Transcript Pedagogy and Instructional Design Part III: Courseware

Teaching on the Web III:
Assessment Techniques and
Future Trends
Dr. Curtis J. Bonk
Associate Professor, Indiana University
President, CourseShare.com
http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk,
[email protected]
Online Student
Assessment
Assessment Takes Center
Stage in Online Learning
(Dan Carnevale, April 13, 2001, Chronicle of Higher Education)
“One difference between assessment
in classrooms and in distance
education is that distanceeducation programs are largely
geared toward students who are
already in the workforce, which
often involves learning by doing.”
Focus of Assessment?
1.
2.
3.
4.
Basic Knowledge, Concepts,
Ideas
Higher-Order Thinking Skills,
Problem Solving,
Communication, Teamwork
Both of Above!!!
Other…
Assessments Possible





Online Portfolios of Work
Discussion/Forum Participation
Online Mentoring
Weekly Reflections
Tasks Attempted or Completed,
Usage, etc.
More Possible Assessments





Quizzes and Tests
Peer Feedback and Responsiveness
Cases and Problems
Group Work
Web Resource Explorations &
Evaluations
Learning Logs
(Paul Hickman, Northeastern University)

Combines journal writing and portfolios.





Interactive (student-student, student-tchr)
Collaborative (share thoughts, consensus)
Electronic (word processed & exchanged)
Essentially portfolios of student work.
Generate q’s, summarize articles, reflect
on what learned, test models, propose
explanations for results
Digital Portfolios


“A purposeful collection of work,
captured by electronic means, that
serves as an exhibit of individual
efforts, progress, and achievements in
one or more areas.” (i.e., demo how
they know what came to know; how
knowledge increased and evolved)
Terry Wiedmar, 1998
E-Portfolios: What might
they include?








Multimedia presentations (video,
animation, voice-over testimonials)
Examples of work
Personal statement
Self-reflections on that work
Connections between experiences
Standard biographical info
i.e., progress, achievements, efforts…
Large, complex, time to grade
E-Portfolios: Skills Learned
(Sanders, 2000)





Planning, design, and reflection on
work
Revision and evaluation of work
Communication of work
Consideration of audience
Track personal improvements and
accomplishments
Electronic Gradebooks
(Vockell & Fiore, 1993)






Calculate scores, store info
Weight scores
Flag students with certain
characteristics
Print reports by individual or group
Provide prompt feedback
But inflexible, impersonal, & can be
incorrect
Sample Portfolio Scoring Dimensions
(10 pts each)
(see: http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk/p250syla.htm)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Richness
Coherence
Elaboration
Relevancy
Timeliness
Completeness
Persuasiveness
Originality
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Insightful
Clear/Logical
Original
Learning
Fdback/Responsive
Format
Thorough
Reflective
Overall Holistic
E-Peer Evaluation Form
Peer Evaluation. Name:
____________________
Rate on Scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high):
___ 1. Insight: creative, offers
analogies/examples, relationships
drawn, useful ideas and connections,
fosters growth.
___ 2. Helpful/Positive: prompt
feedback, encouraging, informative,
makes suggestions & advice, finds,
shares info.
___ 3. Valuable Team Member:
dependable, links group members, there
Issues to Consider…
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Bonus pts for participation?
Peer evaluation of work?
Assess improvement?
Is it timed? Give unlimited time
to complete?
Allow retakes if lose connection?
How many retakes?
Issues to Consider…
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Cheating? Is it really that
student?
Authenticity?
Negotiating tasks and criteria?
How measure competency?
How do you demonstrate learning
online?
Increasing Cheating Online
($7-$30/page, http://www.syllabus.com/ January, 2002,
Phillip Long, Plagiarism: IT-Enabled Tools for Deceit?)

http://www.academictermpapers.com/
http://www.termpapers-on-file.com/
http://www.nocheaters.com/

http://www.cheathouse.com/uk/index.html




http://www.realpapers.com/
http://www.pinkmonkey.com/
(“you’ll never buy Cliffnotes again”)
Reducing Cheating Online






Ask yourself, why are they cheating?
Do they value the assignment?
Are tasks relevant and challenging?
What happens to the task after
submitted—reused, woven in, posted?
Due at end of term? Real audience?
Look at pedagogy b4 calling plagiarism
police!
Reducing Cheating Online








Proctored exams
Vary items in exam
Make course too hard to cheat
Try Plagiarism.com ($300)
Use mastery learning for some tasks
Random selection of items for item pool
Use test passwords, rely on IP#
screening
Assign collaborative tasks
Reducing Cheating Online
($7-$30/page, http://www.syllabus.com/ January, 2002,
Phillip Long, Plagiarism: IT-Enabled Tools for Deceit?)





http://www.plagiarism.org/ (resource)
http://www.turnitin.com/ (software,
$100, free 30 day demo/trial)
http://www.canexus.com/ (software;
essay verification engine, $19.95)
http://www.plagiserve.com/ (free
database of 70,000 student term papers &
cliff notes)
http://www.academicintegrity.org/
(assoc.)
Turnitin Testimonials
"Many of my students believe that if they do
not submit their essays, I will not discover
their plagiarism. I will often type a
paragraph or two of their work in myself if
I suspect plagiarism. Every time, there was
a "hit." Many students were successful
plagiarists in high school. A service like this
is needed to teach them that such practices
are no longer acceptable and certainly not
ethical!”
But how to determine the
pedagogical quality of courses
and course materials you
develop?
Just a Lot of Bonk






Variety: tasks, topics, participants,
accomplishments, etc.
Interaction extends beyond class
Learners are also teachers
Multiple ways to succeed
Personalization and choice
Clarity and easy to navigate course
Wisher’s Wish List

Effect size of .5 or higher in
comparison to traditional
classroom instruction.
Web Based
Instruction
Average Effect
Size
Number of
Studies
CBI
Kulik [8]
CBI
Liao [18]
31
.
32
.
11
97
46
.
41
Quality on the Line:
Benchmarks for
Success in Internet-Based Distance Ed
(Blackboard & NEA, 2000)
Teaching/Learning Process




Student interaction with faculty is facilitated
through a variety of ways.
Feedback to student assignments and
questions is provided in a timely manner.
Each module requires students to engage
themselves in analysis, synthesis, and
evaluation as part of their course
assignments.
Course materials promote collaboration
among students.

http://www.ihep.com/Pubs/PDF/Quality.pdf
Quality on the Line:
Benchmarks for
Success in Internet-Based Distance Ed
(Blackboard & NEA, 2000)
Other Benchmark Categories:






Institutional Support: incentive, rewards, plans
Course Development: processes, guidelines,
teams, structures, standards, learning styles
Course Structure: expectations, resources
Student Support: training, assistance, info
Faculty Support: mentoring, tech support
Evaluation and Assessment: review process,
multiple methods, specific standards
The Sharp Edge of the Cube: Pedagogically
Driven Instructional Design for Online Education
Syllabus Magazine, Dec, 2001, Nishikant Sonwalkar


five functional learning styles—
apprenticeship, incidental,
inductive, deductive, discovery.
http://www.syllabus.com/syllabusmagazine/article.asp?id=5858
New Methodology for Evaluation: The
Pedagogical Rating of Online Courses
Syllabus Magazine, Jan, 2002, Nishikant Sonwalkar
The Pedagogical Effectiveness Index:
(1) Learning Styles: (see previous page)
(2) Media Elements: text, graphics, audio, video,
animation, simulation
(3) Interaction Elements: feedback, revision, email, discussion, bulletin
http://www.syllabus.com/syllabusmagazine
/article.asp?id=5914
For more info, e-mail: [email protected]
New Methodology for Evaluation: The
Pedagogical Rating of Online Courses
Syllabus Magazine, Jan, 2002, Nishikant Sonwalkar
Summative evaluation instrument for
rating online courses:
(1) Content Factors: quality, media, authentic
(2) Learning Factors: interactivity, testing &
feedback, collaboration, ped styles
(3) Delivery Support Factors: accessible,
reporting, user management, content
(4) Usability Factors: clarity, chunk size,
layout
(5) Technological Factors: bandwidth,
database connectivity, server
capacity,browser
What are your quality standards?
Online Testing
Tools
Choice: Select companies that
specialize in online assessment.
Or: Use what the courseware
package gives ya…
Test Selection Criteria
(Hezel, 1999)







Easy to Configure Items and Test
Handle Symbols
Scheduling of Feedback (immediate?)
Provides Clear Input of Exam Dates
Easy to Pick Items for Randomizing
Randomize Answers Within a Question
Weighting of Answer Options
More Test Selection Criteria





Recording of Multiple
Submissions
Timed Tests
Comprehensive Statistics
Summarize in Portfolio and/or
Gradebook
Confirmation of Test Submission
More Test Selection Criteria
(Perry & Colon, 2001)





Supports multiple items types—multiple
choice, true-false, essay, keyword
Can easily modify or delete items
Incorporate graphic or audio elements?
Control over number of times students
can submit an activity or test
Provides feedback for each response
More Test Selection Criteria
(Perry & Colon, 2001)




Flexible scoring—score first, last,
or average submission
Flexible reporting—by individual
or by item and cross tabulations.
Outputs data for further analysis
Provides item analysis statistics
(e.g., Test Item Frequency
Distributions).
Web Resource: http://www.indiana.edu/~best/
Online Survey
Tools for
Assessment
Sample Survey Tools



Zoomerang
(http://www.zoomerang.com)
IOTA Solutions
(http://www.iotasolutions.com)
QuestionMark

(http://www.questionmark.com/home.html)
SurveyShare (http://SurveyShare.com; from
Courseshare.com)
Survey Solutions from Perseus

Infopoll (http://www.infopoll.com)

(http://www.perseusdevelopment.com/fromsurv.htm)
Web-Based Survey
Advantages






Faster collection of data
Standardized collection format
Computer graphics may reduce
fatigue
Computer controlled branching
and skip sections
Easy to answer clicking
Wider distribution of respondents
Web-Based Survey
Problems: Why Lower
Response Rates?






Low response rate
Lack of time
Unclear instructions
Too lengthy
Too many steps
Can’t find URL
Web-Based Survey
Solutions: Some Tips…








Send second request
Make URL link prominent
Offer incentives near top of request
Shorten survey, make attractive, easy
to read
Credible sponsorship—e.g., university
Disclose purpose, use, and privacy
E-mail cover letters
Prenotify of intent to survey
Tips on Authentification




Check e-mail access against list
Use password access
Provide keycode, PIN, or ID #
(Futuristic Other: Palm Print,
fingerprint, voice recognition, iris
scanning, facial scanning,
handwriting recognition, picture
ID)
Evaluation…
Champagne & Wisher (in press)
“Simply put, an evaluation is
concerned with judging the worth
of a program and is essentially
conducted to aid in the making of
decisions by stakeholders.” (e.g.,
does it work as effectively as the
standard instructional approach).
Evaluation Purposes



Cost Savings
Improved Efficiency/Effectiveness
Learner Performance/Competency
Improvement/Progress


What did they learn?
Assessing learning impact


How well do learners use what they learned?
How much do learners use what they learn?
Kirkpatrick’s
Reaction
 Learning
 Behavior
 Results
4 Levels

Percent of Respondents
Figure 26. How Respondent Organizations Measure
Success of Web-Based Learning According to the
Kirkpatrick Model
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Learner satisfaction
Change in
knowledge, skill,
atttitude
Job performance
Kirkpatrick's Evaluation Level
ROI
My Evaluation Plan…
Considerations in Evaluation Plan
8. University
or
Organization
7. Program
6. Course
5. Tech Tool
1. Student
2. Instructor
3. Training
4. Task
What to Evaluate?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Student—attitudes, learning, jobs.
Instructor—popularity, course enrollments.
Training—internal and external.
Task--relevance, interactivity, collaborative.
Tool--usable, learner-centered, friendly,
supportive.
Course—interactivity, completion rates.
Program—growth, long-range plans.
University—cost-benefit, policies, vision.
1.






Measures of Student Success
(Focus groups, interviews,
observations, surveys, exams,
records)
Positive Feedback, Recommendations
Increased Comprehension,
Achievement
High Retention in Program
Completion Rates or Course Attrition
Jobs Obtained, Internships
Enrollment Trends for Next Semester
1. Student Basic Quantitative





Grades, Achievement
Number of Posts
Participated
Computer Log Activity—peak usage,
messages/day, time of task or in system
Attitude Surveys
1. Student High-End Success






Message complexity, depth,
interactivity, q’ing
Collaboration skills
Problem finding/solving and critical
thinking
Challenging and debating others
Case-based reasoning, critical thinking
measures
Portfolios, performances, PBL activities
2. Instructor Success





High student evals; more signing
up
High student completion rates
Utilize Web to share teaching
Course recognized in tenure
decisions
Varies online feedback and
assistance techniques
Faculty Entrepreneurship
Douglas Rowlett has turned his Englishdepartment office into a virtual radio
station that broadcasts continuously on
the Internet, offering a mix of poetry
readings, lectures, and popular music.
He plans to deliver entire courses over
the Internet radio station.
Jeffrey R. Young (Jan 8., 2001). Chronicle of Higher Ed.
Faculty Entrepreneurship?
Santa Clara University has fired
an adjunct instructor who sold
his students thousands of
dollars worth of stock in an
online-education venture that
appears to never have gotten off
the ground.
Sarah Carr, The Chronicle of Higher Ed.
3. Training
Outside Support






Training (FacultyTraining.net)
Courses & Certificates (JIU, e-education)
Reports, Newsletters, & Pubs
Aggregators of Info (CourseShare, Merlot)
Global Forums (FacultyOnline.com; GEN)
Resources, Guides/Tips, Link
Collections, Online Journals, Library
Resources
Certified Online Instructor Program


Walden Institute—12
Week Online
Certification (Cost =
$995)
2 tracks: one for higher
ed and one for online
corporate trainer





Online tools and purpose
Instructional design theory &
techniques
Distance ed evaluation
Quality assurance
Collab learning communities
http://www.utexas.edu/world/lecture/
3. Training
Inside Support…







Instructional Consulting
Mentoring (strategic planning $)
Small Pots of Funding
Facilities
Summer and Year Round Workshops
Office of Distributed Learning
Colloquiums, Tech Showcases, Guest
Speakers

Newsletters, guides, active learning grants, annual
reports, faculty development, brown bags
Technology and Professional Dev: Ten
Tips to Make it Better (Rogers, 2000)
1. Offer training
2. Give technology to take home
3. Provide on-site technical support
4. Encourage collegial collaboration
5. Send to prof development conference
6. Stretch the day
7. Encourage research
8. Provide online resources
9. Lunch bytes, faculty institutes
10. Celebrate success
5
3
RIDIC -ULO US
Technology Use
Model of
4. Tasks (RIDIC):





Relevance
Individualization
Depth of Discussion
Interactivity
Collaboration-Control-ChoiceConstructivistic-Community
RIDIC5-ULO3US Model
of Technology Use
5. Tech Tools (ULOUS):
Utility/Usable
 Learner-Centeredness
 Opportunities with Outsiders
Online
 Ultra Friendly
 Supportive

6. Course Success






Few technological glitches/bugs
Adequate online support
Increasing enrollment trends
Course quality (interactivity rating)
Monies paid
Accepted by other programs
7. Online Program or Course Budget
(i.e., how pay, how large is course, tech fees charged, # of
courses, tuition rate, etc.)

Indirect Costs: learner disk space,
phone, accreditation, integration with
existing technology, library resources, on
site orientation & tech training, faculty
training, office space

Direct Costs: courseware,
instructor, help desk, books, seat time,
bandwidth and data communications,
server, server back-up, course developers,
postage
7. Program:
Online Content Considerations





Self-Paced or Live mentors?
Interactive or content dumping?
Individual or Collaborative?
Lecture or problem-based
learning?
Factual or performance
assessment?
8. Institutional Success

E-Enrollments from






new students, alumni, existing students
Additional grants
Press, publication, partners,
attention
Cost-Benefit model
Faculty attitudes
Acceptable policies
8. Increase Accessibility






Make Web material ADA compliant
(Bobby)
Embed interactivity in lessons
Determine student learning preferences
Conduct usability testing
Consider slowest speed systems
Orientations, training, support materials

e.g., CD-ROM
The Hats of the Online
Instructor
E-Moderator

Refers to online teaching and
facilitation role. Moderating used to
mean to preside over a meeting or a
discussion, but in the electronic world,
it means more than that. It is all roles
combined—to hold meetings, to
encourage, to provide information, to
question, to summarize, etc. (Collins &
Berge, 1997; Gilly Salmon, 2000); see
http://www.emoderators.com/moderators.sht
ml.
Online Concierge

To provide support and
information on request
(perhaps a map of the area…)
(Gilly Salmon, 2000).
Personal Learning Trainer

Learners need a personal
trainer to lead them through
materials and networks,
identify relevant materials and
advisors and ways to move
forward (Mason, 1998; Salmon,
2000).
E-Police

While one hopes you will not
call yourself this nor find the
need to make laws and enforce
them, you will need some Code
of Practice or set procedures,
and protocols for e-moderators
(Gilly Salmon, 2000).
Online Conductor

The pulling together of a variety of
resources as people as in an
orchestra to produce beautiful
integrated sound or perhaps
electrical current conductors if
your conferences are effective and
flow along, there will be energy,
excitement, and power (Gilly
Salmon, 2000).
Online Negotiator

Where knowledge construction
online is desired, the key role
for the e-moderator is one of
negotiating the meaning of
activities and information
throughout online discussion
and construction (Gilly Salmon,
2000).
Other Hats







Weaver—linking comments/threads
Tutor—individualized attention
Participant—joint learner
Provocateur—stir the pot (& calm flames)
Observer—watch ideas and events unfold
Mentor—personally apprentice students
Community Organizer—keep system going
Still More Hats
Assistant
Devil’s
advocate
Editor
Expert
Filter
Firefighter
Facilitator
Gardener
Helper
Lecturer
Marketer
Mediator
Priest
Promoter
Sure…but Cat Herder???
Activity: Pick a Online Instruction
Metaphor from 40 Options
Reality:





___________
___________
___________
___________
___________
Ideal World:





___________
___________
___________
___________
___________
Online Mentoring and
Assistance Online
Twelve forms of electronic learning
mentoring and assistance
(Bonk & Kim, 1998; Tharp, 1993; Bonk et al., 2001)
1. Social (and cognitive)
Acknowledgement:
"Hello...," "I agree with
everything said so far...,"
"Wow, what a case," "This
case certainly has provoked a
lot of discussion...," "Glad you
could join us..."
2. Questioning:
What is the name of this
concept...?," "Another reason for
this might be...?," "An example of
this is...," "In contrast to this might
be...,“, "Who can tell me....?,“ "What
is the real problem here...?," "How is
this related to...?,“, "Can you justify
this?"
3. Direct
Instruction:
"I think in class we
mentioned that...,"
Chapter ‘X’ talks
about...," "Remember
back to the first week of
the semester when we
went over ‘X’ which
indicated that..."
4. Modeling/Examples:
"I think I solved this sort of
problem once when I...,"
"Remember that video we
saw on ‘X’ wherein ‘Y’
decided to...," "Doesn't ‘X’
give insight into this problem
in case ‘Z’ when he/she
said..."
5. Feedback/Praise:
"Wow, I'm
impressed...," "That
shows real insight
into...," "Are you sure
you have considered...,"
"Thanks for responding
to ‘X’...," "I have yet to
see you or anyone
mention..."
6. Cognitive Task
Structuring:
"You know, the task asks
you to do...," "Ok, as was
required, you should now
summarize the peer
responses that you have
received...," "How might
the textbook authors
have solved this case."
7. Cognitive
Elaborations/Explanations:
"Provide more information here that
explains your rationale," "Please
clarify what you mean by...," "I'm
just not sure what you mean by...,"
"Please evaluate this solution a little
more carefully."
8. Push to Explore:
"You might want to
write to Dr. ‘XYZ’
for...," "You might
want to do an ERIC
search on this topic...,"
"Perhaps there is a URL
on the Web that
addresses this topic..."
9. Fostering
Reflection/Self
Awareness:
"Restate again
what xyz did here,"
"How have you
seen this before?,"
"When you did your
internship, what
was the first thing
you did?,"
10. Encouraging
Articulation/Dialogue
Prompting:
"Does anyone have a
counterpoint or
alternative to this
situation?," "Can
someone give me three
good reasons why...," "It
still seems like something
is missing here, I just
can't put my finger on it."
11. General Advice/Scaffolding or
Suggestions:
"If I were in her shoes, I
would...," "Perhaps I would
think twice about putting these
people into...," "I know that I
would first...," "How totally
ridiculous this all is; certainly
the “person” should be able to
provide some..."
12. Management (via private email or discussion):
"Don't just criticize....please be
sincere when you respond to your
peers," "If you had put your case in
on time, you would have gotten more
feedback." "If you do this again, we
will have to take away your
privileges."
What About
Student
Roles???
Participant Categories









Web Resource Finder
Starter-Wrapper
Researcher
Online Journal Editor
Expert Resource Gatherer
Technology Reviewer
Mentor/Expert
Instructor
Seeker/Questioner
Role 1: Starter/Mediator
Reporter/Commentator

Summarizes the key terms, ideas, and issues in
the chapters, supplemental instructor notes,
journal articles, and other assigned readings
and asks thought provoking questions typically
before one’s peers read or discuss the concepts
and ideas. In effect, the starter is a reporter or
commentator or teacher of what to expect in
the upcoming readings or activities. Once the
“start” is posted, this student acts as a
mediator or facilitator of discussion for the
week.
Role 2: Wrapper/Summarizer
Synthesizer/Connector or Reviewer

Connects ideas, synthesizes discussion,
interrelates comments, and links both explicit
and implicit ideas posed in online discussion or
other activities. Here, the student looks for
patterns and themes in online coursework
while weaving information together. The
wrapping or summarizing is done at least at
the end of the week or unit, but preferably two
or more times depending on the length of the
activity.
Role 3: Conqueror or
Debater/Arguer/Bloodletter

Takes ideas into action,
debates with others, persists
in arguments and never
surrenders or compromises
nomatter what the casualties
are when addressing any
problem or issue.
Role 4: Devil's Advocate or
Critic/Censor/Confederate

Takes opposite points of view
for the sake of an argument
and is an antagonist when
addressing any problem
posed. This might be a
weekly role that is secretly
assigned.
Role 5: Idea
Squelcher/Biased/Preconceiver

Squelches good and bad ideas of
others and submits your own
prejudiced or biased ideas during
online discussions and other
situations. Forces others to
think. Is that person you really
hate to work with.
Role 6: Optimist/Openminded/Idealist

In this role, the student notes what
appears to be feasible, profitable,
ideal, and "sunny" ideas when
addressing this problem. Always
sees the bright or positive side of
the situation.
Role 7:
Emotional/Sensitive/Intuitive

Comments with the fire and
warmth of emotions, feelings,
hunches, and intuitions when
interacting with others,
posting comments, or
addressing problems.
Role 8: Idea Generator
Creative Energy/Inventor

Brings endless energy to
online conversations and
generates lots of fresh
ideas and new
perspectives to the
conference when
addressing issues and
problems.
Role 9:
Questioner/Ponderer/Protester

Role is to question,
ponder, and protest the
ideas of others and the
problem presented itself.
Might assume a radical or
ultra-liberal tone.
Role 10: Coach
Facilitator/Inspirer/Trainer

Offers hints, clues,
supports, and highly
motivational speeches to
get everyone fired-up or
at least one lost
individual back on track
when addressing a
problem or situation.
Role 11: Controller/Executive
Director/CEO/Leader

In this role, the
student oversees the
process, reports
overall findings and
opinions, and attempts
to control the flow of
information, findings,
suggestions, and
general problem
solving.
Role 12: Slacker/Slough/Slug/Surfer
Dude

In this role, the student does
little or nothing to help
him/herself or his/her peers
learn. Here, one can only sit
back quietly and listen, make
others do all the work for
you, and generally have a laid
back attitude (i.e., go to the
beach).
Activity: Pick a Role Or
Role Taking Task
Name a role missing from
this sheet and discuss how
you might use it
(see Bonk’s 28 roles)
So What Happens
to Instructors and
Students in the
Future???
“We are evolving out of the era of
the Lone Rangers…faculty
members can choose to be
involved in the design,
development, content expertise,
delivery, or distribution of
course…” (Richard T. Hezel)
Sarah Carr, (Dec 15, 2000, A47), A Day in the Life of a New Type
of Professor, The Chronicle of Higher Education
Faculty Member in 2020








Track 1: Technical Specialist
Track 2: Personal Guide
Track 3: Online Facilitator
Track 4: Course Developer
Track 5: Course or Program Manager
Track 6: Work for Hire Online Lecturer
Track 7: High School Teacher
Track 8: Unemployed
Track 1: Technical
Specialist

Help critique technical aspects of
media and materials built into
online courses. Here one would be
part of a course development team
or instructional design unit.
Freelance learning object
evaluator. Here one would likely
operate alone or as part of a
consulting company.
Track 2: Personal Guide

Provide program or course
guidance to students on demand or
preplanned. Becomes more of a
generalist across university
offerings. For example, one might
help students see how different
learning objects or modules fit
together into a degree.
Track 3: Online Facilitator

Offers timely and informed support
to students struggling to complete
an online course or inserting
questions and nudging
development of students who are
successfully completing different
modules. This is the most similar
to college teaching positions today.
Track 4: Course Developer

Help develop specific courses or
topic areas for one or more
universities. In many institutions,
this will move beyond a course
royalty system to a paid position.
Track 5: Course or Program Manager

Supervisor or manager of an entire
new program or courses, most
often leading to certificates or
master’s degrees. Similar in
stature to a development head or
chairperson.
Track 6: Work for Hire Online Lecturer

Is a freelance instructor for one
course or a range of course. May
work on just one campus or on a
range of campuses around the
world. While this will be highly
popular and rejuvenate careers,
institutional policies are yet to be
sorted out.
Track 7: High School Teacher

As universities begin to offer
secondary degrees, some college
faculty with online teaching
experience and teaching degrees
will find positions in those classes.
Some may view such positions as
being demoted to the minor
leagues.
Track 8: Unemployed

If one does not find a niche in
one or more of the above
tracks or roles, he or she will
likely be unemployed or
highly unsuccessful.
Student Differences in 2020


Live Longer
More Educated







Multiple Degrees
Accustomed to Multiple Learning Formats
Design own programs and courses
Specialists AND Generalists
Courses/Degrees for unknown
occupations
Expect to Take Courses Where Live
Cyber-students (various digital aids attached to
appendages)
Possible Scenarios in Year 2020






Virtual U’s and Traditional U’s Coexist
Traditional Univ’s buy stake in Virtual U’s
Traditional Univ’s form Consortia
Some Trad U’s Move Ahead, Some Don’t
Other Technology arise well beyond Web
Large Virtual U’s Buy Competing
Traditional U’s and shut them down
What Uses for Old Institutions of
Higher Learning???







Museums
Historical Monuments
Bomb Shelters
Resorts and Apartment Complexes
Nostalgic Retirement Homes
Green Space
Prisons
Some Final Advice…
Or Maybe Some Questions???