2nd guest speaker great addition to course

Dr. Marty Tessmer was the 2nd guess speaker for the course. He spent close to two hours answering questions about creating online tutorials. During the previous 1-1/2 weeks, the students had read his book on the topic. The original plan was that they would provide Marty with formative evaluation data about the book before he published it. So, the students completed a "Final Post" discussion about the book, then each posted three questions for Marty in a discussion forum. He responded to all of their posted questions. Then, the experience culminated in the live (via Adobe Connect) session. Marty was able to collect some useful information regarding the direction of his book (e.g., needs to add two chapters and a section at the end of each chapter on formative evaluation). And, the students got to spend time with a well-known ID professional and author, discussing a topic of great interest (and related to the final Culminating Project). Plus, it was a change of pace at a typically low-energy point in the semester -- I think it served to reenergize folks for the final push. [Note: It was also helpful to have Marty so involved with them during a week that I was away at a conference.]

Even though the two guest speakers have been so successful, I decided to cancel the final guest speaker in order to give the students more time and space to focus on their final Culminating Project. Instead, I have offered to host Q&A sessions for the project if the students want and need them.

No required discussion...working?

One of the things I've been concerned about with my design for the course is my decision to not requiring weekly discussions, as previously mentioned in this blog. For the first two weeks I did have an organized discussion set-up in which participation was listed on the Weekly Agendas as a to-do. My thinking with these early discussions was to make sure people were connecting to the course, each other, and me. In addition, I was hoping to sort of get people into the habit of sharing, comparing, advising, chit-chating about the activities and readings...so that when we transitioned to no-required discussion weeks that people would still want to connect and discuss in the Self-select Study Groups forums.

I really haven't given it enough time at this point. I am, as I anticipated, disappointed that people aren't clammering to discuss the readings (this week, Dr. John Medina's Brain Rules). I know that everyone has other demands on their time...and even if they wanted to participate, time just doesn't allow.

Just in case, though, I did post an announcement today as a reminder and invitation to join the discussion, if desirable. I also listed the questions I had posted in the forum so folks reading the announcement would know what was going on in the forum. There has been a little more activity since then...we'll see.

If the discussions are not relevant, then I don't want people to feel they have to participate. Then it is just busy-work...

Is it all challenging enough?

When I started layout out activities, assignments, and projects, I had about 25 things. Yikes! So much for simplicity and balance. It has been very effortful to get the workload under control. My concern -- one of many, I guess -- is that the learners feel they have read, practiced, and discussed enough in advance of completing a "Culminating Project" (which is a project I assess against a rubric and provide more detailed feedback, as opposed to simply check-off as completed which is what I will do with the Minds-on/Hands-on and React and Respond activities). I am trying to not overwhelm with discussions every week. I am trying to ask for a reasonable amount of reading to be accomplished. And so on. I wonder if I will get it right this time -- the balance between workload, engagement, efficacy-strenthening...

Other ways of connecting...what about Twitter?

With the elimination of required weekly discussions, and some collaborative team work, I have concerns about social connection. To try to address this, I have added in a few collaborative activities (for "Hands-on/Minds-on" assignments) and no-penalty peer reviews for Culminating Projects. But, I have been thinking about something more organic, more natural. So, I would like to invited everyone in the class to join me in a Twitter community. I also think it would be fun to include other faculty, and other eLearning students.

Here's my thinking about how it might play out...

One of the IT 5130 students is reading something in the Mayer book and has a question about a term or phrase. She immediately tweets the group, and gets a couple of responses. This allows for a little back-and-forth communication about Mayer, message design, and so on. Another student is working on an assignment and is wondering about embedding music. He tweets the group and gets a response. Another student can't believe what she has just read in Tufte and needs to share. So, she tweets the group and finds someone else who can't believe it either. And so on.

This seems much more natural than logging into eCollege, getting into the course shell, then getting into a discussion forum...and then waiting for someone to respond later (after she or he has already moved on to other work, thoughts, issues).

Also, I have three conferences this fall...and so will be away for about 2 weeks total. I thought it would be fun to tweet everyone from the conferences, let them know what folks are sharing and talking about. A sort of "reporting from the field" experience. I think this could be a good way for us to stay connected.

So, this is my plan. Fingers crossed.

Will they do the reading?

Without required weekly discussions, I am worried that folks won't read. And the readings are really critical to getting this stuff... I am making an effort to require annotations and citations with Culminating Projects, but that isn't necessarily an immediate application of the reading to something. Yet, I don't want to add back in required weekly discussions...I just think it is an overload. I wonder what will happen, and how the learners will react.

Requiring participation in weekly discussions

My thinking about requiring people to participate in weekly threaded discussions has really changed lately. What I really want is for discussion to flow naturally, because people want to connect and share ideas related to what they are reading and experiencing. But, I also know that adult learners have many demands on their time, and when push comes to shove may neglect to pursue these sorts of learning opportunities unless persuaded with requirements and points.

Now, getting back to the desire for things to flow naturally... I decided to pursue this with IT 5130. There will be a few "required" discussion opportunities. But, the other discussion opportunities will be voluntary. To this end, I have set up "Self-select Study Groups" for readings and tools. My hope is that people will choose to contribute to these groups because the connection and sharing is relevant. I am not going to count number of posts or anything like that...and hope that doesn't leave a few folks alone in a forum wanting to discuss and having no colleagues with which to discuss.

To counter this very real possibility, I have added a requirement to the Design Sketches that must be turned in with each Culminating Project. The Design Sketch is a description of the instructional message design decision the learner has made, with a rationale -- based on the readings -- for the decision. OK, so learners will be required to include a certain number of references: a certain number from each of the readings, and then a certain number from the required and optional discussion forums. And, they only way a learner can cite a discussion forum is if she or he participated in the discussion forum by offering at least two ideas, insights, perspectives, or counter-arguments.

So, ultimately I am counting... But, the idea is that people will make their own decisions about participation -- and the value of that participation -- based on perceived relevance and knowing the consequences (a few missed points on Culminating Projects) if they don't participate.

It begins...

It has been a month since my father died, and it is a month out from when the course starts. So, I think I am ready to start going through all of my notes for this course and plan the experience.

A few months ago I had an interesting conversation with Raymond Wlodkowski (well-known author of texts on enhancing adults motivation to learn, and diversity in the classroom) regarding my application of his motivational framework to online courses. This sort of spun off into a discussion about course structure, and how structured to be. I tend to be very structured with online courses (which lead to me creating a 22 page syllabus for my on-campus Adult Education and Learning course...yikes!). At this point, I believe I have been too structured, too complex, too cluttered. So, with this course I want to be minimalist, natural, organic. I'm not sure it is possible for me to do that, but what gives me hope is that I used to teach that way...before teaching online.

Here is the flaw in my thinking about online course design, I believe. The courses I create are for graduate students (or, at least, post-undergraduate). But, my thinking has been that the audience for online programs and courses are not as self-directed as they need to be, that the demands on their time cause a distraction from engaging in the coursework. And, therefore, that I needed to provide layers of structure, and deadlines, and directions in order to scaffold the missing self-direction and wave a red flag to garner attention.

But, here's the reality. Adult learners are self-directed, are motivated. They just may not be self-direct and motivated to do what I want them to do. This has everything to do with relevance (and, of course, their need to balance the many demands on their time and energy). If the learning activity isn't relevant to them, then they are less engaged in the activity. If they do see the relevance, and can find the time and energy to make it happen, then they will engage. My job is to create learning activities that have the potential of being seen as relevant and, thus, engaging. I can't force this to happen with layers of structure, and deadlines, and directions. There is no magic number or size of red flags I can wave to make this happen.

So, throughout this design process, I am going to keep reflecting on what I used to do when teaching face-to-face in a classroom -- what my attitude about the learning-teaching exchange was, what I valued in terms of flow and structure -- and see if I can come up with an approach that reflects a valuing of adult learners' intrinsic motivation to engage. My approach will be as minimalist as appropriate (without leading everyone to confusion), and I will try to create learning opportunities for students that are inviting and not forced.

Let's see what happens...