The most recent video posted on DePaul’s Teaching Commons features Mary Frances DeRose of the School of Public Service. The video focuses on what she’s learned about how to teach statistics since first arriving at the university.

Difficult Courses: Statistics, produced by videographer and animator Heather Banas, joins a growing number of short videos about teaching available in the Teaching for Learning video archive. Each video features DePaul faculty members—from a variety of disciplines—talk about how they teach.

I am not an objective observer. By way of honesty, I was privileged to produce some of the first videos for the DePaul Teaching Commons website. But, as a sometime qualitative researcher, I also can’t help seeing this archive as a growing collection of data! And have, therefore, noticed some themes!

Watch some of the videos and see if you don’t agree:

• Theme One: Some assessments are worthwhile, some are not.
• Theme Two: Real world examples engage students.
• Theme Three: Make good use of students’ time in the classroom.
• Theme Four: Use multiple techniques during class to address the varying abilities among students.
• Theme Five: Create opportunities for immediate feedback.
• Theme Six: Create opportunities where students can view their progress.

In the statistics video, I was particularly impressed by one assignment used by DeRose: returning to the same journal article (one selected by the student) several times throughout the quarter. Over the course of the class, students realize how much they have learned. An assignment to match all six themes!

An upcoming opportunity to hear DePaul faculty talk about teaching—this time live and in person—is the DePaul Teaching and Learning Conference, May 6. Register today!

I recently found myself composing an e-mail to one of DePaul’s Desire2Learn (D2L) beta testers. I am working with her to design and develop her online course using D2L.

I’d sent her a template for her module content—a word-processing document—and she didn’t understand what exactly an “instructor’s introduction” might look like. I should explain here—for those not acquainted with Desire2Learn—that D2L encourages a linear path through online content.

I explained to the faculty member: an “instructor’s introduction” is an overview of the module. It’s where you explain why the topics are important, connect them to the real world through examples or problems, and point out how this week’s content is connected to last week’s. It also might, or might not, include the module learning objectives, and, if not, they should be an item of their own.

My e-mail began sounding like an overview of Gagne’s nine events of instruction.

I determined a more visual approach was called for! So, I did some finagling and came up with my own “Arc of Activities in a Learning Module.” With some input from colleagues, I expanded the Arc, and the current version is attached for your review.

Feedback is appreciated!

In my post from November 9th, 2009, I suggested two discussion starters—polling and pros and cons—and promised more strategies in future posts. So, here are two strategies for getting your online students talking to each other in more depth about course content.

1. Roles in a Case Study – present the class with a short case study and assign each group a part to play in that case. Each group discusses their “part” identifying primary concerns, varying influences, and possible actions for that stakeholder. Each group reports when everyone reconvenes. Discussion flows from there to identify differing approaches to the problem and possibilities for a mutually agreeable solution. I’ve seen this work particularly well using an ethical situation; it would work well in any course addressing conflicting concerns and interests.
2. Problem Solving Based in Theory – In this activity the instructor (or selected students) provide a real-life situation. Each group develops a response based on a different theoretical stance. When the class reconvenes each group reports, and a discussion ensues about the differences between the responses.

Why might these work? In each case, breaking up the class into smaller groups 1) puts more pressure on each student to participate and 2) eases the pressure of individually putting an idea out to the entire class.

The advantage to the instructor? As with the discussion starters of November 9th, you get the opportunity not only to see what students think they know—and so have an opportunity to correct misconceptions—but also to see whether or not they can apply what they know.

Oh, isn’t this the ultimate question for any teacher!

Trying to “keep it real,” a small group of DePaul Teaching Commons souls put our heads together recently to create this resource!

No two teachers approach these questions in the same way so—trying to “keep it real”—this site provides several different approaches.

Approach 1: From “what you want to know” to “what you need to assign”

There are two columns. The left column is what you might want to assess; the right column provides some examples of what you might want to assign. As an example, if you want to assess the student’s “application of discrete research, technical, performance, or meta-cognitive skills,” the Web site suggests you might want to assign case studies, debates, observing a performance, presentations, or simulations and role plays. Find this list on the Evaluation of a Product page.

Approach 2: What can I do right now with what I have?

The site has multiple examples organized by chronology (during a class or throughout the quarter), technology (blackboard surveys or other survey tools), or writing to learn or learning to write! As a former writing instructor, I was particularly impressed with the writing examples.

Approach 3: My students are not learning. Now what?

You’ve gathered the information via surveys or other assessment techniques, but your students are not learning? The site covers some next steps. Analyze the information, and act on that information. Some of these options can be found on the Are my students Learning? page.

It is particularly gratifying to read a headline like this one, which appeared in last week’s Chronicle of Higher Education: “Online-Education Study Reaffirms Value of Good Teaching, Experts Say.”

Gotta love it! "Good teaching" finally makes it into the online tool kit!

The ‘study’ is Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: a Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies–recently released by the U.S. Department of Education. The full report is available online.

I quickly downloaded, printed out, read, and marked up my own copy!

While the report found that students taking all or part of their class online performed better than those in a face-to-face class, the study suggests that it was not the medium for delivery itself that accounted for the difference but rather "it was the combination of elements in the treatment conditions (which was likely to have included additional learning time and materials as well as additional opportunities for collaboration) that produced the observed learning advantages" (p. XVII).

This report could serve as a discussion prompt for faculty interested in developing or teaching an online class. And it would also be useful to instructional designers who may want to review some of the specific learning practices reviewed in the report.

As always, the IDD Blog is interested in what you find to be of interest. Read the report yourself and let us know.