In January 2021, my husband and I bought a messy piece of land in Michigan. Some of the land is (barely) tillable farmland, and the other parts are weedy prairie, scrubby forest, and swampy muck. This is what we wanted—a biodiverse piece of land that needs support to bring it back to its natural, harmonious state of being. Continue reading
In her recent Computers and Composition article on teaching writing using Learning Management Systems (LMSs), Allison Hutchison unpacked the “wicked problem” faculty face when using an institutionally-required system. Hutchison’s literature review outlines how faculty in the field of rhetoric and composition have critiqued the technologies that mediate writing instruction; indeed, this type of scholarship has become increasingly prevalent, as digital platforms for composing seem to be ever increasing (and thus ever more frequently appearing in our classrooms).
I’ve attempted to apply Hutchison’s framework for identifying the problem, the needs, and the potential solutions (albeit in a much simpler format) to a particular strand of practice in the writing classroom: providing feedback on assignments. DePaul recently adopted two technologies that can be used for this purpose, and both contain affordances and limitations that instructors should consider when adopting. The descriptions below are perhaps more utilitarian and less of a critique, but given that this is a blog post, and not an academic article, that framing seemed more…well, useful. Continue reading
“We can just record my existing PowerPoint slides.”
The phrase always sends shivers down my spine. Not because recording PowerPoint slides isn’t effective, as in some situations it can still be useful, but because of the seemingly flippant attitude of the “just” part. If only it were that easy, and a recorded PowerPoint was the end-all solution for online learning.
This is always where we start our conversation that, in essence, defines my ethics of video lectures in instructional design. This is a very loose framework, and not necessarily based on any particular theory I’ve encountered, but rather through observations of multitudes of online courses using various approaches to content delivery and seeing what works based on the course and the context. Simply deploying a “video” isn’t really that simple.
Recently, I heard a phrase that I think sums this up nicely: “You haven’t yet mastered a tool until you understand when not to use it.” Continue reading
This summer, Pearson announced it will transition to a “digital-first” model where their future textbook releases will primarily be in continually-updating digital formats. On the heels of an announcement that McGraw-Hill and Cengage will merge, this decision highlighted a large problem for textbook providers: how to expand access and reduce costs.
Of course, it’s worth noting that while Pearson states they are “commitment to lowering the cost of higher education,” nearly two-thirds of their revenue now comes from digital products.
These decisions directly impact the two-thirds of faculty reported requiring textbooks (and nearly half requiring articles/case studies in their classes according to one study). So as faculty and students feel the pressure of skyrocketing textbook price inflation, the majority of students who do not have access to textbooks cannot do so because of cost. In fact, in one survey, 65% of students reported skipping buying a textbook because of costs.
While many faculty attempt to control costs by supporting used textbooks, rental programs, or placing copies on reserve, there is another option: Open Educational Resources (OER).
If you aren’t an ardent follower of the maker movement, or involved in it yourself, you might have missed the hype about 3D printing. 3D printing has grown from a niche market for creating small prototypes or parts into a multi-billion dollar business spanning industries from medicine to even residential home construction.
Supporters of 3D printing are quick to point out its educational value, where students can bring their digital designs into the physical world. The most straightforward educational uses for 3D printing align most closely with the so-called STEAM disciplines (science, technology, engineering, arts, and math), but there are a number of other fields, such as anthropology and history, where scholars are exploring its potential for both teaching and research.
However, my own experience with 3D printing is far more modest than, say, how some scientists are printing living cells. In fact, I’ve only successfully printed one thing in 3D: a small blue clover cup. Since then, I haven’t been able to replicate my success, which in fact was predicated by a number of failed attempts. Continue reading
Few teaching tasks are as loathsome as re-recording videos for your online course.
In fact, I’ve been trying to come up with potential comparisons for about 20 minutes, and the closest I’ve come is the sinking feeling in your stomach when you survey the stack of final papers/projects that loom before you during finals week. While a root canal might be preferable to re-recording course videos, here are two practical recommendations that helped me when I set out to complete this undesirable task: Continue reading
I frequently work with faculty who want to create a video lecture for an online course using the PowerPoint decks they present in the classroom.
I have misgivings about PowerPoint as a classroom presentation tool to start with (not the least of which is the problem of cognitive load [Mayer1]), but that’s a topic for another discussion. Faculty like them, and an instructional designer (like yours truly) learns to pick their battles.
Since we apply the Quality Matters (QM) rubric to the review of our courses, we typically view the interactions between the elements of the course as “alignment”—the idea that these pieces all flow through or stem from one another, allowing a reviewer and instructor to see the connection of these elements throughout the course. While we have various ways of demonstrating this alignment (numbering and sub-numbering, parenthetical reference, etc.), these tend to be used internally, mostly shared between the instructor, the instructional designer, and the review teams. Rarely do we share this full concept of alignment with students—but why? If we build for structure and scaffolding of the lessons throughout the course, wouldn’t it also be beneficial to students to see ways of connecting the various course objectives with the module objectives, readings, assessments, and other activities?
We have all seen the stereotypical version of what a lecture-based classroom looks like in television and movies. Whenever popular media wants to portray school as being dull, we are shown an unfashionable teacher standing at the front of a class speaking in a monotone voice about a dry topic. This (hopefully minus the dull, monotone, and dry parts) is what’s referred to as a teacher-centered classroom. In contrast, there are student-centered classrooms that encourage learning to be directed by the students. Assignments in this format typically involve small group collaboration and/or autonomy for the learner to choose how and what to learn. The student-centered arrangement has quickly been gaining popularity and is considered by many to be a more dynamic method of learning. However, both structures have their advantages, and I will discuss how each can be implemented in order to create an effective learning environment for all.
In a recent meeting for DePaul’s ongoing series of GLE (Global Learning Experience), professor of Italian Caterina Farina Mongiat suggested facilitators of GLE might gain valuable insights from the field of intercultural communication to prepare for coordinating cross-cultural interactions between student cohorts.
Though conceptualizing what to apply from an entire scholarly field is difficult to do when also planning the logistics and curriculum for a GLE course, we can try to start somewhere with an accessible application. As a student of TESOL studies and now intercultural communication at the Illinois Institute of Technology, I have started by looking at W. Barnett Pearce’s (2005) initial work on the coordinated management of meaning (CMM). The context for Pearce’s work, though now dated, parallels our present challenges in engaging meaningful intercultural discussions, even within an academic space: global nation-state relations, misunderstandings of the cultural and social other, conflicting faith-based and cultural values, among the many complexities that cannot all be accounted for here.