement.

On the other end of the spectrum are courses set up to take full advantage of the technology and the expertise of the faculty. These courses have required reading and perhaps voice-over lecture PowerPoints, but these are merely to provide the background for the rest of the course. The bulk of the course is made up of writing assignments, discussion boards, case studies, and required online class meetings where students and faculty discuss the content and ensure understanding.

Many students have commented that the online environment makes them more comfortable talking and providing their opinion and perspective than a traditional course would. Instead of a 10 question recall question, full use of technology is used to make sure that a fair assessment is provided that assesses critical thinking skills and understanding of the content instead of the ability to look up an answer—more on technology and assessment in a later post.

Should you take an online class?

Should you take an online course? If you are unsure, try one of the MOOCs first, such as the ones offered by EdX and Coursera. These massive courses will give you an idea of whether an online format will work for you at little to no cost. With the number of students involved, be aware that there may be little faculty involvement and that the majority of the discussion and help with the content will come from your fellow learners.

If you like the format and you find you are motivated to stay on top of the content, then online learning may be for you. As you look for courses, pay particular attention to whether there are required meeting times, a discussion board with faculty involvement, writing assignments, and a description of the testing method. The testing method should show the faculty is aware of the pitfalls of testing online and has made an effort to make sure the tests are as fair as possible.

Are you ready to move your courses online?

I can help!

Contact me

Online classes are on the rise, and with them comes the need to assess learners. Instructors have told me that frequently online courses are added to their face-to-face workload, and some say they do not get paid as much for online classes as they do for face-to-face. How do they maintain a fair and equitable testing environment without an exponential increase in workload? Should online courses pay less than face-to-face? Should there be a cap on the number of learners in an online class? How do you prevent cheating in an online class? These are questions many faculty ask when making a move to online courses.

More cheating in online classes?

Several studies have been done to evaluate whether there is increased cheating in online courses versus traditional courses, and so far, the evidence is promising that there is not. Some of these studies are based on self-report. (StuberMcEwen, Etter, Cramer, & Finn, 2007; Watson & Sottile, 2010) and some are based on analyzing the difference in test scores between proctored and unproctored tests. (Ladyshewsky, 2015). However, historically informal surveys of students questioned on cheating have found that that the incidence of cheating may be higher than expected (Corrigan-Gibbs et al., 2015).

What is cheating?

Why? I think in large part it is due to the definition of cheating. In today’s classroom, gone are the days of learning exclusively from lectures and textbooks. Students work in groups and are encouraged to collaborate in answering questions. They are encouraged to use all resources, including online, to find answers to their questions. Savvy instructors are aware that almost all textbook test banks can be found online and have moved to more case studies and essay questions for assessment to combat cheating. In a traditional classroom, collaborative work, followed by an individual essay or short answer assessment, will effectively test personal knowledge, but what about in the online environment?

The issues

The first issue in online testing is who is taking the test? Without any protective mechanisms in place, learners can easily share their username and password with someone else and have them take a test for them. How can you decrease the probability of this? Already available is proctoring software such as Respondus LockDown Browser. The instructor can have the test settings activated for both audio and video monitoring. Instructors can have learners show identification to their webcam,  submit a picture, then pan their environment with a camera, and keep the camera on for the duration of the test. Once the test begins, the webcam is hidden, and the learner frequently forgets that it is even present.

A newer technology in the works for maintaining the integrity of the online testing environment is keystroke monitoring. We all hit the keys on a keyboard at different paces and intensities. Monitoring this could likely identify whether someone other than the intended learner took the test. Both options bring up privacy concerns.

What is considered cheating?

As mentioned above, the definition of cheating can also be an issue, and instructors need to be very clear on what they consider cheating. Most list no collaborative work in their instructions, but what about the use of textbooks and notes? Using a lockdown browser implies that electronic resources are prohibited, but most students have a phone they could use to look up answers even when there is a lockdown browser. The lockdown browser prevents copying and pasting, but not looking up content.

One way an instructor could limit this without increasing their workload is to restrict the amount of time taking the test. Making it impossible to have enough time to look up content and complete the test could mitigate this problem. One recent class I took used this technique. Forty seconds were allotted for each question. Many students complained, but many others found it very effective. The instructor even provided research justifying his time limits using the reading speed of average students. 

One of the more definitive recent studies was done by Alessio, Malay, Mauer, Bailer, and Rubin in Online Learning (2017) in which the authors compared test scores and time to complete a test by students proctored by Respondus Lockdown Browser and those who were not proctored. Their results demonstrated a 14-20 point difference in average scores based on whether or not the tests were proctored. Besides the statistically significant grade spread, the authors found that students taking an unproctored test took significantly longer to complete the test.

What can an instructor do?

So, what can an instructor do? First, instead of copying the academic integrity policy into the syllabus, write a policy that pertains to your specific class. Saying that usage of an “unauthorized source” is prohibited is not helpful in this environment. If online sources, textbooks, or notes are or are not allowed, then specify this directly. Most students assume exams and quizzes are not group work, but some have been told they are “allowed to work together as long as they submit their own work.” What does this mean?

Be proactive in monitoring with a lockdown browser that requires the use of a webcam and showing identification. A lockdown browser alone is not sufficient when most learners have more than one piece of technology available. Write test questions that require critical thinking and interpretation, not recall information that can be searched for online. If all else fails, stipulate in your syllabus that the midterm and final need to be taken in a proctored room in a testing center or a university.

Do you need help with online testing?

We can discuss your assessment goals and make a plan.

Contact me

One concern about the use of online classes is the lack of direct conversation in an online environment. Students learn by testing and defending their ideas. In an online course, if there is no forum to present and defend your ideas, how will you know if your understandings are accurate, and how will you know what you do not know? There are two avenues for discussion that have been used in online courses; the first is discussion boards, and the second is scheduled meetings in an online environment.

The Discussion Board for Online Conversation

In a discussion board, the instructor posts an assignment or a question to encourage conversation. Students are expected to respond to the subject or post their assignments to elicit feedback. Frequently, there are guidelines as to how many posts or replies each student must make to other students, the length of the post, and even specific points that need to be made. In my personal experience, the discussion board sounds like a great idea, but without instructor presence and participation, it frequently fizzles out. Students write thoughtful posts initially, but quickly learn to do the minimum requirement if there is no instructor presence and especially if the motivator to participate is points or a grade. Scanning multiple students’ online classes shows that the vast majority of them do not read the online posts, even if they are in reply to something that they have posted. In one of my current classes, the instructor set up a discussion board for each chapter to encourage student interaction and to facilitate asking questions. So far, with two weeks left in the course, there have been a total of two posts.

A Discussion Board that encourages conversation

There are some very effective uses of discussion boards. The easiest of which is a forum to answer student questions, either by other students or by the instructors. In the graduate school where I worked, discussion boards were used in most of the classes. The students still participate in classes, but as they are active learning classes without lectures, the students frequently will have questions while reading the preparatory content and after the discussion in class. By having the students post a title on their discussion post and having a strong instructor presence, the discussion board has been used very effectively to answer student questions and encourage participation. One reason that this discussion board is working so well is that there is an active instructor presence and students receive timely answers to their questions. Some may argue that this type of discussion board is merely online office hours and does not encourage active thinking, answering questions, and defending an argument.

And one that doesn’t

The second type of discussion board is trickier to implement successfully. This type of discussion board requires students to post short answers or essay answers to questions and then respond to each other’s responses. Adult learning theory states that learners must be motivated by a desire to understand instead of a desire to earn points, but getting a student to respond to a discussion post without some benefit is tricky. An active instructor presence is required as well as transmission of information that the student clearly values.

Anonymous responses?

Should the online discussion board allow anonymous responses? The benefit of anonymous responses is that the students may feel more comfortable responding and therefore increase conversation. The drawback would be that allowing anonymous responses may allow some students to use the discussion board to make comments that they would not make in person.

Confidential responses would enable the poster to be anonymous to fellow students, but not to the instructor. I am not sure this would serve the intended purpose. A possible way to mitigate some drawbacks of anonymous responses is to set clear boundaries early in the class. I would advise being very specific about what is and is not appropriate. Generational differences and the current generation’s comfort level with the online environment and sharing may lead to different understandings of an “appropriate” post.

Tone

Everyone has probably experienced the misreading of tone and intent in emails. In the written online environment, sarcasm and joking may be misinterpreted and be a turnoff to students. An instructor may think they are being funny and trying to make the student feel more comfortable, but, in actuality, the student was asking a simple question and no longer feels comfortable doing so in the future.

The Future

The best users of a discussion board are learners who are self-driven and inquisitive. Learners who are seeking to understand the content and not merely working to see how many points they can accumulate. These learners must be comfortable in a social environment that encourages interaction and is non-hierarchal. They must feel strongly that knowledge is constructed and requires the input of all, not instructor driven with the learner’s role being a recipient of information. As more and more classrooms move to active learning and a flipped classroom style, I wonder if we will see more effective use of the discussion board in the online classroom.

Is it possible to replicate the traditional classroom experience in a virtual setting? In my opinion, it depends on who is teaching the course. I have been in several online classes that had a required synchronous online classroom setting in addition to the asynchronous portion of the class. All students sign into the learning management system to access the virtual classroom using either a link from the instructor or accessing a previously set up classroom at a given time and date. As the student logs in, his/her attendance is noted, and he/she is frequently given access to a chat feature and a microphone that the instructor can mute if desired. The instructor can utilize a virtual whiteboard and PowerPoint in the same way that it can be used in the traditional classroom. In addition, the instructor can share his/her desktop as well as search and display websites. Finally, there are break-out rooms where small group discussions can take place. Each break out room has audio, chat, and whiteboard capability.

Having these features is necessary if the goal is to replicate the traditional classroom experience, but I found that using the whiteboard too awkward and time-consuming to be of value. Unlike in a traditional classroom where students can have side discussions while waiting for the next assignment to be prepared, in an online class, distractions are plentiful, and it is easy to lose focus and difficult to return to the discussion.

The range of style in a virtual classroom

As far as the skillful use of the virtual classroom by the instructor, it has varied from straight lecture to full discussion. In the straight lecture class, there were occasional small group discussions, but they felt more like interruptions than of added value to the class. I found that the classes taught in this style dragged on forever.

The temptation to do other work and only half-listen were strong. At the other end of the spectrum was an instructor who assigned somewhat complicated case studies that required financial analysis on a biweekly basis.  These case studies were due before class started. This style required constant student attention and focus. The depth of these discussions was greater than in any traditional class that I have attended. The online setting made you feel that it was a discussion between you and the instructor. In addition, I think that students who may not be comfortable speaking up in a traditional classroom felt more comfortable doing so in a virtual setting.  More information on discussion boards is provided here.

Voice over PowerPoint

Many instructors do voice-over PowerPoint to provide the lecture component of a class. As someone who has a preference for audio delivery of content, I appreciate that it is provided, but feel that the discussion component to an online class is what makes it on par or better than a course taught in a traditional classroom. 

After completing a course where all lectures were delivered in a voice-over PowerPoint format, I really missed the ability to interact with the instructor, hear his stories, listen for emphasis on topics, and get explanations when needed. Perhaps if instructors were paid the same for teaching online classes as traditional, there would be more instructor involvement in these courses.

Gamification or the use of game elements to teach a concept was only accessible to hard-core coders in the not too distant past. Everyone else could have the imagination and the desire, but with no ability to write code, their creativity was as far as the games could get. Now anyone with a desire to learn can use online code snippets and access videos on how to code. In addition, software like Articulate Storyline and Adobe Captivate makes it possible for all e-learning developers to develop interactive games. With all these possibilities and an explosive trend to move from traditional to online learning, gamification is a hot topic for discussion. According to Deterding et al. (2011), we saw the first use of gamification in education in 2008 and became more widespread in 2010. However, the use of badges and levels has been around much longer. Gamification is becoming more and more prevalent in the business world and is frequently used to encourage wellness initiatives. The rapid feedback provided by games provides powerful encouragement for learners to make small changes in their behavior.

The Pros of Gamification

Gamification can make learning fun. It is interactive and can motivate even the most resistant learner to try it. Trying to win can motivate a learner to engage again and again with the material. Research has demonstrated that active learning and spaced recall are necessary for retention. Playing games provides an excellent media for both. Gamification can encourage problem-solving and can encourage communication skills and team-building. In a classroom, the implementation of gamification can be difficult because of the different developmental levels of the students. However, games can be developed that make it possible for learners at all levels to participate. On the other hand, some students may be able to master the content quickly and be distracting to other students. Besides, even with all the demonstrated benefits of gamification, it can be challenging to get parental and administrative buy-in that they are an effective use of classroom time.

The Cons of Gamification

On the negative side, games are expensive to develop, and typically only a small portion of the relevant content can be included in a single game scene. In today’s society, everything is fast-moving and pervasive. Students are accustomed to immediate access to information and feedback. Some learners with their greater experience with technology may be innately more successful with the games, even if their knowledge base is weaker than less technologically savvy students. The latter cannot demonstrate their knowledge as quickly in a game format. Competitions may encourage participation, but could also lead to divisiveness in the classroom. Care must be taken to promote collaboration and teamwork. The attainment of badges and “leveling up” motivates students, but is this what we want them to be striving for? Will we lose the desire to learn for learning’s sake?

Do we have a choice anymore?

Millennials and Generation Y students are so accustomed to the pervasiveness of technology that the slow-moving classroom may be a culture shock that feels intolerable to learn in. Are we adapting the class to fit the needs of students, or are games just a better way to learn? Is that a negative? They certainly encourage motivation, keep attention, allow for spaced learning, and require memory recall.  They may or may not encourage collaboration and communication. With the trend from traditional classrooms to online learning, will all students learn online utilizing games and technology as predominant learning media? Only time will tell, but it seems the trend is already well established.

With the trend towards more active learning in the classroom, you are likely to see fewer power struggles to maintain quiet and complete a schedule. Students are given tasks, and they work through these tasks, with the instructor having the role of facilitator. This method of teaching and learning seems to engage the students more and lead to better retention. Still, it takes a special kind of instructor, one who does not feel the need to be “in charge” of the classroom, one who tolerates a higher decibel volume, and one who does not have an agenda to follow. As active learning filters down to the high schools and then grade schools, I wonder how it is going to mesh with all the standards that are required and the subsequent testing? 

The changing role of the teacher

I am taking an online class that is focused on power and politics. The text is Managing with Power, Politics, and Influence in Organizations by Jeffrey Pfeffer. It got me thinking about power in the classroom. There is a trend in teaching and learning towards active learning and away from the traditional “sage on a stage.” With the conventional method of teaching, it was evident who was in power, or at least supposed to be. Much of the stress and angst of teaching comes from trying to maintain that power and to follow your syllabus or agenda.

Remember the days of trying to keep the students quiet and focused as you move through your lessons? I have moved out of the classroom and into the training and higher education sector. It was not a surprise to me that I see the same thing there, grown adults in a school required to undergo training to check a box for their organizations, with the facilitator trying desperately to follow the schedule. Recently I had the opportunity to sit in on a ‘train the trainer’ training session. These people were motivated! You could see that they took their job seriously. They wanted to learn the content so they could help their employees. What was going on here? Why do some groups sit there on their phones with a scowl on their faces, and others seem to be excited about learning the content?

The online classroom

As we move to online classes, what will power look like in this setting? An instructor can set an agenda and standards for students to follow, but how will it be reinforced? We can do word counts on discussion boards. We can grade papers with rubrics. We can give graded tests, though these bring up a power and control issue in themselves. How do we guarantee the integrity of our tests? I have taken tests with webcams and microphones, which are timed and require me to show my ID and having my picture taken. Is this sufficient? I guess we will have to pause and consider whether we are testing to make sure that students meet our standards for completion of the course and the subsequent degree, or whether we hope that students will self-police because they want and need a quality education. If it is the first case, we are going to have to work on standards for online learning that help maintains fair and equitable testing and learning environment. If it is the second case, then online learning should fare just as well as in-classroom learning.

Training or teaching?

Maybe the answer lies in moving education into not only active learning but also a ‘train the trainer’ method. After eight years of school, shouldn’t we focus more on training rather than education? Going more toward the technical schools but allowing for the necessary depth of knowledge and critical thinking needed in many professions. Active learning could engage the students and train them to think and problem solve, whereas more of a training mentality would keep the education-focused,  it could decrease costs, and it could provide employers with highly trained employees. It seems like a win-win.