Category: Ask ADDIE

Author and Editor: Dr. Denise Lowe

Dear ADDIE,

I’m in our on-boarding meeting and I can see it in my subject matter expert’s eyes. The telltale signs of upcoming resistance – eyes not meeting mine, arms crossed, and lots of silent sighs. They are saying everything’s fine, there have no questions, and they’re “looking forward to it.” From past experience, I know I will have missed deadlines and sub-optimal submissions when I get them. I usually have success in overcoming the resistance, but not until very late in the development process. Many times, I have to involve their dean in getting cooperation as well. I feel as though if I could overcome this earlier, we could be more productive and get to our milestones on time. Given that our SMEs are contracted to create a “master” course for the college and agree to use our development process which includes planning and alignment (YIKES!), what are some ways to head off the resistance earlier in the process?

Signed,

Resistance is Futile

Dear Resistance,

Overcoming faculty resistance to professional development training for online course design is a common problem for many instructional designers. Although resistance can be an impediment to the working relationship between the faculty member and instructional designer, it can also be a catalyst for faculty to further develop their craft—if it can be navigated successfully.

Faculty may find the entire online process overwhelming due to their lack of familiarity with technology, or they may feel that other tasks are a priority, and they don’t have time for the training. Conversely, as experts in their discipline, they may simply not understand or appreciate the role of the instructional designer in learning a different approach to teaching.

Most of us, as instructional designers, are excited about our online professional training programs, and we want to share this with our faculty.  However, this may come across as a series of dictates or tasks that must be accomplished in the program; for some, this can feel like an “outsider” is
trying to tell them how to teach the content of which they are the expert,
especially if they are required to complete the training or have significant concerns about the integrity and credibility of online learning.

You may find it helpful to begin by inviting the faculty member to talk about their teaching styles and experiences. For example, how do they engage the students in a face-to-face course? What teaching styles do they currently use to further the critical thinking of students? By inviting faculty to talk about themselves first—something most of us love to do—creates an atmosphere that respects their knowledge and experience.

Often, this approach is a stepping stone to discuss the concerns that some faculty have about the online environment and process of course design. As those concerns are shared, the instructional designer can offer the tools, technologies, and best practices that may address their concerns. By keeping the focus on applied concepts—something with which most SMEs are very familiar—the credibility and usefulness of the instructional designer and the online training program is enhanced.

Many faculty approach new training with a WIIFM mindset—what’s in it for me?  It’s a good idea for the instructional designer to look through that lens as well, in order to anticipate potential resistance. Are there incentives for completing this training? Will this help in promotion and tenure? Another aspect to consider is the potential benefit to students, usually a solid reason why they became faculty in the first place.

If all of this sounds like basic communication practice, you’re right! Building rapport with the faculty member is essential to creating the right environment for learning to occur. In the course design process, faculty become students—a role in which they may not have undertaken in some time. Identifying and using faculty experiences, providing peer engagement and administrative support, and understanding the obstacles and opportunities that online learning provides work together to build effective communication—essential elements in overcoming resistance.

I’m sure there are many more tips that others in the community have found useful. What strategies do you use for effectively engaging faculty in the online course design process? Please share your thoughts with our TOPkit community on LinkedIn!

Author(s): Karen Tinsley-Kim, Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Editor: Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Dear ADDIE,

As an instructional designer, how could I improve buy-in or motivate my faculty to be more proactive in their approach to accessibility and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in their online course design?

Signed,

Faculty Whisperer

Dear Whisperer,

Improving buy-in from your faculty to be more proactive in their approach to accessibility and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in their online course design is no easy task as you have stated. However, some faculty are making strides in this area, so don’t give up too quickly. Faculty may feel inadequate or overwhelmed in instructional tasks, technology or course load to give it much consideration.

As an instructional designer, you may find it helpful to start a conversation with your faculty to see what they are thinking at this point. Is there a campus initiative to promote quality assurance? Have students expressed specific concerns or noted barriers? How might your faculty design their courses so students feel more “at home”?

You may want to recommend planning and designing for a warm, welcoming tone throughout the course, or what could be called, “Invitational Design.” In this sense, the activities and assessments planned need to aim at Instructors can create spaces of connection and interactivity in which their presence is made evident through supportive feedback. These can be spaces that offer peer to peer and instructor to students dialogues. Instructors can get to know their students in terms of their learning strategies, foresee some potential pitfalls, and create opportunities for scaffolding.  A virtual “class cafe,” set up as a discussion board, can offer faculty the chance to learn about their students’ preferences. Students can have opportunities to meet, share, and pose questions that the instructor, or their peers can quickly answer or clarify. Thus, students can connect and interact at different levels beyond the course content. Another important perspective for faculty is to regularly take tours of the course in the Student Role, on mobile when possible.

Another aspect of “Invitational Design” your instructor may want to focus on reviewing is the degree of accessibility/UDL of the course content. There may be tools, services, and staff that can help make this content more welcoming for all students. Invite your instructor to become familiar with your accessibility team and the UDL opportunities already available at your institution.

This proactive process works best with at least a semester’s lead time. For example, videos in a course that are not properly transcribed (automatic captions are not good enough) may require time to either locate accessible versions or create solutions and determining who will cover expenses. Online students who use text-to-speech or screen reader software may be challenged by photocopied PDFs. Librarians and support staff may assist with remediation or finding alternative digital documentation.

The time investment for improved and proactive accessibility/UDL as well as Invitational Design is worthwhile since most, if not all students, should feel more welcomed, engaged, and believe they are the most important part of the course experience.

How do you help faculty welcome and make their students feel more “at home” in their online courses? Please share your thoughts with our TOPkit community on LinkedIn!

Author(s): Charlotte Jones-Roberts

Editor: Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Dear ADDIE,

I am new to the instructional design profession. I took this job– which I love– because I taught online, used flipped classroom strategies, and redesigned my course several times; it was not because I have any training or academic background in the field of education. I also did not have the support I needed from my first supervisor (who has since left).  I am looking to update my image because my faculty see me and automatically think “oh, you just want me to teach online!” or “you are making me take this survey‐who are YOU to tell ME what to do?!” For the record, my former supervisor had a different, more authoritative approach that may have contributed to the current ID/faculty relations. I really want to improve my faculty’s understanding of what instructional designers do. How I can help them design and develop great courses for their students. What do you suggest?

Signed,

Prince Not-So-Charming

Dear Charming,

I understand how you feel! New instructional designers can have a difficult time conveying their role clearly to faculty. A faculty member’s understanding of what IDs do can make or break a positive working relationship.

The first step is to define clearly the roles of ID and faculty member along with the ways these roles overlap and complement each other. The faculty member is the subject matter expert, while the ID is the expert in implementation of the content in an online environment. Clearly understanding and working within these roles is the key to mutual respect and can also take the pressure off when you need to ask something of the faculty member.

It might also help to show an example of a previously developed course, either designed by you and another faculty (or another ID’s example if you are brand new). Show the faculty member the elements of the example course that were likely impacted by working with an ID. Exemplifying the collaboration that goes on in a course design can help the new faculty understand how the process works and the shift in teaching philosophy that happens when moving from traditional face-to-face lectures to a more active approach effective online learning.

Also, it is a good idea to establish and maintain good rapport with your faculty member for a great working relationship. For example, IDs who convey empathy for the instructor and can “stand in their shoes” are more likely to build rapport with faculty that IDs who don’t make these efforts. Then, with that insight, use your pedagogical expertise to create something awesome together! To maintain rapport, try sending your faculty an email notifying them about a new tool to keep the rapport going, rather than sending them a survey out of the blue.

A few of these ideas have helped me and my fellow instructional designers in the past, but I’m sure there are other possibilities.

To the community, I pose this question: What have you done to improve your faculty’s understanding of the ID role and create great collaborative relationships?

Do you have any tips or tricks? Please share your thoughts with our TOPkit community on LinkedIn!

Author(s): Dr. Amanda Major, Sue Bauer

Editor: Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Dear ADDIE,

I am an instructional designer (ID) at a large university who works on a large team of instructional designers (15+); we collaborative on a variety of projects that I mostly enjoy. For example, we may work with our faculty and several support teams to (re)design faculty courses, collaborate with other instructional designers to launch new faculty development programs, and even contribute to online campus initiatives that need immediate attention. Many of my fellow IDs possess expertise in instructional design and online instruction but do not necessarily have project management experience. In general, we find it challenging to complete projects in a timely and efficient way. We have found that those with project management skills appear to have an easier time defining their projects, facilitating productive meetings, and submitting deliverables on time. What resources or guidance can you provide to help us adopt a more project management (PM) mindset? 

Thanks,

Leader of the Band

Dear Band Leader,

As a time-limited endeavor, projects have a lifecycle. Those with a PM background move through the processes that comprise a lifecycle for facilitating productivity:

• Initiating
• Planning
• Monitoring & Controlling
• Executing
• Closing

By DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Office of Information and Technology (Project Management Guide) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

To move through these processes, the quick establishment of credibility as well as trust is essential. This trust ultimately creates the vital bond that brings together stakeholder management, team facilitation, management support, and meeting clients’ expectations. Defining clients’ expectations and sustaining a project in any environment is challenging–and in large universities these tasks represent an even bigger challenge!  The complexity lies in that clients are difficult to define. They seem more like a group of stakeholders (or those who are affected by the project) who do not directly compensate us for our efforts than actual clients.

These client-like group of stakeholders may be the state board of governors, your associate vice provost, department heads, a group of faculty members, a faculty member with whom you’ve worked for years, or students. Clients are so important, as success factors of a project are based on their perceptions and consensus. Their perceptions of quality and when the project must be completed definitely counts!

The role of the instructional designer varies from institution to institution. Some IDs perform project management roles in their work: some principal investigators conduct research; faculty development managers guide the development of applications (or tech tools); some professionals design, develop, and deliver professional development; and some organizational development specialists guide online program rollouts and campus initiatives. Even if an ID does not lead on a specific project, they utilize project management practices and techniques to contribute as a team member.

Even if your team members have a background in management, this background may not be enough to successfully structure projects. It takes a strong skill-set. This skill-set differs from the competencies needed to manage ongoing operations, like consultations with faculty members or recurring training. Managing projects may require establishing relationships with a new set of stakeholders. It takes additional effort to create goals and facilitate the team’s productivity. You have to be a jack-of-all-trades because of the many different specialization considerations needed, as follows:

• Resource Management
• Integration Management
• Time Management
• Scope Management
• Quality Management
• Stakeholder Management
• Communications Management
• Risk and Budget Management (depending on the project).

These are basic elements of project management according to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMI, 2017). Instructional designers can use these in their leadership or contribution on a project.

Here are some tools, strategies, practices, and techniques that may assist with guiding successful project completion.

Project Management Infographics

Project Management Terminology

Online Project Management—Infographic

Agile Project Management—Infographic for Short-Term Projects

Integration Management Tools

Integration management is a Knowledge Area covering the coordinate of the core project life cycle.

Trello

Basecamp

Google Suite

Wrike

Templated Files for Project Management

George Mason University’s Project Management Office Templates

Free Project Management Templates from Project Management Docs

General Resources

The Role of an Instructional Designer as a Project Manager by Marina Arshavskiy, March 25, 2014

SkillQ Advisor—Project Management for Instructional Designers Video

OLC Project Management for Instructional Designers Course

Thanks for your question. I hope that these resources come handy. Do you have some project management resources, strategies, or tips you’d like to share? Please share your thoughts with our TOPkit community on LinkedIn!

Author(s): Dr. Anchalee Ngampornchai, Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Editor: Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Dear ADDIE,

I am an instructional designer at a small community college, but I am experiencing a problem that will probably resonate with other instructional designers: the faculty with whom I work (mostly well) appear to have little understanding of what an instructional designer does and, as a result, limit the contributions that I can make to their online courses. For example, they reach out to me with their technical questions but are less likely to see my role in light of improving their courses. Do you have any suggestions that could help me clarify my role to faculty?

Signed,

Crystal Clear

Dear Crystal,

You are not alone in feeling underutilized. Your experience resonates with many instructional designers (IDs) who are eager to contribute more to the pedagogical aspect of online courses. In fact, at least two studies – one by The Chronicle of Higher Education and the other by Intentional Futures – found that the most common obstacle reported by IDs is faculty members’ limited understanding of what instructional designers do.

There are several reasons why faculty have a limited view of what IDs do and, most importantly, how working with an ID can enhance their online courses. One explanation is that instructional designers are still relative newcomers to the higher education landscape (around the time of WWII). And instructional designers’ presence in higher education has only become significant with the growth of online learning. Another explanation is that IDs wear many hats, including course developers, instructional technologists, multimedia specialists, and instructional consultants.  The Instructional Design Symposium and the 2018 TOPkit Workshop feature helpful discussions that uncover the role of IDs varies across institutions. The role of an ID can be confusing even to IDs. How murky might it appear to other faculty members!? Other reasons include cognitive overload—faculty have so much going on that they simply haven’t given much attention to the services that IDs provide beyond online course triage!  Too, faculty may not believe anyone can help them improve or enhance their online courses because no one else knows their fields as well as they do.

If faculty don’t understand what IDs can do, we lose collaborative opportunities. I believe the IDs have a great responsibility to better educate faculty about the ID role. Instructional designers should not assume that faculty know what we do and we should, at the same time, appreciate that faculty may have learned to teach on their own, without the help or support of a pedagogical specialist. Faculty may also be concerned that IDs will judge their course materials, course design, or teaching methods. So, we should clarify our role in as many contexts as possible—earning their trust as well a offering our services and support.

Here are some suggestions for connecting with faculty and clarifying the ID role:

• Use initial faculty consultations as an opportunity to explain your role as an ID
• Share our own research, conference presentations, blogs, and professional publications
• Share personal interests to connect with faculty
• Take time to learn about faculty interests and research
• Plug into the campus culture by attending talks, presentations, and other faculty-sponsored events

We can also publicize our role and services, using websites, digital newsletters, and social media. We can also communicate through face-to-face interactions, including casual conversations and participating in campus committees.

How do you convey the role of the ID to your faculty? Let’s share ideas and hope that our expertise is more valued and better utilized by our beloved faculty! Please share your thoughts with our TOPkit community on LinkedIn!

Author(s): Karen Tinsley-Kim, Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Editor: Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Narrated PowerPoints – how my faculty love them!  ADDIE, I have an issue that I suspect is one that is facing instructional designers and faculty developers all across the country.  The faculty at my Large Public University believe that Narrated PowerPoints are the best way to bridge the gap between challenging content and the online learning environment. Faculty like creating these Narrated PowerPoints because, in addition to helping students, they appreciate the ease of creating these files and the fact that they can be repeatedly used  in their courses and even can be used in multiple classes (depending on the content). But there are so many issues with faculty relying on Narrated PowerPoints as their main content delivery method, especially when these files are not captioned. So, my question is this: what can I do to help faculty make their Narrated PowerPoints more engaging and more accessible to their students?

Signed,

Fill ‘Er Up

Dear Fill ‘Er Up,

This is a great time to be addressing this question. Summer is a popular time to develop online courses as well as an opportunity to prepare for the fall. Narrated PowerPoints (NPPTs) are indeed popular because many faculty are familiar with the technology and it does allow faculty to add an extra layer of explanation and personalization (voice). However, there are problems and limitations associated with NPPTs; some issues are linked to the instructional use of PPTs (and how best to use it in an online environment) and other issues are linked to the addition of voice and the video format. For example, some institutions are no longer supporting Flash/SWF files in their online courses and faculty members may encounter roadblocks when trying to upload their files to YouTube or HTML5 environments.

Narrated PowerPoints have been around for a long time, and therefore it may be useful to reconsider what content is still needed or required in a course. When the ability to easily narrate PPTs became available, many instructors were excited to try this technology as they could record important content that could be reused over several semesters. Although a “one and done” mentality may not have been their intent, some faculty members have built mini-libraries of lengthy NPPTs that they may not have revised for years. While the content itself likely hasn’t changed much, students have.

Today, most students appreciate the ability to watch or engage with digital content at their convenience. However, most students have little patience for videos that are more than a few minutes in length and do not appear to be current (as in recorded this year). In an online course, some students may recognize NPPTs and either skim them as quickly as possible (if they can access it on their computers) or skip them altogether because they anticipate it will be “long and boring.” Instructors’ original goal of using NPPTs—to engage their students and enhance learning—is no longer well-served by relying on long, infrequently updated NPPTs that are not clearly linked to an instructional goal. However, updating how faculty create and use NPPTs represents an opportunity to adopt new ways of delivering digital content that support student learning.  Guidelines for creating engaging NPPTs include:

• Identify and emphasize the instructional goal of the NPPT; Consider other options that might be a better fit for your instructional goal (ex. infographic)
• Keep NPPTs under 5 minutes (2 or 3 minutes is optimal)
• Update NPPTs often and include up-to-date info (news items, department events, new images)
• Include relevant images and limit excessive text
• Conclude NPPT with a clear application of the learning objective (how this NPPT will help the viewer be successful in the course)
• Make sure the NPPT is formatted properly (avoids Flash/SWF format) and is accessible.

A significant technical challenge associated with NPPTs is they are likely housed in Flash or SWF file environments and, while this has been popular, these file types are not accessible for students using mobile devices. For students with deaf/hard of hearing needs, these SWF files cannot be captioned. In addition, web browsers are scheduled to “sunset” or discontinue support for SWF files by 2020. Some higher educational institutions are already preparing for this sunset event by promoting alternatives to their faculty. These options include using HTML5; videos created in HTML5 are accessible via digital devices and can be properly captioned. Screencasting software, such as Camtasia, can record NPPTs that can be uploaded to YouTube, Vimeo, or embedded in an LMS or course website. Other online options include PlayPosit and EdPuzzle that allow instructors to add pauses to a video or video clip (self-made or 3rd party) as well as questions, quizzes, short answers, and notetaking options; some options can be tracked to determine the level of student engagement, which Narrated PowerPoints have never been able to do at such a granular level.

Faculty may perceive that NPPTs are more helpful to their students than they really are; well-intentioned and prepared with lots of important information, faculty may be laboring over NPPTs that receive little attention from students.  One way to update faculty on the impact of different resources in their online courses is to share surveys related to students perceptions of instruction (TOPkit website: Sources of Data on Your Campus).  Although it can be hard to hear, understanding what is or is not working for students is some of the most valuable feedback an instructor can have to guide future development of a course.

Narrated PowerPoints are ubiquitous in online and mixed-mode courses across the country.  What are you doing to encourage faculty to revise or update their current NPPTs and encourage them to consider other instructional options that might be a better fit with specific instructional goals (e.g., online games/activities, discussions, collaborative projects)?  Please share your thoughts with our TOPkit community on LinkedIn!

Author and Editor: Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Dear ADDIE,

I am an instructional designer at a large southern university and I recently had coffee with a faculty member (“Jesse”) who posed this challenging question to me:

In upper-level classes, it can be pretty easy to create learning activities that are engaging; the foundations of a discipline have been laid and students are ready to begin applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating what they have learned.  These learning activities mirror the complexity of higher thinking skills and present challenges and opportunities for elaborate reasoning. They also offer possibilities for meaningful interaction with peers, instructors, and content.

However, developing engaging learning activities for beginning-level courses is more challenging as the cognitive focus tends to be on recall, recognition, and description – tasks that students tend to find boring. Flashcards, study questions, practices quizzes, drill and practice exercises, concept matching, etc. are effective in addressing the lower levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (knowledge, and comprehension) but are not usually very engaging. Too, these activities decontenxtualize concepts and limit opportunities for making real-world connections and develop deep learning.

Any ideas? We appreciate any insight you can provide!

Signed,

Higher Thinking for Everyone!

Dear Higher Thinking:

Jesse has posed a great question that is going to ring a bell with a lot of faculty: how to cultivate students’ higher order thinking skills in beginning courses. Part of this challenge lies in the traditional role of foundational courses—to impart the basic facts of the discipline, usually identified as names, timelines, terms, dates, labels, and norms. While this information is critical to students’ success as they embrace a new discipline, relying on traditional approaches (i.e., rote memorization) to learn the material can be off-putting to students who may have limited experience with memorizing large amounts of material and, more importantly, does little to cultivate their higher thinking skills.  This rote memorization approach does not inspire students to engage with the material, as the information, while perhaps meaningful, is not presented in a way that is meaningful for students.

A powerful approach to cultivating higher-level thinking in all course levels is the constructivist approach: students become active participants in constructing their own knowledge and, at the same time, analyze, synthesize, and evaluate their own knowledge. Examples of activities that foster higher-level thinking include reflection activities, online discussions, peer review, and small group activities and projects. While establishing a core foundation is important in a beginning course, establishing the facts within a context is a strong way to enhance understanding as well as memory.  When students are prompted to use higher order thinking skills in a way that they can relate to, they remember the lower level information with more motivation. Something else to consider is this: beginning courses can foster higher level thinking when new concepts and ideas are applied in ways that engage learners and require them to use new vocabulary in conjunction with problem-solving.

There are lots of resources available to instructors and instructional designers who want to develop activities that foster higher thinking skills.  The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s (2016) Online Course Design and Thinking web page offers suggestions related to putting into practice the goal of creating interactive assignments that require students to think. Two of the most powerful suggestions include the following: (1) allowing enough time for collaborative or group activities and discussions and (2) select learning activities that accomplish objectives (para. 4). For instructors who have a robust list of learning objectives, allowing students to have the time to engage in deep thinking can be the biggest challenge. For example, a discussion or group activity may take more than one week to complete if higher thinking is involved. Another source of information regarding engagement and the adult learner can be found on the TOPkit website under Use Techniques that Complement the Adult Learner. In online courses, cognitive presence has an important role in engaging adult learners and preparing them to tap their higher thinking skills. Cognitive presence is the extent to which instructors and students can construct meaning through discourse within a community; in this case, the community is the course. Cognitive presence creates an environment in which learners can solve problems and come to a consensus. TOPR has some resources for fostering interaction (https://topr.online.ucf.edu/interaction/) and assessment (https://topr.online.ucf.edu/assessment/).   

An instructional designer can play a vital role in helping faculty develop assignments that cultivate higher thinking in their students. Assignments that tap students’ higher thinking skills have the added benefit of engaging faculty more deeply as well, challenging them at the course-design level as well as at the course-delivery level. In addition to facilitating the development of instructional activities, the instructional designer can connect the instructor with additional instructional resources, including collaboration tools (e.g., Google Drive) and web conferences (e.g., Big Blue Button).

Going forward, something to consider is this: how can we engage all students, and not just those students who are already motivated and engaged?  This question is particularly challenging in an online environment where you do have the non-verbal cues of engagement, and it’s easy for students to move through a course while only skimming the surface of what the course and the instructor have to offer.

We hope this answer is useful to you but I hope the TOPkit online community may have other suggestions or questions.  What are some other ways we can encourage our students to go deeper? Please share your thoughts with our TOPkit community on LinkedIn! 

Author and Editor: Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Dear ADDIE,

I am a senior instructional designer at a small liberal arts college in the South. I have been asked to head-up a somewhat daunting project: to transform our institution’s new faculty orientation (NFO) from its current face-to-face format into an asynchronous online format. The current NFO was developed, and is facilitated by, our Human Resources department and is required of all new faculty before they teach their first course.  After the redevelopment, the new online NFO will be co-facilitated by an instructional designer and a member of the HR staff. Since my school is small, the job to transform our NFO will fall to me and one other full-time instructional designer/faculty developer plus one part-time instructional designer.  It seems like a big job for a small team but we are also excited about the opportunity to have such a big impact on NFO and to show new faculty what we are capable of doing when it comes to online course development and instruction. So, here is my specific question: what are two or three recommendations that you can offer to help us get started?  My colleagues and I really want to start on the right foot.

Signed,

Right Foot

Dear Right Foot:

Wow!  You do have a big job on your hands!  But this is an exciting opportunity to lend your expertise to an area that is so important – new faculty orientation. WIthout knowing the specific content of your institution’s orientation agenda, a typical NFO will contain information regarding institutional rules and culture, payroll and benefits, and specific guidelines relevant to faculty. This is also a great time to introduce faculty to instructional design support services and faculty development resources.

A good place to start is to consider a faculty development model, specifically the Quality Transformation Model for Faculty Development (Jowallah, Futch, Barrett-Greenly, & Bennett, 2016). According to this model, factors to consider when creating your NFO include scoping for sustainability, understanding of the institutional culture, addressing the needs of new faculty, and consideration of who will take ownership of the course.  This model provides the groundwork for the planning stage of the development process.  More specifically, the planning stage consists of selecting the design and development strategies that will form the course content and includes the exploration of tools and techniques that will shape your course.

As a co-facilitator and co-developer, your role will be vital to the success of this new approach to NFO. You will likely be collaborating with librarians, media technologists, research and commercialization, office of accessibility services, and other departments so be prepared to manage the needs and priorities of many stakeholders.

Something else to consider regarding the faculty who will be participating in NFO: participants will consist of faculty just starting out in their careers, faculty making a mid-career move to a new university, and faculty who may be new teaching after having worked in industry. This diverse group of learners means ensuring that this new NFO course will address the needs of a diverse group of learners. I also suggest establishing a plan for continuous improvement through ongoing assessment.

Regarding resources, in addition to the links above, include the TOPkit sample course.  Although the TOPkit sample course is designed to serve as a customizable course for online faculty development, there are modules that could be adapted for a new faculty orientation course, including Copyright and Intellectual Property, FERPA, Open Educational Resources, Digital Textbooks, and Mobile Devices and Apps.

In closing, what are some other considerations that should drive initial planning of an asynchronous new faculty orientation?  For example, what is the role of collaboration between the facilitators and the participants?  What kind of course schedule would benefit participants the most? Please share your thoughts with our TOPkit community on LinkedIn!

Author and Editor: Dr. Shelly Wyatt

Dear ADDIE,

I’m an instructional designer at a large public institution, working on a team that supports hundreds of online instructors within dozens of departments. As we work across disciplines, we see creative problem solving, enthusiasm, and great work being done at our university, and we strive to share ideas and connect faculty working towards similar goals. We’re struggling to create a space for faculty to have an easy way to interface with others teaching online so that they may seek thought partners, showcase work, and find resources. We think this collaboration will have an enormously positive impact on student outcomes and the quality of online instruction – we just don’t know how to do it!

Can you help us solve this conundrum?  We want to overcome departmental barriers and a general lack of time to provide a platform for easy collaboration. We would like great ideas and best practices to be shared easily throughout the university. Where should we begin? And how will we maintain a dynamic and engaged community of users?

Signed,

So Many Rocks, So Many Streams

Dear Rocks:

Congratulations on wanting to showcase your online faculty’s work!  It’s exciting to hear that your online faculty are displaying such dynamism and engagement—the question now is how to harness that energy, creativity, and enthusiasm in a way that can be shared and nurtured over time.  One of the challenges facing instructional designers at institutions of all sizes is the nature of online teaching: reaching faculty who are dispersed geographically even when teaching in the same department. A well-designed virtual collaboration space for faculty can facilitate the kind of sharing that you would like to see happen on your campus.  The question, then, is what would that space look like? And what kind of support would faculty contributors need?

The first step in creating this collaborative space – a virtual “teacher’s lounge” – is to involve faculty in the design process.  The October 2017 edition of TOPkit Digest has some tips regarding Building Faculty Buy-In in faculty development.  Questions to ask include how such a virtual collaboration space should look and function, who will manage it, and what kind of control will faculty have regarding the use of its content.  Faculty members’ input for creating the virtual collaboration space will enhance their feeling of ownership of the space.  Their suggestions, too, will better fit their needs.

Once you have the design requirements finalized, it’s time to select the platform that will house your online collaboration space.  This platform can be your current learning management system or some other platform – as long as the platform offers the functions needed to develop your design.  For example, National University built a virtual “faculty commons” where faculty can share their work, best practices, and collaborate with one another.  This faculty commons was created in “partnership with GoingOn Networks, with links to other solutions on campus that housed resources like a streaming video repository (Kaltura) and a virtual meeting center (Adobe Connect).

Next, resources that support online faculty in making the most of their “virtual teacher’s lounge” are essential; these resources can consist of documentation, just-in-time support from instructional designers or technical support staff, and templates that scaffold best practices (TOPkit, Provide Instruction in the Required Technologies).  Examples of documentation include LSM-related information and university-wide goals for teaching and learning.  Templates may consist of sample course homepages, examples of well-designed group projects, and online activities or games.

Finally, there is a role for instructional designers in the long-term watering and feeding of an online faculty collaboration space.  Instructional designers are uniquely positioned to publicize and highlight the site and to encourage faculty to use it and contribute to it.  Along with faculty, instructional designers can participate in, and contribute to, the collaboration platform, offering explanations, posing questions, and emphasizing best practices. They can also scaffold content areas to help faculty contributors organize and share their work effectively as well as encouraging continuous improvement.

In closing, what are some additional potential challenges and benefits associated with creating an online collaboration space for faculty that haven’t been mentioned in this response? Are there tools and techniques that can support and encourage faculty to contribute to and benefit from such a collaborative space? Please share your thoughts with our TOPkit community on LinkedIn!