Selected Papers from the 26th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning by Florida State College at Jacksonville

26th

International Conference on College Teaching and Learning

IGNITE, INSPIRE AND ENGAGE:

POWERFUL IDEAS FOR TODAY’S EDUCATORS 

MARCH 30 – APRIL 2, 2015 I PONTE VEDRA BEACH, FLORIDA

Selected Papers Edited by

Dr. Shep Shepard

The Center for Learning Enrichment

SELECTED PAPERS from the 26th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE on COLLEGE TEACHING AND LEARNING

Florida State College at Jacksonville

Selected Conference Papers CONTENTS Forward

Creating the Opportunity to Learn in an Online Forum: Supporting Collaboration Through Embedded Digital Tools Linda C. Allen William Kiser William Young Jacksonville State University 1 Facilitating Innovation in College Environments: The INNOV8 academy* Naomi R. Boyer Courtlann Thomas Peter Usinger Nelson Marquez Nathan Neuman Kristen Jernigan Polk State College 18 The Benefits of Incorporating Poetry into Composition Courses Kelsi S. Hasden Florida State College at Jacksonville 54 When Worlds Collide: Student Perceptions of Environmental Context During an Immersive Work Experience Amy M. Huber Jill B. Pable Florida State University 63

ii Â

Technically Engaging: Deepening Digital Natives’ Technology Skills Through Coursework Across Disciplines David Marlow Allison Pingley Breanne Kirsch Deshia Leonhirth University of South Carolina Upstate Steven Lownes University of Georgia 96 Complexity and Collapse in Higher Education Bud McClure University of Minnesota, Duluth

117

Integrating Audio-Visual Materials and Mobile App Technologies into Chemistry Course Curriculum Ganesh Naik Mary Ramirez College of Saint Mary 153 An Explorative Study of Enhancing Instructor Visibility and Presence in an Online Course Through Technology and Big Data David H. Reid University of Missouri 162 Wellness, Community and Project-Based Learning: Growing Student retention and Success in the Garden. Sarah C. Stuart Florida State College at Jacksonville 179 An Exploratory Qualitative Study of Students Who Enrolled in and Faculty Who Taught MOOCS Mandayam Thirunarayanan Florida International University

iii

Joliette Re Florida International University

194

Fuzz and Finesse: Educating Thought Clarity is Best Katherine Watson Coastline Community College 213 Self-Paced Learning: The next Game-Changer for College Mathematics Pangyen “Ben” Weng Metropolitan State University 239 Leading Undergraduate students to Bid Data Generation Juanjun Yang University of North Georgia Ju Shen University of Dayton 255

* Best Paper Award form the Conference

Copyright 2014, Florida State College at Jacksonville. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form by any means without prior written permission from the publisher, with the following exceptions: 1) authors of papers published in this volume may reproduce copies of their own articles as indicated in the Publishing Agreement; and 2) reviewers may quote brief passages in review.

ISSN 2333-391X

The Center for Learning Enrichment Florida State College at Jacksonville 501 W. State Street Jacksonville, FL 32202

Selected Conference Papers FOREWORD The Center for Learning Enrichment was developed in 1987 when the College accepted K. Patricia Cross's challenge to use the classroom as a modern laboratory for conducting experiments to gauge the impact of teaching on student learning. The philosophy of the Center for Learning Enrichment is that teachers are a vital key to improving student learning; the Center is therefore composed of faculty members under the guidance of a steering committee which consists of faculty from each of the five major campuses of the College. Part of the Center's success can be attributed to the numerous opportunities given to faculty to test their ideas on how to improve learning and to put research results into practice. Center Steering Committee members serve as Campus Mentors and as sponsors of faculty development programs, both college-wide and on each campus. The Center also supports professional development and sponsors a number of awards honoring teaching faculty. The Center itself has been the recipient of an award—the Theodore M. Hesburgh Certificate of Excellence—for its faculty development programs. In an effort to stimulate creative discussion and promote experimentation to improve the teaching/learning process, as well as to honor those who have already significantly improved learning in higher education, the Center annually sponsors an international conference. The conference features recognized educational leaders in diverse areas of teaching, learning and technology. Since its inception, the conference has grown steadily and now attracts nearly 900 scholars

annually from around the world. This publication, Selected Papers, was created as a result of Center interest in honoring faculty who develop some of the most outstanding contributions to the conference. It also preserves and makes available the contributions made to the teaching profession as a whole. Many people are responsible for the success of the annual conference. We would like to thank all participants, including featured speakers and workshop leaders; presenters from universities, liberal arts, and state and community colleges throughout the world; faithful attendees; and Florida State College faculty and staff who give so generously of their time and efforts each year to help the conference continue its success. Both the international conference and the Selected Papers journal have increased in growth and focus over the years. This year's publication contains articles selected as the best papers of those submitted to the 26th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning; they represent a crosssection of several hundred faculty presentations. All papers submitted for consideration in this year's journal were reviewed by the Florida State College faculty members listed below. Papers were judged on the following criteria: • Quality of content • Quality of writing and presentation • Focus of the paper (i.e., teaching, learning, technology) • Discipline

vii

• Appeal to an audience of professional, post-secondary educators • Theoretical or practical applications We hope you will find the ideas presented here applicable and inspirational to your own teaching, learning and research. Please plan to join us at the 27th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning. Marilyn Metzcher-Smith Professor of English and Center Chair Jacqueline Mack Professor of Dental Programs Glenna Veiga Professor of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and Spanish Dr. Maria Colavito Professor of Philosophy

viii

CREATING THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN IN AN ONLINE FORUM: SUPPORTING COLLABORATION THROUGH EMBEDDED DIGITAL TOOLS Linda C. Allen, William Kiser, and William Young Jacksonville State University Abstract: As online learning continues to grow, instructors are pushed to design interaction and collaboration structures that shape learner experiences within the online forum. Enhanced by a suite of digital tools, an online forum has the potential to embed social interaction that is essential in adult learning. The learning community is the vehicle through which learning occurs (Palloff & Pratt, 2007). Triesman and Satoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (1990) work also clearly showed that creating a structure within a learning environment that provides many opportunities for members to work and learn together enhances academic performance. As members work and depend on each other, learning within the community is enhanced by partnerships that tackle authentic projects such as case studies, debates, wiki literature reviews, and virtual presentations. Throughout the online course experience, bonds can be forged and relationships built that strengthen the learning of all members.

Introduction How is a virtual classroom designed and structured to enhance the interaction and collaboration among community members? Creating opportunities for learning to take place is the key. By providing collaborative activities, an online course has the potential to combat the isolation that threatens to undermine many virtual experiences. As teachers work to create an environment that supports the kinds of student collaboration necessary to shape learner experiences within the virtual environment, access to and familiarity with an enhanced suite of digital tools, including virtual classrooms, discussion boards, wikis, journals, and blogs, is essential. Palloff and Pratt (2007) have shown that the learning community is the primary vehicle through which learning occurs in an online format. Triesman and Sato’s (1990) work also showed that a learning environment rife with opportunities for members to work and learn together can enhance their academic performance. Swan and Shih’s (2005) work, too, has strong implications for community building; they found that when students experience high levels of social interaction during online communications, they feel a strong benefit from peer ideas and insights. As members work and depend on each other, learning within the community is heightened. Through partnerships, authentic group projects, discussions, case studies, and debates, bonds are formed and relationships built that strengthen the learning of all members. An online learning community can be influenced by many variables, including its size, the types of peer relationships it fosters, the structure of the course to which it is beholden, and the presence of offline interactions between members. Falk and Drayton (2009) stated that “the way people can join [an online community], inhabit it, and learn through it reflects important design decisions” (p.

11). They go on to discuss how the vision for the course “is embodied in the . . . architectural design, the content . . . , the facilitation structures, the membership structures, and the . . . tools . . . offered” (p. 18). Course design requires the instructor to consider a variety of features and levels of involvement as activities are designed and digital tools are selected to advance the coursework. Research continues to validate the importance of creating opportunities for student interaction and collaboration (Falk & Drayton, 2009; Swan & Shih, 2005; Triesman & Sato, 1990); in planning for these, the teacher must consider communication strategies, advancement of the learning community, and activity development. Interaction and Collaboration Twenty-first century students have been web consumers most of their lives. They demand online instruction that supports interaction and provides opportunities for collaboration with other students. West and West (2009) concluded that “they [students] want learning experiences that are social and will connect them with their peers” (p. 2). Tu and McIsaac’s (2002) research on social presence has shown that online communication, social context, and interactivity are contributing factors to student success as learners work and share together in the creation of meaning. Their research also demonstrated the need for online communication to be stimulating, provide opportunities for students to be expressive, and create an environment where all members feel safe in sharing sincere emotions. With the wide range of communication tools embedded in many Learning Management Systems (LMS) and also available in other formats on the web, teachers can design online learning environments that support interaction and encourage collaboration among members.

Online communities provide “members with opportunities for information sharing and learning, [and] for companionship and social support” (Kraut & Resnick, 2011, p. 2). However, these do not happen by chance; the teacher must create an environment that provides clear guidelines and supports for participation from the moment the students enter the online course. By doing so, the teacher creates a safe place where students can learn and reach out to peers. The best courses find many ways to “foster lively interaction among the students and teachers” (Falk & Drayton, 2009, p. 31). Discussion boards, blogs, and wikis offer limitless opportunities for teachers to design lessons and activities that offer engaging challenges and promote dynamic discussions. Communication Strategies Students bring different kinds of experiences and levels of ability to the online course. By utilizing a variety of communication strategies, the teacher can embed supports within the course that enhance understanding and promote communication for these often wildly different kinds of learners. “A student’s learning process is enhanced through careful activity preparation on the part of the instructor. The goal must be to create activities that will engage and challenge learners while expanding their personal connections to their existing knowledge” (Conrad & Donaldson, 2011, p. 26). Through thoughtful planning and design, online courses can increase communication and provide content understanding and engagement. This communication begins when the instructor initiates contact with students through introductory emails and provides the course syllabus and orientation. Initial contact. Initial contact must begin with a welcome email (perhaps even some kind of voice mail) and

a copy of the course syllabus. By also attaching a recent photograph and sharing a personal comment, the instructor has an opportunity to forge a more intimate relationship with the students before the course begins, and as students begin to relate to the instructor, they also become more comfortable and at ease in the online environment. Thus, by taking time to begin building relationships early, the teacher can ensure student satisfaction and support the academic growth of all members. Baker (1999) and Byrnes and Miller (2007) confirm the importance of establishing a positive rapport and congenial tone within the course. Brand, Glasson, and Green (2006) also discuss the critical role that high-quality teacher-student interaction plays from the beginning. They emphasize the benefit of validating students’ interests and capabilities. Building relationships with students begins with the first contact initiated by an instructor. For example, teacher responses to initial icebreakers can establish a foundation for these important relationships. Brand et al. (2006) highlighted the value of creating an environment where the teacher is supportive, accessible, and approachable. By ensuring that students have easy access to him or her, an instructor promotes student freedom to question and think critically about content. Orientation. The orientation should provide initial understanding and help build each learner’s confidence, setting the tone for the course as a whole. Lehman and Conceicão (2010) suggested “online course orientation activities not only set the tone for the entire course but also create an opportunity for learners to get ready for a safe and comfortable environment” (p. 40). The orientation should put the learner at ease and provide a forum for building relationships among peers as they take part in introductory activities. “A well-designed pre-course orientation can help learners feel they are part of the learning community

and are ‘there’ and ‘together’ from the beginning of the course” (p. 41). A comprehensive orientation is thus an essential part of a collaborative environment that supports positive membership interaction. The orientation session should also provide some initial face-to-face contact for the members because ensuring that students have access to pictures and videos of each other throughout the course expands the opportunity to build connections and form relationships . This kind of interaction can be offered in a virtual classroom where members can see and talk to each other. How-to videos and documents are also extremely important as students begin to explore the introduction to the course prior to orientation; these supplements ensure that each member has the step-by-step knowledge needed to get started. Every effort should be taken to ensure that all items are clear and concise. The goal must be to provide instruction and support student understanding as learners work to master embedded digital tools that enhance collaboration throughout the course. Setting the stage. As students enter the LMS and begin to explore the course, an initial welcome provided by a short video clip can share overall expectations. By also including an initial video clip at the beginning of each learning unit, the teacher has an opportunity not only to introduce the unit and provide a quick overview of assignments but also to set the stage for the work that will be accomplished. Embedding short presentations including video clips or sound bites throughout the course both inform students and provide a feeling of security. Mayer (2005) emphasized the importance of speaking in a relaxed tone when producing podcasts, voice boards, or video clips so that students are put at ease. He also stated that “people learn better when the words of a multimedia presentation are in a conversational style rather than [a] formal [one]” (p. 6). In short, an informal or conversational tone provides

the learner with a sense of security in the virtual environment (Vai & Sosulski, 2011). Safe learning environment. Creating an appropriate learning environment is crucial to student success (Knowles, 1980). Knowlesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; research emphasized the importance of creating an atmosphere where students feel accepted and respected, and such an atmosphere is essential to the virtual learning environment. Initial course development therefore must include activities that ensure open lines of communication and opportunities for students to get to know each other. Conrad and Donaldson (2011) recommend the use of icebreakers to set the tone of the course and support the development of the learning community, for they bring a humanizing aspect to the virtual environment. By participating in icebreakers, orientation, discussion boards, blogs, and authentic collaborative activities, members of the class begin to build a level of trust within the online community, and community interaction grows in turn. Implementing a variety of communication strategies before and during the first few learning units ensures that students feel a positive connection right away and feel safe. A safe classroom allows for mistakes and provides ongoing and productive feedback. In a safe environment, students have some control over their learning, such as choice of format for assignment completion. Sense of belonging. Initial course activities should include two or more opportunities for students to post personal photos and develop video biographies to share their thoughts about the work to come. Through ongoing embedded discussions, students build relationships with their instructor and peers and associate comments with a physical image just as they do within a face-to-face environment. An instant messaging system (IM) can provide many ways for students to interact. Be it through chat, phone, or conferencing capabilities, IM offers

students an opportunity to quickly see who is online in a course and contact them with a question. Within many IM systems, students can set up profiles that include their pictures, contact information, and short background statements. Recent updates in LMSs like Blackboard include places where students can update their profiles with photos that show up in course discussion boards, blogs, wikis, and journals. Multiple encounters with peer pictures and assignment communications work to sustain collaboration within the course. Homans (1958) found that continual social interaction strengthens relationships; increased peer connections through the sharing of personal photographs and the use of communication tools that encourage reflection and insight sharing bolsters the learning community. Because online activities with embedded communication components require more time, special scheduling consideration must be given to ensure that students can plan and work together effectively. Providing additional time increases opportunities where â&#x20AC;&#x153;depth of thought is likely to be greaterâ&#x20AC;? (Conrad & Donaldson, 2011, p. 21). In the online environment, students and teachers should have ample occasion to think critically, problem solve, develop responses, and research topics before responding to each other. The design and structure of a course should guarantee that all peers are held accountable; no one can passively sit back or avoid participating in online discussions, journals, and blogs. The teacher ensures ongoing communication by blending digital tools into the design of each assignment within the course. Summary. Within an LMS, teachers have access to many digital tools designed to support and improve interaction and collaboration. From the initial orientation session that is held in a virtual classroom wherein the teacher and students first formally meet, through emails,

participation in discussion boards, and IM conversations, students have many opportunities to communicate and work together to support learning within the online community. By selecting and utilizing different digital tools to sustain student discussion and collaboration, the teacher provides opportunities that are essential to learning throughout the virtual experience. Learning Community An online learning community can be a “virtual space where people come together with others to converse, exchange information or other resources, learn, play, or just be with each other” (Kraut & Resnick, 2011, intro.). It can also be a virtual classroom where learning is studentfocused and collaboration among members is central to the experience. The important role of learning communities within the online environment has been greatly advanced by a wide selection of sophisticated digital tools that facilitate collaborative learning experiences (McConnell, 2006). Members come to the environment with certain expectations for their personal learning experiences; the design and structure of the course, the application of digital tools, and the quality of activities embedded within the virtual course impact how learning is conducted, sustained, and enjoyed within the learning community. Conrad and Donaldson (2011) maintained that online educators must take an active role as content facilitators. The design of the online course should support and promote self-directed, collaborative skill development within the membership. As a facilitator, the teacher guides students throughout the learning process by providing a combination of learning experiences and feedback. The teacher is the catalyst who frames the course’s discussions and assignments to challenge each learner’s thinking (Lehman & Conceicão, 2010). Within the virtual

community, learning is a truly collaborative process enhanced by the contributions of all its members, instructor and students alike. The learning community is central to the online course experience. The instructor must design activities that support members as they work with and depend on each other to achieve the learning outcomes for the course (Palloff & Pratt, 2007). The teacher must carefully design activities that provide multiple opportunities for each student to build relationships with peers. Collaboration linked to authentic, project-based learning activities provides opportunities for the continued growth of all members within the course. Utilizing Engaging Tasks in a Virtual Classroom: Ideas for Change Well-designed collaborative activities have the potential to eliminate the feelings of isolation that many students experience when taking an online course. Numerous studies have validated the importance of supporting the ongoing connection between learners that contributes to student satisfaction and positive learning outcomes within the online forum (Kazmer, 2000; Picciano, 2002; Tu & McIssac, 2002). The teacher is responsible for carefully designing the structure of the course that provides the collaborative activities and for maintaining involvement with the students throughout the learning process. As facilitator, the instructor must ensure the success of all members and guide the learning process by providing students with many opportunities to choose their paths throughout the learning process. Palloff and Pratt (2005) stated that “It is the outcome…that is most critical—how the students get there should be of minimal interest to the instructor” (p. 3).

Great care must be taken to provide an explanation for the collaborative work, including the provision of clear and concise guidelines for each step of the collaborative process. Research has shown that student preparation prior to the engagement in collaborative activities significantly increases cognitive achievement of the participants (Ge, Yamashiro, & Lee, 2000). With careful planning and design, the teacher can successfully implement collaborative activities within his or her online courses. Initial Contact Effective online courses generally include an icebreaker in the orientation and within the first two or three learning units of the course. Icebreakers provide learners with an opportunity to share contact information, personal reflections, and insights. These initial activities let peers begin to identify common interests, setting the tone for future partnerships and small group work. An icebreaker should be a fun and nonthreatening activity that reveals commonalities among members and allows the students to express emotions and be imaginative. An icebreaker should also include a way to ensure that each member reads peer responses or otherwise interacts with the rest of the class (Conrad & Donaldson, 2011). Discussion boards and blogs provide the perfect forum to locate peers with similar interests and backgrounds. Over time, relationships evolve as members work together to complete assignments. Icebreakers: Discussion Boards, Blogs, and Virtual Classrooms Allen, Kiser, and Montgomery (2013) recommended

•

having members introduce themselves in one sentence, locating peers with common interests, and then having them post comments to several peers. having students share something about themselves that not many people know and then, based on the comments of other learners, having them find one other person with whom they have something in common. having each student post a symbol that represents some area of his or her life and then discussing why the symbol was selected; based on peer comments, students then post to two or more peers. having students share their top four personal and professional priorities by creating a single slide using a symbol for each one and then writing a short narrative discussing their choices (and also posting to two other peers). having students select a picture of their favorite place and posting about it, telling why these places are special and posting to two peers that selected similar places. having students each select one word that best describes them, telling peers why the word was selected, locating two peers with similar descriptions, and commenting on those students’ posts. having students tell about their favorite hobbies, selecting two peers that have hobbies that are very different from theirs, and then asking a question about each selected peer’s hobby. Instructors must assure the questions are answered for this to be effective. having students develop five-slide video biographies in a virtual classroom or recording

the videos and uploading them to YouTube. The teacher can have students post video links to a wiki page or discussion board within the course to be viewed by all members. Both options allow the community to see and hear each memberâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s biography. Instructors should ensure that two slides reflect student research and current trends related to the course. (pp. 1922) Partner Activities Instructors should consider having students work together as partners using three different roles: supporter, reviewer, and partners who develop a shared activity. Each role allows a different level of participation and involvement. The role of the supporter is to provide recommendations and feedback to help improve a partnerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s written work, while partners proof-read article reviews, proposal sections, or other documents for each other. The goal of the supporter is to provide comments that are kind but specific concerning changes that should be made before a paper is posted for grading. A reviewer takes on a very different role. As a reviewer, the student completes self-assessments for his or her own presentations and also critiques peer presentations (PowerPoints and videos) using an assignment rubric. A discussion board or blog can provide a forum for critiques. As students complete critiques, they identify both strengths and areas of need. The role of the reviewer is to support the growth of the groupâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s members by providing specific feedback based on the assignment rubric. Conrad and Donaldson (2011) recommend that all online courses build in opportunities for learner critiques. As students reflect on their own performances and those of their peers based on the

rubric, they develop a stronger understanding of their own work and areas for growth. Finally, partners work together to complete a shared activity. They may collaborate to acquire new information on a specific topic, debate opposing viewpoints, develop a literature review, or problem-solve a case study; in the online environment, the final results of this work can be documented in a video or a written paper. A shared activity should be designed to ensure collaboration between peers and the development of a quality project that requires equal participation from all members. Each partner role requires peers to interact and communicate in different ways throughout the course utilizing a variety of digital tools. Through their interaction and collaboration, partners work, learn, and grow together. Small Group Activities Small group work allows three or four peers to work together to complete an assignment. As members collaborate and interact, they must utilize a variety of resources and digital tools to support their efforts. As with partner work, small group activities provide more opportunities for interaction and rich discussion. Students can work together to complete many different types of assignments, and a variety of digital tools are available to support such small-group learning. A wiki is an excellent tool for group work because it shows all additions and changes made to a written document; it records the individual work of each member and reports the percentage of each personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s contributions based on the entire work. A wiki also provides a great place to gather and store digital media for access by all members. The use of a wiki is only limited by the instructorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s project design. Also, a discussion board or blog can support student interaction, and a journal provides

the means for individual reflection on an assignment or learning unit project. Some small group activities might include the development of a digital resource area (wiki), recording of civil debates (blog), constructing a written assignment (wiki), producing a video discussion of a case study or topic (virtual classroom video), setting up a grant proposal (wiki), creating a video lecture where the members become guest experts (virtual classroom video), or making a video presentation utilizing a PowerPoint. A plethora of digital tools are available to enhance small group work with a focus on increasing interaction and collaboration among peers; by increasing the opportunities for students to work together in a variety of ways, the teacher also promotes the growth and success of all members. Conclusions The instructor must give careful consideration to the structure and design of the course in order for it to support interaction and collaboration among its members. Attention must also be given to ensure that students have many opportunities to get to know each other, work together as partners and in small groups, and collaborate in a variety of ways. In every learning unit, collaboration and interaction are essential. These can be provided through activities and projects that support the content. Digital tools must be chosen deliberately and strategically to support the development of a strong learning community. Working to create an environment that is interactive, engaging, and collaborative will ensure the growth and satisfaction of all members within the course.

References Allen, L., Kiser, W., & Montgomery, M. (2013). Moving from promising to exemplary: Developing and refining the online course. In J. A. Chambers (Ed.), Selected papers from the 24th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning (pp. 1-32). Jacksonville, FL: Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning. Baker, J. A. (1999). Teacher-student interaction in urban atrisk classrooms: Differential behavior, relationship, quality, and student satisfaction with school. The Elementary School Journal, 100(1), 57-70. Brand, B. R., Glasson, G. E., & Green, A. M. (2006). Sociocultural factors influencing studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; learning in science and mathematics: An analysis of the perspectives of African American students. School Science and Mathematics, 106(5), 228-236. Byrnes, J. P., & Miller, D. C. (2007). The relative importance of predictors of math and science achievement: An opportunity-propensity analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(4), 599629. Conrad, R., & Donaldson, J. (2011). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for creative instruction. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Falk, J. K. & Drayton, B. (2009). Creating and sustaining online professional learning communities. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6), 597-606. Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Association Press.

Kraut, R. E. & Resnick, P. (2011). Building successful online communities: Evidence-based social design. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Mayer, R. E. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. McConnell, D. (2006). E-learning groups and communities. Maidenhead, Berkshire England: Open University Press. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Swan, K., & Shih, L. F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115-136. Triesman, A. & Sato, S. (1990). Conjunction search revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perceptions and Performance. 16(3), 459478. Tu, C., & McIssac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131-150. Vai, M., & Sosulski, K. (2011). Essentials of online course design: A standards-based guide. New York, NY: Routledge. West, J., & West, M. (2009). Using wikis for online collaboration. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

FACILITATING INNOVATION IN COLLEGE ENVIRONMENTS: THE INNOV8 ACADEMY Naomi R. Boyer, Courtlann Thomas, Peter Usinger, Nelson Marquez, Nathan Neuman, and Kristen Jernigan Polk State College Abstract: Polk State Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Innov8 program was designed to build additional capacity and support for technology integration and innovation into the instructional process, including intensive hands-on, face-to-face technology training, ongoing monthly community of practice meetings, and faculty action research projects on implemented classroom innovation. Implemented in the summer of 2013 to discover not only how faculty use technology in the classroom but also why and when they do so, the program is at the time of publication in the second of its three phases. This article unpacks and explores data gathered during the projectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first phase.

Introduction Polk State College is a multi-campus institution serving over 24,000 students with Associate of Arts, Associate of Science, bachelor’s, and certificate/workforce training options. The college has grown significantly since 2006 in both enrollment and course delivery options, and it now offers online, hybrid, and face-to-face courses in addition to small class sizes, affordable tuition, and alternative course schedules. With student success central to its organizational mission, Polk State has aligned its strategic direction through innovation, engagement, and value to maintain excellence and quality in current services while also creating sustainable, dynamic systems to respond to local economic trends. A 2013 faculty survey identified new and emerging technologies as being somewhat or extremely important to 96% of the faculty and staff at Polk State College to compete in the local post-secondary marketplace and provide students with workplace acumen (Office of Institutional Research Effectiveness and Planning, 2013). The majority of those surveyed indicated the variables of distance education/online learning and classroom technologies as having a predominant impact on the future of the college. To this end, the Innov8 program was conceptualized and submitted for special college-project funding. The purpose of this initiative was to build additional capacity and support for technology integration and innovation into the instructional process, including the following components: intensive hands-on, face-to-face technology training during the summer; ongoing monthly community of practice meetings; and faculty action research projects on implemented classroom innovation. The program was designed not only to explore “how” faculty use the technology but also “why” and “when” they utilize it

(Johnson, Wisniewski, Kuhlemeyer, Isaacs, & Krzykowski, 2012) through increased “domain specific” self-efficacy in the ability to learn technology topics (Ponton, Derrick, Confessore, & Rhea, 2005, p. 86). The initial implementation of the program began in the summer of 2013; the first cohort of 20 participants completed it in May of 2014. The Research Problem and Focus The described project and research study was based upon sets of identified institutional and instructional challenges associated with teaching and learning issues that were disclosed in the applications of the initial 26 faculty members who were seeking to participate in the year-long program (see www.polk.edu/innov8 under Appendix heading - Marketing and Application). In general, applicants did not express confidence in their ability to use a wide array of technology in their instructional environments and indicated low utilization of technology and best practices, as well as a resistance to implementing technology into their courses. In response to these identified problems, a program was designed that is assessed in this study. The following questions guided the research protocol: • What strategies can be utilized to enable the researchers to develop a formal institutional mechanism to scaffold/facilitate faculty innovations? • To what extent did the faculty acquire relevant skills to enable them to integrate technology in their instructional and learning processes? • To what extent did the faculty’s level of utilization of relevant innovations/best practices in technology in the curriculum improve?

â&#x20AC;˘

To what extent did the facultyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s confidence level (willingness to take risks) in regard to integrating technologies in their instruction improve?

Literature Review A lack of a pragmatic framework for an institutionwide mechanism to scaffold/facilitate faculty innovation was noted in the problem exploration described above and is a similar concern in other post-secondary institutions (Alsofyani, bin Aris, & Eynon, 2013; Boyer, 2007; McConnell, Parker, Eberhardt, Koehler, & Lundeberg, 2013). Consequently, researchers observed that faculty concentrated more on lecturing, taking on the role of providers of information. Researchers found that a deficiency in the integration of technology in instruction, a low level of technology utilization and best practices, and a lack of confidence in technology integration in the curriculum might stem from several sources that were identified and substantiated through data gathered from the program participants. However, instructional integration of technology is not warranted if it does not contribute to learning gains and student success. One of the key underpinnings of this study lies in the assumption that a higher degree of faculty engagement, as reflected in instructional innovation activities, will ultimately lead to improved student engagement and its well documented positive impact on student learning and success (McClenney, Marti, & Adkins, 2007). Rate of Technology Adoption in the Teaching and Learning Process Research conducted in the last two decades confirms the belief that integrating technology into the

teaching and learning process will improve student learning and better prepare students for the 21st century workplace (Butzin, 2005; Hopson, Simms, & Knezek, 2002; Prime, 1998; Reiser, 2001; Sam, Othman, & Nordin, 2005). On the other hand, though this belief exists among many educators, there is “an alarming gap between technology’s presence in higher academic institutions and its effective integration into classroom instruction” (Keengwe, 2007). Technology has proliferated in higher education in areas such as administration and research and campusspecific places such as libraries, but faculty continue to lag behind implementing technology in instruction (Georgina & Olson, 2008; Spotts, 1999). A number of external factors prevent faculty from adopting technology, including age and tenure status (Peluchette & Rust, 2005), lack of compensation and recognition for curriculum development, lack of institutional support, and the failure of institutions to deliver professional development opportunities (Johnson et al., 2012; Osika, 2006). Various studies have also explored additional internal factors related to the slow adoption of technology by faculty. Internal Factors – Faculty Assumptions, Attitudes, Apprehension Causes for the lack of technology integrated into teaching by higher education faculty originates from both internal and external factors. Internal factors include the attitudes and assumptions that faculty have in general toward using technology. Little, Page, Betts, and Boone (2009) reported that “encouraging faculty adoption and innovation in teaching and learning with Information Technology” was one of the top five challenges in higher education. Stroud (2009) described technology adoption as complex and developmental, involving cognitive, emotional, and contextual concerns.

Attitudes linked to perceived time and value are variables in whether or not faculty adopt technology. Rogers (2000) reports that as new educational technologies emerge, faculty engage in an adoption decision process that includes gathering information, experimenting using the technology, and analyzing whether or not it offers added benefits worth the investment of time and energy to learn and implement it successfully. Lederman and Jaschik (2013) analyzed Gallup survey results of faculty attitudes about technology and found that the more faculty had experience with online learning, the more they valued its quality and effectiveness. The survey indicated only 30% of faculty taught online, and the majority of faculty surveyed are skeptical that online learning is as effective as face to face learning (Lederman & Jaschik, 2013). Computer anxiety or apprehension is another internal factor that impedes faculty implementation of technology. Ravai and Childress (2002) reported that computer anxiety was related to psychological factors and attitudes that can be decreased with purposeful instruction; they found that faculty who took courses focused in technology not only built their knowledge repertoire but improved their self-efficacy, as well. Christensen (2002) reported that computer anxiety was minimized if faculty development training was designed to scaffold several stages of competency which minimized computer apprehension and negative feelings toward technology integration. Solution Strategies for Technology Integration in the Teaching and Learning Process Faculty training. Integrating technology into the teaching and learning process goes beyond “software” or “skill” based technology training, which has been the most common type of training for faculty (Rogers, 2000). This

type of training rarely leads to high levels of use or full integration because the training is focused on independent and isolated activities unrelated to larger pedagogical applications. In fact, most faculty development is usually offered in one-time, short workshops that produce little systemic change in practice (McConnell, Parker, & Eberhardt, 2013). In order for faculty to adopt technology and integrate it successfully into their teaching, faculty development must contain components that encourage innovation and increase successful implementation. Kenney, Banerjee, and Newcombe (2010) reported the importance of at least a week-long, “hands-on,” “learning by doing,” collaborative learning opportunity that included continued mentoring and modeling, on-call technical support, and web-based resources accessible to faculty on or off campus. An internal infrastructure of support mechanisms at both the personal and institutional levels must be created and maintained (Bacow, Bowen, Guthrie, Lack, & Long, 2012; Keengwe, Kidd, & Kyei-Blankson, 2009). The Innov8 program design emerged from best practices in adult education, online faculty training, technology professional development, and sustainable learning. The Innov8 program merges a number of preferable training formats (Herman, 2012; Norbury, 2012), including institutionally-supported self-teaching opportunities, peer mentoring, collaborative course design, workshops, online training, and quality assurance evaluation programs. Herman (2012) found in her research on online faculty development programs that “faculty members also prefer learning with their peers and having the opportunity to apply theory through actively using technology.” Facilitation of or focus on self-efficacy. Facilitating a change of perspective, comfort with technology, self-directed learning, and implementation of

new educational strategies for faculty requires an intentional focus on development of support systems and a safe environment; after all, faculty are experts within their fields of expertise, and feelings of vulnerability can emerge when faced with new and unfamiliar topics such as technology (Johnson et al., 2012; Boyer, 2007). Establishing an environment that provided the opportunity for increased faculty self-efficacy in learning technology was critical. One must note the distinction and nuance between the need for faculty to believe that they can successfully use and implement technology and the belief that they can “learn” to successfully use and implement technology. This distinction supports the recommendation by Ponton, Carr, and Wiggers (2014) that “educators, must move toward developing people who believe strongly in their ability to learn challenging, novel content” (p. 10). Fink (2003) presents learning conditions that must be at hand to overcome barriers to faculty growth, such as awareness, encouragement, time, resources, cooperative students, and an adequate recognition/reward system. Each of these areas, except cooperative students, was considered and included in the design of the Innov8 program. Andragogic content design. Critical to any positive adult learning experience is the relevant and meaningful design of the content in an andragogical format. Andragogy focuses on strategies of teaching adults rather than those appropriate for children (Knowles, 1970). Professional development designed with andragogy in mind includes the opportunity for the learners to participate in the planning and evaluation process, incorporate past experiences into the learning activities, capitalize on life and job roles, and work in a problem-based rather than a content-based framework (Johnson et al., 2012). The Innov8 program design was important not only for the transfer of knowledge but also for establishing best-practice

models that could transfer to the classroom setting (Chickering & Gamson, 1987). Communities of Practice. In concert with faculty training, creating a community of professional practice encourages faculty to adopt and implement technology. Reilly, Vandehouten, Gallagher-Lepak, and RoalssstonBerg (2012) found that beyond the technology content of a faculty professional development program, communities of practice were key to establishing a synergistic peer network encouraging technology exploration. Communities of practice have been found to provide a common platform for sharing knowledge and to help break down the walls of the “ivory tower” syndrome in order to cultivate the development of learning organizations (Buckley, 2010). Kopcha (2010) describes the fusion of communities of practice and mentors to create a robust professional development system that increases teacher technology adoption/integration; this systems-based approach was found to be successful in “establishing a culture of technology integration” as it helped create teacher leaders (p. 175). Action research. Action research serves as a learning engagement tool for participants, a program assessment mechanism, and a lens for evaluating individual participant learning outcomes. According to Jaipal and Figg (2011), action research is well aligned to teacher professional learning and “personally relevant and meaningful issues and engagement in approaches of collaborative action research that augment existing work conditions appear to support and sustain changes to teaching practice and student learning” (p. 71). More than just a methodology, action research was used in the Innov8 program as an opportunity to connect faculty in meaningful dialogue about the successes and challenges encountered during the technology implementation process, providing a means for critically analyzing the impact of innovation on

the success of student learning outcomes and preestablished hypotheses. To this end, as is suggested by Hine (2013), action research can “enhance the lives of those professionals who work within educational systems” through Hensen’s (1996) list of attributes: facilitating the development of new knowledge, promoting “reflective teaching and thinking,” enhancing the variety of teaching methods, empowering teachers in their craft, linking practice and achievement, fostering lifelong learning, and bestowing ownership of best practice interventions. Methods Two distinct layers of action research were conducted during the Innov8 program. First, an action research methodology was used and was intended to be the lens for program assessment and overall impact of the designed intervention. The Innov8 action research group began meeting in November 2012 to plan the scope, process, roles, and methods of the research study. Data collection began in December 2012 with the release of the participant application and continued until the end of the first program cycle in May 2014. The action research group met consistently and adjusted the program dimensions, data collection, and intervention as needed to improve participant outcomes. Typical of action research, the Innov8 action research team was embedded in the program delivery and therefore also a part of the research process. Thus, the Innov8 action research team cannot claim to have made objective observations; however, triangulation of data sources and perspectives was utilized to strengthen the validity of the findings (Kember & McCay, 1996). The second layer of action research was at the program participant level. The faculty participants were asked to either individually or as part of a group design an

action research project to conduct during the year that would assess the impact of an intervention on student learning. There were ten individual projects and four group projects planned by the group. These projects were presented at the college professional development day toward the end of their program the following year, and participants were encouraged to present at a professional state-wide distance learning conference. Instrumentation The instruments utilized as part of this study were selected in order to better understand the institutional issues and individual needs and development of the participants. Four measures were administered in a pre-post format with all pre-data gathering taking place prior to the start of the program and post occurring after the full year of program participation and completion of one project iteration. The project rubric was utilized after the completion of the participant action research projects. Program application. The program application (see www.polk.edu/innov8 under Appendix heading Marketing and Application), which was electronically distributed and collected, included two different self-rated matrices that captured the rate of utilization of the various technologies and the level of interest in learning more about specific technologies. These same matrices were readministered to the participants to determine if any changes in utilization and interest emerged after the programâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s implementation. The program application was completed by two program participants prior to administration to pilot the process, and a team-developed rubric was utilized to rate the applicant pool. Technology self-reporting skills and efficacy (TSSE). The TSSE was administered electronically through an online survey comprised of two separate

instruments, the Computer Integration Technology Survey and the Innovation Component Configuration Map (ICCM). The 21-item Computer Integration Technology Survey (Wang et al., 2004) was adapted with author approval to assess participant confidence in the implementation of technologies. This self-efficacy measure asks participants to assess their technologyintegration beliefs through a five-level Likert scale. The reported instrument characteristics show a level of convincing content validity and construct validity per the factor analysis, and they identified two distinct factors: computer technology capabilities and strategies and external influences of computer technology uses. Reliability for the instrument on pre-post measures was reported as .94 and .96 respectively (Wang et al., 2004). The ICCM categories within the self-rating rubric were modified for electronic administration and covered the following topics: faculty understanding of technology operations and concepts; integration of technology in planning and designing learning environments and experiences; integration of technology in the planning of curriculum; integration of technology in evaluation and assessment; integration of technology to enhance productivity and professional practice; and understanding and application of the social, ethical, legal, and human issues surrounding the use of technology (Javeri, 2003). The ICCM is comprised of 25 components linked to national and state technology standards of ISTE, 2002 and NETS, 2000 and was found to have a â&#x20AC;&#x153;high degree of content validity for the measurement of a pre-defined innovationâ&#x20AC;? (Javeri & Persichitte, 2007). Assessment activity. To substantiate and further triangulate data sources, faculty were asked at orientation to rate their level of confidence (not confident at all, somewhat confident, or very confident) with 17 different software, hardware, or application tools. To gather this

information, each of 17 different bags was labeled with the name of a specific technology, and participants indicated their specific level of confidence on slips of paper and inserted them into the appropriate bags. Project rubric. The Action Research Evaluation Rubric was developed and piloted to assess the outcomes of the participant action research projects (see www.polk.edu/innov8 under Appendix heading - Action Research). The rubric was implemented by at least two reviewers from the action research team, and the scores were calculated on a total value. The action research projects provided qualitative and quantitative information in regard to faculty utilization and integration of innovation into their learning or administrative process. Participants The participant group of the program included 26 at the outset, but due to attrition, 20 completed the program. There was split representation from the two primary campus locations approximately 30 minutes apart geographically. A wide range of disciplines were included, mirroring the diverse course and program offerings at the Polk State College. See Table 1 for participant characteristics. Table 1: Innov8 Participant Characteristics Campus Location Gender Age Ethnicity

Lakeland Participants 8 Male

Winter Haven Participants 12 Female

18-25 0 White 15

26-35 36-45 3 4 Hispanic 2

46-55 7 Black 2

56-65 >65 4 2 Multi 1

Tenure

1-5 yrs

6-10 yrs

11-15 yrs

16-20 yrs

>20 yrs

English

Science

Business

2 Reading Writing 1

Psychology Wellness

1 1 5 Disciplines Humanities Education Math Theatre 2 1 1

Nursing 3

Intervention Strategy and Program Design The Innov8 project was coordinated by a lead instructional technologist with input from a 12-member planning team. The project itself emerged from a staff professional development grant special submission that was awarded in August 2012 and designed similarly to a model presented by Boyer (2007). Included in the Innov8 project team were representatives from the departments of Education, Instructional Technology, Mathematics, Strategic Initiatives, and Information Technology, as well as from the campus libraries. The program design had four phases: planning, program application, program orientation, and faculty training intervention. Figure 1 provides a representation of the overall project timeline of the various Innov8 phases and components. Figure 1: Innov8 Project Timeline

Planning phase. The project planning team began meeting monthly in October 2012 and continued until the initiation of the first participant session in May 2013. The meetings focused on details for the organization of the four-day summer intensive training. Items of discussion at the planning meetings included level-of-interest results; level- of-utilization results; session-details (prospective session lengths, locations, and topics based on interest results on application data); guest speakers; vendor invitations; hardware and software availability; and room reservations. Program application phase. A program application was released following a marketing campaign and college-wide communication plan. Applicants were asked to provide information about the following areas: general applicant information course(s) for innovation implementation, current level of use and interest in technology topics, and additional tools of interest not mentioned in the application. A short abstract of their planned research was also included. The applicants were asked to commit to attend the four-day, intensive summer Innov8 Institute; participate monthly in year-long community of practice meetings; create an individual or collective action-research project; implement a new strategy/technology in at least one course; and present their experiences, findings, and recommendations at a faculty showcase at a college-wide professional development day. A review committee utilized a team-developed rubric (see www.polk.edu/innov8 under Appendix heading - Action Research) to determine those members who would participate in the inaugural class. Participants were each provided with a 32 GB iPad and appropriate accessories (i.e. projector connection cables, app purchase funds, protective case) for program participation. Participant orientation phase. A participant orientation was held in March 2013 at the collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

professional development day to provide an overview of action research, collect additional project data, and provide onboarding information. Participants were provided general concepts and theoretical background on action research, templates for planning the action research project (see www.polk.edu/innov8 under Appendix heading Action Research), and support throughout the research process from the Innov8 action research team. The onboarding information included details on the logistics of the four-day summer academy (i.e. dates, location, and expectations). The participants were also technically oriented to the iPad devices that were distributed prior to the summer training days. Orientation days were held to provide background information on the device and its operating system to alleviate anxiety prior to the first day of the summer training. Consistent communication was in process at this orientation stage (March â&#x20AC;&#x201C; May 2013). Faculty training intervention phase. Full-day intensive technology sessions in 2013 were held on the dates of May 30 and 31 and July 25 and 26 with participants attending all four days split between the two campuses. Table 2 provides a listing of the topic themes that were covered on each day of the academy sessions (see www.polk.edu/innov8 under Appendix heading - Summer Institute Schedule). Table 2: Innov8 Topic Themes included in the Intensive Academy Day 1 Topics Cutting Edge Technology Content Area Enhancement

Day 2 Topics Instructional Design Ethics

Day 3 Topics Student Engagement Communication

Day 4 Topics Online Leadership Assessment

The program also included monthly, two-hour, community of practice meetings held on pre-determined

dates on each campus. These sessions provided the opportunity for training on group established topics, discussing updates on participant action research progress, and sharing among the Innov8 participants. The communities of practice were established with the purpose of providing an opportunity for networking, support, and shared learning. Action research protocol. The second level of action research was at the program-participant level. Faculty participants were asked to design, either individually or as part of a group, an action research project they would conduct during the year that would assess the impact of an intervention on student learning. Ten individual projects and four group projects were planned. These projects were to be presented at the college professional development day toward the end of the participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; program the following year, and they were encouraged to be prepared to also present at a professional state-wide distance learning conference. Findings Innovation and Technology Needs The initial technology-utilization needs indicators were based on the academyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s inaugural faculty cohortâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s self-reported values on the program application measure for utilization of and interest in selected technology tools. Table 3 below shows large differences between traditional and non-traditional areas of technology utilization and some, but smaller, variations across faculty interests. Variances were strong even among tools of the existing learning management (LMS=D2L) application (range=1-5). This measure served as needs assessment data that contributed to the design of the Innov8 program experience.

As part of the initial assessment, participating faculty indicated strong interest across all areas of technology application despite the usage variances shown above. All interest scores were above the 55% threshold that was important for inclusion considerations; 67% were at or above the 80% margin. The spread of data clearly showed the need for introductory and in-depth training of new and existing applications. Table 3: Utilization and Interest of Faculty Based on Self-Rated Pre-Academy Needs Assessment Mean Domains of Self-Rated (Range Technology Tool Utilization 1-5) 4.20 Content LMS (D2L) 4.15 Grades High Utilization 3.50 Dropbox Areas 3.15 Quiz

Converted Usage Score 80.0%

Converted Interest Mean

LMS (D2L) Low Utilization Areas

Checklist

1.25

6.3%

IA Tool

1.05

1.3%

Competence

1.65

16.3%

Rubric

1.55

13.8%

71.3% 83.8% 71.3% 71.3% 80.0% 91.3% 80.0% 88.8%

Mixed Interest, Medium Usage Tools

Tablets

2.00

25.0%

88.8%

Cell Phones

2.45

36.3%

77.5%

Plagiarism

2.35

33.8%

83.8%

Clickers Digital Stories

1.20

5.0%

73.8%

1.10

2.5%

83.8%

QM Rubric Atomic Learning

1.75

18.8%

81.3%

1.35

8.8%

86.3%

Tegrity

1.70

17.5%

96.3%

Mixed Interest, Low Usage Misc. Tools Lecture Capture

78.8% 62.5% 53.8%

Traditional Applications

Lectern Tools

4.30

82.5%

90.0%

MS Office

5.00

100.0%

Trad. Techn.

5.00

100.0%

66.3% 55.0%

Technology Skills Faculty technology competencies were measured using the Innovation Component Configuration Map (ICCM) to assess faculty perceptions of technology skills, comparing individual self-rated competency perceptions at the onset of the project (T1) with post-academy ratings (T2) using a five-point Likert Scale. As Table 4 indicates, assessment results show significant increases (% Gain) across almost all (12 of the 14) assessed implementation domains. Table 4: Faculty Technology Integration Competency Perceptions % Gain

TProb Value T

ICCM â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Skills Self-Assessment

T1 T2

I select appropriate technology tools (resources).

3.35 3.70 10.45% -2.52

0.0210

I have skills related to the use of various productivity and management 3.04 3.45 13.49% -2.67 software.

0.0153

I have skills related to the use of course management tools for Webbased learning.

4.48 4.70 4.91% -0.89

0.3828

I design developmentally appropriate 3.43 3.85 12.24% -2.37 learning opportunities that apply technology-enhanced instrumentation.

0.0284

I apply current research on teaching and learning with technology when planning learning environments.

2.65 3.55 33.96% -4.06

0.0007

I identify and locate technology resources and evaluate them for accuracy and suitability.

2.65 3.80 43.40% -4.94

0.0001

I identify and apply instructional design principles associated with the development of technology.

3.09 4.10 32.69% -4.33

0.0004

I collaborate in planning and designing technology-based learning environments.

2.78 3.65 31.29% -3.33

0.0035

I integrate technology-enhanced experiences that support use of distance learning environments.

3.30 3.80 15.15% -2.40

0.0265

I support curriculum that incorporates 3.91 4.25 8.70% -2.13 integration of technology skills to enhance student learning.

0.0467

I integrate technology to address broader and multiple perspectives in the content area.

3.17 3.85 21.45% -3.00

0.0074

I integrate technology to develop studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; higher-order skills and creativity.

2.48 3.25 31.05% -2.74

0.0130

I apply technology to assess student learning of subject matter using a variety of assessment technology.

3.30 4.20 27.27% -3.69

0.0016

I apply technology to assess instructional practices and maximize student learning.

2.78 4.10 47.48% -4.66

0.0002

Technology Utilization Faculty technology utilization scores were established as part of the pre-academy assessment using a five-point Likert scale reflecting the self-reported use of various technology components in the online (D2L) and traditional teaching environments at that point in time. Technology utilization gains have been established as a result of the Innov8-based impact on the post-academy faculty responses using the same instrument. The pre-post measure comparison in Table 5 shows significant utilization improvements across most LMS tools and three additional support applications.

Table 5: Pre-Post Differences of Faculty Self-Reported Technology Utilization

Category

High-Usage LMS (D2L) Tools

Low-Usage LMS (D2L) Tools

Medium-Usage Technologies

Technology Type

Mean T1

Mea % n T2 Change

T Value Prob T

Content

4.20

5.00

19.0%

-2.43

0.0252

Grades

4.15

4.80

15.7%

-2.10

0.0497

Dropbox

3.50

4.40

25.7%

-2.71

0.0138

Quiz

3.15

3.10

-1.6%

0.18

0.8628

Checklist

1.25

1.85

48.0%

-2.04

0.0553

IA Tool

1.05

1.55

47.6%

-2.36

0.0289

Competence

1.65

2.25

36.4%

-2.35

0.0298

Rubric

1.55

2.60

67.7%

-2.30

0.0327

Tablets

2.00

2.75

37.5%

-1.68

0.1094

Cell Phones

2.45

0.0%

0.00

1.0000

Plagiarism

2.35

3.25

38.3%

-2.44

0.0248

Low-Usage Technologies

Lecture Capture

Common Applications

Clickers

1.20

1.10

-8.3%

1.00

0.3299

QM Rubric

1.75

2.55

45.7%

-1.96

0.0646

Digit. Stories

1.10

1.15

4.5%

-0.44

0.6663

Atomic Learning

1.35

2.55

88.9%

-5.08

0.0001

Tegrity

1.70

2.30

35.3%

-2.56

0.0190

Lectern Tools

4.30

4.40

2.3%

-0.29

0.7715

MS Office

5.00

0.0%

Traditional Technologies

5.00

0.0%

Faculty Confidence Faculty confidence in the use of technologies was established using two sets of measures: the Computer Technology Integration Survey (CTIS) and a somewhat more technology-tool-specific confidence self-rating at the onset of the academy. The 21 items of the five-point Likertscale CTIS instrument produced three factors, all of which showed significantly higher confidence ratings after the completion of the Academy as illustrated in Table 6.

Table 6: Pre-Post Faculty Self-Reported Confidence with Technology Tools and Technology Integration CTIS Construct Confidence in Ability to Use & Support Appropriate Technology for Instruction Confidence in Ability to Overcome Barriers & Coping with Obstacles/Constraints Confidence in Motivating Support & Responsiveness to Student Technology -Related Needs

Mean T1

Mean T2

T Value

Prob T

3.90

4.44

-4.38

0.0003

4.20

4.50

-2.88

0.0095

4.00

4.30

-2.67

0.0152

Similarly, ten of the 17 technology-tool-specific confidence ratings showed significant gains, and three additional items showed meaningful gains (not significant due to larger variances) as demonstrated in Table 7. Table 7: Pre-Post Faculty Tool-Specific Confidence Ratings Confidence Area

Variable Description Mean Mean % T Prob T T2 Confidence withâ&#x20AC;Ś T1 Change Value Student Response Systems

1.50 1.75 16.7%

-2.08 0.0555

SmartBoards

1.55 1.94 25.0%

-3.16 0.0064

Synchronous Software 1.40 1.94 38.4% Classroom Multimedia Object and 1.20 1.94 61.5% Supplemental Creation Tools

-3.09 0.0074

Atomic Learning

1.55 2.50 61.3%

-4.57 0.0004

-4.90 0.0002

2.15 2.94 36.6%

-4.57 0.0004

1.70 2.33 37.3%

-2.65 0.0169

1.70 2.06 21.3%

-1.46 0.1639

2.25 2.50 11.1%

-2.61 0.0197

Web 2.0

1.85 1.75 -5.4%

0.62

Digital Cameras

1.95 2.06 5.8%

-0.68 0.5090

LMS/D2L Tools Online QM Standards & Learning Course Design Environment SMART Lectern iPad/ Tablets/Cell Social Media Phones Tools

1.80 2.69 49.3% Plagiarism Tools Challenging Lecture Capture Tools 1.35 1.94 43.5% Applications Digital Storytelling 1.10 1.75 59.1% Tools 2.90 2.94 1.3% Computer Basics General Laptops/Desktop Computing 2.85 2.81 -1.3% Computers Skills 2.50 2.81 12.5% Microsoft Office

0.5445

-3.95 0.0013 -3.58 0.0028 -3.48 0.0034 -0.56 0.5805 0.00

-2.09 0.0544

Conclusion Strategies for Institutional Faculty Scaffolding of Innovation A comprehensive faculty development program was designed and implemented, one which provided technology and research training and empowered faculty to become scholars as a result of their engagement in a year-long action research project. Overall, the program appears to have met its targeted outcomes during its first phase. The intensive training, supported learning community framework, integrated action research model, and ongoing reflective practice established structures to assist faculty in thinking differently about both technology and the instructorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role in the classroom. To support these conclusions, it is critical to examine the final outcomes of the faculty participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

individual or team action research projects developed in direct response to the interest and classroom challenges identified. Table 8 provides a listing of the different action research projects developed during Cohort 1 and the research team evaluation of these projects based upon rubric guidelines established by the group of raters. A number of the faculty continued self-identified action research projects beyond the program timeframe; others initiated new action research projects and facilitated discussions with their departmental peers about how to implement additional improvements and integrate technology across the curriculum. Faculty reported that based on specific data collected, such as pre- and post-grades, student satisfaction, and increased course retention and participation, the action research projects positively impacted student performance. In addition, this study is in the process of aggregating faculty- and course-specific data that will be used to compare pre- and post-academy course grades, failure and withdrawal rates, and studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; course and faculty evaluation feedback to more objectively assess the longitudinal impact of the academy training on key student success measures. These data will be added to the next iteration of this paper to include a wider range of courses and a more substantial number of faculty in the assessment. Faculty Technology Skill Development and Integration to Improve Instruction As the technology skill ratings in Table 4 show, faculty indicated significant gains of 86% in their instructional technology-related self-ratings. Additional factor analyses revealed that these skills are representing three distinct areas of their assessed abilities:

• •

•

planning—to identify the instructional design principles and appropriate resources to assist with the development of student’s higher-order skills. selection—to select the appropriate instructional technology applications required to support those design principles and optimize the learning environment. implementation—to manage the integration of the various tools to serve student learning across academic contents and course-delivery challenges.

The correlations between planning, selection, and implementation were highly significant at the onset (T1), but showed gained strengths at the post-academy assessment (T2). Furthermore, all three skill-sets showed significantly higher scores at T2, where the strongest gains could be established for planning and selection (3.7), which had originally the lower score averages (2.9). In addition, implementation skill ratings grew from a mean of 3.6 to 4.2, evidence that even stronger skill sets can still improve if adequately supported. Faculty Utilization of Innovation/Best Practices into Curriculum Similar to the skills-related self-assessments, faculty feedback concerning the utilization of instructional technologies and tools showed strong gains from T1 to T2. Except for MS Office and other traditional tools, which already showed and retained the maximum mean (5.0) and no variance at T1 and T2, almost all technology utilization scores went up, and nine of the remaining 17 increased significantly. The only other item without any change was the cell-phone utilization score, understandable due to the current absence of an institution-wide BYOD policy and missing recommendations for best practices.

As Table 5 illustrates, technology utilization gains could be established in both high-usage and low-usage tools. Since improving online learning was part of the academyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mission, the most relevant overall utilization was reported for Desire-2-Learn learning management system (LMS) tools. While it could be expected that previously underutilized (low usage) LMS tools showed on average the largest utilization gains, already well utilized (highusage) tools showed equally strong gains in terms of statistical significance. In addition, tools and technologies such as Atomic Learning, applications of the Quality Matters Rubric, Tegrity as a lecture capture tool, plagiarism detection applications, and tablet computer utilization made extremely strong inroads in faculty utilization, showing an average utilization gain of over 46%. Improvement of Faculty Confidence in the Integration of Technology in Instruction As shown in Table 6 and Table 7, faculty confidence with technology utilization was established by two separate sets of measures: technology/tool-specific areas of confidence (Table 7) and a 21-item Computer Technology Integration Survey instrument (CTIS). The results for the measures of both instruments follow similar patterns established previously for technology skills and technology utilization: faculty report strong gains in general and tool-specific confidence for the majority of areas assessed. In detail, technology-specific gains were reported in 10 of the 17 tool areas and showed almost equally strong advances across such diverse areas as classroom/ supplemental technology tools, challenging stand-alone applications, and tool-sets directly associated with the

online learning environment, which underlines the reach and depth of the Innov8 Academy’s underlying program design. As mentioned earlier, in lieu of an institutional BYOD policy and associated utilization recommendations to address the use of social media tools for instructional advancements, confidence scores largely indicated faculty uncertainties at this point in time. In the area of general confidence with regard to instructional technology utilization, the CTIS assessment results revealed three major factors with both strong factor separation and significant inter-factor correlations: • • •

application confidence—my confidence to use and support the appropriate technology for instruction. coping confidence—my confidence in overcoming barriers and coping with obstacles or constraints. support confidence—my confidence in providing adequate support and responsiveness to student technology-related needs.

As before, all three constructs showed significantly improved score gains between T1 and T2; similarly, the originally lowest-scoring item (application confidence) showed the strongest gains. The gain in support confidence particularly mirrors the gain in planning skills described above (from rho=0.38 to rho=0.50*). Anecdotal evidence gathered from dialogue during an Innov8 community of practice meeting indicated that even those faculty participants who were initially convinced that they knew what they wanted to learn experienced a transformation of perspective. To paraphrase the sentiment of one such faculty member, he thought he knew what he needed to learn, but it was what he wanted to know, not what he really needed to know. This suggests that the learning outcomes of the program were more farreaching than originally intended and that the confidence,

interest, and utilization that emerged also facilitated a collateral impact through self-realization. Limitations The generalizability of the information in this study to a wide representation of higher education institutions is limited due to the small number of participants. However, subsequent cohorts will increase the sample size and provide increased data for analysis that could assist confirmation of the presented findings. In addition, the applicability of the preliminary findings may be limited to the academic disciplines of the participants represented in the study. The first phase of this research was very informative for the researchers, and as is appropriate in action research, the programâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s design and delivery of content was modified for subsequent cohorts. Additional guidance was provided in regard to the action research design, and the timing of the pre- and post-assessments was shifted to assure a more timely completion of the instrumentation. The action research implementation team collaborated throughout the duration of the program and prior to the implementation of phase two to alter delivery of the institute. Alignment to the topic needs of the second group was just as critical as during the first phase of the research. Additionally, it was noted that before the completion of the second cohort, there is a need to train researchers to reach a common understanding and application of the Action Research Evaluation Rubric used to evaluate the projects for consistency. Further triangulation over time, across researchers, and within instrument validity is required to further substantiate the findings of this study. The nature of action research requires diligence to research design to escalate the rigor and impact of embedded scholarship.

Next Steps Empirical research and publications in top tier journals are often the only types of scholarship that receives attention in higher education. In a post-secondary teaching institution, research is often not encouraged due to this very limited perspective. However, scholarly exploration and analysis of contemporary teaching methods and instructor attitudes in discipline-based education, as well as of the professional development opportunities that affect those methods and attitudes, has tremendous value that can inform practice, elevate faculty status as scholars, and leverage best practices and strategies, thereby catalyzing innovation within the college setting. The evolution of action research includes cycles of iteration in response to researcher learning and emergent issues. This study represents phase one of a three-phase project; at the time of this publication, phase two with Innov8 cohort two is underway. Future studies will increase the sample numbers, expand program topics, and solidify or modify the findings presented in this study. As additional time passes, further work can be done to capture the overarching impact on student learning outcomes based upon participation in the Innov8 program. Course grades and withdrawal/failure rates of students enrolled in courses of faculty participants and end-of-term student course evaluations should be studied to link to conclusions about the impact of this program. Data that represent the impact on student performance, retention, and satisfaction should be added to each project poster and to the evaluatorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; rubric to better capture influences on student success. Of course, it is incumbent upon the research team not to lose sight of the ultimate educational intent of the professional development program in question, which is to improve student success.

References Alsofyani, M., bin Aris, B., & Eynon, R. (2013). A preliminary evaluation of a short online training workshop for TPACK development. International Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 25(1), 118-128. Bacow, L.S., Bowen, W.G., Guthrie, K.M., Lack, K.A., Long, M.P. (2012). Barriers to adoption of online learning systems in U.S. higher education. Ithaka S+R. Retrieved from http://www.sr.ithaka.org/sites/default/files/reports/barri ers-to-adoption-of-online-learning-systems-in-ushigher-education.pdf Boyer, N. (2007). A sea of change: Faculty self-direction in technology integration. International Journal of SelfDirected Learning, 4(1), 16-26. Retrieved from http://sdlglobal.com/journals.php Buckley, S. (2012). Higher education and knowledge sharing: From ivory tower to twenty-first century. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 49(3), 333-344. Butzin, S. M. (2001). Using instructional technology in transformed learning environments: An evaluation of project CHILD. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 33(4), 367-373. Chickering, A. W., Gamson, Z. F., & American Association for Higher Education. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 3-7. Christensen, R. (2002). Effects of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 411-433. Fink, L.D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Georgina, D. A., & Olson, M. R. (2008). Integration of technology in higher education: A review of faculty self-perceptions. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(1), 1-8. Hensen, K. T. (1996). Teachers as researchers. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (4th ed., pp. 53-66). New York: Macmillan. Herman, J.H. (2012). Faculty development programs: The frequency and variety of professional development programs available to online instructors. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(5), 87-106. Hine, G.S.C. (2013). The importance of action research in teacher education programs. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 151-163. Hopson, M. H., Simms, R. L., & Knezek, G. A. (2002). Using a technology-enriched environment to improve higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(2), 109-19. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (February 2002). Educational computing and technology standards. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards Jaipal, K., & Figg, C. (2011). Collaborative action research approaches promoting professional development for elementary school teachers. Educational Action Research, 19(1), 59-72. Javeri, M. (2003). Technology integration: Best practices in higher education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(11A), 4019. (AA No. I3110919) Javeri, M., & Persichitte, K. (2007). Measuring technology integration practices of higher education faculty with an innovation component configuration map (ICCM). International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 3(1), 28-50.

Johnson, T., Wisniewski, M.A., Kuhlemeyer, G., Isaacs, G., & Krzykowski, J. (2012). Technology adoption in higher education: Overcoming anxiety through faculty bootcamp. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(2), 63-72. Keengwe, J. (2007). Faculty integration of technology into instruction and studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perceptions of computer technology to improve student learning. Journal of Information Technology Education, 6, 171-180. Keengwe, J., Kidd, T., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2009). Faculty and technology: Implications for faculty training and technology leadership. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 23-28. Kember, D., & McKay, J. (1996). Action research into the quality of student learning. Journal of Higher Education, 67(5), 528-554. Kenney, J. L., Banerjee, P., & Newcombe, E. (2010). Developing and sustaining positive change in faculty technology skills: Lessons learned from an innovative faculty development initiative. International Journal of Technology in Teaching & Learning, 6(2), 89-103. Knowles, M. S. (1970). The Modern practice of adult education; andragogy versus pedagogy. New York. Association Press. Kopcha, T. J. (2010). A systems-based approach to technology integration using mentoring and communities of practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 175-190. Lederman, D. & Jaschik, S. (2013). Survey of faculty attitudes on technology. Inside Higher Ed. Little, J.K., Page, C., Betts K., Boone, S., et al. (2009). Top teaching and learning challenges in 2009. Educause Review, 44(2), 30-44.

McClenney, K., Marti, C.N., & Adkins, C. (2012). Student engagement and student outcomes: Key findings from CCSSE validation research. Community College Survey of Student Engagement. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED529076 McConnell, T.J., Parker, J.M., Eberhardt, J. Koehler, M.J., & Lundeberg, M.A. (2013). Virtual professional learning communities: Teachersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perceptions of virtual versus face-to-face professional development. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22 (3), 267-277. National Educational Technology Standards (NETS). (2000). National educational technology standards and performance indicators for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/nets_for_teachers_2000.p df?sfvrsn=2 Norbury, K. (2012). Bringing faculty into the fold. Campus Technology, 25(7), 10-12. Office of Institutional Research Effectiveness and Planning. (2013). Polk State College employee survey: Perceptions of technology importance. Lakeland, Fl: Polk State College. Osika, E. (2006). The concentric support model: A model for the planning and evaluation of distance learning programs. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. 9(3). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall93/osika93.p df Peluchette, J. V., & Rust, K. A. (2005). Technology use in the classroom: Preferences of management faculty members. Journal of Education for Business, 80(4), 200-205. Ponton, M.K., Carr, P. B., & Wiggers, N.R. (2014). Selfefficacy to do or self-efficacy to learn to do: A study related to persistence. Paper presented at the 28th International Self-Directed Learning Symposium, Cocoa Beach, FL.

Ponton, M.K., Derrick, M.G., Confessore, G.J., & Rhea, N. (2005). The role of self-efficacy in autonomous learning. International Journal of Self-directed Learning, 2 (2), 81-90. Prime, G. (1998). Tailoring assessment of technological literacy learning. The Journal of Technology Studies, 24(2), 18-23. Reilly, J., Vandenhouten, C., Gallagher-Lepak, S., & Ralston-Berg, P. (2012). Faculty development for elearning: A multi-campus community of practice (COP) approach. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(2), 99-110. Reiser, R.R. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 49(1), 53-64. Rogers, D.L. (2000). A paradigm shift: Technology integration for higher education in the new millennium. Educational Technology Review, 13, 19-27. Rovai, A. P., & Childress, M. D. (2002). Explaining and predicting resistance to computer anxiety reduction among teacher education students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education (International Society for Technology in Education), 35(2), 226. Sam, H.K., Othman, A.E.A. & Nordin, Z.S. (2005). Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, and attitudes toward the internet: A study among undergraduates in Unimas. Educational Technology & Society, 8(4), 205219. Spotts, T.H. (1999). Discriminating factors in faculty use of instructional technology in higher education. Educational Technology & Society, 2(4), 1-11. Stroud, S. (2009). A new way forward. T.H.E. Journal, 36(10), 18-22.

Wang, L., Ertmer, P.A., Newby, T.J. (2004). Increasing preservice teachersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; self-efficacy beliefs for technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36 (3), 231-250.

THE BENEFITS OF INCORPORATING POETRY INTO COMPOSITION COURSES Kelsi S. Hasden Florida State College at Jacksonville Abstract: Students typically think poetry is difficult to understand because they are not accustomed to the manner of description, figures of speech, pacing, or even graphic appearance on the page that, on a basic level, make poetry what it is. However, using poetry in a composition course teaches students how to use critical thinking, perform analysis and evaluation, summarize, and discover purpose, audience, and point of view. When they are introduced to poetry through music and language with which they are more comfortable, students are more capable and willing to work with poetry. Questions posed to them while they are analyzing the poems enable them to determine audience, purpose, and point of view; they are then given writing assignments that ask them to evaluate certain aspects of the poems based on readersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; general expectations of poetry defined during class discussions of the poems. Poetry presents a challenge to students that they may not initially confront on their own; meeting this challenge can lead to improved analytical skills and reading comprehension.

Introduction According to the Florida State College at Jacksonville College Credit Course Outlines (personal communication, 2011), argument, analysis, evaluation, and summary are skills that are taught in ENC 1101 and 1102. The University of North Florida (UNF) requires that students of ENC 1143, Rhetoric and Narrative, learn rhetorical analysis, “markers of syntactical fluency, diction, and tone” (personal communication, 2014). UNF students must also learn how to think critically, solve problems, and express themselves, as goals outlined in the Florida Mandated Student Learning Outcomes for General Education (personal communication, 2015). Students typically learn the skills from both schools by reading academic essays, fiction and nonfiction stories, or novels and then, through class discussion, exercise critical thinking to determine audience, point of view, and purpose. One genre that is greatly overlooked that can be effectively used to develop these required skills is poetry. Poetry provides both a challenge to students and an opportunity to show them that they are able to overcome such challenges (as well as their own potential aversions to poetry). Discussion College students do not typically study poetry unless they are English majors who favor such texts. Additionally, many college students have not been exposed to much poetry beyond Robert Frost’s “The Road Not Taken”, Edgar Allen Poe’s “The Raven”, or poems by Shel Silverstein (Hasden, 2012). Expecting students who have had such little exposure to poetry to engage in an assignment that requires them to analyze, evaluate, and summarize poetic works—tasks that go far beyond basic understanding of the poems—is unfair and

counterproductive. To ensure student success when introducing a class to poetry, the instructor must bring the works to the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; level. Students may not choose to read poetry, but most of them enjoy listening to popular music, which can be viewed as poetry put to a beat. Thus, students are already accustomed to hearing poetic devices, especially in rap and R&B music. When the instructor draws attention to this fact, students will see that they already harness the skills to understand poetry, skills they may not have realized they had. Introducing poetry to students through music engages them on several levels. For one, students realize that the instructor is interested in what they can bring to the discussion because their own interests have been referenced. Using music also tells students that the instructor wants to meet them halfway in this challenge; the instructor is aware that poetry may be perceived as hard or boring , so by introducing popular texts that students already enjoy, he or she is able to pique student interest and capitalize on skills the students use every day without necessarily realizing it. The instructor should pick a song the students are familiar with and play it while projecting the lyrics onto the overhead screen. When the song has ended, the instructor should ask the class the following questions in the form of a class discussion: 1. What is the songâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s topic? 2. From what perspective is the singer approaching that topic? 3. What is the singerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s purpose for performing this song? 4. Is the singer the speaker in the song? How do you know?

By addressing these questions during class discussion, students are allowed to voice their own ideas regarding the song’s lyrics and, perhaps most importantly, they can substantiate their claims. Ensuring that there is no wrong answer, that responses simply need to be fleshed out or explained, typically persuades students to participate. Once students have ascertained the meaning behind the song, the instructor should introduce them to more traditional poetry. It is a good idea to begin with poems like Archibald MacLeish’s “Ars Poetica” (1926a) or “The End of the World” (1926b) so that students can see that poems can be lighthearted and can be appreciated independently of their deeper meaning. The instructor reads the poem out loud and encourages students to reread the poem if they wish. For example, leaving the last line of “Ars Poetica” up on the screen, the instructor might ask students to discuss their thoughts about the poem and its underlying meaning. Pointing out that MacLeish tends to be the most clear in his last line, the instructor can present it as the main idea of the poem. This shows students that poetry is not designed to be allusive but is meant to be experienced; as MacLeish (1926a) states in his final lines, “A poem should not mean/but be”. An effective poem to introduce after MacLeish’s poems is Emma Lazarus’s (1883) “The New Colossus,” which contains descriptions that should remind students of the Statue of Liberty. This poem can help the class transition to a discussion of poems’ deeper meanings and the practice of close reading. When first reading “The New Colossus,” students may not catch all of the references unless they take the poem apart line by line and explain what Lazarus describes. Dorthea Mathews’ (1928) “The Lynching” is another poem that demonstrates the necessity of careful reading. For example, students tend to misunderstand Mathews’ poem because they skip the title,

which tells the reader the event being explained in the poem. Other poems that demonstrate the use of clear and simple language rather than unclear references or high diction are Edna St. Vincent Millay’s (1920) “Oh, oh you will be sorry for that word” and Anne Sexton’s (1966) “Cripples and Other Stories.” These two poems utilize narrative structures to report on women’s experiences in the 1920’s and 1960’s. An excellent poem with which to end the discussion is Mark Strand’s (1978) “The Coming of Light.” This poem is very hard for students to understand and serves as an example of the kind of poetry that scares readers away. “The Coming of Light” echoes MacLeish’s idea that poetry doesn’t have to mean anything but can “just be” (MacLeish, 1926a). Poetry is not allusive; it provides a feeling, an experience that washes over the reader and leaves him or her better for having experienced it. Strand’s poem serves as an example that language exceeds experience and that sometimes an experience cannot be expressed in everyday prose. Several writing assignments can be used for application after the song lyrics and poetry discussions. A literary review [See Assignment 1 in Appendices for the full assignment] tests students’ ability to evaluate as well as summarize poems. In order to write an accurate review, students need to understand what readers expect of poetry; for this assignment, they thus must choose a poem and write how well or how poorly that poem meets the readers’ expectations. When poems cross literary genres, the students are then asked to consider those genres, as well. They are able to write positive and/or negative reviews, keeping in mind that the reviews are more than just their opinions; they are writing about how well poems adhere to social expectations.

The literary analysis assignment [Assignment 2] asks students to read one of Anne Sexton’s (1971) poems from Transformations, her collection of altered fairytales, and pick the poem apart, determining its meaning and purpose by looking at its plot, characters, setting, point of view, or tone. The student needs to understand how literary devices are used within the poem, how the classic fable itself has been changed in the poem, for what purpose the characters are used, or how the original story’s tone may have been changed to fit Sexton’s purpose. The rhetorical analysis assignment [Assignment 3] asks students to read Greek mythology and then read Carol Ann Duffy’s (2001) poems from The World’s Wife, looking at how the poems take on these classic stories. They are asked to look at the figurative language, diction, and ideological underpinnings of the myths and explain how Duffy alters them. The student thus needs to explain Duffy’s use of diction and style in order to satisfy the requirements for this assignment. Each of these assignments tests the critical skills that students are expected to develop in ENC 1101, 1102, and 1143. Conclusion Poetry serves as an invaluable resource that can be incorporated into more courses. Using poetry as an alternative to traditional academic essays and fiction or nonfiction prose creates variety and allows the instructor to effectively incorporate popular music into the lesson, thereby establishing student interest. Drawing parallels between music and poetry helps students understand how popular lyrics and traditional poetry intersect and help them better analyze the latter as well as future texts.

References Duffy, C.A. (2001). The Worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wife. Faber & Faber: New York. Hasden, K. S. (2012, November 15). Rhetorical analysis lecture. ENC 1143 Fall Course. Lecture conducted at the University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL. Lazarus, E. (1883). The new colossus. Retrieved from http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/175887 MacLeish, A. (1926a). Ars poetica. Poetry Magazine, 28(3). Retrieved from http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/p oem/6371 MacLeish, A. (1926b). The end of the world. Retrieved from http://allpoetry.com/The-End-Of-The-World Mathews, D. (1928). The lynching. In M. Honey (Ed.), Shadowed dreams: Womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s poetry of the Harlem Renaissance (pp. 92). Rutgers University Press: New Brunswick. Millay, E. (1920). Oh, oh you will be sorry for that word. In Collected sonnets (pp. 591). Harper Perennial: New York. Sexton, A. (1966). Cripples and other stories. In D. W. Middlebrook & D. H. George (Eds.), Selected poems of Anne Sexton (pp. 109-111). Houghton Mifflin Company: New York. Sexton, A. (1971). Transformations. Houghton Mifflin Company: New York. Strand, M. (1978) The coming of light. In Selected poems (pp. 115). Alfred A. Knopf: New York.

Appendix Assignment 1: ENC 1101 Literary Review Pick one of the poems from the packet and follow the directions on how to write a review; you are free to write a positive or a negative review. Keep in mind that a review is not about your opinion; it is about whether or not the poem follows the expectations of the genre. Some of the poems are about fairy tales, some are about Greek myths. How well do the poems meet your expectations of those genres (fairy tales, myths, poetry)? Be sure to support your claims with examples from the poem, and remember to cite your quotes. Your essay should be two pages long, and you should also have a works cited page citing the poem. Assignment 2: ENC 1101 Literary Analysis Write at least one page analyzing one of the fairy tales below. You may choose from Hansel and Gretel, Little Red Riding Hood, Snow White, Rapunzel, Rumpelstiltskin, or The Frog King. Analyze the meaning of the story by asking a question from the textbook's chapter on literary analysis on plot, characters, setting, language, or tone. You can use the Grimm story, Sexton's poem, or both in your analysis. Your paper needs to be typed using the MLA format and needs to have a works cited page.

Assignment 3: ENC 1143 Rhetorical Analysis For this assignment, you are to select one myth/poem group from the following: • Medusa • Midas • Orpheus • Pygmalion You then are to discuss how and why the poem differs from the myth. What are the significant differences between the myth and the poem? Look at the language each work uses the ideology each describes, and apply the information you know about myths and how to read and understand poems. Carol Ann Duffy’s work is not as complicated as Mark Strand’s, so you will not need to look up explanations of her poems online; all you will need is the myth that accompanies her poem and your running knowledge of myths and analysis that we have discussed in class. Remember, do not simply summarize the two texts— instead, explain how and why they differ from one another. Remember that analyzing the sources and writing the paper are two different acts. You’ll need to actively read and analyze the sources to learn as much as possible and understand each individual rhetorical situation. Then, when you write the essay, you’ll be pulling pertinent information from your analyses to support your argument about the texts’ differences. The paper should be 3-4 pages long and in MLA format. Your two sources are The World’s Wife by Carol Ann Duffy and Mythology: Timeless Tales of Gods and Heroes by Edith Hamilton. It is up to you to properly put them in a works cited page and cite them within your paper.

WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE: STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT DURING AN IMMERSIVE WORK EXPERIENCE Amy M. Huber and Jill B. Pable Florida State University Abstract: In this case study, students physically changed learning environments by working in an architectural design office for three days at the midpoint of their projects. Data was collected before and after the trip, and ascertained the studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work style preferences and their perceptions of the physical and social work environments encountered. In general, students indicated the trip was a worthy experience. However, what became clear is that the perception of environment can vary drastically from student to student. Aside from feedback received, the students valued the relationships formed and indicated that observations of both work settings and environmental cues were helpful to their overall understanding of workplace environments. They felt that some aspects of the trip could be replicated using technology, yet the students also indicated that the nuances of the social environment were important and could not be replicated given current technology.

Introduction Educators are increasingly being held accountable for producing results and that their students can apply what is learned in the classroom to career-applicable situations. As such, a helpful tool in aiding knowledge transfer might be leveraging domain-specific learning environments to aid in enculturation of tacit knowledge and workplace behaviors. This could include replicating qualities found within actual working environments or physically placing students within their target workplace environments. Yet, todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s educators are teaching at a time when technological advances can make possible new opportunities to help students understand the context of their learning. In the face of widespread interest in the use of technologies within instructional design, it may be helpful to document those environmental qualities students perceive to be influential to their learning and if students believe these specific environmental nuances could be replicated using current technological applications. In this case study, students physically changed work environments by traveling to a working architectural design office at the midpoint of their projects. During this immersive experience, Interior Design graduate students worked for three full days on the production of videos to document their thesis research and design project approaches. These videos would become a part of their online portfolios and a tool with which to secure future design positions. The goal of this study was to document these studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perceptions of this change relative to social and physical work environments, as it was surmised that these environments could serve to either support or hinder their learning.

Situational Context This specific scenario was a new opportunity for two reasons: â&#x20AC;˘

â&#x20AC;˘

This was a first time course offering. While students had previously created videos to document their work and design philosophies, there had not been a course dedicated to learning concepts of storytelling and the necessary technological skillsets to produce videos. It involved a new, immersive typology. This alternative type of extended immersion which allowed students to work on their own projects within the office context was a new approach. Students in the department do have opportunities to tour architectural and design firms; however, these visits often last no more than two hours. These shortterm experiences do not impact the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; physical work environment, which essentially remains within the confines of their respective classrooms. Students do have opportunities to intern for credit in design firms, but in those cases they would be working on projects mandated by the firms.

In addition to their academic experience, both researchers have worked in design firm environments. Because they knew the students would soon be working in similar environments, it was deemed important to incorporate situational learning experiences where appropriate. Advantages of this type of in situ learning might include added opportunities for feedback on the

project at hand and shaping long-term goals through on-site observation. In keeping with the guidelines of Gagne and Merrill (1991), the research team identified two goals for students in this experience, which were •

•

to stimulate student learning via change in environment—having prior experience of architectural firm settings, the research team was aware of the high activity level inherent in this type of working environment and surmised that students could have the opportunity to observe workplace behaviors such as active exploration evidenced by project pinups and physical prototypes. Further, collaboration would be apparent as teams huddled together over tables and computer screens. In fact, this particular environment even contained a cappuccino bar in the open lobby to foster areas of informal collaboration. to provide students with additional sources of feedback and inspiration—while the course instructor and other faculty members provided preliminary comments on student work, it was believed that the students could gain valuable insight from formative feedback offered by the types of professionals that they may soon be interviewing with.

While planning for the new course entitled Advanced Visual Communications, the educator team (consisting of the course instructor, department chair, graduate coordinator, and faculty involved in the students’ design studio courses) determined the type of deliverables that would best aid students in their job seeking. These

holdings were envisioned to include two videos, the first of which was the subject of this alternative learning experience and would document each student’s unique project approach by highlighting his or her research and design process. The second video (completed after the experience) would document the students’ personal design philosophies. The aim was that through these videos designers and/or firms in the position to hire entry level designers would have an additional tool to better understand the students’ higher-order thinking and ability to communicate design ideas. The potential benefit of portfolio-oriented video as a vehicle to hiring students was confirmed in an earlier small-scale study (Pable, 2012). The course instructor (who was a research team member) mapped out a preliminary timeline and contacted several former colleagues who work in areas of design communication. After subsequent discussions, an invitation to work with students on aspects of storytelling ensued, and planning for a physical trip during the student’s spring break began. It is important to note that this trip was a volunteer opportunity, and the students were not obligated to take part in the trip, received no additional grade for participation, and were not directly funded by the school to partake in the experience. As this type of immersion was a relatively novel pedagogical tool, the researchers wanted to explore the value of such engagements. Literature Literature supported the goals of this experiential learning activity and framed the basis of inquiry.

Student Change Astinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s seminal I-E-O model (1985) has been influential in providing a methodological guide to the study of how college impacts students. The model examines three sets of elements: inputs, including demographics, familial backgrounds, and the academic and social experiences that bring students to their studies; environment, including people, policies, cultures, and experiences that are encountered; and, outcomes, including student characteristics, knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, beliefs and behaviors resulting from their time in college (see Figure 1). Figure 1: I-E-O Model of Involvement

The I-E-O model traditionally was used by researchers to examine undergraduate students and the impacts of their college experience. Data supporting the development of the model was derived from pretests, student self-predictions, and personal characteristics administered in a questionnaire nationally to incoming college students. Researchers then compared the results to the same cohortâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s actual graduation data, evaluating student success and attrition rates (Astin, 1993; p. 21). In the opinion of the authors of the study described here, parallels can be drawn between undergraduate studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; new-found experiences at an academic institution (as referenced in the I-E-O model) and short, intense experiences when students are physically removed from their perceived comfort zones and engage with others for a specified time period. In both scenarios (students attending college for the first time and the immersive work

experience highlighted here) students have a preexisting paradigm prior to the engagement, the engagement occurs, and the students are changed as a result of their involvement. Thus, an alternative engagement experience may be a catalyst to enhanced learning, just as the Astin study documented. Further, in an exploration of learning environments (E in the model), constructivist learning paradigms may help guide instructional design. Constructivist thought posits that people know what they know based upon their interactions and experiences with their personal learning environments (von Glaserfield, 1988). On a broad level, constructivist theories such as cognitive apprenticeship (Collins, Brown & Newman, 1989) and situated learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991) share the premise that social and physical environments can serve to facilitate student learning. Similarly, Lebow (1995) outlined key constructivist learning values, several of which served as a framework in the design of this experience: •

•

Active engagement of learners: Lebow posited that it was important for students to come to an engagement with newfound focus. Thus, instructors seek to eliminate potential distractions and foster mindfulness. Authenticity in learning environments: environments are designed to develop understanding through application of knowledge within the normative practices of the target culture (Brown et. al., 1989). Collaboration: opportunities for noncompetitive social interactions are implemented in order to positively affect cognitive development. Community of learners: learning is in large part constructed by all stakeholders in lieu

•

• •

of an individual expert (Brown & Campione, 1990). Complexity: reality is assumed to be weblike with multiple interacting forces, and such interaction is deemed to be positive. This type of classroom is characterized by ill structured problems (Doll, 1989). Pluralism: the belief that no single view is “right” is promoted. Acknowledging multiple perspectives: experiencing the same material a variety of ways for a variety of purposes is encouraged.

Further, Deci and Ryan’s (2000) Self Determination theory provides further guidance in the creation of social constructs within learning environments. Based on their empirical research from multiple domains, they observed higher levels of sustained motivation from individuals who perceive a supportive instructional environment. These environments contain the psychological constructs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. That is, if students feel they can master the material, can determine how to do so, and can relate to the material and to each other through the material, they are likely to have a higher motivational orientation for its learning. A review of literature about learning environments would be incomplete without addressing knowledge transfer. While explicit knowledge is considered relatively easy to transfer from one person to the next as it can be communicated via writing, tacit knowledge, in contrast, cannot be as easily articulated as it arises from experience. Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) observed that tacit skills are learned through observation, imitation, and practice. In order to facilitate the transfer of knowledge, constructivists have stated that learning environments should parallel the

transfer environment (i.e. the environment that is to be modeled) along with their inherent complexities. While specific approaches vary, in general, constructivists share the premise that engaging students in authentic activities facilitates their transfer of knowledge from what is learned to how it can be applied in relevant settings (and for this study, such engagement also includes being in authentic locations). Learning within Design Domains Some literature within the discipline of interior design explores learning efficacy and its ties to physical environments. Interior design pedagogy has been studied in terms of cognitive development using the Perry scheme (Carmel-Gilfilen & Portillo, 2010), Measure of Designing (Portillo, 1987), and Kolbâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s experiential learning theory (Carmel-Gilfilen, 2012). The related issue of classroom climate has also been studied through the use of Lewinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Field Theory and Murrayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Needs Press Theory (Hill, 2007). While valuable, these studies do not yet examine student perceptions of an environment resulting from change in physical work environments, suggesting that case studies such as this one which engage students within alternative learning environments may be supportive of later research to determine their suitability to student growth. Purpose The goal of this study is to assess student perceptions of out-of-class work environments (physical and social) and how these environments may have helped or hindered targeted student processes and outcomes. An understanding of these consequences would be helpful

when considering whether such immersion activities should be included in future coursework. Parameters of the Learning Experience The immersion experience occurred during the midpoint of a 16 week semester. At this point students had been working on their projects (videos communicating their thesis research and design intent) for approximately five weeks. This time was spent determining the content of the message, storyboarding the message, developing and editing a script, designing an overall concept for the video, creating informative graphics, adding motion to graphics, and importing work into formative videos. Consequently, the students needed to learn three new software programs in order to complete these tasks. Anecdotal evidence suggested the cognitive intensity of the course was relatively high. Planning for the Immersion Experience Students were invited to two planning meetings. The first discussed the premise of the trip and occurred three months prior to departure; the second occurred two weeks before leaving, at which point the refined itinerary was shared as well as parameters of the working environment. During these meetings students had the opportunity to ask questions, determine final arrangements, and make any suggestions for minor changes to the schedule. All but one of the tripâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s participants attended these meetings. Additionally, all students met with three individuals from the host firm at this time via virtual meeting to discuss their specific thesis topics, brainstorm ideas for communicating research, and view examples of the firmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s video communications.

Immersion Experience Schedule The trip itself lasted five days as outlined below: • •

•

• •

•

Day 1—This day consisted of travel and a welcome dinner at one of the firm employee’s home. Day 2 morning—The students and instructor arrived at the host firm, had breakfast, met the firm’s multi-media director, and had an informal tour of the office. Day 2 lunch—The multi-media director conducted a “lunch-and-learn” focused on storytelling. This was the first interaction for students with firm staff, as many staff attended the session. Day 2 afternoon—The firm’s multimedia director viewed the videos and provided feedback, and the students began to edit videos. Additionally, an offsite tour was conducted with a communication strategist at a nearby museum. Day 2 evening—The students were able to have dinner at the location of their choice, and the evening was free. Many students opted to edit videos in their hotel rooms. Day 3 morning—Students worked in a conference room on editing and refining their videos. Day 3 lunch—Students had lunch with two design strategists and a small team of graphic designers from the firm. This opportunity was used to elicit feedback. Day 3 afternoon—Students worked in a conference room. At this point the firm also invited students to work in the “studio”

• •

•

space of the office (described in detail below). Two students chose to work outside of the conference room. Day 3 evening—The group had a celebratory dinner with the firm’s liaison. Day 4 morning—Students again worked on refining their videos. Two students worked in the “studio” environment and the others remained in the conference room. Day 4 lunch—Students finalized videos and had lunch. Day 4 afternoon—The students presented their improved, albeit still formative, videos to the office staff, which consisted of approximately 40 architects, interior and graphic designers, and design strategists who had varying levels of experience ranging from two to over 30 years. During the screening, each student stood, provided orientating remarks and personal goals, discussed the type of feedback they hoped to receive, and shared his or her video. Due to time limitations each student was given two to three verbal comments; however, each audience member was given forms on which additional commentary could be recorded. A happy hour was held after the event, which was followed by a screening and discussion of a design-oriented biographical film with the film’s director. Day 5—This day was reserved for sightseeing and travel home.

Immersion Experience Working Environment As identified previously, the working environment varied. The firm itself is situated on three floors. The first is at street level, which is unique to a design firm and is highly visible from both the street and the entirety of the office. The first floor conference room is adjacent to an internal two-story atrium, open lobby, and cappuccino bar; its walls consist of floor-to-ceiling clear glass, with a translucent film at eye level that obscures direct views into the room. This meeting space was used for the initial introductions and the final screening event. The second floor conference room is far less visible and was used by the students only for the “lunch and learn” session, while the third floor was used extensively. Here a conference room was dedicated to the students and became a “base camp” of sorts, giving them opportunities to leave their belongings and come and go. This room has one floor-toceiling clear glass wall and is adjacent to a small break area. The environment was quiet, and little could be heard from outside of the room (see Figure 2). Figure 2: Students working in the third floor conference room (known as the “base camp”)

The studio environment on the same floor was quiet when compared to floors one and two. However, designers were at work there, and students could see and hear their discussions. Immersion Experience Modes of Feedback Modes of feedback varied depending on the availability of the individuals providing reactions. The intent was for the students to first receive feedback from the individuals they had met previously, a strategy meant to reduce their level of anxiety. During the initial feedback session, each student played his or her video, giving all students the opportunity to view the work of their peers and provide commentary. After this initial session, the practitioner groups grew in size, and the students began receiving feedback from unfamiliar staff. This feedback generally occurred side-by-side with two to three staff members sitting alongside students and providing commentary while their videos played. The third type of feedback occurred when staff provided key comments during the more formal screening. The final feedback type consisted of written comments offered by staff. This feedback was generally positive yet provided constructive criticism and was disseminated to the students following the trip. Methods of Inquiry Data collection referenced the I-E-O model on a micro-level to understand student perceptions of change and more specifically individual perceptions of feedback (i.e. social environments) and environmental settings (i.e. physical and social environments). Eight out of the ten graduate students enrolled in the course participated in the trip. Six of the eight students agreed to participate;

however, their participation in the study was unknown to the course instructor for the duration of the class and the immersion experience. All study participants were female graduate students in the program of interior design ranging in age from 22-24. Open-ended written, qualitative questions sought to determine those inputs the students deemed valuable (the I in the IEO model) and how their respective environments contributed to their work (the E in the model). Participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; formative videos were collected prior to leaving, addressing the O in the IEO model (See Table 1). However, these outcomes are not the focus of this study. After the trip, the students responded to similar questions so that all IEO aspects were again gathered for comparison. After the conclusion of the semester, responses were inductively coded to determine emerging themes. Table 1: Initial Data Collection Points

Upon initial examination of the preliminary survey data, areas targeted for further exploration in subsequent interviews included: â&#x20AC;˘

Physical and social working environments o How did the working environments on the trip differ from preferred environments? o How did the working environments impact their progress?

•

Interactions and feedback o How did the feedback differ from their customary or preferred ways of obtaining feedback? o How did these differences impact their progress?

These areas of inquiry were explored through individual interviews, each lasting approximately 30 minutes. Following interview transcription, the transcripts were member checked by sharing a copy of the transcript for review with each participant. Participants could edit or add to the transcripts’ content for clarity or confirm the documents as they were. Data Analysis Survey Data While survey data is representative of a relatively small sample size of six participants, initial analysis of data indicated areas for further inquiry and served to form baseline data regarding the students’ goals and expectations for the trip. While the students collectively indicated they would take part in the experience again, student perceptions of feedback and environment varied greatly. Pre experience survey. In order to fully understand the context of the trip it was important to understand student motivations for participation. These perceptions in the frequencies listed were gathered from participants: • • • •

Networking (83%) Obtaining Knowledge (67%) Gaining New Ideas (50%) Having Fun (33%)

•

Other-collaboration (17%)

All survey respondents initially indicated they felt prepared for the trip. When asked how they prepared outside of class in terms of skill acquisition, students indicated using additional resources for navigating the software, and in terms of interpersonal communication, students indicated that they read blogs, attended multiple networking events, and worked with fellow classmates. The students did not indicate any areas where they felt underprepared. Post experience survey. All students indicated the trip was worth the expense, which totaled approximately $600 per participant. The students went on to say that the feedback was helpful, as was the exposure to collaboration within design firm environments; they valued having experience in a real world office culture and frequently mentioned networking opportunities. One individual indicated that in hindsight she was not prepared for the trip and wished she had learned to “discuss their topic more simply.” Overall, students did indicate having enough comfort with the technology to have the ability to incorporate feedback. Several students indicated that their video underwent a great deal of change during the experience. In general, students indicated that they perceived the biggest benefits from the experience were • •

•

interacting with professionals for extended periods of time; having opportunities to present their work to a large office where they were not previously known and therefore received unbiased commentary; and, networking and friendship formations.

Environment From questionnaire responses, it became readily apparent that the studyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s participants, although in the same environment, often had very different perceptions in terms of its atmospherics and social contexts. As such, follow up interviews focused on environmental aspects both physical and social, including feedback. How did working environment on the trip differ from preferred environments? The students were asked a series of questions about their preferred working environments and how the working environments found on the trip may have differed. Prior to departure students indicated that most of their work was completed in the departmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s computer lab (60%), in their on-campus studio classroom (20%), or at home (20%). Students indicated that their preferred working environments were relaxed (40%), loud (20%), stimulating (20%), quiet (0%), or all of the above (20%). When asked why they chose these locations, students noted the presence of peers for discussing ideas and the importance of having proper resources. However, one student indicated a level of interpersonal tension and subsequently opted to work at home, despite her previous preferences. In interviews the students were asked to first describe their typical working environments when at school. This elicited responses which referred to a wide range of objective and emotive qualities. In general students noted a desire for collaboration in their typical working environments, seeking background noise and activity. One student commented that the physical proximity of other students helped to move her projects forward by virtue of impromptu discussions. Often, their chosen physical environments allowed for removal of distractions (i.e. headphones served as cue of focused work). However, some were not as adaptive; one indicated

that the appropriateness of the environment was highly influenced by the level of engagement in the space. This student said that at times a space would be appropriate for her work but that the same space later could be too loud or distracting. During the trip the students indicated equal time being spent working on the video in the firm’s conference room and in the hotel environment (i.e. room or lobby). They described these working environments as stimulating (50%), quiet (25%), and relaxed (25%). However, it is important to note that none would have preferred these environments had there been other options. How did the environments impact their progress? In follow up interviews some students described the trip’s working environments as stimulating while others described them as quiet. Those that indicated stimulating also described the working environments as distracting, for they were “having to stop work when new individuals came in” and at times found the space over-stimulating; hence, concentration became an issue for some. However, when discussing how the environment impacted her work, one student commented that despite being distracted in the environment, it “helped me to be more creative. Having everyone around to ask questions was great and gave me some ideas I probably would not have had, if I were alone.” Students also commented on how the environment impacted their general perceptions (beyond the project at hand): “having the opportunity to see how the various employees worked at the firm, and how they went about giving feedback on project development, was a great experience! The firm atmosphere was friendly and diligent, which was great.” Paradoxically, some students noted the same environment as being quiet, and one indicated it was tense. Yet, they also explained that the quiet tone allowed them to work “effectively and quickly.”

Interestingly, one student mentioned that after reflection she unconsciously opted to sit in environments which might be considered the antithesis of her previously preferred locations. At school, she opts for quiet locations, but during the trip she sought “total immersion.” It should be noted that on the last day and half students had the opportunity to work either in the conference room or the studio environment sitting alongside design staff; two students opted to sit in the studio. Students were asked about this decision and the respective qualities of the environments. Those that chose to sit in the studio explained that “it (the conference room) gave us a ‘personal bubble’ where we could be students and be immersed in our work, but after a few days it felt like we needed to get out and I was craving immersion” and “I wanted to venture out and we were invited to do so, so I didn’t want to appear to not be taking up the invitation. It was nice to have the conference room as a ‘home.’” Others remained in the conference even if this was not necessarily desired. As one such student explained, I thought about it, but others already did. It was nice to have the opportunity to do so. (The conference room) was nice to have place to “set up shop.” I think the environment positively impacted my projects. I actually want to start over. These responses underscore that although they may be in the same environment, students can have varying notions of an environment’s effectiveness and support. Feedback To understand how students preferred to receive feedback, obtaining a general understanding of their preferred modes of work was important. Students indicated

they felt most comfortable working alone and receiving occasional feedback (60%) or working within a small group (40%). Students indicated they preferred to receive feedback daily (60%), and some indicated only at key points (40%). When asked about the social environment, the students indicated a preference for receiving feedback from peers with whom they had grown most comfortable. Prior to the trip they indicated having received feedback from instructors, peers, and friends through in-person discussion (100%) or via • • • •

Phone conversations (40%), Social networking (20%), Texting (40%), or Email (20%)

Students indicated this feedback provided guidance relative to the timing, tempo, content, and branding of the messages, as well as provided different ideas from various perspectives. In general, students indicated a preference for getting feedback often and early in their design process, mixing scheduled and informal sessions. How did the feedback differ from their customary or preferred ways of obtaining feedback? During the trip 75% of the participating students indicated they engaged two to five of the firm’s designers in conversation about their videos, and 25% engaged more than five staff in discussions about their videos. Overall, students felt the feedback was productive, yet there were issues. First, the students indicated that the feedback scenarios offered were dissimilar to what they encountered in educational environments. This was due in part to time limitations, but also in tone. One student indicated that the professionals’ feedback was more general in tone than her professors’ types of feedback; this may have been due in part to the fact that the staff was viewing the student’s work

for the first time. Conversely, another student felt the feedback was more direct and that directness proved “very helpful.” However, students felt at times they had to wait for feedback as there were not enough professionals for multiple, simultaneous informal reviews. Other limitations included that students felt too far along to incorporate the comments and that they were not all visited by the same groups of professionals. One student asked that the professionals go so far as to be “held accountable for how much time per student they can share,” suggesting the professionals use a timer. How did these differences impact students’ progress? When asked how the feedback impacted their work, the students mentioned that critiques helped them to improve what they were working on but conversely caused them to revisit work they had initially thought was finished. Half of those indicated the experience did not change how they preferred to receive feedback, while the other half indicated that it did. The latter students indicated that the experience impacted their general preparedness for getting and giving feedback, mentioning that they were able to observe and model behaviors of the professionals. Another student elaborated that the experience gave her insight into prompting others to give specific feedback, thus allowing them to better tailor the feedback experience. Another indicated that “everyone had a different take on each video. It was great to hear multiple opinions and (this) will allow me to make a decision based off of what the majority of viewers thought.” Students commented on the level of interaction and enthusiasm from the staff, one indicating that interaction with the staff increased her sense of resiliency, perhaps due to more criticisms being proffered than in other assessment experiences.

Benefits and Limitations of the Experience To better understand their opinions of the trip, students were asked a series of questions expanding on their perception of benefits and limitations. Students overwhelmingly indicated that networking and feedback from professionals was the biggest benefit of having participated. The biggest obstacles included the intensity of the experience and the cost of travel. Interestingly, when discussing the benefits of the trip, participants were split between those offering deliverable-oriented explanations, focusing on how the experience improved their work outcomes, and those whose explanations were more process-orientated, discussing how the feedback or observations informed their design process or work flow. Additionally, obstacles noted included a general sense of overscheduling and added stress. The students felt that they did not have enough time to make their desired changes based upon the feedback. One student indicated they felt the environment and tone of the trip was not positive and elaborated that they felt slighted in terms of receiving feedback. This student was not in attendance for the planning meeting ,which may have added to her frustration. Perceptions of Virtual Delivery In both surveys and subsequent interviews participants were asked a series of questions aimed at understanding if they felt a similar experience could be conducted virtually. One individual felt the out-of-class experience could be replicated to an extent because it would allow for the sharing of videos but added that â&#x20AC;&#x153;being present and able to hear live critiques, questions, and see the expressions of the viewersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; faces while they experienced the video was extremely valuable.â&#x20AC;? Still other

students indicated the experience could not be replicated via technology due to the personal interactions that allowed them to connect with the firm’s team on a greater level, stating “although I’m sure the feedback would be similar, I believe that people gave us more small tips by being in the moment.” This student further observed that “the people we met and the places we worked enhanced my understanding of not only producing a video but how to collaborate more efficiently.” Thus, students gained exposure to lessons that went beyond the project at hand. Two students indicated that the trip changed their career aspirations, allowing them to grasp what it was like to work in a large firm environment. One stated “not only have I become aware of the energy and atmosphere of this larger firm, but I have also come to truly appreciate the ability to grow and expand as a designer.” Students indicated they would recommend the trip for subsequent semesters, and one student suggested that “although it hindered some students’ progress, it made their videos much better in the long run.” On the other hand, students indicated the biggest limitations were time, travel, and cost, all of which could be decreased using virtual technology. During interviews students were able to more specifically elaborate on aspects of the experience that could and could not be replicated, and several of the same themes were apparent. One mentioned that such a virtual replication could be accomplished but would likely be missing the “human relations” aspects, stating that “digitally you don’t get to see them [design professionals] in their environment.” Another indicated an additional positive pressure of having to “impress” by physically being in the environment and suggested that students would “not work as hard” if the interactions were to be conducted solely through digital means. Another said,

I honestly do not think the experience would be the same. Half of the journey was physically working with industry professionals and having to overcome the nervousness of working with a top design firm. At first this was intimidating, but visiting the office became a valuable opportunity to strengthen other skill sets and better prepare for job interviews and what the future may hold for us as designers. Conversely, one student indicated the experience should actually be conducted digitally, feeling that this would allow for more logistical management. All students felt having the experience in the firm’s environment was beneficial despite the inherent stress level of being within the environment. Limitations of the Study This study’s focus was neither the outcome quality of the videos themselves nor the efficacy of the videos’ supporting ability to secure jobs for their student creators but the students’ perceptions of the work environment. Due to small class size (and limited access to the immersion activity), a major limitation of this study is that the sample size (N=6) has been isolated to a single graduate level class. As this is a homogenous group, data could not be generalized to any other student groups; however, other educators may benefit from this specific experience’s implications, especially if they are contemplating creating alternative learning environments. Implications and Lessons Learned When trying any new pedagogical tool, the instructor has to embrace a certain level of uncertainty and complexity. This ambiguity causes inherent stress but also

provides opportunities for critical reflection and improvement. From the instructorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s personal experience, several lessons were learned from this experience that may benefit others contemplating developing a similar domainspecific assignment. Compromises and Expectations When an instructor removes his or her students from their normal working environments, comprises are made. These compromises may be deemed worthwhile by the instructor, but this belief may not be shared by all students. Even in constructivist environments the instructor has to provide a level of stewardship, controlling for variables such as time allocation and perceptions of fairness. However, it is difficult to expect these same parameters from professionals who do not have a background in education and are volunteering their time to spend with students. Unfortunately, this clash of perspectives proved difficult to prepare for and may have caused some frustrations and bruised egos as the professionals did exhibit more excitement about some projects over others. Moreover, student and professional schedules can be very different; the students are still learning, which means their work often takes more time, while professionals frequently need to strive for efficiency. As such, the professionals may have overlooked the learning process and assumed that the time it would take for them to implement changes would be similar to that of the students. Such unrealistic expectations can be problematic. Conversely, students who had not yet navigated work environments were not aware of the time constraints under which the professionals were likely working. Design firms work on a billing system, and every minute has to be billed to a client; as such, all time spent with the students

was volunteered. Although this situation was previously discussed with the students, it was quickly forgotten, and the students had high expectations in terms of the time allocated to their specific projects. Additionally, some students reacted well to feedback while others exhibited signs of impasse, becoming verbally defensive in their responses. Scheduling. The students generally indicated that the schedule was too intense and too many activities were planned. They would have preferred an additional day in the office and an additional day allocated to site seeing (as the trip was to a highly interesting and diverse large city). However, this would have made the entire trip (including travel) a seven day long experience, which in turn would have significantly increased their respective travel budgets. In addition, some students wanted to work at night on their videos and others did not; while such additional work was not required, social pressures may have influenced some studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; decisions, and these students may have resented these influences and their competitive undertones . Job prospects. After the trip some students anecdotally indicated they thought job opportunities would result from the experience. While this was never stated by the instructor, professionals may have fostered these notions by sharing their own employment stories. These narratives also could have led to unrealistic expectations about the opportunities the trip would provide. Because cooperation is central to constructivist learning environments, any student perceptions that they were competing for a position in the firm would have severally hindered budding notions of collaboration. Networking. While networking was frequently mentioned as a benefit of the experience, it was handled by students in different manners largely as a result of their diverse personalities; whereas some were comfortable speaking with relative strangers, others were not. One

indicated having resented those students whom they felt were acting inappropriately by being too forthcoming with the professionals. They suggested that further coaching be provided relative to networking situations. Instructor Reflections Any new courseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s design largely depends on the personal choices of the instructional designer with the assumption that choices made are the best ones. Yet, situational influences are never known in advance when these choices are made. The students believed they were paying for the experience itself by virtue of self-funding travel, and that belief carried over to the learning environments encountered on the trip, influencing their perception of what they were owed. Further, while there was certainly a benefit to having high level exposure for their work, as an unintended consequence, for these students, failure was not an option, and this mindset limited their experimentation and exploration. This is certainly problematic, as instructors desire to provide students with new and meaningful opportunities but cannot predict or even communicate assurances to the students putting forth the effort and expense to pilot these experiences. Conclusions Other instructors planning similar immersive activities may find the following suggestions helpful: â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

Temper high stakes situations by maintaining blocks of open time between activities to allow for respite and reflection. Allow opportunities for observation apart from work. Having one day dedicated to observation prior to commencement of work may allow for the

â&#x20AC;˘

students to better acclimate prior to the added pressure of sharing their work. Insights from these observations may actually hold longer term implications than the actual feedback received. Manage expectations by preparing students for the realities of schedule conflicts and unforeseen changes. Perhaps have a professional describe their daily schedule; this may be more impactful than anything the instructor can do to prepare the students. Ensure that students receive feedback early and often, both before and during the immersive experience; varying the settings, persons involved, and level of formality prior to the experience may help learners better prepare for any potential scenarios. To the extent possible, prepare students for ambiguity. This could be done by sharing the benefits of ambiguous experiences, aligning these experiences with scenarios they may encounter in their careers. Again, firsthand accounts given by professionals may be helpful.

The instructor was expecting to witness levels of transformative change as evidenced by the students. This was not the case, and instead students mentioned incremental changes (if any) resulting from the experience. However, in a broader sense, this opportunity did provide a unique level of exposure for the students from which to base their future decisions. Several of the students have now come to work in large firm settings. While their employment certainly cannot be attributed to this specific experience, at least such experiences help students enter the workforce with the foreknowledge of specific work environments and their suitability to their goals.

What became clear through this case study is that the perception of environment can vary drastically from student to student. In general, students indicated the trip was a worthy experience. Aside from feedback received, the students valued the relationships formed and indicated that observations of both work settings and environmental cues were helpful to their overall understanding of workplace environments. They felt that certain aspects of the trip could be replicated using technology, such as the sharing of the videos and the communication of feedback, yet the students also indicated that the nuances of the social environment were important and could not be replicated with current technologies.

References Astin, A. W. (1985) Achieving educational excellence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Brown, A.L, & Campione, J.C. (1999). Communities of learning and thinking, or a context by any other name. In D. Kuhn (Ed.), Developmental perspectives on teaching and learning thinking skills. Contributions to human development, Vol. 21 (pp. 108-126). Basel, Switerland: Karger. Brown, J.S, Collins, A., & Duguide, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher. 18(1), 32-42. Carmel-Gilfilen, C. (2012). Uncovering pathways of design thinking and learning: Inquiry on intellectual development and learning style preferences. Journal of Interior Design, 37: 47–66. doi: 10.1111/j.19391668.2012.01077.x Carmel-Gilfilen, C., & Portillo M. (2010). Creating mature thinkers in interior design: Pathways of intellectual development. Journal of Interior Design, 35(3), 1– 20. Collins, A., Brown, J., S. & Newman, S.E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and the “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the selfdetermination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.

Doll, W. E. (1989). Foundations for a post-modern curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 21(3), 243-253. Gagne, R.M., Merrill, D. (1991). Integrative goals for instructional design. Educational Technology, Research & Development, 38(1), 23-30. Gurung, R. & Schwartz, B. (2013). Contributions from psychology: Heuristics for interdisciplinary advancement of SOTL. In K. McKinney (Ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in and across the disciplines. Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press. Hill, C. C. (2007). Climate in the interior design studio: Implications for design education. Journal of Interior Design, 33: 37â&#x20AC;&#x201C;52. doi: 10.1111/j.19391668.2007.tb00320.x Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lebow, D. (1995). Constructivist values for instructional design: A case study of a graduate-level learning environment (Doctorial Dissertation). Retrieved from http://digitool.fcla.edu Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford Press. Pable, J. B. (2012). Beyond the final studio presentation: Multimedia project storytelling as portfolio enhancement. In Interior Design Educators Council National Conference, Baltimore, MD (pp. 388-393). Indianapolis, IN: Interior Design Educators Council.

Portillo, M. B. (1987). A developmental approach to design: Thought structuring related to creative experience (Unpublished masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s thesis). University of Wisconsin, Madison. von Glasersfeld, E. (1988). The reluctance to change a way of thinking. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 9(1), 83-90.

TECHNICALLY ENGAGING: DEEPENING DIGITAL NATIVES’ TECHNOLOGY SKILLS THROUGH COURSEWORK ACROSS DISCIPLINES David Marlow, Allison Pingley, Breanne Kirsch, and Deshia Leonhirth University of South Carolina Upstate Steven Lownes University of Georgia Abstract: Integration of technology across the curriculum ranks highly on strategic plans of universities across the United States and in many other parts of the world. This paper explores aspects of one such integration through the lenses of five faculty members in five distinct disciplines, each of whom is committed to enhancing student learning through meaningful applications of technology. This article combines the insights and experiences of these teachers in specific discipline related courses. While the content of the courses varies widely, many similarities are found and many correlations may be made between the use of technology amongst these endeavors. Working on the premise that cross-pollination of ideas can yield valuable results, the authors have collaborated in their own efforts to increase student engagement in course material while simultaneously seeking to move today’s “digital native” students from surface level use of technology toward becoming thoughtful practitioners of technology applicable to academic concentrations.

Introduction Like it or not, technology has become a permanent fixture in contemporary classrooms. Technology released into the classroom without careful consideration may be counterproductive, but it can also be manipulated to advance student learning through satisfying a variety of learning styles and stimulating diverse cognitive processes (Sharkey, 2013). As current trends in higher education involve shifting students from consumers of content to information synergizers more fully engaged with course material (Horizon Report, 2014), social media, userfriendly apps, and Internet-based tools can be employed to engage Millennial students in course activities. Although one might presume that Millennials are digital natives who thoroughly understand technology (Prensky, 2001; Palfrey & Gasser, 2008), studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; self-confidence and skills vary widely (Jones & Healing, 2010). Many students have only a shallow understanding of technology as they have employed it mainly for social pursuits (Davies, 2011; Jones & Healing, 2010; National Higher Education ICT Initiative, 2003). Introducing students to unfamiliar technology in class thus can have immediate positive effects, for as they use such tools outside the classroom (Murphrey, 2010) and to survive in the increasingly technical workplace, students need a level of technical fluency that will enable them to adapt to technologies that have yet to be invented (Hough, 2006). Training students to use technology in a variety of disciplines for a variety of purposes and giving them time to investigate tools (Hough, 2006) should constitute a positive step toward equipping them with the flexibility they will need to look deeply into current and future technology and employ it effectively in real-world applications in their ongoing pursuit of technology literacy (Davies, 2011).

This paper explores experiences in five distinct disciplines where faculty have led students into meaningful applications of technologyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;not for the sake of technology itself, but in order to disseminate course content and achieve desired learning outcomes. In Political Science, students use Twitter to discuss current events; in Spanish, they use Twitter and other communicative applications to connect the classroom to Spanish-speaking communities surrounding campus; in Informatics, students break away from the sometime-crutch of PowerPoint by supporting spoken presentations with infographics; in Grammar, technical tools encourage students to approach language quantitatively and analytically; and in Information Literacy, students evaluate and select applications that will enable them to complete a variety of tasks. Tweeting Thoughts for Online Discussion When one teaches American National Government, current news events are often utilized as a way to make learning about politics and government more interesting and relevant to studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; lives, as encouraged by the American Political Science Association (Pollock & Wilson, 2002). In online courses, current event discussions can be cumbersome and even demotivating. Since social and webbased technologies encourage students to play active roles in the learning process (Weimer, 2002), particularly by enabling them to have a voice in class discussion (Bryer & Seigler, 2012), Twitter (www.Twitter.com) was employed to engage students in current events for the online course discussed in this section. Twitter is a social networking application that allows students to post links to news stories and video clips of current events together with comments limited to 140 characters per post. Creating short posts requires students to carefully consider the content and

construction of their messages and encourages more conversation amongst students. In this course, students were required to initiate posts for two current events; when posting an event, students had to include the link to the news story or video clip and give a very brief summary. Additionally, students were charged with moderating the discussion of posts they initiated by answering questions and responding to other comments. Interaction was encouraged by requiring each student to comment on five posts from classmates (including moderating comments). To ensure that both students and the instructor could easily find course-related posts, students were required to use a unique hashtag (e.g. #ANG101) in all their posts. Many students went above and beyond the minimum posting requirements; even though students only were required to make seven total tweets during the semester, on average each student made 11 tweets. In the future, posting and comment requirements will be increased to further encourage student interaction with each other and course concepts. The quality of articles posted and conversation surrounding them on Twitter was impressive compared with similar student posts and discussions in previous iterations of the course. With Twitter, students were more likely to post links to stories from the last day or two, whereas in classroom discussions and online postings to course management software, students often used events that were several weeks or more old. The students responding seemed more engaged, as well. Indeed, on several occasions the same person posted more than a few different comments to the same event, resulting in more of the back and forth conversation and deeper discussion than in previous classes. One negative was the amount of information posted; since students were limited to 140 characters on Twitter, they could not elaborate as much as is possible in

other venues, and even though students could have posted several tweets in a row to include more information, no one did this. Therefore, some content is lost on Twitter, but as the primary goal in using current events is to get students to be aware of the world around them and how government and politics applies to their everyday lives, Twitter remains appropriate. While further research would be needed to confirm this, it could be argued that the shorter posts in Twitter encourage more critical thinking since students must make connections from events to course concepts for themselves. Twitter is user-friendly tool. Since a surprisingly large number of students were new to the service, a user guide and several links to â&#x20AC;&#x153;how toâ&#x20AC;? sites were provided. Students reported no major problems using it, and some even commented on how much they enjoyed it. While the primary purpose of including Twitter in the course requirements was as a discussion forum for current events, it was also used for general class communication. Students would often ask questions via Twitter that could then be answered for everyone at once, reducing repetition as well as allowing students to answer each otherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s questions. As an additional bonus, Twitter was used to remind students about upcoming exams and assignments. Overall, Twitter proved to be a highly effective medium for class discussion and communication. The students embraced its user-friendly interface, and it served to promote class discussion together with student empowerment (Bryer & Seigler, 2012). Students were able to select topics for posting and response and therefore had increased control over course content. The 140-character limit is a drawback, but this can be manipulated to encourage students to carefully craft their comments to maximize impact and clarity. Lessons learned in this

100

American National Government course can be applied to other disciplines, as explored in the following section. Employing Tech for Real-World Connections As noted in the introduction, our digital native students are considered familiar with technology, but many of them lack a deep understanding of how it works or how to apply it in real-world contexts. Similarly, for many students in World Languages courses, the language being studied only exists during the class period and within the walls of the classroom itself. Most students do not understand the importance of using this language in a culturally significant and real-world context. This section describes an approach to blending of technology with Spanish language skills to enhance studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; fluency with both. In order to engage students in culturally rich, technically enhanced language investigation, a Twitterbased project was created in which students became citizen-journalists through observing and analyzing Spanish signage throughout the Upstate region of South Carolina and sharing their work online. This project was based on a concept that students exposed to language in a natural context will better learn the necessary points for language development (Krashen, 1982). The project extended the classroom beyond campus and enabled students to engage with the language in a new way, yet it had its frustrations. Students were required to find, photograph, and analyze three Spanish signs that they encountered in the Upstate community. While finding a sign with an English translation was not required, many found that bilingual signs enabled a richer analysis. Their analyses were to contain three elements: (1) new words they learned, (2) the import of the sign for the community, and (3) quality of the translation (if there was one). Throughout the semester

101

students were encouraged to post their findings (pictures + analyses) to Twitter. At the end of the semester, students revised and reposted their signs with an analysis of the signage to Padlet (www.Padlet.com), a type of online bulletin board for sharing and collaboration; the decision to use Padlet was to further the content and quantity of student analyses. Indeed, while Twitter is a microblog and appropriate for minimal messaging, Padlet allows for more detailed final analyses. Overall, the analyses were good, and students demonstrated that they were able both to understand the importance of Spanish in their community and to evaluate usefulness of translations and signs. The primary issue for students follows Jones and Healingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2010) observation that self-confidence varies amongst students, especially when using a technological tool. Even students who had used Twitter prior to class as their preferred method of social media found it daunting to use it for class. Students found including hashtags and photo sharing difficult to master, and posting to a Padlet wall also proved challenging as none of them had used this program before (even though posting only requires a double click anywhere on the wall). In conclusion, fluency levels in both language and digital culture require testing to ensure real world applicability. By creating situations and assessment activities for students to use new and familiar programs in unfamiliar ways, students improve their fluency in both language and technology. By adding textual analysis with a digital reflection, students can also better understand the way they should use information and present it in new ways. This activity is easily applicable to any discipline in which students benefit from application of classroom concepts to real-world contexts.

102

Infographics for Presentation and Problem-solving Continuing the theme of connecting students to the real-world, the aim of Senior Seminar in the Department of Informatics is to challenge students to create a thesis that reviews information management and systems literature in order to identify a current challenge faced in one specific industry and to propose a technological solution to the problem. The major deliverables in the course are a final paper and presentation. While presentation visuals in business and in the classroom have largely been created in PowerPoint in recent decades, PowerPoint presentations tend to be dull and rote (Hedges, 2014). To encourage students to think deeply about the complex relationships in their research content (Abilock, 2014) as well as to enhance the marriage of vocal and visual messages, students were required to employ an infographic as the visual component in their final presentation. An infographic has been defined as â&#x20AC;&#x153;a claim expressed through visual metaphor, conveying the creatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s fresh understanding of relationships, expressed through a judicious selection and arrangement of visuals, evidence, and text acquired during inquiry research within a disciplineâ&#x20AC;? (Abilock, 2014). As such, infographics make suitable companions to oral presentations of the indepth research expected of students in Senior Seminar and in other contexts, as well. For this multi-step project, students were encouraged to experiment with a variety of Web-based infographic creation tools and choose one. None of the 27 students in the course had previous experience creating infographics, so the first step was a 15-minute introduction to the topic of infographics during which examples were shown. Students then had one hour to create infographics based on previously reviewed journal articles addressing a single topic; a primary purpose of this step was to force them to take ownership of the project. Initially students

103

were frustrated; as so-called digital natives, they expected to master the process quickly and easily, and their inclination was to appeal to the instructor for help at every obstruction. When they found no help forthcoming, they turned to each other, which led to collaboration and group problem solving. This embodied the project-based instructional mode described by Gulek and Hakan (2005) in which students gain increased access to information, improve research analysis skills, direct their own learning, report a greater reliance on active learning strategies, readily engage in problem-solving and critical thinking, and consistently show a deep and flexible use of technology. At the end of the session students were instructed not to work on their infographics any further but to turn in what they were able to complete in one class session. The results were impressive for first time use with a 60-minute time limit. In the next class session the class discussed the pros and cons of the different tools they had used and identified the tools they felt were most user-friendly and had the most free features. The studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; top two recommendations were Piktochart (www.Piktochart.com) and Canva (www.Canva.com); note that the latter supports free downloading in PDF format, but the former does not. The third step was for students to synthesize findings from their final research papers in infographics. To get students started and to encourage more collaboration, students were given an hour and fifteen minutes in class to work on this assignment. Students then had two weeks to draft their infographics outside of class. They turned in both electronic and printed copies that were blind peer reviewed by student colleagues and the instructor. Students seemed to enjoy reviewing their peersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; infographics, and many reported that they acquired ideas to enhance their own projects. The peer review assignment taught students about providing constructive feedback

104

(discussed in class prior to the assignment) and about the importance of accepting criticism and learning from it. Students used the peersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and instructorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s feedback to revise and resubmit their infographics one week before their final presentation; the instructor then provided a grade with additional feedback. Students were invited to modify their infographics before final presentation but were clearly told such modifications would not change their grades. Surprisingly, more than half of the students chose to update their infographics without a grade incentive, demonstrating a vested interest in the assignment and personal pride in their work. While the quality of individual presentations varied, the infographics proved a viable alternative to PowerPoint. Additionally, despite their initial frustration, students noted in feedback on the project that they could see its applications to their careers. One student who works for a veterinarian, for example, plans to create an infographic to communicate with pet owners. While the original intent was to use this semester to choose an infographic creation tool for future classes, this class seemed to benefit greatly from the collaborative trialand-error involved in exploring tools for themselves. While frustrating, this experience foreshadows the reality students will face as new technology is introduced throughout their lives and hence will remain part of the course curriculum. These skills are needed to catapult students of many disciplines into the technically driven working world of the 21st century. Graphics for Grammatical Analysis While employers recognize the importance of grammatical skills for salaried employees (NCW, 2004), students typically expect grammar courses to be abstract, boring, and unconnected to their lives. Unfortunately, these expectations have both historical precedence

105

(Jespersen, 1924) and current justification (Minchew & Hopper, 2008; Brown, 2009). Many students, therefore, take a “give me the medicine” attitude while they wait for the instructor to provide syntactic rules to transform their writing. In-class active learning activities (Marlow, 2009; 2010) contribute to meaningfulness (Nehari & Bender, 1978) and deep learning (James, 2014), but even students who perform well in the classroom often find themselves unable to transfer those skills to the real world. This demands a learner-focused strategy for application of grammatical knowledge outside the classroom. Accordingly, this section reports on steps taken in a 200-level grammar course to enhance transferability of classroom skills with three primary goals in mind: (1) get students to apply course concepts outside the classroom (Castro-Schez, 2014), (2) lead today’s digital natives to meaningful application of information technology tools (Prensky, 2001; Palfrey & Gasser, 2008), and (3) engage students in self-evaluation covering the entire scope of Bloom's (1956) six cognitive process domains while simultaneously challenging students at meta-cognitive levels (Anderson & Krathwol, 2001). To do this, external analyses have been implemented across the entire course, culminating in a final course project that has students comparing their own writing to that of a professional in their targeted career field. From the beginning of the course, students are told that this will be like no other grammar course they have ever taken; they are informed that the primary focus in the course will be critical thinking and analysis and that grammar serves as the mode of study, but that the analytic skills they develop should be of equal or greater value to them than the grammar itself. The first step in transforming this course was to create Web-based analysis exercises focused on applying concepts and principles from each unit of study to students’ own writing. The instructor created five digitally delivered

106

exercises based on five units of study with each exercise designed to lead students through guided analysis of selfselected texts. Within each exercise, students completed both quantitative and qualitative analyses of samples of their own writing in light of unit concepts. These exercises took students through the first four levels of Bloomâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956; Anderson & Krathwol, 2001): remembering, understanding, applying, and analyzing. To move them up to the final stages of evaluating and creating, students compared their own written work to others in a multi-step analysis project. The analysis project guided students through comparing their own writing to that of a professional in their intended career field over. This began with a declaration and samples assignment in which students announced what career they intend to pursue and provided a sample of their own writing (preferably a paper of which they were proud, written for a course in their field of study) and a sample of the writing of a professional in their chosen field. This encouraged them to focus on course content with a definite goal in mind. Two weeks later, students created two Wordles (www.Wordle.net), one from each of their two writing samples. As a Wordle is a collage of terms in an inputted text where the size of the words in the collage grows based on word frequency within the sample, Wordles enable global inferences based on word frequency in a text. In the grammar course students analyzed word complexity and parts of speech and submitted a short paragraph of analysis along with their two Wordles. Feedback from the instructor guided students into understanding how analysis differs from description and began a process of honing critical thinking skills, pointing students toward evaluating. When students had completed three of the courseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s five technical unit analyses, they created an infographic combining words and images to capture and communicate

107

the core similarities and differences between their writing and that of their chosen professional authors in a condensed format. Students were encouraged to consider this a modern-day version of an outline in which they were to capture ideas and data to be used in their final project submission. To create their infographic, they had to return to the analyses assignments for the first three units, fix any errors they found in their first attempts, and complete the quantitative sections for their professional writing sample. Once they had quantitative data for both writing samples for each of the first three units, they created graphs comparing their writing with that of the professional and embedded these into their infographics together with brief qualitative analyses of similarities and differences between their samples for each unit of study. Piktochart (www.piktochart.com) was suggested as the default option for creating their infographics, but any method of creation they chose was accepted. Here students were creating new knowledge. Further, they were encouraged to share their work on Facebook, Twitter, and other communication outlets to enhance the meaningfulness of their projects. Next, students completed annotated bibliographies in which they discussed research relating the grammatical constructions they found noteworthy in their analyses for the infographics. In addition to traditional one-paragraph summaries of the articlesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; key points, each student had to justify the inclusion of these sources and select one quote they found particularly relevant from each article. Again, they were evaluating the writing of professionals. At the end of the course, students submitted their formal written analyses comparing their own writing to that of a professional on each of the five content areas covered in class. They were expected to include graphs and other visual representations as well as key quotes from researchers commenting on relevant grammatical

108

constructions. Again, students were creating knowledge through evaluation and synthesis. The quality of thought in studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; final projects varied widely. A few proved unable to make the transition from standard term paper to analytic comparison, but most got the message. This is a 200-level class, and many students floundered with the high cognitive demands of creation and evaluation, but at least they were trying. Although use of technology permeated this semester-long project, most components could be done with pen and paper. The information technology aspect was included to appeal to studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; sense of modernity in their education and to help build familiarity with the digital environments nearly every college graduate must expect to face in the real-world. The closing quote comes from a student who expressed sentiments about grammar that could easily apply to any field of study. At first, I thought this class would be boring and easy. Then I was instantly overwhelmed, and I felt like a fool for thinking that grammar was simple or easy, much less boring. I really like how all of the material we are learning builds off itself, leading to a strong understanding of grammar overall. I have a new respect for just how complex and interesting language is. Student Ownership of Information Literacy Managing complexity now and in the future is a core objective for the Strategies for Information Discovery, a course in which librarians introduce students to the concepts of information literacy and technology literacy. The most important goal in this course is to help students become information literate as well as technology literate for their college careers and future professional careers.

109

In most of the sections above, instructors tended to select technology tools that filled a need in their courses and engaged students in course content with these tools. In this section a technology tools assignment is discussed in which students became comfortable with a variety of technology tools, which were then used throughout the course for additional assignments. To begin, students selected a technology tool from a list of creation tools (tools that allow students to create videos, comics, etc.); they could also choose a different tool if they liked. The primary stipulation for the assignment was that the tool must be free or have a free version. Each student then used the tool to create a video or other media item about its advantages and disadvantages, including subjectively what he or she liked and did not like about it. During one class session, students were introduced to the suggested technology tools to give them a starting point to select their own tool. Some time was given during class for students to use one or more of the tools before finalizing their choices; this session not only introduced a variety of technology tools but also helped the students feel comfortable tinkering with them. The assignment provided students room to fail when tinkering, since they were graded on their assessment of advantages and disadvantages and their presentations but not on their use of the tools themselves. In other words, studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; selection and evaluation of technology tools was the central goal, which will hopefully help them become technology-literate individuals who are comfortable with constantly changing technologies. Because the technology tools assignment is designed to vary greatly, the remainder of this section follows the experience of one student (Ashley) who volunteered to share her final products with the audience for this paper. Ashley used PowToon (www.PowToon.com) to create her video, which can be seen at

110

http://youtube/DbteRHN3jhc (note that Ashley chose not to include sound for either presentation). During her presentation, Ashley explained that she did not like PowToon because it was complicated to use and required too much time to create her video. After explaining some of these complications, however, Ashley also said that she had become comfortable using the tool. For their next project, students were assigned one of the technology tools that had been presented during the technology tools assignment, but one with which they were unfamiliar. Students were asked to assist each other with the technology tools they were proficient in, so Ashley helped other students upload their videos into YouTube when they had trouble doing so before class. Thus, one way that she demonstrated her increasing technology literacy was her ability to show others how to use some of the more advanced features of the tool. Additionally, Ashley exhibited technology literacy during her next presentation using Moovly (www.Moovly.com) for her next project on paraphrasing, (available at http://youtu.be/GY07YxNjwpc). At the conclusion of this project, Ashley said, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Even though PowToon is complicated to use, I like it a lot better than Moovly because of the different features in PowToon, and it was difficult to set the timing in Moovly.â&#x20AC;? She demonstrated facility with both PowToon and Moovly and also knew which technology tool she would use for creating future videos, showing her growth in technology literacy. She may or may not use these tools in the future, but she now feels more comfortable exploring new technology tools. The technology tools assignment helps such students be innovative and express themselves creatively and touches on a variety of literacies, including information literacy and technology literacy. Student reaction to the technology tools assignment has been overwhelmingly positive, and on the course

111

evaluation more than half of the class stated that their favorite project or assignment was the technology tools assignment. Although there often seems to be a fairly steep learning curve, students report enjoying the challenge and are more engaged in the material for the course as a result of it. This type of assignment would be beneficial in a variety of fields to help students become technology literate in their disciplines in preparation for their future careers. Conclusion As has been discussed in a number of articles, introducing and using technology in the classroom helps students become more engaged in the material and appeals to a variety of learning styles (Murphrey, 2010; Warnken, 2004; Davies, 2011). This paper adds to that discussion with specific ideas from five distinct disciplines that can be applied widely across the curriculum. As Warnken (2004) observes, helping students become information and technology literate is an entire universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s responsibility, across all departments. When students are introduced to a variety of technology tools, they can be more prepared for using technology and information in a variety of ways in their lives and careers. While it is certainly true that all of the authors of this paper were predisposed to the benefits of involving students in the use of technology, and this naturally affected the successes of the various projects, it is also true that technology is increasingly important in all areas of life and work, and its ubiquity makes its presence in courses an imperative for technophiles and technophobes alike. Indeed, technology will be an essential part of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; future lives, both in the personal and professional realms, and the university has the responsibility to prepare students for life after college. Hence, instructors of all disciplines

112

would do well to consider ways to help our digital natives become more technology literate. References Abilock, D., & Williams, C. 2014. Recipe for an Infographic. Knowledge Quest, 43(2):46. Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (eds). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman. Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Book 1: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: Longman. Brown, D. W. (2009). Coming to terms with what it means to teach and learn grammar. American Speech, 84, 216227. Bryer, T., & Seigler, D. (2012). Theoretical and instrumental rationales of student empowerment through social and web-based technologies. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 18(3), 429-448. Castro-Schez, J. J., Redondo, M. A., Jurado, F., & Albusac, J. (2014). Experience applying language processing techniques to develop educational software that allow active learning methodologies by advising students. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 41, 6579. Davies, R. S. (2011). Understanding technology literacy: A framework for evaluating educational technology integration. TechTrends, 55(5), 45-52. Educational Testing Service. (2003). Succeeding in the 21st century: What higher education must do to address the gap in information and communication technology proficiencies. Princeton, NJ: Author. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/Information_and_Com munication_Technology_Literacy/ICTwhitepaperfinal. pdf

113

Gulek, J. C., & Hakan, D. (2005). Learning with technology: The impact of laptop use on student achievement. Educational Research Service, 23(4), 420. Hedges, K. (2014). Six ways to avoid death by PowerPoint. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/work-inprogress/2014/11/14/six-ways-to-avoid-death-bypowerpoint/. Hough, B. (2006). Teaching people to be savvy travelers in a technological world. Computers in Libraries, 26(5), 8-12. James, D. (2014). Investigating the curriculum through assessment practice in higher education: the value of a ‘learning cultures’ approach. Higher Education, 67(2), 155-169. Jespersen, O. (1924). The teaching of grammar. The English Journal, 13, 161-176. Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2014). NMC horizon report: 2014 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Jones, C., & Healing, G. (2010). Net generation students: Agency and choice and the new technologies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 344–356. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press. Loke, S. K. (2013). Framed by technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), E49-E51. Marlow, D. W. (2009). Clicking to learn - involving students with a personal response system. In J. Chambers (Ed.), Selected papers from the 20th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning. Jacksonville, FL: Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning.

114

Marlow, D. W. (2010). Engaging syntax: Using a personal response system to encourage grammatical thought. American Speech, 85(2), 225-237. Minchew, S. S., & Hopper, P. F. (2008). Techniques for Using Humor and Fun in the Language Arts Classroom. The Clearing House, 81, 232-236. Murphrey, T. P. (2010). A case study of elearning: Using technology to create and facilitate experiential learning. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 11(4), 211-221. NCW (National Commission on Writing for America's Families, Schools, and Colleges). (2004). Writing: A ticket to work . . . or a ticket out, a survey of business leaders. Retrieved from http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/writingc om/writing-ticket-to-work.pdf Nehari, M., & Bender, H. (1978). Meaningfulness of a learning experience: A measure for educational outcomes in higher education. Higher Education, 7(1), 1-11. Palfrey J., & Gasser U. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. Basic Books: New York. Pollock, P., & Wilson, B. (2002). Evaluating the impact of Internet teaching: Preliminary evidence from American National Government classes. PS: Political Science and Politics, 35(3), 561-566. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Sharkey, J. (2013). Establishing twenty-first-century information fluency. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 53(1), 33-39. Warnken, P. (2004). Managing technology: The impact of technology on information literacy education in libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 30(2), 151-156.

115

Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-Centered Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

116

COMPLEXITY AND COLLAPSE IN HIGHER EDUCATION Bud McClure University of Minnesota, Duluth

Abstract: Higher education has reached a tipping point where its level of complexity is producing diminishing returns. The application of research on the study of collapsed civilizations to the state of contemporary higher education suggests that as college and universities have become more specialized and more complex, they are prone to collapse. This research offers one explanation of why colleges and universities are under intense financial pressure to re-size their institutions. Examples are provided that highlight this discussion.

117

Introduction …while we all need to do the things that produce solid bottom lines, and keep organizations functioning in an orderly and productive manner, sustaining the organization itself is not and should not be the ultimate focus. (Wilcox, 2014) This article examines complexity and collapse in higher education by applying Joseph Tainter’s (1990) research on failed civilizations. It offers one explanation of why colleges and universities are under intense financial pressure to resize their institutions. Greer’s (2014) application of Tainter’s ideas to all forms of organizations is included, as is his notion of intermediation, an idea nearly synonymous with Tainter’s description of complexity that refers to the practice of adding “intermediaries” between the producer and consumer of goods. It is argued that higher education has reached a tipping point where the level of complexity is now producing diminishing returns. The inability to regress systemic complexity systematically is leading to a breakdown in higher education with a number of campuses being hollowed out and others closing. Several examples drawn from colleges and universities around the country as well as examples from the University of Minnesota, the Twin Cities, and the Duluth campuses are used to highlight this discussion. Following the examination of collapse are examples of new models of providing higher education. Complexity and Collapse Tainter has studied complexity and its effect on the collapse of seventeen civilizations, among them the Western Roman Empire and the Mayan and Chacoan civilizations. Prior to collapse in the civilizations he

118

studied, there was an increase in the size of their bureaucracies, an increase in specialization, rising taxes to support the bureaucracy, and more and more monies directed at funding the costs for internal control and external defense (Tainter, 1990, p. 115). Moreover, as these civilizations grew in complexity, the returns produced from that additional growth diminished and eventually turned negative. Complexity produced more complexity, costs grew exponentially, and taxes increased to fund those costs, spiraling ever upward even as the benefits from such growth became more and more diminished. One of the most tantalizing of Tainter’s (1990) theories is the notion that as costs spiral, with a concomitant decrease in benefits, failing civilizations are unable to regress their complexity; they cannot simplify nor decentralize their governance structure. He theorized that once complexity is reached, the only means of unwinding it is through some sort of collapse. Tainter’s thesis is a cautionary tale, and his ideas of complexity and collapse are being applied to contemporary society, economies, and many other organizational structures (Greer, 2008; Heinberg, 2011; Kunsler, 2006; McClure, 2014). In this article Tainter’s ideas are applied to higher education as one explanation for its exorbitant costs and the inability of these institutions to reduce their complexity. In general, collapse represents a sudden reduction in size to a simpler, less centrally controlled, less specialized and less stratified organizational structure with an attendant drop in finances to support it. Tainter also noted that in collapsed civilizations the arts and literature were so decimated that a dark age often followed. Finally, the people who were left experienced the world as having shrunk. Overall collapse is an economizing process that seeks to restore “the marginal return on organizational investment to a more favorable level” (Tainter, 1990, p. 198).

119

Catabolic Collapse Greer (2014) suggests that collapse is not uniform and begins in the most fragile areas, or at the margins, before moving toward the center. Greer (2008) has adapted Tainter’s basic ideas as the foundation for his own theory of catabolic collapse, a kind of downward, stair-step unwinding of the kind of complexity that Tainter discussed. Greer (2014) argues that Tainter’s law of diminishing returns applies “to an astonishingly broad range of human affairs that the more you invest—in any sense—in any one project, the smaller the additional return is on each unit of additional investment.” Greer (2014), with his stair-step analogy, explains collapse as a three stage unwinding beginning with diminishing returns, followed by the point of zero marginal return where investment is equal to the benefits derived from it, and finally reaching the point of negative return where further investment costs more than the benefits it yields. Greer (2008) argues that modern society is currently in the early stages of collapse (Table 1), declining national growth, and increasing national debt. Greer (2014) notes that signs of collapse are evident in our economy today where any growth comes at the expense of environmental degradation, broken infrastructure, wealth and income disparity, increased poverty for many, and other destructive social consequences. Table: Growth Rates in U.S. Real GDP

*Source: Foster & Magdoff (2009)

120

Greer (2014) suggests that today the cost of economic growth is far greater than any benefits derived from it. To illustrate complexity Greer comments that the producers and consumers of the goods and services involved in any given transaction are hugely outnumbered by the people who earn a living from that transaction in some other wayâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;by administering, financing, scheduling, regulating, taxing, approving, overseeing, facilitating, supplying, or in some other manner getting in there and grabbing a piece of the action (Greer, 2014). Greer (2014) calls this process intermediation as he adapts Tainterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ideas to explain inserting complexity between the producer and consumer of goods or services prevalent in complex societies or organizations. The term refers to the intermediaries that can be found layering any society, bureaucracy, or organization. Greer (2008) explains that when collapse occurs, it is not uniform across any society or organization but can be found first at the fragile fringes, and then it makes its way toward the center. We see examples of this today in small rural towns that have lost their local economies and even in big cities like Detroit that have lost their economic base and have gone bankrupt. Examples of collapsing infrastructure abound, from highways to bridges to schools. There is no money and no desire to fix what is breaking or has broken. In line with Tainterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s thesis, defense spending continues to rise, and more money is spent on internal control by expansion of the national security apparatus. Taxes are increased, and in their most insidious form; wealth is being redistributed upward. The greatest evidence of a collapsing state is the spiraling costs of the public and private debt necessary to mask the decline. Today public debt in the United States exceeds $18 trillion,

121

and private debt is near $12 trillion; combined, that is about $86, 000 for every man, woman, and child in the country. This debt likely will never be repaid, and entitlement and other programs that depend on it will end. No amount of magical thinking or technological innovation will change this reality Higher Education Tainterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s link between complexity and collapse can be applied to higher education. At the intersection of declining revenue and organizational complexity universities and colleges find themselves struggling to maintain infrastructures that support business as usual, and many non-selective colleges and universities are under intense financial pressure to re-size their institutions. Between 2004 and 2013 fifty-seven four-year private institutions closed, many of which were at the margins because of their particular focus. These included fourteen religious schools and eleven not classified by Carnegie Commission (typically non-degree granting institutions). Another 25% were made up of bachelorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s level institutions (Segosebe & Shepard, 2013). The common complaint and justification for exorbitant tuition increases among public institutions has been declining state support. For private colleges, costs have increased to pay faculty, add administrators, upgrade infrastructure, and provide financial aid to attract students. Lumped together these might be identified as costs to remain competitive; however, another possibility is that costs have increased at both public and private colleges because they can. With student access to easy credit, expanding an institution has made sense because higher education is wedded to the same philosophy that undergirds our economy--endless growth (McClure, 2014).

122

Currently factors such as a decline in the number of high school graduates and the perceived value of a college degree, loan debt (Table 2), job market conditions (McClure, 2014), and demographic shifts as people migrate from small rural areas to find jobs (Rivard, 2013b) have led to decreasing enrollment and with it the attendant tuition increases that have kept these institutions afloat. Growth limits are not acknowledged by most of the collegiate strategic plans or vision statements produced by higher learning institutions. Moreover, if these limits are suggested, they are ignored in the mistaken belief that colleges are somehow exempt from the consequences of their own excesses. At Edinboro University of Pennsylvania, near Pittsburgh, PA, enrollment is down 18% in the last few years due partly to the declining number of high school graduates in that area of the state. In a moment of candor, Julie Wollman, the president of Edinboro, admitted that when faced with the knowledge of steep demographic declines in the Pittsburgh area, the university continued to do more of the same, thinking, “. . . that’s not going to affect us—it’s going to affect everyone else” (Rivard, 2013a, p. 3). Declining state support for public institutions and the increasing costs of staying competitive for private colleges have been convenient scapegoats for soaring tuition. However, these are not the only reasons for the rising costs of college. Foremost and quite simply, these increases have stemmed from the inability of higher education institutions to reduce their complexity or disintermediate (Greer, 2014). For example, as many universities sought to meet the diverse needs of their students and to diversify their institutions, student affairs and counseling specialists were added. Advisement, once a function of the faculty, spread outward across campuses as more and more specialization took place for various groups of students. Advisors were

123

hired for academic counseling, career counseling, housing, personal counseling, students of color, GLBT students, students with disabilities, tutoring, financial aid, and information technology; the additional echelons of administration needed to supervise these hires also necessitated more positions. Despite being faced with spiraling costs and reductions in state support, universities and colleges mostly stayed the course, and very little effort was made to rightsize these institutions because the costs were simply passed along to students. However, with student loans exceeding $1 trillion, that line of credit is nearly maxed out, and though complaints about state budget cuts and other competitive pressures have increased, the end game is here. Unfortunately, any cuts and downsizing that will take place will be unsystematic and mostly at the institutional fringes. As Tainter noted, once a certain level of complexity is reached, it is not possible to reduce it in a coordinated manner. Resistance to Change The amount of intermediation in higher education today is staggering and is a major factor in its exorbitant costs. During boom times universities spent and built infrastructure without restraint, adding staff and other amenities. Funded by easy credit made available to students, in addition to state monies, schools spent foolishly on their appearances, adapting a strategy of style over substance to stay competitive for students looking for the spa experience. It might be important to note here that individual actors such as departments or faculty or staff or administrators are simply representations of a larger institutional process unfolding mostly outside of their awareness. Although each constituency has its own self-

124

serving agenda to stay employed or grow its disciplines, each is only representative of larger institutional forces at work. Greer (2014) summarizes That’s not to say that this unraveling will be a simple process. All those millions of people whose jobs depend on intermediation, and thus on the maintenance of current levels of . . . complexity, have an understandable interest in staying employed. That interest in practice works out to an increasingly frantic quest to keep people from sidestepping the baroque corporate and bureaucratic economic machine and getting goods and services directly from producers. The resistance to change in academia is in evidence today as people involved in keeping the traditional university intact are invested in keeping their jobs. Dr. Luepker, in the public health department at the University of Minnesota, says any changes are up against “institutional inertia . . . we establish things and programs and they never quite go away;” in referring to these programs, he adds, “They’re nice people and they’re colleagues and they’re good people . . . but in this environment, you have to ask how we can continue this” (as cited in Belkin and Thrum, 2012). Efforts to streamline the academic hierarchy are met with an equal effort to maintain the status quo. As Tainter (1990) noted, in complex societies “maintenance of legitimacy or investment in coercion require constant mobilization of resources. This is the unrelenting cost that any complex society must bear” (p. 193). One example of coercion can be found in the relentless promotion of the value of an education, an endorsement often implying that anyone who does not obtain a degree will be denied access to material riches. Note that any time an editorial appears challenging the

125

value of a college degree, members of the academy respond in force, arguing that people make more money with a college degree than without one (Thiel, 2014; Wadhwa, 2014). Moreover, such rebuttals avoid discussing intermediation, why costs have outpaced inflation, oppressive loans, stiff tuition, low paying and temporary jobs, the fact that income has been flat since 1970’s, the 50% chance that students will end up broke and living in their parents’ basements (McClure, 2014), and, perhaps most importantly, that college is not for everyone. One regent at the University of Minnesota smugly responded to the student debt crisis by saying, “the fact is that most students leave the U with a high-quality education and less debt than it would take to buy a new car” (as cited in Beeson, 2014). Financial Pressures that Point Toward Collapse While there is less state money for public institutions and competitive costs for private schools continue to rise, a big driver in the cost of higher education is the inability of institutions to simplify their operations. Since 1978 the rise in tuition has exceeded the increase in consumer price index that would normally be used as a reasonable gauge for expected cost increases. From 1978 to 2011 college costs rose 7.45% annually, compared to health care (5.8%), housing (4.3%) (see Table 2) and family incomes (3.8%) (Reynolds, 2014), and average college debt equaled $29,400.

126

Table 2

*source Wall Street Journal, Jan. 5, 2014 The complex higher education system is under stress, and many schools are struggling. While selective universities will survive, a number of others will be closed and replaced by more efficient models of education. Again, as Greer (2008) noted, the collapse initially occurs at the margins, and that means fragile, tuition-driven campuses and those with poorer students will be affected first. Between 2010 and 2012, twenty-five percent of private colleges saw enrollment declines of 10% (Rivard, 2013b), and many are being forced to discount tuition up to 45% as competition for eligible students has increased. The search for undergraduates even extends to those prized students living overseas who can pay cash, regardless of any language barriers. Moodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Investor Service is one measure of potential collapse (Anderson, 2014). The firm rates the financial stability of colleges and universities; among the factors it considers are enrollment, tuition revenue per student, total cash and other investments, total debt, and the ratio of the debt to operating revenue. Its scale contains

127

twenty-one rating steps from Aaa to C (as one commenter noted, even Moodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s is subject to grade inflation) (Anderson, 2014). As one might predict, many of the selective universities are more highly rated than those with lower admission standards and are struggling with enrollment decline and other issues. Since 2013 Moodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s has downgraded twenty-three universities. Forbes has also created a financial fitness rating scale and graded each institution using a GPA-like score with corresponding letter grades ranging from A to D (Schifrin, 2013a). As Table 3 shows, the publication rated 900 four-year, private, not-for-profit schools with more than 500 students, and over half of these schools earned a letter grade of C or less (Schifrin, 2013a). Table 3

*Source: Forbes Magazine, Sept. 24, 2013 Research by Segosebe, D. & Shepard, J. (2013) confirms earlier research by Martins and Samels (2009) that identified a number of factors indicative of failing higher education institutions. Among the most significant factors were high tuition dependency, declining enrollment, low endowments, long term recurring expenses from

128

capital expenditures, and maintenance and fixed costs that consume a large portion of the operating budget. This last factor has been indicative of the false assumption that has gripped many institutions over the last decade in the desperate struggle to stay relevant today: that growth through building and expansion will allow them to not only survive but grow as well (Segosebe & Shepard, 2013). This mirrors Tainter’s (1990) critique of advanced civilizations, that endless growth leads to higher costs while producing, at best, marginal returns. In this case, less money is available for other parts of the university because money is needed to maintain the new buildings. Examples: Intermediation, Resistance to Change, Decline, and Collapse The following examples demonstrate that higher education has reached a tipping point where the level of complexity and costly specialization is now producing diminishing returns. Budget reductions from both private and public colleges around the country highlight this discussion, showing that the most vulnerable institutions— those with small endowments and dependent on tuition to fund operations; those with a connection to a particular race, gender, or religion (Segosebe & Shepard, 2013); and those with poorer students—are most likely to collapse. As these schools downsize or collapse, other schools pick up their prospective students to slow the rate of their own decline. By one estimate over 2000 colleges may close over the next fifteen years (McDonald, 2014). First, the University of Minnesota Twin Cities is used to show how intermediation occurs and is accompanied by a corresponding drop in benefits. Second, the University of Minnesota Duluth’s recent financial crisis is examined to show how difficult it is to rightsize a complex institution even when there is an effort at

129

disintermediation. Finally, a number of financially pressured colleges and universities illustrate some of the strategies that are being used to keep institutions intact to avoid collapse. Despite the varied recovery strategies of these latter examples, it is doubtful some of them will survive. While these institutions seek to re-economize themselves to align revenues and expenses, none of their strategies includes eradicating bureaucratic levels, such as eliminating an entire echelon of university and college administrators or student affairs services and advisors and returning these functions to the department level. Moreover, no attempt has been made to rightsize the institution given the declining student pool, such as mothballing dormitories or better repurposing space to senior or low-income housing. Mostly, each of these schools adopts the usual strategies to keep the institution intact: cuts to faculty and staff; hiring more temporary faculty; increased teaching loads; across-the-board pay cuts; cuts to retirement programs; cutting low enrollment programs; downsizing liberal arts; merging with other schools; adding online programs; or adding professional programs such as nursing, pharmacy, and medical schools that prepare students for a specific career. The new focus at many schools will not be the quality of the courses or the quality of the student experience but whether the courses meet enrollment expectations. Almost all of these strategies include some form of institutional rebranding. University of Minnesota - Twin Cities The University of Minnesota Twin Cities provides a good example of intermediation with its upsurge in administrators. Recently, the University of Minnesota was cited in a Wall Street Journal article (Berkin & Thurm,

130

2012) for its explosive employment growth, particularly the expansion of its administrative class. From 2001 through 2012 administrators grew to 19,000 employees, one for every 3½ students, fueled by rising tuition and state money; in fact, administrators grew at twice the rate of both students and faculty—a whopping 37% —and one thousand new administrators were added during that period (Berkin & Thurm, 2012). Human resources and those with “personnel” in their job titles increased 33% to 212 since the 2004-2005 academic year, while enrollment grew only 8% (Berkin & Thurm, 2012). Table 4: Enrollment at University of Minnesota Twin Cities (2001, 2012, 2014) Year 2001 2012 2014 Undergraduates 27,699 30,375 30,135 Graduate school 10,298 13,124 12,711 Professional 2,629 3,824 3,733 school Non-degree 5,971 4,530 4,568 The growth in administrators from 2001-2012 yielded very few additional students—on average 243 undergraduates were added per year. In 2012, perhaps near the zenith of complexity, there is evidence of the beginning of diminishing returns in several categories (Table 4); however, as Greer theorized with catabolic collapse, those lessening returns would not be shared evenly across the organization. From 2011 – 2014 new enrollment in education dropped from 1007 students to 985, while enrollment in science and engineering climbed from 1609 to 1761. Liberal Arts have seen a decline from 2998 students to 2876 (University of Minnesota Office of Institutinal Research, 2015). The Office of Equity and Diversity grew from four directors in the 2006-2007 year to ten directors in 2011-

131

2012, but Table 5 shows that the investment produced only marginal returns. In fact, figures from 2002-2006, when there were presumably only four or fewer directors, show an increase in students of color from 13% of the total student population to 14.9%, a gain of 1.9% over those four years, as opposed to a gain of .8% over the six years with the added directors. Table 5: Students of Color at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 non 42,89 43,23 43,41 43,63 43,43 student 9 7 0 6 0 s of color student 7,503 7,646 7,730 8,023 8,291 s of color % 14.9 15.0 15.1 15.5 16.0

2011 44,27 5

8,272

15.7

Across the country overall spending by colleges and universities to hire managers and administrators relative to instructors grew by 50% (Berkin & Thurm, 2012). The Twin Cities campus ranked number one among the 72 highly ranked public research universities during the 20112012 academic years, figures disputed by the university as misleading (Berkin & Thurm, 2012). Attendant with this rise in administrative bloat were tuition increases, which doubled to $13, 524 in a decade; moreover, the school employed 353 people (81 administrators) making more than $200,000 a year, up 57% from the inflation-adjusted figure of 2001(Berkin & Thurm, 2012). Finally, the university has 136 people in its promotions, marketing, and communications department and has spent $8 million since 2006 to improve its brand. The University of Minnesota also has spent many billions

132

on new buildings over the last ten years, including the addition of a $300 million football stadium. It costs the university $106 million a year to service all of its bonding debt ((Belkin & Thurm, 2012). University of Minnesota Duluth (UMD) The University of Minnesota Duluth provides a good example of how institutions react to budget cuts; rather than make significant changes to reduce complexity, they do more of the same. This example shows how even minor changes are met with institutional resistance. UMD was forced to address budget issues brought to light by declining enrollment, which has decreased from 9728 students in 2011 to 9120 in 2014 (Holden, 2014). Again, the decline is not uniform across majors (Table 6). Table 6 Year Education Liberal Arts Science and Engineering

2011 2208 2106 2870

2014 1895 1646 3049

Wedded to the idea of continuous growth, Vice Chancellor Schokker (VCAA) acknowledged that she should have foreseen this crisis given the “shrinking pool of high school students” (Lerner, 2014). Additionally, administrators discovered that they had miscalculated fringe benefits by $2.3 million. Fueled by rising tuition dollars, the university blissfully spent the money from that revenue stream with little understanding of some of the underlying structural problems that were hidden by the cash flow, such as spending more on part time instructors than was allocated (Lerner, 2014). Schokker said, “I liken it to the dot-com bubble where everything looks good” until it

133

bursts; â&#x20AC;&#x153;itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s kind of just living beyond your means without realizing itâ&#x20AC;? (as cited in Lerner, 2014). Facing a total $11.9 million budget deficit (Fox 21 News, 2013), administrators embarked on a labor intensive and ambitious plan to examine all facets of the university with an eye to addressing these deficits. The Academic Program Prioritization and the Academic Support and Services Prioritization Plans engaged all levels of the university in a process to identify programs and other areas of the university that could be merged, reduced, or eliminated. Every program and area at the university was self-rated by its own faculty and staff. The assessment was based upon student credits hours, number of faculty and staff, cost of programs, and value of the program, among many other factors. This data was collected and passed on to appointed committees who were assigned to collate the data and make recommendations to the VCAA, and the VCAA, in consultation with the chancellor, was charged with making the final decision regarding budget cuts. The process took place over the fall semester of 2013. The intended effort was directed as rightsizing the university and offered an excellent opportunity to restructure the entire institution. In January 2014 preliminary recommendations were made for administrative and academic changes. The administrative changes were minor and included a reshuffling or merger of duties and a staff buyout plan that would replace people who took the buyout with lower paid employees to be hired into most of the same positions. Among the proposed cuts were the end-of-semester buffets for faculty and staff, the commencement dinner luncheon, and professional staff day. In a rare win/win for both the university and faculty, shuttle buses for commencement were eliminated, forcing faculty to walk to graduation and get much needed exercise.

134

The proposed academic changes were minor, too. Among them was a proposal to make faculty-teaching loads equal across colleges, but this was met with stiff resistance and was quickly dropped. The women’s studies program was scheduled for elimination, but after lobbying the VCAA, the department not only survived the cut but also was given a new mandate to reconfigure under a new department called Social Justice. At least sixteen faculty accepted buyouts to leave the university; these faculty positions were not eliminated but rightsized to make room for the hiring of new faculty at lower salaries, a plan similar to the staff buyout program (University of Minnesota Duluth Prioritization Committee, 2014). Recently the women’s hockey coach, her two assistants, and the part-time director of operations were let go as the athletic department cited its own budget pressures; the coach was being paid $215,000 a year (Wellens, 2014). The hue and cry over this dismissal died down quickly when those protesting realized that they could have been furloughed instead (Wellens, 2014). The final recommendation for change made no mention of eliminating or reducing the university’s five college divisions or making any other wholesale change to the university’s administrative structure. Eventually, institutional resistance to change was so great that very few of the prioritizations plans were implemented (University of Minnesota Duluth Program Prioritization Committee, 2014). Richard Sauer, former interim president of the University of Minnesota, cites his own frustration with the intractability of higher education as one of the reasons he left administration; summing up his sentiment, he said, “while tenured faculty have some of the most secure jobs in our society, they are risk averse” (as cited in Sauer, 2014). Through buyouts and other cuts the university was able to reduce the deficit to an estimated $5.5 million as the university was given a special allocation by the Twin Cities

135

campus of $4.2 million. In a sign of business as usual, the university approved a high-cost graduate program for the Department of Psychology that would serve fifteen students each year. In the fall of 2014 there were three new graduate courses with enrollments of five or fewer students (undergraduate classes are required to maintain thirty students). Addressing the six million dollar recurring deficit has been difficult, but the university is finally acknowledging its need for ever increasing funds and is instructing that elective courses that fail to meet the maximum enrollment standards be eliminated. Adhering to the doctrine of endless growth, Chancellor Black vows that “we’re not just going to cut our way out of this problem,” and he said he’s also looking for ideas for programs to attract new students and more income (as cited in Lerner, 2014a). This example shows how an administration seeks to preserve the basic structure of a university by making cuts at the margins of the institution. Even when structural changes like modifications to the teaching load requirement were proposed, they were met with stiff institutional resistance. This approach is in keeping with Tainter’s idea that even in the face of decline (enrollment), reducing complexity is nearly impossible. Southern Methodist University Southern Methodist University (SMU) is a good example of increased spending with diminishing returns. As Tainter (1990) suggested, increasing complexity and specialization requires more and more money be spent just to maintain the institution, resulting in fewer returns on that investment. In this case a tipping point was passed where the money spent in one area led to budget cuts in another area.

136

SMU is a poster child for reckless and excessive spending, much of which was used to re-brand and upgrade the university’s reputation. In 2013 SMU had revenue of $443 million and a debt of $582 million. The campus has been on a building spree with new dorms and other multimillion-dollar structures in an attempt to keep pace with the other institutions they hope to emulate (Repko, 2014). Recently, the university announced cuts of $35 million, which will include layoffs, in the midst of a billion dollar fundraising campaign (Repko, 2014). As a result of the upgrading in 2013, the institution’s expenses grew by $20 million compared to an $8 million increase in revenue (Repko, 2014). University President R. Gerald Turner, an apparent master of doublespeak, suggested that SMU had to makes changes to avoid budget deficits and adapt to a challenging higher education climate (Repko, 2014). Last year SMU hired Bain and Company to review its operations; SMU provost Paul Ludden said the review showed that SMU had “excess management layers” and “proportionally more employees dedicated to support functions, such as finance, HR and IT than other universities” (as cited in Repko, 2014). Chris Regis, SMU’s chief business and financial officer, noted additional factors for the budget difficulties: a declining college-age population, increased competition for those students, and a decrease in federal research funds (Repko, 2014). Using Orwellian language, she says, “It’s not about making budget cuts, it’s about trimming the administrative side of the institutions (sic) so that more funds can be directed to academics” (as cited in Repko, 2014). It is easy to predict that the capital campaign at SMU will be used to prop up a university sorely in need of structural change. This is the cost of complexity—more and more money is needed to maintain the status quo.

137

Kentucky State University Kentucky State University is a good example of how a fragile and complex system, one with little flexibility, will be among those that may collapse. A predominantly black university, Kentucky State had a $7 million shortfall in 2014, has suspended granting tenure and promotions, and is proposing across-the-board wage cuts and furloughs (Kocher, 2014). Eighteen positions will be eliminated, seven in external affairs and development, two in student success and enrollment (now student affairs), eight in academic affairs, and one in finance; in addition, thirty-two adjunct positions will be cut until each faculty has a full time teaching load (Kocher, 2014). Finally a $500,000 reduction in the athletic budget is proposed; all of these reductions are due to a 26% drop in enrollment from 2533 students in 2013 to 1869 this year (Kocher, 2014). Not surprisingly, the plan also adds two administrative positions in the presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office, an assistant for security and risk (probably to protect the president from faculty and staff), and a director of facilities and maintenance operations (which merges two previous positions) (Kocher, 2014). However, these additions will add $97, 500 to the budget this year and $195,000 next year (Kocher, 2014). While substantial, these cuts will not resolve the budget difficulties. Kentucky State has passed the tipping point and may eventually collapse. It is attempting to preserve its current structure (level of complexity) even while experiencing negative returns. Its enrollment is in free fall, yet the institution seeks to do more of the same by cutting staff and faculty without making basic institutional changes to the structure or mission of the university. Predictably, the institution has added more administrators.

138

Midway College Midway College is another example of an institution in trouble that has adopted the very popular strategy of growing its way out of difficulty. Again, as Tainter (1990) and Greer (2014) have suggested, complex organizations require that more and more resources be obtained or redirected just to maintain their current operations. A small, private, predominantly women’s college in Kentucky, Midway College is faced with an 47% drop in enrollment and has made substantial cuts to staff and faculty (Rivard, 2014). The college is now down from fifty-four to thirty-four faculty members, and only three have continuous appointments; furthermore, the retirement match from the school to employees was cut across the board as enrollment has dropped from a high of 2412 students in 2012 to 1139 students in 2014 (Rivard, 2014). The new president, John Marsden, was hired in February 2013 and has since hired a number of administrators, including a new provost, vice president for development, dean of enrollment management, and chief financial officer (Blackford, 2013). Meanwhile, seven former business school faculty members are suing the school, claiming their contracts were terminated so that younger and less expensive faculty could be hired (Rivard, 2014). Rivard (2014) reports that the president wants “to expand internationally and add graduate programs” to grow; Marsden cites a new partnership with Panama to bring students to campus for a college readiness program as already generating “significant revenue” (as cited in Rivard, 2014). Among the plans for strategic growth is a name change to Midway University (Rivard, 2014). In 2010, in an incredibly ill-conceived plan, the school opted for a Hail Mary pass and decided to build a School of Pharmacy. Conceived by a trustee and her

139

husband to re-energize the economy of Paintsville, a small town several hours from the college, Plan A was to build an osteopathic medical school, but they were beaten to it by another school in the Appalachian region of Eastern Kentucky (Kiley, 2012). The couple switched to Plan B and promised $13 million for the pharmacy project but underestimated the project by $11 million (Kiley, 2012). The then-president Drake said “this is such a game-changer for this school forever” (as cited in Kiley, 2012). He proved to be prescient. Among the many disasters that befell the pharmacy school project was when the dean hired to oversee the school’s development was hit by a truck; he survived but left the job (Kiley, 2012). His assistant had little experience, but after several postponements of the accreditation process, the college went ahead with it only to be told by the accrediting committee that their preparations were below expectations (Kiley, 2012). Moreover, the trustees were “surprised to learn that the accreditation council required a building—or financial backing in order to build the building—rather than just plans” (Kiley, 2012). When the trustee’s husband died, the cash flow stopped, and Midway tried to rescue the plan by partnering with another pharmacy school in West Virginia, the University of Charlestown; Charlestown said “no,” and the dream ended (Kiley, 2012). In another imprudent statement higher education leaders in Kentucky said the failure of the pharmacy school should have no effect on Midway’s financial health (Kiley, 2012). Long Island University – C. W. Post (LIU) Long Island University – C. W. Post provides a final example of an institution trying to adapt, this time by decreasing admission standards. A private college in Brookville, NY, C. W. Post has been faced with declining

140

enrollment, as have all of the colleges on Long Island. Ninety percent of its operating budget is tuition dependent (Moodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Investors Service, 2013), and it is ranked near the bottom of the Forbes ratings. It has been operating at a deficit for several years (Schifrin, 2013b). One strategy that LIU used which has been adopted by colleges desperate for students is the express decision week when students are invited to show up with transcripts, SAT scores, and a personal statement and are guaranteed an admissions decision on the spot; application fees are waived, and class registration is immediate (Schifrin, 2013a). The most important criteria for admission may be the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; ability to pay. Antioch University Antioch is an example of a failed institution that was specialized in one area, liberal arts. All of its energy and every attempt to generate more money were directed to perpetuating that one university specialization. As enrollment declined and with little endowment, collapse was the only option. While there was some hope that Antioch would emerge in another iteration, it did not happen. Antioch University closed in 2007. The university was an experiment in radical education, but with rising tuition and declining enrollment, its undergraduate campus in Yellow Springs, Ohio, closed. The campus was designed for 2700 students but ended with 300. For a long time the undergraduate programs siphoned off money from Antiochâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; s other five graduate education campuses to support it (Jaschik, 2007). Antioch had a storied history and admitted women and blacks earlier than most campuses; it helped pioneer the work and study model in which students moved between jobs around the country and campus study. It was mainly a liberal arts college with a

141

strong bent toward progressive politics. Wedded to that idea, it spent its small endowment and accepted marginal students to keep afloat. Its singular focus on liberal arts and leftist politics become less attractive to students in the latter part of the 20th century, so it was stuck in an outdated paradigm and could not evolve or adapt. As with those at many institutions, faculty and staff at Antioch believed it would continue in perpetuity. Eli Nettles, assistant professor of mathematics and associate dean of the faculty, said, "I don't think anybody thought this could happen . . . there were people shocked. A lot of our faculty were students here. They came back after they got their Ph.D.sâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;this is the only place they wanted to be" (as cited in Jaschik, 2007). Antioch was no longer relevant but could not stop its decline. The campus was financially squeezed for a long time, and building maintenance was deferred to a point that many buildings could not be saved although scare money was poured into some renovations. There were many warning signs for years, particularly low enrollment, but once the death spiral starts and all the money is dedicated to life support, nothing remains for recovery. The university could not re-invent itself; it was trapped by the idea of its glorious past and kept doing more of the same. One survival strategy, still in use by other colleges today, was to develop satellite campuses, and at one time Antioch had as many as forty. Moreover, in the years before its closing, trustees shifted their focus toward the cash-producing graduate programs, and the turning point may have been the expansion of graduate education to the five other campuses, which drained money from the Yellow Springs school, a loss from which it could not recover.

142

Summary The preceding examples show that in down times, when state funding is scare and tuition down, colleges are unable to disintermediate and must rely on doing more of the same at ever increasing cost. When cuts come, they are at the margins of the institution with indiscriminate layoffs; those people without job security, tenure, or union protection are cut first. The cuts are haphazard as the institution seeks to preserve itself, keeping programs and the basic structure of the university intact. This confirms Tainter's (1990) hypothesis that disintermediation is not possible once a certain level of institutional complexity is reached. Every institution resists in its own way based on historical precedence unique to that institution. Tainterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ideas provide one lens through which to examine higher education and its seeming intractability with regard to change. Headwinds are increasing for the traditional university structure; while many of the selective schools will remain intact, those with lesser standards and those dependent on enrollment for monies to fund operations are in trouble. So many arguments for continuing the traditional university model are wedded to a romantic notion of early times when university education was affordable, but such is no longer the case. When colleges and universities switched from a collegiate to a business model many years ago, the climate on college campuses began to change. In its current iteration, the calculus of an education is now focused on cost and relevance to occupation rather than the quality of the educational experience, although these factors are not mutually exclusive. In order to remain viable, schools must develop new delivery systems for education that are more affordable and have application to employment; most importantly, university configurations will have to change to survive. However, as Tainterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work suggests, this may

143

only happen through some sort of collapse. Out of those ashes new forms may emerge that offer a very different kind of educational experience. While the academy may be risk-averse, there are many alternative forms of higher education being attempted outside its ivied walls. Online education through forprofits and the large massive open online courses (MOOCS) have been experimenting with different delivery systems, but their utility is questionable. Many of the students who are successful with online work are independent, self-directed, and self-motivated; those who lack these characteristics tend to drop out or fail in frustration. Now that the initial enthusiasm for online coursework has subsided, more work is needed to make such virtual education opportunities more universally effective (Konnikova, 2014). A second iteration of online learning is the forprofit Minerva College in San Francisco, which has plans to open in six other major cities. Beginning last year with thirty-three highly talented students, it is aiming to eliminate all the trappings of a traditional university and focus on intellectual growth (Wood, 2014). The entire program is offered online through a proprietary system that allows students to interact with faculty and classmates; the system was designed to utilize pedagogical practices that had been developed by Stephen M. Kosslyn of Harvard who joined Minerva in 2012 (Wood, 2014). Courses have no lectures, and class time is devoted to problem solving individually and in small groups. The students live together, and in their second year they split time between Buenos Aires and Berlin. Minerva is eventually aiming for 2500 students with a maximum of nineteen students per class (Wood, 2014). A number of other ideas have been proposed and beta tested that will provide fodder for whatever emerges to

144

replace the way higher education is currently delivered and experienced: •

• •

•

Several years ago the state of Oregon adopted the strategy of budget transparency and opened a website that allows anyone to see how all monies are spent at the university; the website is updated daily (Reynolds, 2014). Georgia Tech is now offering a master’s online degree in computer science for only $7000 a year (Reynolds, 2014). The not-for profit Khan Academy is using video game-like software to teach students. The academy combines the best strategies from online learning and individualized instruction (Reynolds, 2014). Manufacturing companies are working with community colleges to create a skills based certification program through which students can learn skills anywhere and then be tested and certified as to their competency (Reynolds, 2014). Many schools are questioning the idea of the Forever Professor (Fendrich, 2014). One proposal is to award tenure for a specific length of time, such as twenty-five or thirty years, followed by offering one-year contracts to those whose tenure has expired. Regional cooperation among colleges and universities identifies the best qualities of each institution; the schools then share students across campuses in order for them to take advantage of each institution’s strengths (Selingo, 2013). Beginning in 2014, Adrian College in Michigan offered students a guarantee that if their starting salaries after graduation were below $37,000, some portion of their student loans would be repaid by the college (Jesse, 2013).

145

â&#x20AC;˘

Some institutions are turning to hoteling, building a campus (or better yet, finding a closed campus) at which to house students and then building the curriculum around the best of online courses from major universities around the country.

Selingo, (2013) provides a good summary of the danger to higher education, explaining that the collapse of higher education's business model has been predicted many times before now, yet more colleges have opened in the past 50 years than have closed. That record provides a false sense of security for academics and contributes to the hubris of American higher education, but failure is not unprecedented. In the years before the Civil War, more than 700 colleges closed for economic reasons or because of competitors entering the scene. Just because academics today think that colleges shouldn't fail doesn't mean they won't. The traditional model of education is failing students who are piling up massive debts to gain questionable degrees. Given the burdensome costs of such schooling, students and their parents want identifiable job skills. Like Icarus, higher education, inflated with selfimportance, has flown too close to the sun; now feeling the heat, colleges and universities are being forced to adapt, but Tainterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ideas of complexity and collapse suggest such change may be very difficult, if not impossible, to orchestrate effectively. As Denneen and Dretler (2012) succinctly explain, higher education in the United States is at a tipping point. In its time of need, the leaders of our colleges and universities have a tremendous opportunity to reshape and reinvent an industry that is directly linked to our economic prosperity and the hopes and dreams of millions.

146

References Anderson, N. (2014, July 11). In Moodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s U.S. college credit ratings, downgrades far outnumber upgrades. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/mo odys-us-college-credit-ratings-downgrades-faroutnumber-upgrades/2014/07/11/4248f474-06c511e4-bbf1-cc51275e7f8f_story.html Beeson, R. (November 4, 2014). Counterpoint: 4 ways the U is addressing student debt. Star Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/ 281526611.html. Belkin, D., & Thurm, S. (December 28, 2012). Cost of college: Collegesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; bureaucracy expands costs. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1000142412788732 3316804578161490716042814 Blackford, L. (2013, September 10). Steep enrollment drop brings faculty layoffs at Midway College. Lexington-Herald Leader. Retrieved from http://www.kentucky.com/2013/09/10/2814656_ste ep-enrollment-drop-brings- faculty.html?rh=1 Denneen, J., & Dretler, T. (2012). The financially sustainable university: A focused strategy can help colleges and universities reinvent their industry and stop spending beyond their means. Boston, MA: Bain & Company, Inc. and Sterling Partners. Retrieved from http://www.bain.com/Images/BAIN_BRIEF_The_fi nancially_sustainable_university.pdf

147

Erwin, A., & Wood, M. (May 21, 2014). The one percent at state u: How public university presidents profit from rising student debt and low-wage faculty labor. Washington, DC: Institute for Policy Studies. Retrieved from http://www.ips-dc.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/05/IPS-One-Percent-at-StateUniversities-May2014.pdf Fendrich, L. (2014, November 14). The forever professors. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Retire-Already/149965/ Foster, J. B., & Magdoff, F. (2009). The great financial crisis: Causes and consequences. Retrieved from http://digamo.free.fr/bellamag.pdf Fox 21 News. (2013, December 9). UMD faces multimillion dollar budget shortfall [Television News Story]. In Fox News Monday. Duluth, MIN: KQDSDT. Retrieved from http://www.fox21online.com/news/video/umdfaces-multi-million-dollar-budget-shortfall Greer, J. M. (2008). The long descent: A user's guide to the end of the industrial age. British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers. Greer, J. M. (2014, October, 29). Dark age America: Involuntary simplicity [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2014/10/dar k-age-america- involuntary-simplicity.html Heinberg, R. (2011). The end of growth: Adapting to our new economic reality. British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers. Holden, M. (2014, March 4). Struggling UMD adjusts to stay afloat. Minnesota Daily. Retrieved from http://www.mndaily.com/news/campus/2014/03/04/ struggling-umd-adjusts-stay-afloat

148

Houle, D., & Fleece, J. (2012, March 14). Why one-third of hospitals will close by 2020 [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2012/03/onethirdhospitals-close-2020.html Jaschik, S. ( 2007, June 13). Antioch to close main college. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://app3.insidehighered.com/news/2007/06/13/an tioch Jesse, D. (2013, September 18). Adrian College to make student loan payments for low-earning grads. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/0 9/18/mich-college-to-make-loan-payments-for-lowearning-grads/2829349/ Kiley, K. (June5, 2012). A tough pill to swallow. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/06/05/ midway-colleges-attempt-creating-pharmacyschool-shows-dangers-assumed-quick-fix Kocher, G. (2014). Kentucky State University board approves budget plan to begin trimming $7 million deficit. Retrieved from http://www.kentucky.com/2014/11/07/3526374/ken tucky-state-university-board.html Konnikova, M. (2014, November 7). Will MOOCS be flukes? New Yorker. Retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/science/mariakonnikova/moocs-failure-solutions Kunstler, J. H. (2006). The long emergency: Surviving the end of oil, climate change, and other converging catastrophes of the twenty-first century. New York, NY: Grove Press.

149

Lerner, M. (2014, May 18). University of MinnesotaDuluth tries to dig out of budget mess. Star Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.startribune.com/local/259676721.html Martin, J., Samels, J. E., & Associates. (2009). Turnaround: Leading stressed colleges and universities to excellence. Baltimore, Maryland: The John Hopkins University Press. McDonald, M. (2014, April 24). Small colleges get an F in finance. Bloomberg Businessweek. Retrieved from http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-0424/small-colleges-fight-enrollment-drops-withtuition-discounts Moody’s Investor Services. (2013, December 20). Moody's affirms Baa3 for Long Island University, NY; outlook negative. Retrieved from https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodysaffirms-Baa3-for-Long-Island-University-NYoutlook-negative--PR_289804 O’Rourke, M. (2014, November 14). Doctors tell all—and it’s bad. Atlantic Monthly. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/ 11/doctors-tell-all-and-its-bad/380785/ Repko, M. (2014, December 4). SMU plans layoffs, other changes to cut $35 million. The Dallas Morning News. Retrieved from http://www.dallasnews.com/news/communitynews/park-cities/headlines/20141204-smu-planslayoffs-other-changes-to-cut-35-million.ece Reynolds, G. (2014, January 15). Degrees of value: Making college pay off. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1000142405270230 3870704579298302637802002

150

Rivard, R. (2013a, December 2). Wither Pennsylvania. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/12/02/p ennsylvanias-14-university-system-feeling-painbudget-cuts-and-demographic-shifts Rivard, R. (2013b, December 9). Private distress. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/12/09/p rivate-colleges-remain-under-weather Rivard, R. (2014, September 5). Professors band together in employment lawsuit. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/09/05/s even-former-business-professors-sue-midwaycollege-after-it-laid-them-during-middle Ross, J. (2013a, January 16). Kaler denies U spends too much on staff but says there's work to be done. Star Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.startribune.com/local/187059851.html Ross, J. (2013b, April 25). House passes higher education bill that funds tuition freezes. Star Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/2047 74361.html Sauer, R. (2014, November 24). Letter to the editor. Star Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.startribune.com/opinion/ Schifrin, M. (2013a, September 24). Behind Forbes college financial grades. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/schifrin/2013/07/24/be hind-forbes-financial-grades/ Schifrin, M. (2013b, September 24). Is your college going broke? The most and least financially fit schools in America. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/schifrin/2013/07/24/isyour-college-going-broke/

151

Segosebe, D., & Shepard, J. (2013). Learning from closed institutions: Indicators of risk for small private colleges and universities. Paper prepared for the Tennessee Independent Colleges and Universities Association (TICUA). Retrieved from http://www.ticua.org/public_policy/sm_files/Learni ng %20from%20Closed%20Institutions.pdf Selingo, J. (2013, December 2). Colleges can still save themselves. Here's how. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Colleges-Can-StillSave/143305/ Starfield, B. (2000). Is US health really the best in the world? Journal of the American Medical Association, 284 (4), 483-485. Tainter, J. (1990). The Collapse of Complex Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thiel, P. (2014, November 21). Thinking too highly of higher ed. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/peterthiel-thinking-too-highly-of-highered/2014/11/21/f6758fba-70d4-11e4893f86bd390a3340_story.html University of Minnesota Office of Institutional Research. (2015). Official enrollment statistics: Spring 2015. Retrieved from http://www.oir.umn.edu/student/enrollment University of Minnesota Duluth Program Prioritization Committee. (2014, January 21). University of Minnesota Duluth prioritization next steps. Retrieved from http://www.d.umn.edu/vcaa/ppdocs/Program%20Pri oritization%20Next%20Steps%201_2014.pdf

152

Wadhwa, V. (2014, December). Counterpoint: College is key step on economic ladder. Star Tribune. Retrieved from http://m.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/284 820271.html Wellens, M. (2014, December 17). Miller criticizes process after UMD opts to not renew coaching contract. Duluth News Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/sports/hockey/3 635549-miller-criticizes-process-after-umd-optsnot-renew-coaching-contract Wilcox, C. (2014, November 3). Leadership for a flourishing world (Web log post]. Retrieved from http://cshwellbeingblog.com/category/wellbeing/ Wood, G. (2014, September). The future of college? The Atlantic Monthly. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/0 8/the-future-of-college/375071/

153

INTEGRATING AUDIO-VISUAL MATERIALS AND MOBILE APP TECHNOLOGIES INTO CHEMISTRY COURSE CURRICULUM Ganesh Naik and Mary Ramirez College of Saint Mary Abstract: This paper discusses the efficient use of audio-visual (AV) materials and online homework assignments centered on chemistry concepts, as well as the development and employment of iOS and Android tablet/mobile phone applications to enhance student learning in and out of the chemistry classroom. The mobile applications were used as interactive tools in classroom instruction and to review important chemistry concepts such as atomic structure, the periodic table, properties of the elements, chemical bonding, organic reactions, etc. In conjunction with these technology tools, online quizzes on the material were developed to assess the student learning outcomes. Studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; performance and satisfaction in the first year and second year course assessments were significantly improved. However, multiyear data trends will be collected over subsequent semesters to assess student learning outcomes.

154

Introduction: Technology in the Classroom Humans have a deeply curious nature; to nurture this curiosity, different education systems and different institutions of learning have been developed. Educators are the pillars of these institutions, and their goal is to design a course curriculum that will develop studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; cognition and metacognitive skills. In the 21st century, technology has become a common element in studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; lives (Gibson, 2008), and if technology is astutely integrated into their course curriculum, it will help both students and educators to meet course objectives and course learning outcomes more effectively (Robin, 2008). The educational use AV materials and cell phone applications is covered in this paper as possible examples of such astute integration. In the 20th century, scientists laid down the foundation for modern science over the course of a few decades; now, first and second year science students are required to learn the foundational aspects of scientific principles in one or two semesters. This, in addition to the other principal course work for which they are accountable, attributes to stress exhibited by new students as they adjust to college life (Chemers, 2001). Studies have found that roughly 40 percent of students enrolled in engineering and science majors end up switching to other subjects or failing to get any degree at all (Drew, 2011). As science educators, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s important to recognize these difficulties and to utilize different teaching strategies to enhance the students' learning experience in the classroom. One such strategy includes integrating technology into course curriculum and classroom instruction. Of course, changing instructional approaches is no easy task, particularly when technology is involved. Indeed, adopting and integrating technology-based instructional strategies has a long history of challenges, but over that time educators have developed a great understanding of how to achieve success with such

155

technologies. Rogers and Mize (2005) studied first year college studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perceptions about integrating technology into the curriculum; student feedback confirms the usefulness of technology in course design and how it attributes to student success. Using Audio-Visual (AV) Materials in Teaching and Learning The primary objective of this project was to develop audio-visual (AV) materials covering some selected topics in chemistry for facile and effective instruction/learning of chemistry concepts and models. The project also fostered teacher-student collaboration as two chemistry majors were involved in the planning and designing of the project, and their inputs helped to significantly improve the format of the teaching materials. In fall of 2011, AV materials such as class lecture videos on Tegrity (a video recording tool), content specific YouTube videos, and NOVA science discovery videos were integrated into the first year and second year chemistry course curriculum through ANGEL (an online course management system) to provide easy and instant access to students. The AV materials were used in conjunction with classroom lecturing and one-on-one help sessions and were also archived on ANGEL as just-in-time references for students. The intended outcome of this activity was to reinforce the discussion of difficult course concepts and to improve student performance on course examinations. At the end of the semester, assessment data was collected in the form of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; reflections, course evaluations, and grades. The data collected over the last three years clearly suggests that student confidence in regard to the chemistry concepts increased tremendously as compared to that of previous semesters, and there was a significant reduction in

156

the number of students failing or withdrawing from the chemistry courses (Figure 1a-b). Figure 1a: Average Student Success Rate before Curriculum Update (Letter Grade, %) in a First Year Chemistry Class (n= 30)

Figure 1b: Average Student Success Rate after Curriculum Update (Letter Grade, %) in a First Year Chemistry Class (n=30)

iOS and Android Tablet/Mobile Phone Applications in Teaching and Learning iOS- and Android-based tablet/mobile phone applications offer educators an interactive teaching platform to engage students both inside and outside the classroom instead of or in addition to traditional white

157

board lectures or PowerPoint presentations. For example, Figure 2 represents the periodic table expressed on a mobile app developed by Theodore Gray which goes way beyond what’s possible on paper or as a simple digital image; students have the ability to click on every element and experience beautiful images of each (often in a variety of forms or states) as well as read a fascinating story about it along with a detailed list of that element’s properties and conditions. Every image is a freely rotatable, live object that students can examine from all angles. Having all of this information on a single platform also allows students to see relations between properties, such as commonalities between freezing/boiling points of certain elemental groups, and they therefore gain a deeper understanding of the elements and chemistry as a whole. Figure 2: Screenshot of Theodore Gray’s Periodic Table Application

158

These tablet/mobile phone application- based learning modules also help to create team-based activities that encourage teamwork and social skills necessary in any professional career. Research has confirmed that teambased learning enhances student performance, yet many students entering college have little to no experience with teamwork (Dune, 2000). In conjunction with these technology tools, online quizzes on the material can be posted in a course management system like ANGEL to assess student learning outcomes. This project was started in fall 2014, and at present a few mobile applications have been identified and integrated into the first and second year chemistry course curriculum (Figure 3). Data will be collected over subsequent semesters to assess student learning outcomes. Figure 3: List of Mobile Applications Used in Chemistry Curriculum Chemistry Course Content Name of the Mobile Application Structure of Atom NOVA Elements Understanding Periodic The Elements table of elements Electronic Distribution in an eDistribution atom Predicting the geometry of ODYSSEY VSEPR Theory mobile applications Understanding nucleophilic Organic Chemistry substitution reactions Nucleophilic substitution reactions Learning Organic synthesis Chemistry by Design Functional Group Reagents Transformations in Organic Chemistry

159

Summary Adopting and integrating these technology-based instructional strategies into contemporary course curriculum is essential in our era of rapid technological innovation. As technology evolves, it’s tough for students and educators alike to keep up; the use of mobile application-based learning modules is one attempt to do so. It’s is important to harness these emerging technologies in order to continuously reach and engage our students. References Chemers, M. M., Hu, L. T., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and first year college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational psychology, 93(1), 55. Drew, C. (2011, November). Why science majors change their minds (It’s just so darn hard). New York Times, 51-52. Dunne, E., & Rawlins, M. (2000). Bridging the gap between industry and higher education: Training academics to promote student teamwork. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 37(4), 361-371. Gibson, D. (2008). Make it a two-way connection: A response to “Connecting informal and formal learning experiences in the age of participatory media.” Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8, 305-309. Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into practice, 47(3), 220-228.

160

Rogers, K. L., & Mize, C. D. (2005). Getting connected, staying connected: Developing a technology-rich freshmen success program. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber, & D. A. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2076-2080). Chesapeake, VA: American Association of Computer Education. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/19372

161

An Explorative Study of Enhancing Instructor Visibility and Presence in an Online Course Through Technology and Big Data David H. Reid University of Missouri Abstract: Finding and utilizing teaching methods or technologies that can enhance instructor presence has become a particularly salient topic for educators. One method that has been proposed to enhance instructor presence within an online course is to increase instructor visibility (Mandernach, Gonzales, & Garrett, 2006; Savery, 2005). This research describes an attempt to enhance instructor presence in an online course by increasing the visibility of instructor actions using a recommendation system tool embedded in the home page of the course. The quantitative survey results found that despite some indication that the recommendation tool was â&#x20AC;&#x153;usefulâ&#x20AC;?, no statistically significant difference was found between instructor presence scores of those students using the tool and those who did not. Furthermore, the qualitative analysis of the student interviews revealed that studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perception of instructor presence centered on the way the instructor set course expectations, as well as the timeliness and appropriateness of feedback, rather than visibility of instructor actions, results which appear to align with previous research done by Sheridan and Kelly (2010).

162

Introduction Because student evaluations of teaching effectiveness are often used in decisions related to promotion and tenure, instructors are keenly aware of the common indicators of student satisfaction within their faceto-face courses. However, as instruction moves online, instructors may face challenges in adapting their instructional techniques and strategies to the virtual realm. One particular challenge new online instructors sometimes face is how to maintain their instructor presence within the online learning management system. Given that research shows a correlation between instructor presence and student satisfaction (Shea, Pickett, & Pelz, 2003), methods to enhance or increase instructor presence has become a particularly salient topic for those teaching online. Indeed, there has been a growing body of work devoted to discovering and evaluating instructor strategies that may enhance presence in online courses (Khurana & Boling, 2012; Borup et al., 2011). These pragmatic approaches have focused on narrowing the gap between theory and practice by providing tips and strategies for online instructor behavior and course structure as well as offering advice on the effective use of various technologies to increase presence. Another method that enhances instructor presence within an online course is to increase instructor visibility (Mandernach, Gonzales, & Garrett, 2006; Savery, 2005). Applying this method in an online course typically calls for an instructor to generate multiple artifacts across the course site, such as posting on the discussion forums or generating a course announcement. These artifacts then provide students a sense of what the instructor has been doing and where they have been in the online course. This approach, however, has two potential deficiencies that may limit its full effectiveness as a method to enhance instructor

163

presence. The first deficiency is that while leaving behind an “artifact” in an online course certainly helps show some of the instructor’s participation, it does not account for all the activity an instructor routinely performs within an online course site. As a result, common instructor activities such as reading course discussions, reading course blogs, or editing course materials often leave no visible “artifact” for the student to find. Another deficiency is that these instructor artifacts are often scattered around the environment, making it difficult for the students to be able to identify that the instructor has been present. One potential way to minimize these deficiencies is to leverage the innate tracking capabilities of all instructor actions contained within the database of the learning management system in question. Many of the commonly used learning managements systems today, such as Blackboard and Sakai, dutifully log every action a user performs within the system. The challenge, however, is that in a busy online course site, there can literally be thousands of actions logged into the database each day. Attempting to display all of these actions at once could easily overwhelm students as they try to pick out meaningful information. However, by applying a collaborative-filtering recommendation system, we can reduce this massive data set to provide a much smaller, more personalized set of recommended artifacts within the online course. Furthermore, these recommenders could draw upon the entire set of actions (both visible and invisible) performed by the instructor and other students within the course. This study utilizes a custom-built, collaborative filtering-based recommendation system to enhance instructor presence by increasing the visibility of instructor actions in an online course site. This Activity Assistant tool will provide each student a personalized list of recommended artifacts, or content objects, based on the

164

actions of their instructor and peers as well as show the extent of instructor and peer interaction around each object. Recommendation Systems A recommendation system leverages the information it knows about a community as well as the information it has gleaned from each individual to assist community members in identifying aspects they may be interested in (Resnick and Varian, 1997). A common example of a well-known recommendation system in action can be seen when one shops at Amazon for a book; underneath the information for the book specifically searched for is another list, generated from Amazonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recommendation system, which contains other books that the user may be interested in reading. This recommendation list is based on what the system has learned about the user from his or her previous purchases and browsing history at Amazon. The collaborative approach to recommendation systems, also called collaborative filtering (CF), is designed to locate items a user would find worthwhile based on their previous preferences as well as those of other users with similar behaviors (Sarwar, Karypis, Konstan, & Riedl, 2001). This differs from a content-based approach, which provides recommendations based on common or shared characteristics of the content items themselves. One of the advantages in using a collaborative filtering-based recommender system is that it can be used in environments where cataloging the content is difficult (Herlocker, Konstand, Borchers & Reidl, 1999). This advantage seems ideally situated for an online learning environment where dynamic content is generated daily from instructors and students within course discussion forums, blogs, and wikis.

165

Zaiane (2002) proposed a framework for how recommendation systems could be applied to online learning. Zaiane postulated that data mining techniques could be used to acquire association rules that could be utilized to provide recommendations for various learning activities and resources to the learners. He also noted that recommenders could be implemented using content-based or collaborative filtering methods in addition to data mining rules (Zaiane, 2002). Since then, researchers have attempted to implement recommendation systems in various aspects related to online learning, including recommending readings (Tang & McCalla, 2005) and helping students select their next lesson (Hsu, 2008) and find discussion board postings they may like (Reid, 2009). Instructor Presence While there is no universally accepted definition of instructor presence, common themes and attributes have begun to emerge. The ideas of visibility (Hislop, 1998; Savery, 2005; Mandernach et al., 2006) and immediacy (Gorham, 1988; Arbaugh, 2001) are mentioned frequently in the literature, as is the idea that both instructor feedback and setting clear expectations play an important role in student perception of instructor presence (Sheridan & Kelly, 2010; Heuer & King, 2004). Additionally, Mandernach, Gonzales, and Garrett (2006) identified teaching presence, immediacy, and social presence as key components of instructor presence. Teaching presence was first identified as a construct within the popular community of inquiry model (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). Garrison et al., (2000) mentioned key characteristics of teaching presence to be based upon instructional design, facilitating discourse, and direct instruction. The differences between teaching presence and instructor presence are not readily agreed upon, and Sheridan and

166

Kelly (2010) noted that teaching presence is often used interchangeably in the literature with that of instructor presence. Additional strategies proposed for enhancing instructor presence discuss the various roles (Heuer & King, 2004) an instructor should take in an online course or the characteristics (Savery, 2005) they should adopt. Methodology Activity Assistant Design In an attempt to increase instructor presence by elevating the visibility of instructor actions within an online course, the author designed a new tool that could be added to the course home page of the Sakai learning management system. In addition to augmenting instructor presence, the tool also attempted to enhance other social learning constructs for the student such as peer social presence and social navigation. Over the course of three years, the author built and improved upon multiple iterations of the tool and utilized each design phase to improve the next iteration. The final iteration of this tool, shown in Figure 1, was called the Activity Assistant, and it provided students with a personalized activity stream for actions occurring around various content objects within the course. Figure 1: The Activity Assistant Tool

167

Using collaborative filtering algorithms, the application would mine the activity data from course logs and then provide a more personalized recommendation of content objects based on the studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s past activity in the course. These learning activity recommendations took the form of a link to a particular piece of course content or of a discussion topic within the forums (see Appendix A). Students also had the ability to modify their own activity streams by selecting connections which would allow activities from their selected peers to appear more frequently within their streams. The principle design decisions made to the Activity Assistant module to increase instructor presence was to make the instructor activity within the online course much more visible. This was accomplished by weighting instructor activity much more heavily in the algorithm used to assign recommendations. As a result, if an instructor viewed a learning object, it had a much higher probability of being recommended to a student. In addition, the instructorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s name would always show up first in the list of individuals who had viewed this item. Research Design After the Activity Assistant module was fully developed, a research study was conducted at a large Midwestern University within three online course sites taught using the Sakai collaborative learning environment. Each course was taught fully online with a combined enrollment of 135 students. Students in each of the three online courses participating in the study were randomly assigned to either the comparison (C) or treatment (T) group at the beginning of the semester. The comparison group did not have access to the Activity Assistant module during the four-week research period during the semester, while members of the treatment group had the Activity

168

Assistant module added to the home page of their course site. In addition, participants in the treatment group had access to a short video overview of the features and capabilities of the Activity Assistant tool. Four weeks after the tool was made available to those in the treatment group, both the treatment and comparison groups were asked via e-mail to participate in a research study that focused on various social constructs, including their perceived instructor presence. Participants completing the survey were offered an incentive in the form of a prize drawing. The survey instrument used was originally developed by Yang et al. (2006) as a means to measure multiple facets of social ability, including instructor presence, within an online course site. The instrument consisted of 30 questions, eight of which specifically dealt with instructor presence. Participants provided responses to survey questions on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” The eight instructor presence items were averaged together to produce a sum instructor presence score, which was used in the quantitative analyses. Yang et al. (2006) showed their survey instrument possessed high levels of reliability for measuring instructor presence with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.91. While Yang et al. (2006) did not specifically mention validity in regards to their instrument, they did state that their question sets were developed by a group of social researchers that included faculty experts within the domain of social computing and thus show a measure of content validity. The quantitative data were analyzed using traditional statistical methods. Data from the survey were then used to choose twelve exemplar participants to serve as case studies to further explore the participant experiences with the Activity Assistant module. Each of these individuals was invited to participate in a brief 20minute interview with the researcher to further expound

169

about his or her experiences using the Activity Assistant and its impact on instructor presence and other social learning constructs. Results Of the 135 surveys sent out to students, a total of 59 (N=59) were completed, representing a response rate of 44%. Of those completing the survey, 29 students (nT = 29) had access to the Activity Assistant in their course site, while the other 30 students (nC = 30) did not. Descriptive statistics for the treatment and comparison groups are displayed in Table 1. Table 1:Descriptive Statistics for Instructor Presence Scores Mean SD Treatment (T) 5.21 0.90 Access to Tool Comparison (C) No Access

5.03

1.23

A Shapiro-Wilks test for normality was conducted and found that the instructor presence scores were not normally distributed within either the comparison or treatment groups. As a result, a non-parametric MannWhitney U test was conducted which does not require the data to be normally distributed. No statistically significant difference was found between the instructor presence scores for the treatment group and comparison group (U = 424.5, P = 0.87). A maximum variation purposeful sampling strategy (Patton, 1990) was utilized to select students for a followup interview on their online course experiences; the twelve participants chosen to be interviewed had instructor

170

presence scores ranging from 3.8 to 6.8. The average instructor presence score among all survey participants was 5.1; those falling below this average were classified as having “low” instructor presence, while those above were classified as having “high” instructor presence. The qualitative analysis portion of the study followed the data analysis model described by Miles and Huberman (1994) that consists of data reduction, data display, and conclusion. The data display generated as a result of the iterative data reduction process is shown in Table 2. Table 2: Data Display for High and Low Instructor Presence High Low Instructor Instructor Presence Presence Treatment • Provided • Lack of clear feedback. guidance. • Lack of • Valued interaction. instructor • Delayed feedback. instructor • Timely response. responses. Comparison • Timely • Only wants responses. to do what is explicitly • Provided required. clear guidance. • Wanted additional guidance, scaffolding, or clarity • Delayed instructor response.

171

Discussion The quantitative analysis yielded no statistically significant differences in instructor presence scores between those students who had access to the Activity Assistant tool in their course and those who did not. Likewise, analysis of the qualitative data obtained from the interviews (see Table 2) found no readily discernable theme related to instructor presence between individuals in the treatment and comparison groups. However, while access to the Activity Assistant tool appeared to have little effect, the qualitative analysis did identify two emergent themes that showed a stark contrast between the students classified as having high verses low instructor presence scores. The first theme identified between the high and low instructor presence groups in the qualitative analysis was related to the instructor providing guidance, feedback, and appropriate scaffolding. Those students who reported high instructor presence talked about the guidance and assistance received from the instructor, saying it was “valuable” and “helped clarify” misconceptions. As one student indicated, “without [the instructor’s] feedback [you’d] just basically [be] teaching yourself.” Conversely, those with low instructor presence often felt they were left alone in their learning and would mention a lack of instructor interaction, direction, scaffolding, or needed feedback. Student responses within this theme included: “I would like more interaction [with the professor] then I’ve had in this course;” “there is no real discussion of your idea or feedback on your idea from your peers and very little feedback from the instructor;” and “[the instructor] should have been more clear upfront and provide[d] clear expectations.” Another common theme of the responses provided by participants with high and low instructor presence alike was that of timeliness of responses. Indeed, those students

172

who had high instructor presence scores generally indicated during their interviews that their instructor was prompt in replying to inquiries. As one student mentioned, “[the instructor] always replied pretty promptly back to me via email.” In comparison, those with a low instructor presence score would frequently mention a delay in response time. A sampling of student responses who rated their instructor’s presence very low included: “I would usually end up waiting a day or two [for the instructor to respond],” “it takes quite a while for the instructor to jump in,” and even the extreme “my professor never really responds to the questions.” Thus, this study appears to provide further validation that setting clear expectations and timely feedback are indeed two crucial components to a student’s perception on instructor presence as described in the study by Sheridan and Kelly (2010). This study is potentially limited by two factors: (a) student non-use of the Activity Assistant tool and (b) the nature of the participating courses. Despite the Activity Assistant tool’s prominent placement on the course homepage allowing direct access to it, students may have chosen not to use it. This potential limitation was highlighted in one interview when a participant simply responded, “I never noticed [the Activity Assistant tool].” As a result, any impact the Activity Assistant might (or might not) have had on instructor presence could have been lessened by the fact it wasn’t incorporated into the learning routine of the student. Another limitation of this study may have been that the courses participating in the study relied heavily on self-directed learning, and as a result some students may have felt they did not “need” the instructor to complete the course, an attitude which likely affected student-instructor interaction. An instance of this limitation may have been evident in the response, “just to get the grade, I did not need [the instructor] at all.”

173

Conclusion Instructor visibility historically has been proposed and delineated as a vital component of instructor presence. However, this study failed to find a statistically significant difference in student perception of instructor visibility when they used a tool designed to leverage active and passive instructor action data within an LMS to increase that visibility. On the other hand, this study did find further evidence supporting the research done by Sheridan and Kelly (2010) that student perceptions of instructor presence seem to revolve heavily around the way instructors set course expectations and the timeliness and appropriateness of the feedback they provide. Clearly additional research is needed to better understand if increasing the visibility of the passive and active instructor actions within an online course can enhance instructor presence. As the literature continues to establish and refine a universal definition of instructor presence, we may find that the individual constructs that make up instructor presence are highly interdependent. If so, attempts to isolate and manipulate a single construct within instructor presence may not generate consistent, meaningful results. Finally, additional data mining research within this realm may want to both explore the key instructor actions that maximize presence as well as identify data patterns within the student action data that may also provide an indication of low instructor presence such that the instructor can intervene.

174

References Arbaugh, J. B. (2001). How instructor immediacy behaviors affect student satisfaction and learning in web-based courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 64(4), 42-54. Borup, J., West, R. E., & Graham, C. R. (2012). Improving online social presence through asynchronous video. Internet and Higher Education, 15(3), 195-203. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 1â&#x20AC;&#x201C;14. Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between verbal teaching immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 17, 40-53. Herlocker, J. L., Konstan, J.A., Borchers, A., & Riedl, J. (1999). An algorithmic framework for performing collaborative filtering. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual ACM SIGIR Conference, Berkeley, CA. Heuer, B.P., & King, K.P. (2004). Leading the band: The role of the instructor in online learning for educators. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 3(1), 1-11. Hislop, G. (1998). Instructor visibility in online courses. AMCIS 1998 Proceedings, Paper 360. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis1998/360 Hsu, M. H. (2008). A personalized English learning recommender system for ESL students. Expert Systems with Applications, 34, 683-688.

175

Khurana, C. & Boling, E. (2012). ‘Setting the climate’: The role of instructional design and multimedia to enhance social presence. In T. Amiel & B. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2012 (pp. 1813-1818). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Mandernach, B. J., Gonzales, R. M., & Garrett, A. L. (2006). An examination of online instructor presence via threaded discussion participation. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 2(4), 248–260. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source book (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Reid, D. H. (2009). An exploratory study on the use of a recommendation system to facilitate discussion board activity awareness within an online learning environment. In M. Simonson (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2009 Association for Educational Communications and Technologies Conference, Louisville, KY. Retrieved from http://www.aect.org/publications/proceedings/2009.as p?id=1 Resnick, P., & Varian, H.R. (1997). Recommender systems. Communications of the ACM, 40(3), 56-68. Sarwar, B. K., G., Konstan, J., & Riedl, J. (2001). Itembased collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms. Proceedings of the 10th international Conference on World Wide Web, Hong Kong. doi:10.1145/371920.372071

176

Savery, J.R. (2005). BE VOCAL: Characteristics of successful online instructors. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 4(2), 141-152. Shea, P., Pickett, A.M., & Pelz, W. (2003). A follow-up investigation of â&#x20AC;&#x153;teaching presenceâ&#x20AC;? in the SUNY Learning Network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(2), 61-80. Sheridan K., & Kelly, M. (2010). The indicators of instructor presence that are important to students in online courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(4), 767-779. Tang, T. Y., & McCalla, G. (2005). Smart recommendation for an evolving e-learning system: architecture and experiment. International Journal on E-Learning, 4(1), 105-130. Yang, C. C., Tsai, I., Kim, B., Cho, M.C., & Laffey, J.M. (2006). Exploring the relationships between students' academic motivation and social ability in online learning environments. Internet and Higher Education, 9, 277-286. Zaiane, O. R. (2002). Building a recommender agent for elearning systems. Computers in Education, 1, 3-6.

177

Appendix Anatomy of a Recommendation within the Activity Assistant Tool

(1) The title of recommended learning object. (2) The course tool where the learning object resided. (3) Social information pertaining to this object. There was a high degree of probability that the instructorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s name would show up here if he or she had interacted with this particular object. (4) Date range of the activity surrounding this learning object. (5) The last time the individual accessed the object. (6) Score representing how close this object matched the user profile the system had built based on the studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s past activity in the course.

178

WELLNESS, COMMUNITY, AND PROJECT-BASED LEARNING: GROWING STUDENT RETENTION AND SUCCESS IN THE GARDEN Sarah C. Stuart Florida State College at Jacksonville Abstract: This essay explains how a simple co-curricular program, the FSCJ Urban Garden, has enhanced student learning, social engagement, and community coherence. It is a program that suits commuter and non-traditional students well because of its low time and commitment requirements. It also serves as project-based learning for faculty and students who choose to engage on a deeper level. The flexibility of this kind of program serves students who may have many other commitments in their lives outside of the college. Over the course of two years, the garden program has proved effective in engaging students social and academically, boosting retention rates by keeping the commitment requirements flexible.

179

Introduction Decades of research suggest that students who are invested socially and emotionally in their campus communities tend to thrive academically and complete their degrees at higher rates. The positive relationship between student engagement and student retention is clear. A large body of evidence published by Pascarella and Terenzini (1991, 2005) over several decades shows that involvement in student groups, especially educationally purposeful cocurricular activities such as service organizations, increases student persistence. Tintoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (1993) widely-used model for student retention provides one of the broadest studies of the reasons students leave college. He argues that the communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s attitudes and underlying purpose lead to retention or attrition. His research supports the idea that having multiple social opportunities on campus is beneficial both for residential and commuter students. But how do we engage students at non-residential colleges where the typical student has other responsibilities such as a full-time job, a family, or both? Sometimes these students may be motivated to complete their programs for different reasons than traditional students (for example, they may have a work-related mandate or a practical application of the skills they are learning), but the majority of commuter students are still exploring and finding their way through their programs. Under these circumstances, such students can easily flounder at a large state or community college or lose momentum halfway through the program. They need to connect just as much as residential students, but traditional campus social activities may not be well-suited to their schedules. This article demonstrates how a very simple co-curricular program can enhance learning, social engagement, and persistence for commuter students without requiring too much time or commitment.

180

Based on Pascarella and Terenziniâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (1991, 2005) research, finding a social network, participating in projectbased learning, and engaging in rewarding service work are three key factors to success. Students clearly benefit from these qualities, but how do colleges provide them to those who have little time and few resources? The program that follows can address needs across the curricular and social lives of all kinds of students. It is a low-key garden project that was established two years ago at the downtown campus of Florida State College at Jacksonville. The original goals of establishing a student-centered, edible vegetable garden on campus were to teach students to grow their own food, to inspire healthy living and to supplement the science curriculum; as it turns out, it also provides the social and service components of college life. Figure 1: Planting Day

Background The campus is located in an urban setting in downtown Jacksonville. A good number of students are native to Jacksonville and come from low-income local neighborhoods; many others are veterans, and another large portion of the population is made up of international

181

students who are new to the US. Participants in the garden represent all of these backgrounds. College wide, only 32% of students are enrolled full-time, and the average student age is 27 (FACTOR, 2014). This can pose a challenge when it comes to getting students involved in campus life. For the non-traditional and part-time student, clubs and extracurricular or cocurricular activities need to be simple, accessible, and flexible but also meaningful and enriching. Kuh et al. (2005, 2010) identified 20 schools that boasted excellent student engagement and high graduation rates and found that these schools have a number of things in common; one is higher than average student-faculty interaction, and another is service. They also are known for â&#x20AC;&#x153;using the settingâ&#x20AC;? by taking advantage of outdoor learning spaces. These approaches have all been demonstrated in the ongoing garden project at FSCJ, positively impacting the students involved. In addition, the tasks of the club do not impose a burden on the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; time or energy, and the benefits emerge in as short a time span as one meeting or planting day. The burden on faculty is also minimal given the way the garden club relegates responsibility. The interdisciplinary club faculty advisors (English and microbiology) have learned that once they establish a schedule for garden care, the students take charge. Some students have taken on leadership roles, and others have used the garden as a learning tool for science programs. Faculty members have also used it in writing and reading courses as subject matter for composition projects. The garden provides a meeting spot, a sense of shared duty, and an ongoing feeling of accomplishment for students and faculty alike. Year-round planting conditions in North Florida make it so there is always something sprouting, flowering, or fruiting. Students may use the

182

garden as much or as little as they likeâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;they may eat from it, work in it, or study it. After the seasonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s planting day, the minimum upkeep requires only one ten-minute visit per week per student. Figure 2: Students Clearing Out Old Plants

Whole-student Impact What follows are the stories of four very different students who have participated in the garden project. Some are told in their own words. Each profile illustrates the positive effect that simple service organizations can have on commuter students. Their experiences demonstrate each of the key factors necessary for persisting: a social network, project-based learning and service work.

183

Figure 3: Students and Faculty, Planting Day

International Students In the spring semester of 2014, Professor Glenna Veiga assigned the book Seed Folks by Paul Fleischman to her EAP Reading students. The short novel tells the story of an urban community coming together to fill an old vacant lot with an edible garden. Veiga selected it for its content as well as its appropriate reading level; as a young adult book, it is well suited to non-native readers. She also gave them the opportunity to â&#x20AC;&#x153;adopt a plantâ&#x20AC;? in the garden and create a journal that follows its growth and the overall development of the garden during the course of the semester. Some students attended club meetings and participated in the general care of the garden, while others simply visited on an individual basis to observe the growing process. In addition to learning more about gardening, the project provided opportunities for learning English. One unexpected outcome of the international studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; involvement in the garden project was that they had a lot to contribute in terms of plant care. One student was from a rural part of Nigeria; she taught the group about a plant called cassava, a staple crop in her native country. After discussing the benefits and challenges of growing it

184

in the garden, she became very excited at the prospect of having “a little bit of land” to grow something very familiar to her. Another student experimented with one of the beds using lunar and solar cycle farming strategies that he had learned in his home country of Haiti. One of Professor Veiga’s students, Heba Osmon, also took a keen interest in the garden. Heba is new to the US; she was born and raised in Egypt and is now living in Jacksonville with her husband and two young children. Heba discusses her experience with the garden: My reading professor gave us an assignment to participate in the Florida State College Urban Garden Club. I went there and I liked what I saw. The faculty advisor said children were welcome, so I brought my young daughter, Serena. It was the happiest day of my life; I saw her for the first time planting and holding the small shovel, and she was listening to the garden advisor when she asked her to hand out the small stones to us so that we can put them in the beds to identify each seed. Since then, my daughter and I have been doing things in the yard together and I started to involve my son too. Even though he is only one year old, he loves to do whatever his sister does. (H. Osmon, personal communication, January 21, 2015) Doing “whatever his sister does” is a promising take away in regard to the evaluation of this project. The student learns through faculty and peers, her family learns from her, and the cycle continues.

185

Figure 4: Heba and Her Daughter, Serena

Military Students John Joseph originally came to Jacksonville with the Navy. He is now using the GI Bill to go back to school and study in the Medical Lab program. John has been a member of the garden club for more than a year now; he first got involved through his ENC 1101 class. The benefits that he derives from the garden are effectively summarized in his comment below: Being a member of the garden club has helped me grow as a student by feeling part of the actual school even though there are no dorms and everyone goes their own way at end of day. Sometimes the feeling of belonging to a school gets lost when they do not have big sports teams and there are no dorms. Also, helping out at a function attended by a few of students who happened to be in my classes broke the ice, and they introduced themselves to me. It made things more engaging throughout the semester. Being part of something important can get you newfound respect and noticed

186

by others. (J. Joseph, personal communication, January 19, 2015) Johnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s story demonstrates the significance of campus community for commuter students. The importance of this sense of belonging is often overlooked, especially for non-traditional students like John. Figure 5: Garden Club with John Joseph (bottom right)

Figure 6: Students Start the Plants from Seed in the Science Lab. Students built Grow Lights to Keep Them Healthy Indoors

187

Project-Based Learning Nikki Spikes was a senior at FSCJ when she became involved in the garden through project-based learning. In conjunction with a microbiology course, she adopted one of the beds to use for her senior project on Rhizobea speciation. Her project was a success, and after she graduated with a Bachelorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s of Science in 2012, she began attending pharmacy school at the University of Florida. Nikki recalled her experience in an email: Being involved with the garden club was a great experience! I developed a skill in leadership by organizing the plots and assisting the students with plant placements. I was able to use scientific knowledge in a practical setting. Also, I was able to work with ESOL students who had very little experience in the science field and were interested in learning more about it. Not only did I work with students from other classes, but from other cultures. Their knowledge and experience with plants provided a new insight in gardening as well as a collaborative interest in making the most out of our little piece of land. (N. Spikes, personal communication, January 23, 2015) Figure 7: Professor David Beall (top), Nikki Spikes (far left), and Mark Thomasson (middle, standing) Building a Trellis with Other Students

188

Transformation through Leadership Student Mark Thomasson was a key player in the establishment and maintenance of the garden project. From its inception, he showed a keen interest in helping organize the club. Through the garden’s success, he has proven himself to be a reliable leader and a dedicated pioneer in urban gardening in downtown Jacksonville, but he had to overcome great hardship to get to where he is now. In a personal interview, he said that his involvement with school and extracurricular activities has been his saving grace (M. Thomasson, personal interview, March 30, 2014). Like many of his peers at FSCJ, Mark has endured food insecurity and homelessness in the recent past. When he first enrolled at FSCJ, he was living in and out of shelters and friends’ apartments, but the goal of earning his degree motivated him to rise above his hardship. Soon after Mark enrolled at FSCJ, he secured permanent housing near the school. He excelled in his coursework and soon was inducted to the academic honor society Phi Kappa Theta; simultaneously, he was helping faculty advisors and peers to form the garden club. He was very interested in the idea of empowering oneself by learning to grow food. He became interested in different strategies of urban farming due to the inner city’s “food desert” issues. Once the garden was established, Mark became the Communications Director, an important role in a group that is charged with organizing the daily care of living plants. He created a public Facebook page which now has more than 150 likes and a private club member page for the garden task schedule. In addition, he has served as the faculty-student liaison and has met with the dean of Liberal Arts and the campus president to discuss innovative landscaping and gardening ideas for the college.

189

A core group of garden members, including Mark, took part in a special training program offered by the Duval County Extension Office. They have also been involved in workshops that the garden club sponsored on campus. Through his own research, Mark continues to grow his expertise in gardening. He has helped create the garden’s composting system and has been instrumental in the training of new members. Figure 8: Mark Thomasson Working in the Garden

Final Thoughts For students who may have limited resources and few healthy food options, learning to grow their own food can be life-changing. Acquiring these kinds of skills proves invaluable to many of them. The “garden effect” continues to grow, not only in students’ persistence and success but also in their overall health and well-being. Heba and her family are benefitting from her involvement in the garden, and she is excelling in her program, continually improving her language skills; John’s academic and social spheres continue to be enriched

190

by his affiliation with the garden; Nikki thrived in her senior year by engaging in project-based learning and is now a successful pharmacy student at a renowned program; and Mark was transformed from a struggling, homeless student to an urban gardening expert and a respected student leader. Although these are individual narratives, they represent the results of a larger student body. From a whole-student standpoint, the garden supports success; though it is a small project, it can have a far-reaching impact on the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; health, family, friendships, and academics. It supports student retention by creating a meaningful co-curricular community project while maintaining an underlying sense of purpose.

191

Figure 9: Students Harvesting Carrots

192

References FACTOR. (2014). Annual Fact Book 2013-2014. Florida State College at Jacksonville. [Data file]. Retrieved from http://fscj.s3.amazonaws.com/22357/fact.book.pdf Fleischman, P. (1997). Seed Folks. New York: Harper Collins. Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Shuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (2005, 2010). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students (Vol. 2): A third decade of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

193

AN EXPLORATORY QUALITATIVE STUDY OF STUDENTS WHO ENROLLED IN AND FACULTY WHO TAUGHT MOOCS Mandayam Thirunarayanan Florida International University Joliette Re Florida International University Abstract: Sixteen students and three faculty members responded to interview questions about their experiences with MOOCs. The findings of a few other published research studies were confirmed by this qualitative study, the results of which suggest that students enroll in MOOCs to learn new skills and to advance in their careers. Faculty members decided to teach MOOCs to share their expertise and to keep up with trends in the delivery of education. The study found that there was a lack of communication among students as well as a lack of interaction between students and the instructors in two of the MOOCs taught by instructors who participated in this study. Students said that they will recommend MOOCs to their friends. Faculty members also said that they will recommend teaching a MOOC to their colleagues. According to students, MOOCs will have a future in both formal and informal educational settings.

194

Introduction Massive, Open, Online Courses (MOOCs) have been referred to as “a new form of digital learning that has enthralled some, infuriated others, and changed the conversation about higher education in the United States and abroad” (Kelly, 2014, p. 1). According to Klawe and Schofield (2014), the current discussions in higher education focus on “whether and how MOOCs might fit with their institutional missions and goals” (p.8). The future of MOOCs is yet to be written, and their role in academia is yet to be determined, but all indications are that higher education will find a place for them. Purpose of the Study The authors think that the future role and place of MOOCs in higher education should be determined by what they offer those students who enroll in them. Because faculty buy-in is important for any large-scale change to take place in higher education, it is also important to also know what faculty members think about MOOCs. The study sought answers to questions such as: • • • • •

Why do students enroll in MOOCs? What do students think are the advantages of MOOCs? What do students think are the disadvantages of MOOCs? Will students recommend MOOCs to their friends? What do students think about the future of MOOCs?

Similar questions were asked of faculty members who taught MOOCs. Answers to these and other questions will determine what MOOCs can offer for students and institutions of higher education.

195

The purpose of this paper is to find out what students who enrolled in MOOCs and faculty members who taught MOOCs thought about the courses. This paper will add to an emerging knowledge base about students’ and faculty experiences with MOOCs. Significance of the Study According to Bauernfeind (1968), “the principle of replication is the cornerstone of scientific inquiry” (p. 126). However, Bauernfeind also notes that “the principle of replication was largely ignored in educational research until around 1950, and even today it is not viewed as a major criterion of quality research” (p. 125). Makel and Plucker (2014), who conducted a study of replication in educational research, stated that “the present study analyzed the complete publication history of the current top 100 education journals ranked by 5-year impact factor and found that only 0.13% of education articles were replications” (p. 1). The present study is significant because its findings are similar to those of other studies that have been published on the topic of MOOCs. Though it has a smaller sample size, this study used qualitative methods to confirm the other studies’ findings. Review of the Literature on MOOCs Much has been written about MOOCs, but most of the early writing has been based more on opinions and speculation rather than on empirical research. Pappano (2012) labeled the year 2012 as “The Year of the MOOC.” Vardi (2012) asked the question “Will MOOCs Destroy Academia?” Popp (2013) asked if MOOCs will “. . . spell the end of the university as we know it?” (p. 56). Leckart (2012) notes that a professor who offered a popular MOOC

196

has predicted that no more than ten educational entities will be delivering higher education courses worldwide within the next fifty years. The implication of this prediction is that ninety percent of the institutions of higher education currently offering courses and degrees will cease to exist. Not everyone thinks that MOOCs will have a negative and destructive impact on institutions of higher education. Saltzman (2014), for example, states that “ . . . MOOCs may not devastate traditional suppliers of higher education as the Internet has devastated newspapers and travel agents. But blended MOOCs, where local instructors engage students, are likely to have a growing role in higher education” (p. 27). Liyanagunawardena, Adams, and Williams (2013) noted that “MOOCs have created wide interest as a change agent in higher education, and the peer-reviewed research literature on them is growing but still limited” (p. 219). The findings of this paper will add to the emerging and growing research literature on MOOCs. Either because they are available for free, because of their novelty, or because of the ease of access afforded by them, MOOCs have been successful in attracting the interest of large numbers of students. However, very few of these students actually complete the courses. According to a study conducted by Breslow et al (2013), “one of the more troubling aspects of MOOCs to date is their low completion rate, which averages no more than 10%” (p. 22). According to a report about Harvard and MIT’s MOOCs, fifty-percent of those who register in the courses are not active beyond the first week (Ho et al., 2014). The percentage of students from the United States who enrolled in the courses varied from 15% to 36% across the different MOOCs (Ho et al., 2014). A study of a MOOC by Breslow et al. (2013) found that “Use of the discussion forum was very popular . . . .,”

197

but “. . . over 90% of the activity on the discussion forum resulted from students who simply viewed preexisting discussion threads, without posting questions, answers, or comments” (p. 16). Students representing one hundred and ninety-four countries enrolled in the MOOC, and “. . . teenagers to people in their seventies” were enrolled (Breslow et al., 2013, p. 18). Bruff et al. (2013) conducted a study of students who completed a MOOC in a blended course environment and found that the MOOC offered the advantage of flexibility and learning at one’s own pace. Milligan, Littlejohn and Margarayan (2013) interviewed 29 MOOCs participants to find out “what patterns of engagement exist within the Change11 cMOOC course?” and “what principal factors mediate this engagement?” (p. 152). This study identifies different types of participants in the course and provides insights about designing MOOCs to help students learn. A study by Khalil and Ebner (2013) found that students and faculty members were highly satisfied with the MOOC, but instructors indicated that the large numbers of students who enrolled in MOOCs made it difficult for them to communicate with their students on a regular basis. Study Methods The Interview Questions Fifteen research questions were developed for MOOC faculty to respond to, and a similar set of fifteen questions were used to interview student participants; all the interview questions were approved by the university’s Institutional Review Board. The questions were designed to glean students’ and faculty members’ motivations, observations, thoughts, and reactions about their experiences with MOOCs. The original intention was to

198

interview the three faculty members and the participating students either face-to-face or using videoconference technologies; however, the participating faculty members as well as the students preferred to receive and respond to the questions via email. In the case of at least one student, it was not possible to use videoconferencing technology for an interview because the student was from another country and did not have easy access to such technologies. Study Participants Three faculty members who taught MOOCs at a large urban university in a big city in the southeastern part of the United States and sixteen students who enrolled in MOOCs participated in this qualitative study. The MOOCs instructors were identified by perusing the web site of the university where courses offered by the university are listed. During the semester when the instructors were interviewed, only three faculty members were offering MOOCs at the university. One of the MOOC instructors helped the researchers recruit sixteen students to participate in the research study. Student recruitment was done in two phases. During the first go around, the instructor informed students that a research study was being conducted and that they could contact one of the researchers directly, and this resulted in thirty potential participants expressing an interest in participating in the study. Out of the thirty students, only fourteen actually responded to the interview questions. The instructor was once again called upon to help recruit a few more students to participate in the study, and this effort resulted in two more students participating for a total of sixteen students. The total number of students that the instructor reached out to is not known. Because data saturation was reached, there was no need to recruit additional students for the study.

199

Data Analysis The students’ responses to the questions were first reviewed a few times and then coded into topics which were combined into categories. The categories that are reported in this paper were agreed upon by both researchers. The findings of this study are triangulated by comparing them to the findings of other studies on the topic of MOOCs. The responses provided by faculty to selected interview questions are reproduced in their entirety because only three faculty members participated in the study. When possible, the similarities between students’ and faculty members’ responses to the interview questions are highlighted in the discussion of the findings. Limitations of the Study The study is limited by the small number of instructors who participated (three). Moreover, the instructors responded to questions via email, so their answers were rather brief and to the point. A face-to-face interview would perhaps have yielded more thorough and elaborate responses to the interview questions. Because of this limitation, only selected findings from faculty responses to the interview questions are presented in this paper. The content of the instructors’ MOOCs and details about how the courses were structured and delivered are not included in this paper because such data were not collected for this study. Students were recruited with the help of one of the MOOC instructors. Detailed background information regarding the students was not obtained. The sex of the students, their level of education, and whether or not they completed the MOOC are also not known. The students who participated in the study had enrolled in the MOOC

200

taught by one of the instructors; the instructor also participated in the study. Major Findings of the Study: Students Gaining or furthering their knowledge and skills was the main reason why students said that they signed up for the MOOC. Responses provided by students included “further my knowledge of the subject,” “I want to increase my knowledge and my skills,” “to advance my knowledge,” and “to gain some more knowledge.” Some of the students indicated that they were working in the field and gaining additional knowledge would help them in their jobs. Students said that they learned the content delivered by the MOOC in which they were enrolled; for example, one of the students acknowledged learning “. . . a good amount of information . . . ,” and learning “. . . the difference between projects and operations.” Students cited the facts that MOOCs allow for flexible, self-paced learning and are free as some of the advantages of enrolling in them. Examples of students’ responses included “flexible learning . . .,” “flexibility, low-cost . . .,” “cost, flexibility . . . ,” “self paced learning . . .” and “free education at your pace, on your schedule.” Similar findings have been reported by Bruff et al. (2013). Other reasons given for enrolling were the ability to “. . . take just as much as you want from a course” and to “. . . brush up on skills.” These findings are similar to those of Breslow et al. (2013) and Christensen et al. (2013). A major disadvantage was that there was “no direct contact with the teacher.” Other comments made by students were “limited interaction with the professor” and “the classroom interaction between students and the professor is a disadvantage.” Those students who did not see any disadvantages in a MOOC stated “I didn’t feel there were disadvantages,” “cannot think of any,” and “a

201

person who cannot benefit from a MOOC just doesn’t enroll in it.” Other disadvantages according to students were “MOOC is still in early stages of getting full credit recognition,” “not as comprehensive in terms of the material covered in a traditional course,” and “that it doesn’t give credit for any university . . . .” Would students take a MOOC again? The following student responses indicate that a majority of the students would do so: “Definitely, there is just so much to discover and learn;” “I would like to. It was big experience for me, I would like to learn more and then use it in my work, and university work too;” “Or [sic] course. Because I like to learn new or interesting subjects, and helps me to keep updated with tools and technics;” “Yes, surely. Whenever I will have / want to learn about a specific topic and a course becomes available;” “Yes, currently I am enrolled in a number of MOOCS . . . ;” and “Yes I would take a MOOC. I enjoy the flexibility of the course.” As far as communication and interaction between students and instructors, such interplay seems to be practically nonexistent in MOOCs. Responses from students included “I did not contact the instructor during this MOOC;” “Never; I won’t ask for help unless I absolutely need it, I would be inclined to ask more questions if I were in a traditional course setting;” “Did not interact with the instructor. Read what the assignments were and completed them onsite;” “Never had to contact my instructor because everything was straight forward so far;” “I never had to I understood all of his classes;” and “I did not interact with the instructor.” However, it should be pointed out that one of the instructors did say that he or she communicated with students “about every other day.” Overall, not much communication took place among students who were enrolled in the MOOCs, either. Responses that suggest this lack of communication among students included “None;” “I never did;” “I didn’t use that

202

feature because I was a little reluctant to communicate with people I will never meet;” “I did not contact peers during this MOOC;” and “Never for this course. The course was intuitive enough where I didn’t have to chat.” It is worth noting that Breslow et al. (2013) found that only three percent of the students who enrolled in the MOOC that they studied used the discussion board. Communication between students will certainly vary from MOOC to MOOC, and there may be more student-student communication in some MOOCs and less in others, depending on the students and how the MOOCs are designed and delivered. The students who participated in the study said that they would recommend MOOCs to friends. Some examples of their comments were “Yes I would recommend. There are many benefits of studying through MOOCs;” “Yes—because it’s so flexible and offers many growth opportunities;” “I would recommend it to a friend for the convenience;” and “Yes I would recommend a mooc to a friend because I would want them to experience what I'm achieving.” What about the future of MOOCs? Students seem to agree that MOOCs: “. . . will have a bright future.” Comments included “I think MOOC [sic] have a promising future. It is a great way to get additional skills at a convenient and flexible format;” “I think it will only grow and expand;” “I think they are here to stay. They may charge some fees in the future. They will augment traditional coursework in a college and university. They will get better with time;” “Global and will truly impact the world even more;” and “The future is for MOOCs to be recogznized [sic] by companies and for them to be grouped with specific goals and areas in mind.” One student provided a particularly detailed response, offering that

203

MOOCs will continue to play a role, with an increased role in a formal setting either as advanced lecture material to supplement/replace existing materials or even as a complete replacement of courses in some universities. In an informal setting, MOOCs will also play an increased role, with certificates/badges becoming increasingly relevant for employers. After the current hype, the question of business models for MOOCs will has [sic] to be answered, otherwise they are not really sustainable. Major Findings of the Study: Instructors Why did the instructors decide to teach a MOOC? Responses such as “To share my knowledge and experiences;” “I was already an online professor so thought doing a MOOC would not require that much new design work and was excited by the possibility of reaching a wider audience;” and “Education delivery is going to change, and I want to be ahead rather than behind the curve” indicate that they wanted to share their knowledge to a larger group of students and also be ready for the future. Sharing one’s expertise with others can be considered ‘altruistic,’ and this confirms the finding reported by Kolowich (2014). The time reportedly spent by faculty to develop their MOOCs ranged from 40 to 50 hours. The technologies that they used to create their MOOCs included “multiple choice quizzes, PDF lecture transcripts, Captivate audio lectures, interactive discussion forums;” “Powerpoint, iMovie, a Flip video camera, Word, Excel;” and “PDFs, Office Suite, and Mediasite.”

204

The faculty members responded as follows when asked to “explain the similarities and differences between teaching a MOOC and a traditional face-to-face course:” •

•

“I do not teach face-to-face, but being that this is a self-paced online course makes it very different. Students are required to read the syllabus and objectives, complete the video lessons, do the activities, take the quizzes at their own pace within the 90 days of access. The course is about 8 hours of seat time and they can use the discussion forum to ask questions and interact with peers.” “The two are radically different. I would say the three primary differences are (1) rhythm: you don’t plan, deliver, and grade once per week rather you engage with students more frequently, ideally daily, (2) feedback: you don’t get real-time feed as you so in teaching an in-person course but have to solicit it and read into postings to sense how people feel the course is going, and (c) this is not about doing it yourself and more about setting a system in which it gets done.” “They have very little in common.”

Here is what the faculty members had to say regarding communicating with their students: •

• •

“Because this is a self-paced courses there is not much communication with my students; however I monitor the discussion forum weekly and some participants reach out to me personally via email.” “About every other day.” “Rarely. The MOOC is designed to not be interactive. I have a heavy research load.”

205

Will the faculty members recommend teaching a MOOC to their colleagues? Their responses were: •

• •

“I would recommend that my colleagues teach a MOOC because it is a way to share your knowledge with participants who may not have been able to take such courses otherwise, thus enabling them to learn something new or grow personally and/or professionally.” “Yes because it gives you broader exposure and it allows you to build the skills that will drive the evolution of education.” “Yes. It opens their eyes to possibilities.”

Two of the three instructors said that they did not receive any training before they started teaching the MOOC. Two instructors also noted that they did not have any student assistants helping them with the course, while one of the instructors did have help and stated “Could not do it without her support.” The instructor who had a student assistant to help was one of the two who did not have any training. Regarding the future of MOOCs and making their MOOC experiences better, the three faculty members stated: •

“I think there will be an increase in instructors offering MOOCs and institutions accepting MOOCs for competency/credit. There are opportunities for improvement each time an online course is run. Since I started offering this MOOC, Blackboard has rolled out new features such as badges which I would love to implement next time I launch the course. I would also update the course with new case studies and activities in the field of Project Management to keep it current.”

206

• •

“If there were a way to get a periodic, daily or weekly, email that pushed me some information about activity on the course, that would really help.” “MOOCs will remain around; however, they will change significantly. I do not plan to do another unless it helps the university.” Discussion of the Findings

Even though the number of instructors who participated in this study is small, it is worth noting that only one of three had any training before they started teaching their MOOCs. This suggests that training faculty to teach MOOCs is an area that should be paid more attention in the future. Only one of the three instructors also had help from another person. As MOOCs continue to grow in numbers, instructors will need graduate assistants and/or instructional designers to help them develop and also teach their courses. Students said that they will enroll in other MOOCs and that they will or have already recommended MOOCs to others. Faculty members also said that they will recommend teaching MOOCs to their colleagues. This indicates that there is room for MOOCs to grow and the need for more instructors to develop and offer MOOCs. According to the students, communication between them and the faculty and with other students was minimal. As one of the faculty members stated, “Rarely. The MOOC is designed to not be interactive.” One instructor did report communicating with students on a regular basis; however, in general, even in cases where MOOCs include discussion forums, students’ participation seems to be very low (Grainger, 2013). This situation is likely to change as MOOCs evolve and are offered as a part of required coursework for degree programs.

207

Students thought that MOOCs will continue to play a role both in formal and informal education settings. In formal education settings MOOCs could either supplement traditional courses or entirely replace some of them. In informal settings, certificates and badges earned by completing MOOCs could be recognized by employers. Faculty members who participated in this study reported using advanced and emerging technologies to deliver their MOOCs. This could create problems for potential students in developing countries where the latest technologies may or may not be readily available. Access to the Internet, which is taken for granted by many in the United States, may neither be cheap nor be available on demand. Such factors could limit the spread of MOOCs worldwide because potential students may not have access to needed technologies. According to faculty members who responded to the interview questions, MOOCs are here to stay but will continue to change. One faculty member predicted that there will be “. . . an increase in instructors offering MOOCs and institutions accepting MOOCs for competency/credit.” It is worth noting that some schools have already started accepting MOOCs for university credit (Bishop, 2013). One of the reasons why students enrolled in the MOOC was because it was “free.” This raises the question whether MOOCs will be as attractive to large numbers of students if fees are charged for enrolling in and completing such courses. Suggestions for Future Research Future research might include studying the curriculum of different MOOCs and how they are organized and delivered as well as analyzing the synchronous and asynchronous interactions that take place

208

in the courses. A study in which more MOOCs faculty members participate will provide more useful information about faculty members’ experiences and thoughts about teaching a MOOC. Conducting face-to-face interviews will also help generate more information because follow-up questions can be asked in a spontaneous manner. Additional studies based on interviews with and surveys of larger groups of students who enroll in MOOCs are also needed to confirm the findings of this study. Conclusion This study is one of a growing number of studies regarding students’ and faculty members’ experiences with and thoughts and opinions about MOOCs. The study has confirmed the findings of other research studies and has also added additional insights to the knowledge base in an area where research is just beginning to emerge. The findings of this study have to be replicated with groups of students and faculty members who have experiences with MOOCs offered by other universities and by private educational organizations. References Bauernfeind, R. H. (1968). The need for replication in educational research. The Phi Delta Kappan, 50(2), 126-128. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20372254 Bishop, T. (2013). Maryland college offering credit for massive open online courses. The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved from http://articles.baltimoresun.com/201309-04/news/bs-md-mooc-20130815_1_moocs-umuchigher-education

209

Breslow, L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., & Seaton, D. T. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom research into edXâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment, 8: 13-25. Retrieved from http://www.rpajournal.com/dev/wpcontent/uploads/2013/05/SF2.pdf Bruff, .D. O., Fisher, D. H., McEwen, K. E., & Smith, B. E. (2013). Wrapping a MOOC: Student perceptions of an experiment in blended learning. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2). Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/bruff_0613.htm Christensen, G., Steinmetz, A., Alcorn, B., Bennett, A., Woods, D., & Emanuel, E. J. (2013). The MOOC phenomenon: Who takes massive open online courses and why? Abstract retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2350964 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2350964 Grainger, B. (2013). Massive open online course (MOOC) report 2013. London, University of London International Programmes. Retrieved from http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/sites/default/files/ documents/mooc_report-2013.pdf Ho, A. D., Reich, J., Nesterko, S., Seaton, D. T., Mullaney, T., Waldo, J., & Chuang, I. (2014). HarvardX and MITx: The first year of open online courses Fall 2012 Summer 2013. Abstract retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=238 1263 Kelly, A. P. (2014). Disruptor, distracter, or what?: A policymakerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s guide to massive open online courses (MOOCS). Retrieved from http://bellwethereducation.org/sites/default/files/BW_M OOC_Final.pdf

210

Khalil, H. & Ebner, M. (2013). â&#x20AC;&#x153;How satisfied are you with your MOOC?â&#x20AC;? - A research study on interaction in huge online courses. In J. Herrington et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2013 (pp. 830-839). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Klawe, M., and Schofield, E. (2014). The evolving MOOC. EDUCAUSE, 49(2). Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM1423.pdf Kolowich, S. (2014, July). The professors who make the MOOCs. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/The-ProfessorsBehind-the-MOOC/137905/#id=overview Leckart, S. (2012, March). The Stanford education experiment could change higher learning forever. WIRED. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2012/03/ff_aiclass/all/ Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(3), 202-227. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/145 5/2602 Makel, M. C., & Plucker, J. A. (2014). Facts are more important than novelty. Educational Researcher, 43(6), 304-316. Milligan, C., Littlejohn, A., & Margaryan, A. (2013). Patterns of engagement in connectivist MOOCs. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 149-159. Retrieved from https://www.oerknowledgecloud.org/sites/oerknowledg ecloud.org/files/milligan_0613.pdf

211

Pappano, L. (2012, Nov. 4). The year of the MOOC. The New York Times, 1-7. Retrieved from http://edinaschools.org/cms/lib07/MN01909547/Centric ity/Domain/272/The%20Year%20of%20the%20MOOC %20NY%20Times.pdf Popp, T. (2013). MOOC U. The Pennsylvania Gazette, 111(4), 56-63. Retrieved from http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0313/PennGaz0313_feat ure4.pdf Saltzman, G. M. (2014). The economics of MOOCs. The NEA 2014 Almanac of Higher Education, 19-29. Retrieved from https://www.nea.org/assets/docs/HE/2014_Almanac_Sa ltzman.pdf Vardi, M. Y. (2012). Will MOOCs destroy academia? [editorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s letter]. Communications of the ACM, 55(11), 5.

212

FUZZ AND FINESSE: EDUCATING THROUGH CLARITY IS BEST Katherine Watson Coastline Community College Abstract: Commitment, engagement, motivation, and success have become buzzwords, vague and ill-defined. The present paper proposes a renewed, objective tri-partite analysis of these terms, which are all too often bandied about in subjective ways. First, the terms are set forth as exemplars of â&#x20AC;&#x153;fuzzyâ&#x20AC;? thinking, as that has been defined in mathematics, language, and the social sciences. Second, they are placed in diverse disciplinary and cultural contexts, worldwide, for comparative scrutiny in disciplines ranging from education and communication to business and marketing. And finally, a renewed, objectively realizable Learning Paradigm is proposed to offer agreed-upon precision to concepts that have previously been too vague.

213

Introduction Commitment, engagement, motivation, and success are commonly proposed as objective measures of student, program, and institutional achievement in higher education, but definitions of these common catchwords incorporate vague, subjective, “fuzzy” perceptions such as feelings, satisfaction, trust, and the like; the words are deployed all too often to explain one another, and it is difficult to apply genuinely objective, rigorous, replicable scientific analysis to explain or evaluate the four. In fact, so-called “measurements” applied to them typically include terms such as “frequent,” “likely,” “manifold,” “strong,” “unlikely,” or “weak.” As Kenny, Kenny, and Dumont (2005) have written, the concepts comprise some of the “latest buzzwords” of modern education, but as Shapiro (2013) has stated, “there is little difference among…the desired skills [these terms attempt to identify] . . . although the language is distinct.” As Shapiro (2013) points out, “— it is potentially dangerous to confuse subjective values with a codified objective skill set.” However, notions that may at first seem impenetrably subjective can indeed be analyzed objectively. A three-part discussion is presented below to render objective what may appear to be only subjective. First, currently popular “fuzzy” educational concepts, often resting on “fuzzy science,” must be seen for what they are; commitment, engagement, motivation, and success will be seen to represent epitomes of fuzz, as explained in mathematics (Zadeh, 1997), language (Lakoff, 1973), and the social sciences (Koshar, 2014). It must be asked if/how these terms can be considered for more rigorous, acontextual analysis, if not clearer definition. Second, these four concepts will be seen within diverse disciplinary and cultural contexts for comparative scrutiny; for instance, they are used regularly not just in education but also in

214

communications, psychology, marketing, and business. It must be asked if diverse fields of study offer alternative, context-based analyses or definitions. Third, and finally, a renewed, objectively realizable Learning Paradigm will be seen to provide guidance to educators in search of clarity in a world of fuzz. In the end, it will be questioned how the finely tuned goals inherent in the Paradigm, popularized in the late twentieth century by Barr and Tagg (1995), can be ensured objectively with respect to commitment, engagement, motivation, and success. Fuzzy Concepts and Fuzzy Science: Inexactitude in an Era Increasingly Exact “Fuzzy concepts” typify the subjective, the inexact. Rather than depending upon numbers or the precision of statistics, they emanate from, and often exploit, the inexact emotional. Words such as “happy,” “satisfactory,” or “pleasurable” mark the fuzzy; word suffixes such as “ness” are exemplars of fuzzy concept formation (Lakoff, 1973). Similarly, “fuzzy science” has been said to comprise the intellectual outlook that things occur “to a certain degree or extent” (Lakoff, 1973), “with some magnitude of likelihood” rather than with a certain probability ranging from zero to one. Zadeh (1997) proposed that people communicate knowledge more commonly than not through the use of fuzzy concepts rather than otherwise, implying ironically that the fuzzy has proven ever more prevalent and important as machines have become increasingly responsive to human input. Zadeh adds that “the [soft] social sciences, including economics, psychology, philosophy, linguistics, politics, sociology, and religion, among others . . . [should have] picked up on their own use of [the fuzzy].” But although the fuzzy may be useful to promote feel-good, non-threatening interaction, may even provoke

215

“meaningful” reactions, it remains typically inexact, requiring distinctions, conditions, “hedges” (Lakoff, 1973), or qualifiers. Sociolinguists, among others, point out that the fuzzy is best clarified through recognition of social, ethnic, philosophical, religious, and linguistic constructs that “frame” the fuzz. Psychologists hold that the strict binary logic gates that define “sharp” or “hard” computer reasoning do not characterize the often illogical, but meaningful, “softer” associative patterns of the necessarily fuzzy human mind; from this perspective, the quality of being human is characterized by fuzz. Indeed, the very human-oriented field of nursing offers a good example of the meeting of fuzzy and sharp, of soft and hard, to which educators might do well to offer heed. Koshar (2014) outlines certain distinctions defining both modes of reasoning: On the one hand, the “exact” or “hard sciences” are acontextual, deductive, empirical, objective, quantitative, reductionistic, and values-free, but on the other, the fuzzy “soft sciences” are contextual, inductive, qualitative, subjective, and values-influenced. Nurses know, in Koshar’s understanding, that for humans fuzzy and sharp do not represent a zero-sum mind game. Neither is it the case that things fuzzy should remain impenetrably undefined, as the aforementioned linguist George Lakoff (1973) has demonstrated. Thus, as Nolan (1998), among others, suggests, fuzzy inexactitude should and can be made subject to “soft computing and expert systems technology” marrying the subjective to the objective. Fuzz and Finesse: Four Notions to be Defined and Refined What follows is a presentation of four fuzzy terms used frequently in education, along with definitions of the terms as they are exploited in various academic and non-

216

academic fields in the United States and elsewhere. Subsequently, a renewed version of Barr and Tagg’s 1995 Learning Paradigm will be proposed to promote discussion, bringing focus to the fuzz. The four terms in question are: commitment, engagement, motivation, and success. Commitment, Seen for What It Is and May Be Contextually Commitment implies “follow-through,” as authors for the United Kingdom company Mind Tools, Limited (2009) explain, adding that it involves a taking on of personal responsibility; commitment is best developed, in this analysis, through communication, which is the interactive process par excellence of promoting human understanding. In education, commitment is frequently equated with persistence or attrition, the latter being an absence of the former. Given this reckoning, it becomes easy to measure commitment by determining how many students leave class, leave school, leave academics altogether. But at least two questions arise when such an equation is proposed: For one, is commitment really just obstinate doggedness under a different name? Secondly, should we not dig more deeply to find out the causes, and the consequences of failed commitment? For their part, for instance, Hackman and Dysinger (1970) have stated, with respect to the second question, that students who fail to commit do so for any one of four fuzzily undefined reasons: financial difficulties, academic problems, family trouble, and social problems. These reasons can be classed as fuzzy because, although survey and questionnaire data are reported, the data depend upon “perceptions,” “optimism,” and things subjectively “favorable” or not. Interestingly, educators in the Usa often retain a definition of commitment with an emphasis different from

217

that of professionals in other countries. Thus, as John Hanson (1955) has written for the American Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), the term promotes for Americans the kind of Horatio Alger air of rugged determination discussed by Hackman and Dysinger, a praiseworthy diligence, “with a visible symbol in effort,” typically among students more than among teachers. By contrast, the Australian Northern Territory Government (2014) and the New Zealand Ministry of Education (2014), among others, see commitment as flowing from education professionals, including teachers, administrators, and all other staff, to students. In addition to subject matter competence, commitment from this perspective is marked by a continuing desire to meet student needs, an incessant striving to improve, and an active interaction with colleagues, all of which must first infuse the educator before he or she can stimulate the student. Indeed, the New Zealand Te Ke Ipurangi holds that it is educational professionals who are the critical key to commitment; we must “have an unremitting focus on student learning.” The “personal responsibility” cited by the aforementioned Manktelow is therefore the province of the professor initially; students are encouraged to take it on through a sort of subtle professorial push. An even broader-based, or –sourced, responsibility for developing commitment has been proposed in northern Africa’s informatics-based Observatoire sur les Systèmes d’Information, les Réseaux, et les Inforoutes au Sénégal (OSIRIS), as set forth by that organization’s Senegalese secretary general, Olivier Sagna (2005). Sagna holds that commitment to the achievement of educational goals must, like commitment in any/all other public domains, flow naturally from a nation’s political will, as that is nurtured by its business sector, itself having a vested interest in proper schooling so that diplomas or academic certification will lead to rewarding jobs. Sagna points out that, as

218

countries throughout the world accept that commitment is as political as it is social and educational, international transdisciplinary development will move apace. In western Europe, Robert Michit (2008), of the University of Grenoble-centered European Laboratory of Social Sciences and Human Resources, has noted that commitment will probably always remain difficult to measure objectively because it basically comprises things “psycho-social” and is thus anchored in subjectively sensed “social determinants,” including the aforementioned political ones; commitment involves the interaction of individual social position, the social environment, and the position of one’s society as it is engaged in the wider world. The “objectification” of such commitment requires rational thought, Michit continues, and a setting forth of clear, group-accepted measurable definitions of terms, alongside discussion of people’s shared understanding of their engagement with those terms. Engagement, Seen and Contextualized Although the two American English words “commitment” and “engagement” are defined in many other languages by a single word, or at least by words synonymous with one another, engagement among students in the United States, as Axelson and Flick (2011) have reported, “. . . has come to refer to how involved or interested students appear to be in their learning and how ‘connected’ they are to their classes, their institutions, and each other.” That is, academic engagement comprises something more than the pure communication or the taking on of responsibility that inhere in the English term “commitment” as set forth above. Educational consultant and “service learning” expert Adam Fletcher (2011), of Olympia, Washington (Usa) has described engagement in school as “a student’s willingness, need, desire, and

219

compulsion to participate in, and be successful in, the learning process.” Notably, Fletcher adds that “there is little consensus among students and educators as to how to define (engagement).” Like many social scientific concepts, then, engagement remains a fuzzy one. “Positive emotional tone” is cited, along with “intense efforts and concentration” and “enthusiasm, optimism, curiosity, and interest.” Typically, these descriptors are difficult to define precisely and are even more difficult to measure; they express the sort of thing that we can recognize but that we cannot effectively explicate. A 2007 report made by the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AACU) held that engagement could be “enhanced” by educators concerning themselves and their students across disciplines with “the Big Questions,” exemplified, according to the AACU, by examining how to accommodate international culture(s) and values; how to realize global interdependence and how to address it; how to adapt to the changing economy worldwide; and how to achieve and maintain human dignity and freedom. In Canada, Parsons and Taylor, of the University of Alberta “University Partners,” published a review of the literature on student engagement in 2011, stating that the phenomenon is “ubiquitous in our school systems, but not yet understood” (p. 5). The review adds that “there are several types/categories” of engagement, including “academic, cognitive, intellectual, institutional, emotional, behavioral, social, psychological, to name a few” (Parsons & Taylor, 2011, p. 3). The review goes on to say that there is much “murkiness” to the meaning of any of these and that “interesting qualitative criteria and differing definitions of engagement in learning” exist (Parsons & Taylor, 2011, p. 4). Indeed, the Canadian report continues, “the question of measure(ing) the process and not simply the content of

220

learning” must be addressed during any analysis of engagement, if only because, as the University Partners found, and as has also been noted with respect to commitment, there is “a gap between what teachers consider engagement in learning and what students consider engagement in learning” (Parsons & Taylor, 2011, p. 4). Indeed, as Jay (2012) has written, engagement is becoming ever more often a “public,” a “community” affair, in part because of AACU-style notions of transdisciplinary and trans-national “interdependence” and also in part because of the increasingly “social” and/or “interactive” nature of news, if not knowledge as a whole. Jay suggests that, like Fletcher’s “service learning,” curricula of “project-based engaged learning,” once the province of vocational-technical schools or more recently that of STEM programs alone, have “revitalized” academic programs in the arts and humanities by “integrating [them] into public life,” often making them accessible openly through multiple media. As Sénégal’s Olivier Sagna proposed in 2005 in his push for an “engaged” e-Sénégal, three “poles,” or objectives, are becoming increasingly easy to attain in a world where physical boundaries are dissolving and where technological access to anything is becoming almost overwhelming: (a) to put citizens and their enterprises (small business, particularly) at the center of their governments’ plans and preoccupations; (b) to permit and to facilitate access among all sectors of society to education, training, and information; (c) to respond to the needs expressed by various service providers and decision-makers, so as to promote productive and responsive decision-making. Thus, for Sagna, governmental commitment can and should lead to business and school engagement for an educated, internationally developed society in all sectors.

221

But how is engagement to be measured? Hardy and Bryson (2012), of the United Kingdom’s Higher Education Academy, report research results from the UK, Canada, Australia, Singapore, and the United States—all Anglophone societies—showing that “engagement is positively related to persistence rates and grades” as well as to “measurable study behaviours” such as “level of academic challenge,” “enriching educational experiences,” a “supportive academic environment,” “active and collaborative learning,” and “student-faculty interaction.” In Australia in particular, Hardy and Bryson write, engagement is demonstrated by students’ active and effective access to work; that is, their engagement is clear when they can show that they have been able to apply their classroom-learned knowledge to an outside-the-classroom job. However, these authors stress that the “feelings” of the student remain the most important determinants of engagement, and these feelings are not only something “holistic” that suffuses the engaged student but also remain fuzzy in the conceptual sense, difficult to define objectively or to measure. Grasgreen (2013) reports that more than 500 institutions, mostly in the United States of America, have responded to an Inside Higher Ed inquiry on engagement by citing students’ access to and use of academic advisers and/or counseling as handy, easily calculable measures of engagement. Grasgreen adds that within the past four years, however, measures of engagement have become broader-based and more easily calculable, including questions to students about how many and what kinds of email interactions they have had with their instructors, how many course evaluations students have chosen to complete, and how many assignments they have finished that have required “higher-order learning, includ(ing) more reading, writing assignments, and reports that (have) challenged (them) to approach the material in deeper ways.”

222

Grasgreen notes that institutions have reported that, despite the fact that modern employers in most domains and in most countries have come “to demand quantitative skills from college graduates, regardless of their chosen career,” not all students in all subject matters are yet learning “quantifiabilité”: “While seniors in science, technology, math, and engineering engage most often in quantitative reasoning activities, arts and humanities majors did so the least,” she reports. And unhappily for the two-year community college, whose students are often “nontraditional,” often exclusively online, older, or firstgeneration, “First-generation online, and adult students were less likely to learn collaboratively, and thus to engage . . .” (Grassgreen, 2013). Thus, not only are these students atypical in the traditional sense of engagement evaluability, but they may be presenting their institutions with types of engagement that have until recently been more apparent abroad—such as in Australia, Canada, England, France, New Zealand, or Sénégal—than they have been in the United States. The educational model in which students become learners by developing a certain motivation to design their own programs with the help of academic experts, business mentors, and/or even government-sourced sponsors may be coming to engage America’s academic community in ways heretofore unknown. Motivation, Sensed and in Context Motivation is “the psychological force that enables action,” as social psychologists Touré-Tillery and Fishbach (2014) have stated. Generally, basic psychology defines two essential types of motivation: the intrinsic, generated from inside the curious individual, and the extrinsic, stimulated in the person by something outside himself. As psychological constructs, both of these sorts of motivation

223

remain somewhat fuzzy, difficult to measure precisely. While intrinsic motivation is said to be “caused by the underlying need for a sense of competence and selfdetermination,” extrinsic motivation is typically “mediated” by “pay or promotion” or good grades in school, as Thakor (1994) summarizes. While it may seem that things extrinsic might be easier to determine, to measure, than things intrinsic, neither notion is truly fuzz-free. Exemplarily, the California Measure of Mental Motivation (2013) comprises “an assessment of the mindset” of “cognitive engagement and mental motivation toward intellectual activities.” “Motivated people,” claims the Measure’s creator, Insight Assessment, “are more likely to engage problems, apply knowledge, and achieve results . . . .” As Thakor (1994) has stated, an “operational definition” of intrinsic motivation includes an observation of “(behaviors) performed in the absence of any apparent external contingency”; things are done because the person feels like doing them. No “reward” is expected or even hoped for, as it is with external motivation. Again, as Stipek (2014) has put it, external motivation is easier to measure because, as he writes, psychologists have long deployed “reinforcement” or “reward strategies” in its execution. Simply stated, this “mechanistic” practice “feeds” a creature, whose hunger and desire then encourage and motivate it to do more to get more. As Touré-Tillery and Fishbach (2014) have written, the externally motivated individual is likely “outcome-focused,” interested in a reward of some kind, while the internally motivated one concentrates on adhering to standards as well as on the joy of achieving accurate results. Indeed, as Touré-Tillery and Fishbach point out, “tests” of whether an individual has been well motivated or not often entail measuring “time on task,” how fast that individual might work, and then how the task may have been completed. It has been observed that speed and

224

performance both improve as a task is better learned, and so motivation might be a cyclical process, with success inciting ever more improved motivation. Success, Sensed and in Context Success, as Stipek (2014) summarizes it, can mean “winning” in sports or even in politics; it can be “measured,” Stipek explains, by the length of applause at a performance, and it can be clear from good press reviews or criticism. In the realm of health services, success can mean that patients have improved, been cured, have survived. In real estate, it is evident if a property has changed hands successfully. As Miller (2014) has asserted, since success remains difficult for educators to objectify among their students, many academic institutions have chosen to measure it simply through student retention, that quality of persistence described above as the opposite of attrition. But “equating student success with student retention is both narrow and misleading,” Miller adds, indicating that it probably accounts for only 20%, at the most, of what can be termed success. Miller goes on to suggest that, as his own Marymount College has proposed, success comprises at least five “categorical outcomes,” including retention, educational attainment, academic achievement, student advancement, and holistic development. A United States Department of Education “Committee on the Measures of Student Success” presented in 2011 its own analysis of success, also incomplete, concentrating as it did on graduation rates to the exclusion of all else. And as the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AACU) reported in 2007, “Almost everywhere, ‘college success’ is currently documented through reports on enrollment, persistence, degree completion, and sometimes, grades.” Probed in

225

more detail, states the AACU, “ . . . these metrics for success make it indisputably clear that college attainment is stratified by income level, and that there are also significant disparities in attainment between white students and specific groups of racial and ethnic minorities . . . .” However, despite the disparities, or perhaps because of them, educators must recall that, as Deschênes (2012) has stated, “success is something that must be evaluated, measured, even if evaluation is considered to be a necessary evil, . . . if access to programs is to be ensured for all.” In fact, as Manktelow (2009) advises, “continuous evaluation” should be pursued “to maximize effectiveness,” to adapt to the changes that he cites as being inherent in the human behavior that underlies learning. And so, the fuzzy concepts complainant might ask, how is success to be measured objectively, particularly if its definition remains subjectively murky? Iteractive Canada’s Michelle Deschênes (2012) suggests that, in a twenty-first century rich in modern technologies, various active, interactive, and socially reactive tools be deployed to “integrate” knowledge for “clear and explicit goals.” It might be noted, though, that although Deschênes calls for clarity and explicitness, as well as “an attention to detail, to results, [and] to continuous rather than episodic evaluation” to determine success, she offers no specific examples of how either she or the Quebec Ministry of Education that she cites might measure it. Conclusive Recommendation: A (Re)new(ed) Learning Paradigm to Clip the Fuzz? As Miller (2014) has stated, “when students fail to learn, it is regrettable, but the system doesn’t change” as it should; the same old “instructional paradigm” is just pushed harder, occasionally tweaked, but not really changed, transformed from the inside out. More “experts”

226

and/or consultants are hired, more “knowledge bases” are conceived, and more effete awareness is said to inhere in the few. Indeed, even more “specialized” micro-thinking is often added, and curricula are “enhanced” by added fuzz. For example, rather than offering one course in algebra or calculus that might provide solid foundations in the field and link it to other disciplines in a practical way, institutions provide a panoply of dizzying, but isolated, options to the prospective learner. Instructors are encouraged to “develop” themselves professionally in their own fields, honing their specific expertises among other professors of like kind. Students are expected to study, to become engorged with new specifics that they will then disgorge upon demand. In 1995, Barr and Tagg proposed a change to all this that they called The Learning Paradigm, a paninstitutional proposal which, in sum, held that “no policy, practice, or program should be instituted or maintained that does not promote student learning.” The Paradigm was in vogue for a time, but its adherents have, in many instances, all but given up. A 2008 report by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, for instance, documents the suggested implementation of a “Rubric for evaluating institutional student learning assessment processes” that aims to report the “status” of such Learning Paradigm-generated notions as the importance of ensuring that “clear statements of expected learning outcomes at the institutional, unit, program, and course levels have been developed and have appropriate interrelationships,” among others. Once again, it seems that “clear” and “appropriate” cry out to be made precise; Middle States Commission documents do not provide obvious precision. In Singapore, the National University has posted a chart on its Webpages showing how the Learning Paradigm differs from the Teaching or Instructional one, but no

227

apparent examples of the Learning Paradigm are set forth as being used at that University or elsewhere as we enter the middle of the second decade of the twenty-first century. “Instruction” comprises unitary thinking, with students being asked to attain simple mastery of rules and structures without much context, while “Learning” is supposed to be more holistic, uniting subject matters, often using techniques from one area of interest to clarify concepts in another. Thus, as Barr and Tagg pointed out in their 1995 publication on the Learning Paradigm, schools that were beginning in the mid-1990’s to congratulate themselves on having instituted “critical thinking” curricula as a way to promote “committed,” “engaged,” “motivated,” “successful” learning-centered student bodies soon became frustrated because students and their teachers were not making it obvious either what such “critical thinking” really comprises or how specifically it operates, particularly in ways different from what most Instructional Paradigmtrained educators had been used to. Indeed, “critical thinking” is still all too often taught, using the Instructional Paradigm, as a course or a set of courses, within a particular curriculum, and in a classroom. As Barr and Tagg have noted, this is pure absurdity, for thinking critically is a Learning Paradigm practice par excellence, something that should be instilled transdisciplinarily; its processes should be incorporated into assignments and stimulated in discussions, not set aside as a separate area of study. Moreover, as Boggs (1999) has observed, surface changes in courses or their methodology sustain a teaching or instructional paradigm rather than promoting a learning one. This, Boggs continues, “confuses a means (instruction) with an end (learning).” As the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AACU) suggested in 2007, “a concerted and collective effort” remains to be made in favor of learning among educators and the society in which they work, given

228

that the twenty-first century is one of obvious integration of the academic, the sacred, and the profane. Thus, as the AACU states, it is clear that “Collaborative action is needed because the impediments to educational excellence are systemic rather than isolated.” Solutions to the problems impeding progress must be systemic ones, too, just as Sagna (2005) noted nearly a decade ago in Sénégal. Preferably, these solutions should also comprise something objective, measurable, and accepted as applicable across domains, across disciplines, and around the world. But it is still the case that even Tagg (2007), one of the co-creators of the Learning Paradigm, admits that “most institutions cannot even coherently describe what they are trying to get students to learn,” much less show whether or not those students have learned. Tagg goes on to note that, although new jobs in our still-new century often demand “complex communication” and “expert thinking,” neither of these terms is defined in a non-fuzzy, measurable way. Indeed, commitment and engagement are cited as desirable traits, proper motivation is expected, and success in school is supposed to lead to success in the workplace. The problem, Tagg holds, remains that job-makers and jobgivers, just like educators in academic institutions, continue to think in a top-down way according to which knowledge and awareness remain the private province of the small percentage of people who are on top, and the task of the larger percentage of us thus becomes to try to penetrate the fuzzy barriers immuring that province. Tagg suggests that cutting away the fuzz can best be done by our attending to “better information,” which he calls “concrete [exact, numerical] evidence about educationally relevant activities.” That is, rather than submitting students to regular multiple-choice or other objective-style quizzes and tests, teachers in the new learning paradigm should notice whether and how students

229

know more this week than they did last week or whether learners in this semester’s courses have learned more or in a different way from those who were enrolled last semester, for instance. Educators must not only become sensitized to such changes but must develop objective means to measure the shifts. Indeed, how is “more” or “good” or “better” success to be determined, assessed, evaluated, and/or measured in the context of the Learning Paradigm? If a school decides to overhaul its policies, practices, and programs in favor of this supposedly objective and fuzzfree “learning outcomes”-based modus operandi, how can that school determine whether or not the Paradigm is working? The place to start the assessment of the Paradigm’s success is, as Pescosolido and Aminzade (1999) have stated, in the conventional classroom where particular courses are being taught in accordance with it. From there, Pescosolido and Aminzade suggest, transdisciplinary agreed-upon assessment should be applied to programs and to entire institutions, always deploying “processes external to instruction,” practices that ought to be becoming easier to execute in the electronic age. Thus, as Pennsylvania’s West Chester University’s (2009) “Assessment Brown Bag , Spring 2009” states, “an objective assessment is one that needs no professional judgment to score correctly.” Such an assessment is best determined directly, as WCUPA asserts, through an analysis of “student products or performances,” a determination of how well or badly a student can analyze, synthesize, and then apply the knowledge gleaned from a particular course or program. As has been noted, “innovative applications of soft computing” can be marshaled for this service (Nolan, 1998). In a similar manner, the American National Institutes of Health’s Widaman (2014) suggests an iterative

230

process of defining for understanding, identifying, listing, and then re-defining, et cetera. Sagna (2005) would also remind us that education should not be assumed to exist in a vacuum, particularly in a twenty-first century in which learning happens at home, in the workplace, on the street, and online, as well as in the classroom, at any time of day or night. As Boggs (1999) has written, the Learning Paradigm holds that learning is an exciting, unrestricted, “unbound” process; Sagna notes that it is also holistic and continuous, infusing thought processes, attitudes, and behaviors in constant change. But despite the suggestions of Nolan, Pescosolido and Aminzade, Sagna, or the WCUPA, it remains difficult to determine objectively the feasibility of applying the Learning Paradigm to measure the perennially subjective commitment, engagement, motivation, and success, especially since these terms are unexceptionally fuzzy. A European Union 2008 report on “learning to learn” establishes standards for testable “computer literacy,” “reading comprehension,” and “knowledge of the natural and social world,” among other indicators of educational success; the standards are flexible, and European institutions that subscribe to them are expected to share student work among participant institutions from Finland to Portugal to France to Greece and elsewhere (Hoskins & Fredriksson, 2008). At the University of Helsinki, for example, students arrive after having been tested more than once a year in mathematical and other reasoning skills, in their ability to communicate in speech and writing, and in their understanding of the significance of various world events, starting from age 11 and continuing through university (Hoskins & Fredriksson, 2008). In a Barr and Tagg-like Paradigmatic way, educators across the European Union determine how these students are learning, as well as what they are learning, how they are changing from one semester to the next, how their commitment and

231

engagement are or are not exhibited in their measured motivation. The European Union report cites a development of “critical curiosity” and “strategic awareness” as being objectively measurable through rubrics devised by educators at more than a dozen institutions throughout the Union (Hoskins & Fredriksson, 2008). Indeed, it might do American educators well to see how these rubrics can be applied in our own institutions for learning, while at the same time heeding Sagna’s call to ensure that our schooling, if it is to develop and then energize truly educated citizens successfully, shall be integrated into community, society, politics, and the greater world with objective finesse. References American Association of Colleges and Universities. (2007). College learning for the new global century. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/ GlobalCentury_final.pdf Axelson, R. D., & Flick, A. (2011). Defining student engagement [Abstract]. Change,43(1). Retrieved from http://www.changemag.org/Archives/Back%20Issu es/2011/January-February%202011/studentengagement-abstract.html Barr, R. & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning -a new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27(6). Retrieved from http://pacweb.alamo.edu/FacultyDev/pdf/Pats_files/ Linda%20Suskie/BibFiles.pdf

232

Boggs, G. (1999). What the learning paradigm means for faculty. Learning Abstracts, 2(4). Retrieved from http://www.vet.utk.edu/enhancement/pdf/feb112.pdf California Measure of Mental Motivation. (2013). Critical thinking attributes. Retrieved from http://www.insightassessment.com/Products/Produc ts-Summary/Critical-Thinking-AttributesTests/California-Measure-of-Mental-MotivationLevel-III Committee on Measures of Student Success. (2011). A report to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. Retrieved from U.S. Department of Education: http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/cmsscommittee-report-final.pdf Deschenes, M. (2012). Évaluation des productions issues de l'intégration pédagogique d'outils du web social. Itéractive. Retrieved from http://iteractive.ca/evaluationwebsocial/evaluation.p hp Fletcher, A. (2011). Student engagement. Retrieved from http://www.soundout.org/student-engagementAF.pdf Grasgreen, A. (2013). New survey, same engagement. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/11/14/n sse-2013-measure-student-engagement-andlearning-outcomes Hackman, J., & Dysinger, W. (1970). Commitment to college as a factor in student attrition. Sociology of Education, 43, 311-324.

233

Hanson, J. W. (1955). The role of commitment in learning. ASCD Journal. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el _195512_hanson.pdf Hardy, C. & Bryson, C. (2012). Student engagement: Paradigm shift or political expediency. Networks, 9. Retrieved from http://www.adm.heacademy.ac.uk/library/files/reso urces/networks/networks09.pdf Hoskins, B., & Fredriksson, U. (2008). Learning to learn: What is it and can it be measured? Luxembourg: European Commission Joint Research Centre. Retrieved from http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstre am/111111111/979/1/learning%20to%20learn%20 what%20is%20it%20and%20can%20it%20be%20 measured%20final.pdf Jay, G. (2012). The engaged humanities. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 3(2). Retrieved from http://jces.ua.edu/the-engagedhumanities-principles-and-practices-for-publicscholarship-and-teaching/ Kenny, G., Kenny, D.,& Dumont, R. (2005). Mission and place: Strengthening learning and community through campus design. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2, pp. 458-508. Retrieved from https://georgelakoff.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/he dges-a-study-in-meaning-criteria-and-the-logic-offuzzy-concepts-journal-of-philosophical-logic-2lakoff-19731.pdf

234

Koshar, J. (2014). Nursing research and evidence-based practice. Retrieved from http://www.sonoma.edu/users/k/koshar/n300/week0 3_PRviews.html Michit, R. (2008). Introduction: Une vieille question trop vite enterrée. Science humaine, science exacte, les normes de la pensée sociale. Mémoire Online. Retrieved from http://www.memoireonline.com/07/08/1429/m_scie nce-humaine-science-exacte-normes-penseesociale1.html Miller, B. (2014). Five outcomes to student success [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.ellucian.com/Blog/Five-outcomes--tostudent-success/ Miller, H. (2014). Paradigm shift: How higher education is improving learning. Retrieved from http://www.hermanmiller.com/content/dam/herman miller/documents/research_summaries/wp_Learnin gParadigm.pdf Mind Tools, Ltd. (2009). Team building tool kit. Retrieved from http://www.utexas.edu/facilities/about/qapi/docume nts/TeamBuildingToolkit.pdf National University of Singapore. (2008). Facilitating learning: The learning paradigm. In Learning to teach, teaching to learn: A handbook for NUS teachers. Retrieved from http://www.cdtl.nus.edu.sg/handbook/learn/paradig m.htm

235

Nolan, J. (1998). A prototype application of fuzzy logic and expert systems in education assessment. IAAI-98 Proceedings. Retrieved from http://www.aaai.org/Papers/IAAI/1998/IAAI98018.pdf Northern Territory Government. (2014). Individual commitment to learning. In Northern Territory Government: Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.education.nt.gov.au/teacherseducators/professionallearning/framework/committment Parsons, J., & Taylor, L. (2011). Student engagement: What do we know and what should we do? Retrieved from University of Alberta website: https://education.alberta.ca/media/6459431/student_ engagement_literature_review_2011.pdf Pescosolido, B., & Aminzade, R. (Eds.). (1999). The social worlds of higher education, vol. 2. Thousand Oaks, California: Pine Forge Press. Sagna, O. (2005). Le Sénégal dans la société de l’information: État des lieux. Rencontres d’ affaires sur les technologies del’information 6 - 7 décembre 2005, Dakar, Sénégal. Retrieved from http://www.researchictafrica.net/countries/senegal/ OSIRIS_2005.pdf Shapiro, J. (2013, October). Grit, optimism, and other buzzwords in the way of education. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jordanshapiro/2013/10/ 14/grit-optimism-and-other-buzzwords-in-the-wayof-education/

236

Stipek, J. (2014). Defining achievement motivation [excerpt]. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/definin g-achievement-motivation/ Tagg, J. (2007). Changing minds in higher education: Students change, so why can’t colleges? Planning for Higher Education, 37(1). Retrieved from https://www.sdcity.edu/Portals/0/CollegeServices/St udentServices/LearningCommunities/PedagogicalIn sightProcess/ChangingMinds.pdf New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2014). Ki Te Autūroa: Improving inservice teacher educator learning and practice. Retrieved from http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/p df_file/0005/163355/Ki-te-Aoturoa-ImprovingInservice-Teacher-Educator-Learning-andPractice.pdf Thakor, M. (1994). Innate: Development of a new intrinsic motivation measure. Asia Pacific Advances in Consumer Research 1, 116-121. Retrieved from http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conferenceproceedings.aspx?Id=11190 Touré-Tillery, M., & Fishbach, A. (2014). How to measure motivation: A guide for the social psychologist. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8 (7), 328-341. Retrieved from http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/ayelet.fishbach/rese arch/SPCOTilleryFishbach.pdf WCUPA. (2009). Assessment brown bag, spring 2009. Retrieved from https://www.wcupa.edu/tlac/documents/More%20o n%20Measures--Definitions.pdf

237

Widaman, K.F. (2014). Objective measurement of subjective phenomena. In e-Source: Behavioral and social sciences research. Retrieved from http://www.esourceresearch.org/eSourceBook/Obje ctiveMeasurementofSubjectivePhenomena/1Learnin gObjectives/tabid/693/Default.aspx Zadeh, L. (1997). Toward a theory of fuzzy information granulation. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 90, 111-127. Retrieved from http://sci2s.ugr.es/docencia/doctoSCTID/Zadeh1997.pdf

238

SELF-PACED LEARNING: THE NEXT GAME-CHANGER FOR COLLEGE MATHEMATICS Pangyen “Ben” Weng Metropolitan State University

Abstract: In the college math classroom, especially at developmental or general education levels, students vary greatly in motivations and abilities, and self-paced learning can be used to improve student success in this environment. This paper describes the concept of self-paced learning and ways to implement it in college mathematics courses. The paper also reports on the author’s experiment running a selfpaced math course at Metropolitan State University and discusses future developments in and challenges for selfpaced learning.

239

Introduction Competency-based learning is commonly used in vocational training and applied fields such as medicine and accounting. Competency-based learning emphasizes meeting learning objectives; student success is not confined to the time frame of semesters or trimesters. According to Fain (2014), by 2013 more than 350 institutions had been offering or were seeking to create competency-based degree tracks. One of the powerful ideas driving competencybased education is self-paced learning. Self-paced learning not only accelerates the learning process for stronger learners; it also offers weaker learners more time to succeed, and it allows every student the flexibility to manage the pace of his or her learning experience. For these reasons, implementing self-paced learning is a potentially game-changing strategy for teaching mathematics. Background Information Competency-based Education Competency-based learning emphasizes the acquisition of concrete skills by meeting set learning objectives; it is commonly used in vocational training and applied fields such as medicine and accounting. According to the website of U.S. Department of Education (2015), [Competency-based learning is] transitioning away from seat time, in favor of a structure that creates flexibility, [and] allows students to progress as they demonstrate mastery of academic content, regardless of time, place, or pace of learningâ&#x20AC;Ś This type of learning leads to better student engagement because the content is relevant to each student and

240

tailored to their unique needs. It also leads to better student outcomes because the pace of learning is customized to each student. While the Department of Education encourages competency-based learning in K-12, it was not until 2013 when it officially allowed student aid to go into competency-based programs in colleges and universities (U.S. Department of Education, 2013). This action has motivated colleges and universities nationwide to pursue competency-based programs; by 2013, more than 350 institutions have been offering or seeking to create competency-based type of degree tracks, as Fain (2014) reports in Inside Higher Ed. Self-paced Learning One of the powerful features of competency-based education is self-paced learning, or what K-12 educators refer to as individualized learning. While self-paced learning is usually associated with the acceleration of learning for stronger students, it has many other benefits, such as • • •

reducing stress and anxiety for students who can learn at their own pace. ensuring that students don’t have to follow a uniformly set schedule or are forced to move on without completely understanding a topic. providing additional time to weaker students and giving their instructors more chances to provide assistance.

Self-paced learning is a comfortable fit for mathematics teaching and has been considered an effective strategy by many educators and researchers. The positives

241

and negatives of such an individualized approach are explicated in many publications; for example, in one report, Slavin, Leavey, and Madden (1982) described why individualized instruction is appealing to many: The compelling argument that students should receive instruction at their own level and progress through it at their own pace has led over the years to development of many programmed instruction models… The rationale behind individualization of instruction is that students enter class with widely divergent skills and motivations… In a highly sequential subject such as mathematics, where learning each skill depends on having mastered a set of prior skills, individualized approaches such as programmed instruction would appear to be especially needed. On the other hand, the authors also commented on why (at least his contemporary) individualized learning programs in mathematics found “no trend toward positive effects”: Many students find programmed instruction boring, and individual work isolates students from one another in class, reducing the potential for healthy social interaction and perhaps reducing motivation… Some students become bogged down in individualized programs as the task becomes familiar and monotonous, and there is usually little incentive for students to progress rapidly… Because students must have their individualized materials checked before they go on to the next unit, they may have to wait for long periods for teaching assistance. (Slavin, Leavey, & Madden, 1982)

242

A number of the issues of individualized learning can be resolved by using better instructional designs. Slavin, for one, designed a cooperative-individualized program called Team-Assisted Individualization and then proved that his design produced better test results than control groups (Slavin, Leavey, & Madden, 1982). Some negative factors of individualized learning have little or nothing to do with students and are technical issues that can be resolved by technology, which is why modern self-paced programs usually rely heavily on online resources. For example, Stanford University conducted an experiment with Title I students using its online courses of the technological and individualized EPGY kindergarten through fifth grade Mathematics Course Sequence and found improvements in their outcomes in the California Standard Math Tests (Suppesa, Holland, Hua, & Vua, 2013). Self-Paced Learning in College Math College math teaching in the U.S. is in principle competency-based. The American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges (AMATYC) makes recommendations for pre-calculus college math standards, and the Mathematical Association of America (MAA) has a Committee on the Undergraduate Program in Mathematics, which makes recommendations to guide mathematics departments in designing curricula in almost all collegelevel math courses. Their standards are broadly adopted by colleges and universities nationwide. Self-paced learning is less common in college mathematics teaching than in Kâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;12; however, new government policy, the latest learning technologies, and the lack of success in developmental and general education math courses nationwide are making many educators and researchers consider self-paced learning as a viable strategy.

243

New Government Policy In 2013, the U.S. Department of Education started granting student-aid eligibility to competency-based programs with self-paced learning that would â&#x20AC;&#x153;provide students with the means to acquire the knowledge and skills at an individual pace to demonstrate achievement of specific competencies identified as necessary to complete a program and earn a degree or other credentialâ&#x20AC;? (U.S. Department of Education, 2013). Latest Learning Technology With web-based learning technology, learning is no longer limited to time in the classroom but can be done anywhere at any time. Video lessons and web-based learning programs are now readily available for students across the nation and around the world. Many video math lessons are available online. For example, Khan Academy offers a large collection of high quality mathematics lessons up to pre-calculus, and instructors who wish to create their own lessons can do so easily on tablet devices using applications such as Educreations or ScreenChomp. In addition, learning systems such as MyMathLab and WebAssign provide students with interactive online learning environments. Students get immediate feedback and real-time assistance on homework problems they do not understand; they can also access many multimedia learning resources. The systems can be programmed to be competency-based and can create individualized study plans for students.

244

Lack of Success in Developmental and General Education Math Student retention rates and academic success in college mathematics courses are both at all-time lows. For example, 70% of students in two-year colleges who enroll in developmental math cannot complete their developmental math sequences (Attewell et al., 2006). Moreover, College Algebra, a course taken by more students than any other college course, has only a 40% national passing rate (Thompson, 2010). Thus, many educators and researchers hope that self-paced learning can help reverse such trends. Requirements and Feasibility of Self-paced Learning College students are widely divergent in skills, motivations and ethnic/cultural/socioeconomic backgrounds. Contrary to Slavinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s claims about individualized learning in elementary education(Slavin, Leavey, & Madden, 1982) , college students are mature learners who can and should be held responsible for their own learning. They have many incentives to make adequate progress, especially with paid tuition and college diplomas at stake. Most college students are also capable of using technology. These characteristics make college students suitable candidates for self-paced learning. On the other hand, opponents of self-paced learning often claim that mathematics is too difficult for students to learn on their own. After all, mathematics is so challenging that even brilliant students sometimes get stuck, and learning math is such a sequential process that one cannot possibly continue learning when he or she gets stuck. Such concerns are legitimate and should be addressed. Students in self-paced programs learn independently but are under proper guidance; they learn at

245

their own pace but are provided with easy access to information, timely response to questions, and immediate assistance with learning difficulties. Their learning needs are met by both the innovative use of technology and human intervention. Technology and the self-paced learner. Video lessons and web-based learning systems play essential roles in content delivery and student assessment for self-paced courses. Other technologies used for instructional purposes also include web-meeting software for online tutoring, such as Fuze for iPads, and course management systems for discussions, such as Desire2Learn. Luckily, many colleges and instructors have already adopted some, if not all, of these technologies. Thus, for blended or online courses, adopting self-paced learning requires little or no change to existing online materials. The importance of human intervention. To ensure student success in a self-paced learning program, adequate human intervention is essential. Instructors or staff members of the program need to constantly monitor student progress and follow up with those who are struggling to progress. Tutoring services need to be provided, and if there are proctored tests, they need to be conducted regularly at places and times that are convenient for students. A Game-changer for College Math From web-based learning systems to online courses and flipped classrooms, modern math teaching has been influenced by advanced technology and innovative designs. Self-paced learning can be the next innovation in teaching college math, for it delivers both high productivity and excellent learning experiences while saving time and money for students and institutions alike. Its other benefits include

246

• • • •

improving student retention rates and learning experiences. ensuring consistency in teaching and assessment with online instruction. reducing the need for classroom lectures and helping institutions that have difficulty finding enough qualified instructors. meeting pedagogical needs such as reinforcing important concepts and assessing mastery of skills.

The U.S. Department of Education is supportive of self-paced learning. According to its website, [Such systems] help to save both time and money . . . create multiple pathways to graduation, make better use of technology, support new staffing patterns that utilize teacher skills and interests differently . . . and . . . identify opportunities to target interventions to meet the specific learning needs of students. Each of these presents an opportunity to achieve greater efficiency and increase productivity. (2015) Challenges Self-paced learning should not be viewed as just another program that uses online learning tools. It requires a lot of administrative and academic support. Indeed, perhaps the biggest challenge for creating a self-paced learning program in college is how to administer it. Administrative support is needed from many departments and in many aspects, including grade registration, student billing, faculty resources, etc. Moreover, though self-paced learning programs may use

247

fewer instructors, they require more tutors and staff to provide sufficient human intervention. An Experiment In 2013 the author taught a developmental math class at Metropolitan State University by experimenting with flipped teaching and self-paced learning. The course title is MATH 98 Introduction to Mathematical Thinking, and it is the only developmental math course required at Metropolitan State University. Students in this course usually lack adequate preparation for college mathematics, and many have math-phobia or test-anxiety. Due to administrative limitations, the class was scheduled to last for 15 weeks. However, students with inadequate progress were offered incomplete grades and extensions if they could not complete it on time. The following is a brief description of the experiment and some of its outcomes. For a complete description of this experiment, see Weng, 2015. Course Setting The course consists of six learning modules, and each consisting of an online homework assignment, an online quiz, and a proctored test. Each student must demonstrate mastery of the homework (80% correct) to get to the quiz and must pass the quiz (80% correct) to get to the test. A module is completed when a student correctly answers 80% or more of the test questions. Retakes are allowed for quizzes and tests in modules. To complete the course, a student must complete at least the first five modules, pass a qualifying online gateway test, and pass a written final exam.

248

Figure 1: Course Flowchart

Self-paced Learning and Flipped Instruction All the learning modules are online, and students are allowed to learn at their own pace. A tentative schedule is recommended to students and used to monitor their progress accordingly. Students are encouraged to study ahead, and their attendance is not required when they do. Students who fall behind the tentative schedule can earn full credit if their module work is less than one week past due and earn 80% of the credit if the work is one to three weeks past due. Students watch the authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s video lessons at home and do online homework and quizzes using a web-based learning environment called MyMathLab. The class meets twice per week for 100 minutes each time. One class meeting is for discussions, and the other is in the computer lab for online testing and/or one-on-one help.

249

Measured Outcomes The two classes in the experiment were compared with two traditional classes the author taught in 2012 and 2013. The curriculum and expectations were the same for these classes, and so were the format and level of difficulty in the final exams. In all classes, students must pass a gateway test to be eligible for the final exam. Table 1 shows that students in the experiment had a similar rate of final exam eligibility as that of students in traditional classes. Table 1: Retention Class type

Students

Experiment Traditional

62 63

Minus withdrawals 56 59

Eligible for final exam 45 42

Because students took similar final exams, results of these exams can be used to compare their learning outcomes. Table 2 shows that students in the experimental course did better than those in the traditional classes; 68% of students in the experiment passed the final exam compared to 50% in traditional classes. Table 2: Student Performances in Final Exams Class type Flipped Traditional

Eligible for final exam 45 42

20% 21%

24% 12%

24% 17%

24% 33%

7% 17%

On-time Completion Rates One concern for self-paced learning is that most students would not make adequate and timely progress. However, students in this experiment did not demonstrate such behaviors: the percentage of on-time completions decreased over time but not to an alarming degree. One

250

may even argue that these rates were comparable to, if not better than, those of traditional classes (see Table 3). Note that Module 6 was not required for the final, and its deadline was the day of the final. Table 3: On-time Completion Rates Module 1 2 3 4 5 6

Number of completions 58 54 54 53 45 25

On-time

Past-due

91% 56% 74% 66% 58% 100%

9% 44% 26% 34% 42%

Student Feedback A survey was given to students at the end of the semester. 39 students took the survey. Noteworthy responses include: • • •

79% of students were learning at their own pace (instead of the tentative schedule). 83% of students thought this class suited them better than traditional ones. 79% of students would recommend this class to other students.

Written comments from students were mostly positive. For example, • •

I like the amount of opportunity to learn at your own pace… I like being able to take my time with each lesson. It helped me learn better…

251

â&#x20AC;˘

I really appreciated being able to learn at my own pace. It worked with my busy school schedule very well. Conclusion

Provided they are bolstered by good design decisions and modern technology, self-paced math learning programs could be the answer to many questions about the viability of contemporary college math teaching. Selfpacing creates excellent outcomes and remarkable learning experiences; it also improves retention rates in college math and hence boosts on-time graduation rates. An effective, innovative strategy, it enjoys the support of U.S. Department of Education and will change the way many math courses are delivered in colleges and universities across the nation. References American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges. (1995). Crossroads in mathematics: Standards for introductory college mathematics before Calculus. Retrieved from http://www.amatyc.org/?page=GuidelineCrossroads American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges. (2006). Beyond crossroads: Implementing mathematics standards in the first two years of college. Retrieved from http://beyondcrossroads.matyc.org/doc/PDFs/BCAll .pdf Attewell, P., Lavin, D., Domina, T., & Levey, T. (2006). New evidence on college remediation. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(5).

252

Bailey, T. (2009). Challenge and opportunity: Rethinking the role and function of developmental education in community college. New Directions for Community Colleges, 145, 11–30 Fain, P. (2014). Experimenting with aid. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/07/23/c ompetency-based-education-gets-boost-educationdepartment Mathematical Association of America. (2006). Undergraduate programs and courses in the mathematical sciences:CUPM curriculum guide 2004. Retrieved from http://www.maa.org/programs/faculty-anddepartments/curriculum-department-guidelinesrecommendations/cupm/cupm-guide-2004 Slavin, R. E., Leavey, M., & Madden, N. A. (1982). Combining cooperative learning and individualized instruction: Effects on student mathematics achievement, attitudes and behaviors (JHU-CSOS326). Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Special Education. Suppesa, P., Holland, P.W., Hua, Y. & Vua, M. (2013). Effectiveness of an individualized computer-driven online math K-5 course in eight California Title I elementary schools. Educational Assessment, 18 (3), 162—181. Thompson, C. J., and McCann, P. (2010). Redesigning college algebra for student retention: Results of a quasi-experimental research study. MathAMATYC Educator, 2(1), 34—38 Weng, P. (2015). Developmental math, flipped and selfpaced. PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies. Advance publication.

253

U.S. Department of Education (2013). Applying for Title IV eligibility for direct assessment (competency-based) programs (DCL ID: GEN-13-10). Retrieved from http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/GEN1310.html U.S. Department of Education. (2014). Competency-based education programs- questions and answers (DCL ID: GEN-14-23). Retrieved from http://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/GEN1423.html U.S. Department of Education. (2015). Competency-based learning or personalized learning. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/oii-news/competency-basedlearning-or-personalized-learning

254

LEADING UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS TO BIG DATA GENERATION Jianjun Yang University of North Georgia Ju Shen University of Dayton Abstract: The world is entering a generation defined by “big data.” Big data is widely used in a large number of applications, and an understanding of it is essential for student success in Computer Science. However, it is very difficult to train students in big data effectively with regular lectures because manipulating data sets often requires running massively parallel software and there is no specific big data course in most schools. In this article, the authors present a unique method for teaching big data by using network simulators and image processing tools to train students to analyze, manipulate, and apply massive data sets. This method develops students’ hands-on abilities with big data and improves their critical thinking abilities, helping them enter the big data generation.

255

Introduction People are facing a flood of data today as information is being collected at unprecedented scale in many areas, such as networking, image processing, virtualization, scientific computation, and algorithms. This massive collection of data is called big data, an all-encompassing term for any compilation of data sets so large and complex that it becomes difficult to process them using traditional data processing applications (“Big Data,” n.d.). New technologies and new forms are driving the big data development, with the global Internet population growing by an average of 6.5% in the past three years and now consisting of two billion people; indeed, today almost everyone has heard the term. Big data is useful in the study of a wide variety of phenomenon, including traffic patterns, purchasing behaviors, and online video consumption, and it is also important for real-time inventory management. Consequently, there is a high demand for job positions that work with big data. In Georgia and Ohio, for example, a critical need exists for a highly qualified information technology (IT) workforce skilled at analyzing and interpreting big data, and according to searches on monster.com and careerbuilder.com in 2014, there are over 4,000 vacant IT jobs related to big data in these states that employers cannot readily fill. Although almost everyone has heard the term “big data,” many people, even undergraduate students in computer science, have a poor understanding of what big data is. Because big data is so critical for these students’ current studies and future careers, many schools are attempting to incorporate it into their programs; however, it is extremely difficult to do so for a number of reasons. First, manipulating data sets often requires massively parallel software running on tens, hundreds, or even thousands of servers. Second, no specific big data course

256

has been developed in most schools. Many instructors thus must meet a lot of challenges when they attempt to teach the subject to students, including difficulties related to analysis, capture, search, sharing, storage, transfer, visualization, and privacy. In this article, the authors present a unique method for teaching big data using network simulators and tools of image processing to train students to analyze, manipulate, and apply massive data sets. This method develops students’ hands-on abilities with big data and improves their critical thinking abilities. The authors’ intention is not merely to introduce big data as a concept but to facilitate students’ research design abilities, data collection and manipulation skills, analytic proficiency, and capacity for problem solving in regard to networking and multimedia. The authors provided students with two areas of big data application: the first relied upon use of the web/mobile devices. A simulator was provided, and students learned how to simplify big data using a single computer program. The second application dealt with image processing—the authors used a novel image-based rendering algorithm which required user intervention to generate realistic 3D virtual worlds. The learning outcomes are significant. Design and Conduct Relevant Experiments The literature highlights the importance of handson activities in the teaching of technologies (Curto & Bayer, 2002). Hence the authors trained students Big Data by Projects. In their teaching experiences, they assigned projects on networking and image processing for three phases from easy to difficult.

257

Phase 1: Reorganization of Big Data and Simplification from Big Network Data to a Simple Simulator Big data is critical in computer science not only because it is an emerging technology but also because it is fundamental for studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; future careers. Some computer science scholars have gravitated toward introducing easy content to their classes under the assumption that the students will be more receptive to it, but this is not an effective approach. If the goal of teaching big data is just to introduce the basic concepts, it would be an easy task to do so. However, such trivial and superficial content runs the risk of boring students, especially computer science majors. Moreover, this teaching strategy prevents students from grasping the fundamentals concretely. On the other hand, it is difficult for students to learn the abstract concepts associated with big data by merely listening to lectures. To instill students with the joy of interacting with big data, the authors seek to demonstrate alternative instructional methods. Appropriate teaching tools can effectively illustrate the theories of big data, which are abstract and often complicated. For example, when the authors taught a computer network course, they studied the characteristics of wireless devices, including laptops, iPads, iPhones, and Android phones, to help them design a software program as a simulator for mobile networking. In order to consistently create an enthusiastic learning environment and facilitate student success, they used this simulation as a tool to introduce and simplify big dataâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s networking applications. Such simulations imitate the behavior of physical or abstract systems, such as events, real-world situations, or processes that do or could exist (Damassa & Sitko, 2010). Some scholars (Maran and Glavin, 2003) consider the use of simulations to be a perfect educational technique that creates learning by reproducing all or part of an event or

258

situation. Theoretically, simulations could be created for any number of topics, courses, or programs in education, and some of the more popular simulations offered in various academic programs include those in business, health care, and transportation. Indeed, contemporary technology has allowed instructors to design simulations emulating stock markets, roller coasters, and trucking. As mentioned above, the authors simplified big network data by using a simulator. Figure 1 is the real network topology being emulated, and figure 2 is the graphical interface of the designed simulator. When the authors introduced big data, they presented the scenario of connected network devices illustrated in figure 1. Because many modern and popular devices were used in the scenario, the class seemed relevant and compelling for students. High volume data were demonstrated from different aspects, such as their structures, transmissions, and representations among the network devices. Then the authors explained how one would retrieve the critical data content, such as IP addresses, locations, and resource capabilities (Yang & Fei, 2013). Afterwards, they instructed students to practice manipulating big data through hands-on projects. Students were guided to allocate the resources to mobile devices by solving linear equations. The authors pinpointed areas where students could add nodes based on the properties of the heterogeneous devices in order to increase the number of equations, thereby simplifying the big network data. Students later implemented the equations by programming, and the results were displayed in the simulator. This provided undergraduate students a unique opportunity to use experimental technologies to learn the nature of complicated big data problems and understand its abstract concepts.

259

Figure 1: Network Scenario

Figure 2: The Simulator Interface

Phase 2: Development of Android App Marc Prensky (2001) effectively summarized the allure of gaming when he said games offer fun, play, rules, goals, interactivity, outcomes, feedback, conflict, opposition, problem solving, structure, flow, motivation, and pleasure. Given this list of benefits, and the fact that much of the gaming enjoyed by students takes place on

260

mobile devices, it is a good idea to use smart phones for teaching in the classroom. The authors taught Android development for big data. App Inventor for Android is a new visual programming platform (developed at Google Labs by a team led by MIT) for creating mobile applications (apps) for smart phones. To develop smart phone apps in App Inventor, students do not write code; instead, they design tools to visualize the app by using block-based GUI, allowing students to directly control their apps’ behaviors through interlocking components. App Inventor aims to develop intuitive tools enabling novices to program in an enjoyable manner. Given the popularity and ubiquity of mobile phones among today’s generation of students, App Inventor has great potential for attracting a new generation of students and helping them learn to effectively interact with big data. The authors’ students found App Inventor very accessible, and they quickly learned how to develop their own apps. Though App Inventor looks simple, it actually incorporates a large amount of data with different formats (e.g. images, sounds, labels, etc.) and involves considerable control logics. Hence, App Inventor enables students to focus on how to handle the big data rather than on coding syntax. The authors asked students to design some very interesting app projects. For example, the students developed an interactive map of the attractions in Paris; when an attraction is clicked, its corresponding information will be displayed. Figure 3 shows the design of the app, while Figure 4 shows its interface on a virtual cell phone. App Inventor helps develop students’ problemsolving abilities because it not only provides easy-to-follow reproductions of already written apps but also helps students develop completely new apps based on the principles acquired through its tutorials and demonstrations. Students progressed quickly from writing “Hello Kitty” to developing apps using databases, interactive maps, client

261

server communication, and other advanced concepts. Thus, they learned how to manipulate big data even when they encountered problems. Indeed, students were able to apply their programming skills to new types of problems, including those involving databases, client-server communication, image processing, and algorithms. Figure 3: Logic Blocks

Figure 4: Interfaces on Virtual Cell Phones

262

Phase 3: Big Visual Data Editing System for Image Retrieval and Reconstruction For the third phase of training students to understand big data, the authors proposed an interactive system to operate on big visual data supporting online picture sharing or virtual 3D world navigation. Students in the authorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; interactive media course were involved with the whole process of system development and performed coding and online image editing as well as designed 3D models. With the explosive growth of the Internet and the populationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s extensive use of web-based cameras, billions of photographs are uploaded to the Web every day. This massive collection of imagery has inspired the development of a wave of different applications. Part of the excitement is due to the fact that photographs are so easy to take with our cell phones and tablets, and efficient online access via Wi-Fi or any phone network allows them to be immediately available online. Imagine building a virtual 3D world by taking advantage of these online images, such as the Google street view databases or the Flickr image collection. A system that could build such a virtual environment could provide an immersive experience, allowing users to walk freely in a re-constructed virtual world and view scenes from various perspectives. In addition to its virtual reality value, as a photo repository such a system could also house a massive amount of useful visual information. For example, when at a vacation resort, people often take many pictures ; however, sometimes these photos may be less than satisfactory, such as when background scenes are not fully captured or are occluded by some objects. Photo editing tools are available to improve these images, but it can be a pain to modify such pictures directly without any extra information, and these modifications often introduce noticeable artifacts. If additional pictures taken from the same location at a similar time are available to the

263

photographer in question, these photos could serve as adequate replacements for the less-than-satisfactory images. In such a way, travelers can share their experiences and enrich their photo collections using the massive amount of visual data housed online. The authors assigned students a series of projects centered on image retrieval, localization, and the reconstruction of 3D geometry from a large, disordered collection of online images of landmarks and cities (Irschara, A., Zach, C., Frahm, J.M., & Bischof, H 2009; Li, Y., Snavely, N., & Huttenlocher, D.P 2010; Hays, J., & Efros, A.A 2008). The use of such real photos not only supports realistic image synthesis with little user intervention but raises the important issue of controlling and altering the representations, so this assignment forced students to consider multiple big data-related possibilities and problems. Because the students in this course had gained experience from the first two phases of big data training (as discussed above), the authors asked students to use image feature descriptors, such as SIFT or SURF, as a means for identifying similar images for clustering. Then, based on the detected feature correspondences across multiple views, a sceneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s geometry could be approximated. The students were really interested in the projects and happy to present their work to the instructors. The resulting projects demonstrated that the students had developed the ability to use tools to render realistic images efficiently and accurately. The projects of this phase represent an integrated research and educational program which has two goals: to produce new technologies allowing undergraduates to manipulate and alter large visual data directly in high dimensions and to expose undergraduates to the cutting edge technologies in big data processing, especially for visual data clustering and reconstruction, both of which can stimulate student interest in the related fields. This phase

264

also requires students to explore the core techniques used when interacting with big data and to develop novel solutions for problems that arise when one tries to efficiently manipulate such data. During the phase, students had the chance to learn well-established algorithms and become familiar with state-of-the art big data technologies dealing with image matching, 3D graphics, and data visualization. For example, in some applications of visual data, people only need to know the outline of an object; figure 5 shows the process used to reduce the big data relating to a car to much smaller data that represents the outline of the car. Figure 5: Using Big Data to Generate Car Outline

Conclusion Big data is very important yet very difficult to teach. The authors thus have proposed an effective way to teach the subject to students, not by not merely introducing the concepts related to it but by using concrete examples to illustrate its importance and usefulness gradually through three phases. They assigned students relevant projects to

265

develop their ability to handle big data, think critically, and finally generate big data for a specific purpose. References “Big Data.” (n.d.). In Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_data Curto, K., & Bayer, T. (2005). Writing and speaking to learn biology: An intersection of critical thinking and communication skills. Bioscene, 31(4), 11-19. Damassa, D. A., & Sitko, T. D. (2010). Simulation technologies in higher education: Uses, trends, and implications. ECAR Research Bulletin, 3. Boulder, CO: Educause Center for Applied Research. Hays, J., & Efros, A.A. (2008, June). Estimating geographic information from a single image. Paper presented at the IEEE conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Anchorage, AL. Irschara, A., Zach, C., Frahm, J.M., & Bischof, H. (2009, June). From structure-from-motion point clouds to fast location recognition. Paper presented at the IEEE conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Miami, FL. Li, Y., Snavely, N., & Huttenlocher, D.P. (2010, September). Location recognition using prioritized feature matching. Paper presented at the 11th European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV 2010), Crete, Greece. Maran, N. J., & Glavin, R. J. (2003). Low- to high-fidelity simulation—a continuum of medical education? Medical Education, 37(1), 22-28. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. Chicago, IL: McGraw-Hill.

266

Yang, J., & Fei, Z. (2013). Broadcasting with prediction and selective forwarding in vehicular networks. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 2013.

267

ISSN 2333-‐391X The Center for Learning Enrichment Florida State College at Jacksonville 501 W. State Street Jacksonville, FL 32202   