How can we stay in front of the online learning eight ball? Professional development for tomorrow's university teachers
Martijntje M. Kulski, Daniel Boase-Jelinek, Vikki Pedalina,
Stephen Quinton and Megan O'Connor
Centre for Educational Advancement
Curtin University of Technology
As universities continue the move towards online course development there is a real challenge for institutions to provide quality support and training for tomorrow's teachers. If academic staff are to successfully adopt online teaching approaches they require ongoing, responsive professional development programs that are tailored to their individual needs. These programs should also reflect innovations and advances in the use of educational technologies. For example, training staff in the use of proprietary Learning Management Systems (LMS) may eventually be replaced by a need to provide support for the use of Learning Content Management Systems (LCMS). The LCMS approach, based on the concept of reusable learning objects, promises to be a more 'transparent' and accessible approach which is more intuitive and user friendly for both students and teachers. That is, a learning object focus presents an opportunity to develop sophisticated tools designed to produce high quality learning resources that otherwise would require intensive staff training. These advances will enable teachers to direct their attention towards the pedagogical aspects of online learning design, and thus represents a dramatic shift in the professional development needs of academic staff. These issues are being explored as part of a larger project on online learning development at Curtin.
Introduction
The challenges facing university centres with responsibility for academic staff development have escalated in recent years. In addition to a continuing need to improve the quality of face to face tuition (Ramsden, 1992) there are now also imperatives to teach online as universities seek to incorporate the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) into their academic programs (Oliver, 2001; Paloff & Pratt, 1999). All this is occurring against a background of decreasing budgets, an associated ongoing reduction in resources, and rapidly changing educational technologies. It is essential therefore, that programs offered by staff development centres for tomorrow's university teachers are responsive, cost effective and foresighted to meet the ongoing and emerging demands and challenges confronting the education sector.
Oliver (2001) notes that much of the literature indicates staff in universities are not ready for a large scale transition to online teaching. He points out:
Teacher readiness is in most instances a matter of staff development and opportunity. Most universities within Australia recognise the limiting features of staff readiness for online learning and now have organisational structures and strategies that are aimed at supporting this endeavour. (Oliver, 2001)
This is the case at Curtin University of Technology where staff in the Centre for Educational Advancement are exploring these issues in the planning of academic staff professional development programs for online learning. In this context, we are reviewing the burgeoning literature on the use of ICT in teaching and learning and associated professional development issues. Our aim is to establish a coordinated approach to provide high quality programs and support strategies that will assist academic staff at Curtin to teach online in pedagogically sound ways. Also, given the increasing pressure on staff workloads we are mindful of the need to provide support that is timely, strategic and reflective of advances in the use of ICT in teaching and learning whilst still addressing the ongoing need to improve the quality of face to face teaching.
The roles of academic staff
One aspect of our investigation involves an analysis of academic staff roles and competencies in the use of ICT in their teaching and learning practices. In this regard, we are exploring the changing roles of academic staff as they move from face to face to online teaching and the implications of these changes for the planning of professional development programs. It is clear that the number of roles undertaken by university teachers is steadily increasing (Bess, 1998). For example, a comparison of the six roles identified for teachers in 1985 (McKeachie, 1986) with the eight roles for teachers using online materials in 2001 (Goodyear, Salmon, Spector, Steeples, & Tickner, 2001) outlined in Table 1, shows this trend. In this table we have attempted to 'align' the roles of face to face teachers with those of online teachers. Whilst in this comparison it is no surprise that the technologically focussed roles have changed significantly, there is considerable overlap in the roles of university teachers as disciplinary experts, facilitators of student learning and student advisers. It can also be argued that the 2001 role of Manager-Administrator which does not align with any of McKeachie's roles has perhaps less to do with a move towards online teaching than reflecting the adoption of new responsibilities by academic staff that were previously undertaken by support staff in universities.
Table 1: Changing roles of university teachers
The six roles of teachers in 1985
(McKeachie, 1986) | The eight roles of online teachers in 2001
(Goodyear et al., 2001) |
- Expert - presents knowledge
|
- The Content-Facilitator - facilitating understanding of course content.
- The Researcher - producing new knowledge to teach
|
- Formal Authority - sets learning goals
|
- The Assessor - providing grades, feedback, and validation of learners' work
|
- Ego-Ideal - role model for developing positive attitudes to learning
|
- The Process Facilitator - facilitating a range of online activities supportive of student learning
|
- Facilitator - attends to the learning environment
|
- The Designer - designing worthwhile online learning tasks.
- The Technologist - making technological choices to improve the environment available to learners
|
- Socialising Agent - attends to the intellectual and social development of students
- Person - providing a human link with student - recognising student's values and interests
|
- The Adviser-Counsellor - offering advice or counselling to students
|
|
- The Manager-Administrator - managing learner registration, security, and record keeping
|
Others who have delineated the roles or skills required of online teachers have somewhat differing views. Thus, Williams (2000) delineates thirteen roles required for flexible delivery adding roles such as instructional designer, site facilitator and proctor, librarian and graphic designer to Goodyear et al.'s (2001) list. Alternatively, Kemshall-Bell (2001) describes three key skill areas; namely technical, facilitation and management. These authors also analyse the competencies associated with the roles. The differing analyses of these competencies highlight the common characteristics of effective face to face and online teaching. As Goodyear et al. (2001) note:
...many of the things that are said about online teaching could be held to be applicable to teaching more generally. Our resolution on this issue has two parts. First, it is important to recognise the similarities between conventional face to face teaching and online teaching and not to assume that there is no transfer between conventional teaching skills and online teaching skills. (p. 71).
However, Goodyear et al. (2001) also note that a more 'robust' analysis of competencies is required "to instantiate good teaching in the online learning environment" and that although this analysis may be premature it should be done soon. Indeed, Salmon (2000) also indicates that further analysis into these competencies is imperative for understanding these roles which in turn raises challenging issues for educators.
Other trends in university teaching and learning have also impacted on the changing roles of university staff and students. For example, the change from a highly directive teacher centred approach to a more self directed student centred approach (Ramsden, 1992; Biggs, 1990) has impacted on the ways teachers and students presently relate to each other in traditional teaching modes. These changes in staff and student roles are also reflected in analyses of teacher and student roles involved in online courses, as shown in Table 2. (Collins & Berge, 1996).
Table 2: Changing student and teacher roles
(adapted from Collins & Berge, 1996)
| Changing teacher roles | Changing student roles |
- From oracle and lecturer to consultant, guide, and resource provider
- Teachers become expert questioners, rather than providers of answers
- Teachers become designers of learning student experiences rather than just providers of content
- Teachers provide only the initial structure to student work, encouraging increasing self direction
- Teacher presents multiple perspectives on topics, emphasising the salient points
- From a solitary teacher to a member of a learning team (reduces isolation sometimes experienced by teachers)
- From teacher having total autonomy to activities that can be broadly assessed
- From total control of the teaching environment to sharing with the student as fellow learner
- More emphasis on sensitivity to student learning styles
- Teacher-learner power structures erode
- Emphasis on acquiring learning strategies (both individually and collaboratively)
|
- From passive receptacles for hand me down knowledge to constructors of their own knowledge
- Students become complex problem solvers rather than just memorisers of facts
- Students see topics from multiple perspectives
- Students refine their own questions and search for their own answers
- Students work as group members on more collaborative/cooperative assignments ; group interaction significantly increased
- Increased multi-cultural awareness
- Students work toward fluency with the same tools as professionals in their field
- More emphasis on students as autonomous, independent, self motivated managers of their own time and learning process
- Discussion of student's own work in the classroom
- Emphasis on knowledge use rather than observation of the teacher as expert performance or learning to "pass the test"
- Access to resources is significantly expanded
|
Emerging professional development needs
As noted above, the changes in roles, skills and competencies required of university teachers when moving from traditional to online teaching has implications for centres that provide professional development and support programs designed to meet emerging needs. Some of the key issues are considered below.
- The need to create challenging learning environments
The relevance of learning materials to student needs has become an issue as more learning becomes available online. Salter & Hansen, (1999) point out that students are more likely to "opt out" of an online course than a face to face course if they do not see it as being relevant. Teachers must also learn to find ways to engage with students and provide meaningful challenges relevant to their learning (McInnis, 2001). It is important therefore that professional development programs assist staff to develop challenging, engaging and supportive learning environments.
- The need to attend to pedagogical issues
Novices to online teaching tend to simply transfer text material onto the web ("web mounting") (Ellis & Phelps, 2000). The new technologies are providing a challenge to academics to look more deeply at their pedagogical approaches to teaching and learning and explore ways to use the new technologies to enhance the teaching and learning experiences they provide to students. This poses a challenge for professional development centres as to how pedagogical issues can be integrated into staff development programs.
- The need to work as a team
The demands of the new technologies are stimulating academics to adopt a team approach to their teaching and learning practices (Ellis & Phelps, 2000; Burford & Cooper, 2000; di Corpo, 2001). As academics adapt to working in teams to collaborate on production of learning materials, there is an increased awareness of the need to attend to the processes of collaboration (di Corpo, 2001) in professional development programs for online teaching.
- The need for support for students and staff
Staff require support for dealing with technology and to develop new ways of working together (di Corpo, 2001; Faire, 1994; Herrington & Oliver, 2001; Loucks-Horsley, 1997; Macchiusi & Trinidad, 2001). Students also require support to ensure that they are equipped to cope with the changing learning environment (Hicks, Reid, & George, 1999).
Directions for developing programs for tomorrow's university teachers
There is nothing about the issues described above that is exclusively related to new technologies. Rather, it seems that the introduction of new technologies has prompted reflection and re-evaluation about the way university teaching has occurred in the past. This raises several fresh questions to consider in the planning of professional development programs.
- How should universities respond at an institutional level?
Universities are struggling to adapt to the changing environment in which they operate (Adams, M. Marshall, & Cameron, 1999). One aspect of this change is the need to provide infrastructure to enable staff and students to access new technologies (Atkinson & Brown, 1997). Another aspect is that institutions must look at their strategic options for the future (Reid, 1999) and provide a framework for staff to make those options become reality (Pospisil & Willcoxson, 1988). For example, a high technology solution including the use of reusable learning objects and online learning design may provide a more flexible and responsive learning environment without demanding high levels of technical expertise for online teachers and learners (Quinton, 2001) and Oliver (2001).
- To what extent are the changes occurring in teaching and learning due to the new technologies?
The introduction of new technologies is just one of several factors influencing the way universities operate. Another factor is our changing knowledge about the nature of teaching and learning. A third factor is the changing context in which both teachers and learners operate, as outlined above, and the impact this has on teaching and learning practices (Trinidad & Albon, 2001). For example, teachers are already working in teams to develop new ways of teaching quite independently of the introduction of online learning (Trinidad & Albon, 2001).
- To what extent are face to face teaching and online learning facets of a corresponding process?
There are arguments (Bryant, Scoufis, & Cheers, 1999) that teachers must learn to view face to face and online learning as part of their repertoire of tools of trade, and use these tools appropriately to meet the needs of their students. By working more collaboratively they can work efficiently in their area of expertise and interest and make use of the expertise and interest of their colleagues (Bess, 1998). Insofar there are overlaps between traditional and online teaching modes the integration of online methodologies with professional development for face to face teaching would appear to make sense.
- How may the introduction of new technologies improve the quality of teaching and learning?
One suggestion for improving the quality of teaching and learning is that teachers need to become students in order to become better teachers (Ramsden, 1992). Possibly, the process of learning to use online technologies improves the quality of traditional face to face teaching through providing opportunities for reflection and discussion (Campbell, McGee, & Yates, 2000; McShane, 1999; Torrisi-Steele and Davis, 2000). Harnessing this reflection and discussion through providing opportunities for mentoring and the dissemination of these findings may be another avenue for professional development centres to enhance teaching and learning in universities.
Conclusions
Analysis of the roles, skills and competencies required for academic staff to make a transition to online teaching suggests that the current trend toward providing courses that focus primarily on online teaching may need to be rethought. In our view, given that most university teachers will continue to be involved in face to face modes of teaching, there may be more efficient ways of providing professional development programs that aim to improve the quality of all modes of teaching in higher education. These approaches could include:
- initially building on, and integrating the principles of effective teaching into skill development for high quality online teaching and learning environments;
- team based collaborations (eg. inter and intra-departmental) between professional development centres and academic staff wanting to teach online;
- providing easily useable tools and templates through which teachers can produce quality learning resources without the need for high levels of technical competency
References
Adams, M. Marshall, S., & Cameron, A. (1999). Strategic academic program development: Heads of schools' perceptions of the role of professional development. In Cornerstones: What do we value in higher education?. HERDSA 1999 Conference Proceedings, Melbourne, Australia, 12-15 July.
http://www.herdsa.org.au/vic/cornerstones/pdf/AdamsM.PDF
Atkinson, R., & Brown, A. (1997). Online units: What infrastructure services are required? In Learning Through Teaching. Proceedings of the 6th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia, February.
http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/asu/pubs/tlf/tlf97/atk_brn_tlf97.html
Bess, J. L. (1998). Teaching well: Do you have to be schizophrenic? The Review of Higher Education, 22(1), 1-15.
Biggs, J. B. (1990). Teaching: Design for learning. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA), Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia, July.
Bryant, M., Scoufis, M., & Cheers, M. (1999). The transformation of higher education in Australia university teaching is at a crossroad. In Cornerstones: What do we value in higher education?. HERDSA 1999 Conference Proceedings, Melbourne, Australia, 12-15 July. [abstract only]
http://herdsa.org.au/vic/cornerstones/abstracts/bryant.html
Burford, S. and Cooper, L. (2000). Online development using WebCT: A faculty managed process for quality. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(3), 201-214.
http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet16/burford.html
Campbell, N., McGee, C., & Yates, R. (2000). 'It is not out with old and in with the new': The challenge to adapt to online teaching. Competition, Collaboration, Continuity and Change Conference Papers, Adelaide, 11-13 Sep 2000
http://www.com.unisa.edu.au/cccc/papers/non_refereed/campbell.htm
Collins, M., & Berge, Z. (1996). Facilitating interaction in computer mediated online courses. Paper presented at the FSU/AECT Distance Education Conference, Tallahassee, Florida, June
http://www.emoderators.com/moderators/flcc.html
di Corpo, S. (2001). Supporting academic staff to use learning technologies - the instructional designer as staff developer. Paper presented at the Moving Online Conference II: A conference to explore the challenges for workplaces, colleges and universities, Conrad Jupiters Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, 2-4 September.
http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/sawd/moconf/papers2001/dicorpo.pdf
Ellis, A. and Phelps, R. (2000). Staff development for online delivery: A collaborative, team based action learning model. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 26-44.
http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet16/ellis.html
Faire, M. (1994). Improving the practicum: The professional development needs of lecturers, associate teachers and student teachers. Paper presented at the 24th Annual Conference of the Australian Teacher Education Association, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, July 3-6.
Goodyear, P., Salmon, G., Spector, J. M., Steeples, C., & Tickner, S. (2001). Competences for online teaching: A special report. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 49(1), 65-72.
Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2001). Online learning: Professional development for the changing role of the lecturer. Paper presented at the Moving Online Conference II: A conference to explore the challenges for workplaces, colleges and universities, Conrad Jupiters Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, 2-4 September.
http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/sawd/moconf/papers2001/herrington.pdf
Hicks, M., Reid, I., & George, R. (1999). Enhancing online teaching: Designing responsive learning environments. In Cornerstones: What do we value in higher education?. HERDSA 1999 Conference Proceedings, Melbourne, Australia, 12-15 July.
http://www.herdsa.org.au/vic/cornerstones/pdf/Hicks.PDF
Loucks-Horsley, S. (1997). The Role of Teaching and Learning in Systemic Reform: A Focus on Professional Development. Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the National Institute for Science Education, Washington DC, February.
http://teech.terc.edu/papers/papers/susanlh.htm
Macchiusi, L., & Trinidad, S. (2001). Information and communication technologies: The adoption by an Australian university. In Expanding Horizons in teaching and learning. Teaching and Learning Forum, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia, 7-9 February
http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/confs/tlf/tlf2001/macchiusi.html
McInnis, C. (2001). Signs of disengagement? The changing undergraduate experience in Australian universities. Centre for the Study of Higher Education, Faculty of Education, University of Melbourne.
http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/downloads/InaugLec23_8_01.pdf
McKeachie, W. J. (1986). Teaching tips: A guidebook for the beginning college teacher (8th ed). Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath.
McShane, K. (1999). Academics online: A study of academics adapting to web-based teaching. Proceedings Australian Association for Research in Education and the New Zealand Association for Research in Education Joint Conference, Melbourne, Australia, July 12-15.
http://www.aare.edu.au//99pap/mcs99609.htm
Oliver, R. (2001). Assuring the Quality of Online Learning in Australian Higher Education. Paper presented at the Moving Online Conference II, Goldcoast, Australia, 2-4 September
http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/sawd/moconf/papers2001/oliver.pdf
Paloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace: Effective Strategies for the Online Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pospisil, R. and Willcoxson, L. (1998). Online teaching: Implications for institutional and academic staff development. In C. McBeath and R. Atkinson (eds), Planning for Progress, Partnership and Profit. Proceedings EdTech'98. Perth: Australian Society for Educational Technology.
http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/gen/aset/confs/edtech98/pubs/articles/p/pospisil.html
Quinton, S. (2001). Meaningful learning in a complex information environment. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Computers in Education/SchoolNet 2001, Seoul, Korea, November 12-15.
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London: Routledge.
Reid, I. (1999). Beyond models: Developing a university strategy for online instruction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 3(1), 19-31.
http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/Vol3_issue1/reid.htm
Salmon, G. (2000). E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. UK, Kogan Page.
Salter, G., & Hansen, S. (1999). Modelling new skills for online teaching. In Proceedings ASCILITE '99: Responding to Diversity. The 16th Annual Conference of the Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 5-8 December
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/salterhansen.pdf
Torrisi-Steele, G. and Davis, G. (2000). "A website for my subject": The experiences of some academics' engagement with educational designers in a team based approach to developing online learning materials. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(3), 283-301.
http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet16/torrisi-steele.html
Trinidad, S., & Albon, R. (2001). Tapping out new rhythms in the journey of learning. In Expanding Horizons in Teaching and Learning. Teaching and Learning Forum, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia, 7-9 February
http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/confs/tlf/tlf2001/trinidad.html
| Contact person: Tina Kulski, Centre for Educational Advancement, Curtin University of Technology. Email: t.kulski@curtin.edu.au
Please cite as: Kulski, T., Boase-Jelinek, D., Pedalina, V., Quinton, S. and O'Connor, M. (2002). How can we stay in front of the online learning eight ball? Professional development for tomorrow's university teachers. In Focusing on the Student. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 5-6 February 2002. Perth: Edith Cowan University.
http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2002/kulski.html |
[ Proceedings Contents ]
[ TL Forum 2002 ]
[ TL Forums Index ]
This URL: http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2002/kulski.html
Created 29 Dec 2001. Last revision: 1 Feb 2002. HTML: Roger Atkinson [ rjatkinson@bigpond.com ]
