Holly Denney
OMDE 607, 9040
Final Paper
December 1, 2001

Management Issues in Distance Education Course Development at
Mauch Chunk University

Introduction

There is support at all levels (management, faculty, and staff) for developing Distance Education (DE) courses and programs. There are two centers for helping faculty incorporate technology into their teaching, one for Mauch Chunk University (MCU) courses and one for working with MCOnLine (MCO). The resources of these centers are available at no charge to faculty and teaching staff, and MCU does not claim any copyright interest in the developed courses. In addition, MCU faculty are a part of the MCO's online MBA, MEd, and Masters in Distance Education degrees. MCO also provides resources for course development, and uses the level of support as the determinant of copyright issues. Currently, MCU uses a modified team approach - the subject matter expert (SME) and the web developer.

DE is highly structured, and there is an implicit understanding that the students in DE must be equally structured in their approach to learning. Before making a decision to incorporate DE into its course options, the university must know its student base as well as its own strengths and weaknesses. Instructional systems design (ISD) provides the structure for evaluating whether or not DE is appropriate.

There are many ISD models from which to choose. Seels and Glasgow (1998) touch briefly on several, most of which are linear processes. All incorporate analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation (the "ADDIE" model), and all have their strengths and weaknesses. What is important is to identify the structure that meets the institution's needs, then allow for dynamic interaction throughout the ISD process. The structure may incorporate aspects of several of the models or it may bypass certain steps.

The concepts of ISD are a part of a major initiative at MCU developed and implemented over the past eight years. I have participated in significant portions of these initiatives over the past three years, and I am applying the process to the development of DE degree programs at MCU for three distinct groups of students.

Applying ISD

Analysis

Mauch Chunk University (MCU) is a Native American-serving, urban, research-intensive university. The majority of the students are first-generation college students who live off-campus and work 20 or more hours per week to contribute to the family income. Financial aid is extremely important, few homes have computers; even fewer have Internet access. In addition, the majority of the students are under-prepared for succeeding in college.

The "digital divide" definitely exists. MCU used a significant portion of its U.S. Department of Education Title V funding to construct and equip five computer labs on its campus. Two of the labs have wireless laptops that students may borrow for on- and off-campus use. Several campus initiatives continue to seek funding to install computers with Internet access in community centers.

DE has a role at MCU and can be used to expand access to its courses. The groups identified have access to computers and the Internet, whether at home or at work. Many of the resources to develop the DE courses and programs are available on campus. Two of the additional groups of students are:

o K-12 teachers seeking advanced degrees, and
o K-12 teachers' aides seeking a bachelor's degree.

These are groups with a demonstrated need for more accessible education. Some are attending other institutions that are offering DE programs or "weekend colleges." It's important to identify and develop features that will make these programs unique from the other institutions. For this group, because certifications and practicum may be a part of the degree programs, it is important to determine that (1) existing accreditations will cover a DE program and (2) in the case of the teachers' aides, whether or not their teaching experience will replace any portion of the practicum requirements.

In addition, there is a third group, upper division bachelor degree-seeking students in science, engineering, and math. The students will be the participants in one of our National Science Foundation grants, the Model Institutions for Excellence initiative. These students are highly motivated, they use technology, and many participate in off-campus undergraduate research experiences (REU) that provide invaluable experience but also extend their degree completion time. DE would enable these students to continue their course work in conjunction with the REU. The DE option will make the extension of the freshman-year learning community experience that is central to the program a reality. An added benefit will be experience with collaborative online group work with their MCU colleagues. Funding for laptop computers and, if needed, Internet access will be provided through the NSF grant funding.

Design

Quality of all aspects of the designed course or program is the primary concern. Students who are prepared to study online have an almost limitless choice of institutions. The university will be sensitive to faculty and students' needs throughout the design stage. Support issues will be addressed, particularly 24/7 access to key services. Without that access, students would not have the flexibility of "anytime" learning. Copyright permission will be obtained for all DE uses of materials such as articles and book chapters.

Theories of learning. Including theories of learning (behaviorism, cognitive psychology, and constructivism) adds to the ISD process. Behaviorists look for the appropriate response, not unlike an instructor who gives objective tests. Cognitive scientists look for the process of knowledge acquisition, much like asking a student to draw a concept map. Constructivists believe learning is personal, that learning cannot be predetermined, and that traditional assessments do not measure learning. Each theory addresses different learning needs, and each is appropriate to include, depending upon the learning task to be accomplished.

Instructional design expertise. DE places different demands on the SME and the students. Everything the student needs to know for success in the course must be available in written form at the beginning of the course. This means that the course is fully developed in advance, yet that development also has to allow flexibility for the dynamics of classroom interaction. Consistency of "course design, communication, technology, and assessment" (Indiana Partnership, 2000) ensures that the students are able to concentrate on learning the material rather than the technology to access the material. The material must be student-centered and incorporate the techniques of cooperative learning, active learning, and problem-based learning.

Student access. Learning curves can be deterrents for even the most determined students. The program developed will be easy to use and load quickly. Any additional features, such as audio or video, will use readily available components that the students can download from the Internet. The course design will be sensitive to special needs and learning preferences. Technical help will be available 24/7, whether to assist with problems or to answer questions.

Faculty development. DE requires that faculty understand the differences between f2f and DE - the lack of visual cues, the difference in the "energy" generated, and how to handle "teaching moments." It is also recommended that faculty "…provide online models of good coursework for their students" (Aycock, 2000). Faculty involvement is crucial - they must model good participation, contact non-participants, and maintain a warm and inviting atmosphere.

Staff development. Staff interactions with DE students are crucial. All inquiries must be answered promptly, courteously, and completely.

Faculty workload/compensation/evaluation. DE involves a greater commitment from the faculty. Their participation will be encouraged through adjusted workload or compensation and greater weight could be assigned for evaluation purposes. Class size will be addressed to ensure interaction among faculty and students.

Testing and assessment. Students will not come to campus to take exams. Assessment will be frequent and methods of assessment will vary. Grading criteria will be established for participation in class discussions. A pre-test will be administered to determine the students' knowledge of the subject; the same test will be re-administered as a post-test.

Student support services. Students at a distance will have equal access to support services as their campus peers: library, tutoring, financial aid, registration, orientation, applying, advising, bookstore, testing (entrance and placement), counseling, and special needs. All services will be accessible online. Students will have 24/7 access to technology help.

Technology selection criteria. The technology used will be appropriate to support the course goals. The cost-benefit analysis for the institution and the student will support the technology choice. Contingency plans will be in place in the event of technology failure.

Development

Materials will be developed to the specifications identified in the design stage to meet the needs of DE students. The project team will be actively involved in this process to ensure that the development of materials proceeds as planned.

Initial training for faculty and staff will address the issues identified during the design stage.

Formative evaluation is a part of this stage. A pilot group of students and faculty with experience teaching in DE will be selected to try the materials. Their recommendations will be reviewed for inclusion in the final product.

Support services will be a part of the formative evaluation as well. It is crucial that all employees recognize the importance of their roles in the DE programs. Individual responses to hypothetical situations will be evaluated and training will be scheduled.

Implementation

Seels and Glasgow (1998) include training and budgeting within this topic. In this analysis, I moved those items to "design" because

o it is important that all groups have ownership in this project, and ownership requires a full understanding of what is involved and how it is different from the existing model;
o this project is a new experience for the majority of the participants, and issues such as academic freedom and copyright ownership should be discussed early;
o whether design and development are done with institutional or grant funding, budgets are a significant part of the proposal process;
o when public funds are used, project cost overruns or cancellation are not acceptable.

This step involves the actual offering of the courses and programs. The design team will continue its involvement through the first offering of each of the courses to ensure that everything does work as intended.

Implementation includes accepting responsibility for the course content, that it be kept current and relevant to the needs of the students. This includes budgetary commitments to support the courses and programs as designed as well as to support the costs of maintenance and updating.

Evaluation

Did all of the designed elements work as planned? If anything did not, what was done to correct the situation, and what can be done to prevent its recurrence?

Evaluation is incorporated into all of the ADDIE steps in this analysis. MCU uses both general and specific end-of-semester evaluation forms. Evaluation is an important component of all that is done, and the forms are designed to include both qualitative and quantitative responses. Questions include whether the instructional goals were met, were students satisfied with their learning experience, and are there any recommended changes. Responses will be evaluated and will be incorporated into design adjustments

Diffusion

Once the new course or program has been implemented and found successful, the results will be shared with the larger academic community. MCU is very supportive of faculty and staff presenting at conferences and publishing their findings in scholarly journals and books.

"Problems and Pitfalls"

Despite the most thorough planning, problems and pitfalls are anticipated and contingency plans will be prepared that include

o budget adjustments for higher or lower enrollment than projected;
o criteria for opening additional sections or canceling a course;
o faculty substitution after the course begins;
o failure of student support systems, whether human or technological;
o unavailability of selected course materials, whether out-of-print or use denied by copyright owner.

Conclusion

MCU continues to make a commitment to the success of its students and to extending educational opportunities to all who want to learn. It is increasingly important that DE be a part of an accredited university's courses and programs.

DE course and program development is a way for MCU to meet the needs of these three identified student groups. The groups include teachers and professionals, many of whom have technology and Internet access at home as well as at work. Many have positions that preclude their making a commitment to be physically on campus to attend class, also illustrated by the students participating in REUs. Many of the K-12 teachers are MCU graduates, and more have begun without completing degree programs here. They are motivated, they are attaining their educational goals, and MCU must position itself to be their institution of choice.

References

Aycock, A. (2000). Web lessons in a nutshell: Findings of the faculty/TA collaborative web project. Teaching with technology today (7)3. Retrieved from the World Wide Web November 22, 2001, http://www.uwsa.edu/olit/ttt/aycock.htm

Indiana Partnership for Statewide Education. (2000). Guiding principles for faculty in distance learning.

Seels, B., & Glasgow, Z. (1998). Making Instructional design Decisions (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Additional Resources Consulted

Bates, A. W. (Tony). (2000). Managing technological change: Strategies for college and university leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.

Cole, R. A. (Ed.). (2000). Issues in web-based pedagogy: A critical primer. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1997). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

O'Rourke, J. (1993). Roles and competencies in distance education. The Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved from the World Wide Web November 13, 2001.

Paloff, R. M., and Pratt, K. (2000, October). Making the transition: Helping teachers to teach online. Paper presented at EDUCAUSE 2000.

Twigg, C.A. (1997). Notes for the June 4 - 5, 1997 NLII-ITP symposium on creating and delivering collegiate learning materials in a distributed (networked) learning environment: A business model for university-corporate collaboration. Retrieved from the World Wide Web November 13, 2001, http://www.educause.edu/nlii/nliiitpnotes.html

All links verified as of October 31, 2002.