Alicia's Learning Journal

0 unread of 14 messages - 8 author(s)

I wrote a whole big long discussion about this and the browser crashed. Grrrrr...
One issue that might come up in the near future (certainly is in my department) is Consistency vs. Customization. The stakeholders would be the administration or MOOC developers on the consistency side, and the faculty on the customization side. They both have the students in mind, but I'm thinking they might not be the same students.
Siemens (2012) in listing aspects of a MOOC mentions "a uniformity of understanding" or synchronization. While he's talking mostly, I think, about content, this applies also to a consistency of design in the materials used in the course. The consistency of design, in both "architecture" (you always find the readings in the same place, say) and in appearance (same logo, same font choice, same colors) can help new students or casual learners feel comfortable right away and be more willingly to plunge in because they feel familiar with the situation.
However, professors in more traditional (smaller) online courses often also stress the importance of "customization", resting on the constructivism of Gagne and the honoring of the professor-student joint "construction" of learning. Also, the customization of instructional material allows a more close fit with course objectives, fitting in with the cognitive theory that shows the importance of defining the skills to be achieved. The sort of student taking classes for credit, majoring in a particular discipline, might beneift more from customization than consistency.
Both can be achieved to a limited level. Consistency of format can be carried through in all material-- but for customized material, content can still more closely match the course. So content-intrusive design decisions (like, as I was once told, "A handout should never be more than three short paragraphs-- try explaining essay structure usefully in three short paragraphs!) might be more applicable to MOOC-style information-intensive classes than to for-credit courses meant to teach not only information but skills.
Consistency of appearance is always appreciated, I think. And placement-- nothing like having four courses in Tycho, and in one, the assignment instructions are in "conference 4", and in another they are in "Course Materials", and in the third they're in "Project Descriptions," and in the fourth they're in "Required Reading." Frustrating! Maybe the point is to "make them work for it," but isn't that what the assignment will do?
I do think it's important for education design research to be done on educational material. Much of the research on reading and focusing seems to have been done on more ephemeral material, like marketing and advertising, and I don't think students paying tuition to take a class for credit and eventual use in the future are necessarily going to give the same limited attention they do when they're skimming an ad.
Siemens, G. (2012).. What is the theory that underpins our MOOCs? elearnspace.Retrieved July 8, 2013, from http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2012/06/03/what-is-the-theory-that-underpins-our-moocs/

student-widgets?

student-widgets?

Cynthia Whitesel - Jul 24, 2013 6:07 PM

0 unread of 11 messages - 10 author(s)

Alicia,
You raise many good points here! I, for one, have pondered this consistency vs. customization issue for years.
So. . . . do you think we should go for consistency? IMHO, I think about how different teaching styles (and teacher organizational styles) often lead to new learning and new thinking. I think about how the teacher then gets to contribute to construction of new knowledge.
We are facing standardization at UMUC as we move our classes over to D2L or LEO.
Standardization is a drivign force in industrialization. Do we produce more student-widgets?
Customization enables teachers to become forces of learning as they "break" the rules. Do we find ways to do this online?
Why must "practice" and policy push for standardization? How can the teacher's individuality be respected?
Where does the teacher's individuality fit in this drive for student-centeredness? Is this healthy for education?
Inquiring minds want to know. . . . Cindy

Re: student-widgets?

Re: student-widgets?

Alicia Rasley - Jul 24, 2013 6:45 PM

0 unread of 1 messages - 1 author(s)

I guess I think both are important, but for different purposes -- consistency is going to be important for creating familiarity and ease of use, and that's especially useful in MOOCs as the consistency will help make the information more understandable.
And there are many ways to make design consistent without making the instruction the same-- types of headings, placement of graphics, length of paragraphs.
But I think maybe this is getting to the ultimate distinction between "mass" and "individual" in education. The student who is paying tuition should get more individual treatment than the one (like me) who signs up for a free course and has no investment and no real need to pay close attention.
Customization of content to me is the first way instructors make a difference. (The other would be interaction and feedback.) What's really individual is that different instructors will have different styles and emphases-- and I think that's good. We don't want the desire for consistency to mean that instructors are all alike. (this is the issue I've been facing in my own work... how much of my own teaching style and priorities should/can be evident in my classes?)
How about this:
Design consistency can enhance instructor customization by making it easier to organize individual material to make it accessible to the target audience, whatever that is.
I always like having some format provided so I don't have to worry about (the latest issue) what color of red this font is. I don't actually care (maybe I should, but I'm really willing to defer to those who can tell the difference between "garnet" and "oxblood"), and would rather have a designer make the basic decisions. And then when it comes to design decisions that affect content (like paragraph length), we can have a conversation so we understand each other's particular reasoning and come up with a way to have both the meaning I want and the presentation the designer wants.
I keep reading Siemens' article over because I see this issue broached but not really addressed there... How can "consistency" help "customization?" And vice versa? But most important, what are the objectives of class situations and how will this inform that discussion?
Audience matters too. A newer audience (first-year college students, or many MOOC students) might need more consistency in presentation as the consistency itself will provide a jolt of meaning-- "This is important... this is cause and over here this is effect... this is best explained graphically...."
And we can look at lab reports to see how even at the highest level (peer reviewed articles in academic journals), consistency of format (and wording) is prized so that it can be easily grasped and the reader can find quickly what's most important to him/her-- like "is the methodology useful to my work?" or "Let's cut to the chase-- I want the results!" or "This seems sort of off somehow-- better check the sample size."
But if we're presening (even different) material in the same way to casual learners and to graduate students, I think we might well be missing a chance to understand our audience and purpose and our own objectives for the course.
I'm a good customizer but not really good at consistency, and I think often those two skills don't necessarily show up together in one person, so this might be an opportunity for teamwork.
I see this coming up a lot in writing. I once wrote a characteristically discursive book about the fictional element of point of view, and then when it got bought by a publisher, I had to learn from the editor the value of consistency of format (so that each chapter had the same type of bullet list introduction, and the same sort of list of recommended books at the end). But I think this worked mostly because it kept most of my content (though the editor decided my fabbo "history of point of view in the novel" essay didn't really fit <G>). Novelists struggle with this a lot, as often consistency seems to the enemy of creativity. It isn't, but different novel processes might start differently... I might think, "I'm going to write this book using the Hero's Journey schema," or I might write the novel the way it comes out and only try to organize it consistently after I have the draft done.
This is the great American issue, really, individualism vs. community. There might not be a final answer, but surely the dialectic will produce great new forms?
Alicia

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 6:07 PM
Subject: student-widgets?

Alicia,
You raise many good points here! I, for one, have pondered this consistency vs. customization issue for years.
So. . . . do you think we should go for consistency? IMHO, I think about how different teaching styles (and teacher organizational styles) often lead to new learning and new thinking. I think about how the teacher then gets to contribute to construction of new knowledge.
We are facing standardization at UMUC as we move our classes over to D2L or LEO.
Standardization is a drivign force in industrialization. Do we produce more student-widgets?
Customization enables teachers to become forces of learning as they "break" the rules. Do we find ways to do this online?
Why must "practice" and policy push for standardization? How can the teacher's individuality be respected?
Where does the teacher's individuality fit in this drive for student-centeredness? Is this healthy for education?
Inquiring minds want to know. . . . Cindy

Re: student-widgets?

Re: student-widgets?

George-Paul Fortuna - Jul 24, 2013 9:23 PM Last Edited: Jul 24, 2013 9:33 PM

0 unread of 9 messages - 6 author(s)

Whoa! Back The truck up!
In all the readings from our esteemed colleagues, including Harasim and Ally, I cannot find any contradiction to the premise that the learner is primary in consideration.
“Consistency vs. customization” seem to be code words for “the system” vs. the “participant”. While I respect the “system” maintaining academic integrity, the ultimate test should be is the learner changed in their thinking – this is the ultimate universal notion of higher learning if not training. As practitioners, we may present material. The learner will accept or reject the material with explanation – this is the essence of didactic discourse.
Case in point, a student who “flunks” high school mathematics writes on the blackboard, “E=MC²”. While he might not have grasped the lesson (consistency), by customization, did he achieve the lesson? YES! In this instance he saw beyond the consistency and begged the customization of his science and fellow colleagues. Science and the world changed. The mitigation is the practitioner who can see beyond consistency and appreciate the possibilities as all good practitioners do.
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 6:07 PM
Subject: student-widgets?

Alicia,
You raise many good points here! I, for one, have pondered this consistency vs. customization issue for years.
So. . . . do you think we should go for consistency? IMHO, I think about how different teaching styles (and teacher organizational styles) often lead to new learning and new thinking. I think about how the teacher then gets to contribute to construction of new knowledge.
We are facing standardization at UMUC as we move our classes over to D2L or LEO.
Standardization is a drivign force in industrialization. Do we produce more student-widgets?
Customization enables teachers to become forces of learning as they "break" the rules. Do we find ways to do this online?
Why must "practice" and policy push for standardization? How can the teacher's individuality be respected?
Where does the teacher's individuality fit in this drive for student-centeredness? Is this healthy for education?
Inquiring minds want to know. . . . Cindy

Re: student-widgets?

Re: student-widgets?

Alicia Rasley - Jul 24, 2013 9:54 PM

0 unread of 3 messages - 2 author(s)

Of course, the student who flunks math flunks math. A great teacher might be able to see some promise in this student, but "you need to score 69% on the final exam" is likely going be more determinative.
My dad was majoring in Civil Engineering at Purdue after WWII, and he failed first semester calculus. He went to the professor and said feebly, "I actually wanted to major in math." The professor laughed and said math majors often failed calculus because they tried to figure it out without learning the formulas. And he said take it again and memorize what you need to know! And Dad got an A the second time, and ended up a math professor. But he always said if that prof hadn't been able to look past the "rule" (if you fail something, you're bad at it), he would have probably dropped out thinking he was stupid.
I've always thought that was a great example of a teacher who understood not just what but WHOM he was teaching. And understood how they think.
That's like what you mentioned: the practitioner who can see beyond consistency and appreciate the possibilities as all good practitioners do.

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: student-widgets?

Whoa! Back The truck up!
In all the readings from our esteemed colleagues, including Harasim and Ally, I cannot find any contradiction to the premise that the learner is primary in consideration.
“Consistency vs. customization” seem to be code words for “the system” vs. the “participant”. While I respect the “system” maintaining academic integrity, the ultimate test should be is the learner changed in their thinking – this is the ultimate universal notion of higher learning if not training. As practitioners, we may present material. The learner will accept or reject the material with explanation – this is the essence of didactic discourse.
Case in point, a student who “flunks” high school mathematics writes on the blackboard, “E=MC²”. While he might not have grasped the lesson (consistency), by customization, did he achieve the lesson? YES! In this instance he saw beyond the consistency and begged the customization of his science and fellow colleagues. Science and the world changed. The mitigation is the practitioner who can see beyond consistency and appreciate the possibilities as all good practitioners do.
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 6:07 PM
Subject: student-widgets?

Alicia,
You raise many good points here! I, for one, have pondered this consistency vs. customization issue for years.
So. . . . do you think we should go for consistency? IMHO, I think about how different teaching styles (and teacher organizational styles) often lead to new learning and new thinking. I think about how the teacher then gets to contribute to construction of new knowledge.
We are facing standardization at UMUC as we move our classes over to D2L or LEO.
Standardization is a drivign force in industrialization. Do we produce more student-widgets?
Customization enables teachers to become forces of learning as they "break" the rules. Do we find ways to do this online?
Why must "practice" and policy push for standardization? How can the teacher's individuality be respected?
Where does the teacher's individuality fit in this drive for student-centeredness? Is this healthy for education?
Inquiring minds want to know. . . . Cindy

Re: student-widgets?

Re: student-widgets?

George-Paul Fortuna - Jul 24, 2013 10:43 PM

0 unread of 2 messages - 2 author(s)

Alicia,
As usual, you have demonstated a knack for humanizing complex theory through story. Your Dad surley was an amazing fellow .

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 9:54 PM
Subject: Re: student-widgets?

Of course, the student who flunks math flunks math. A great teacher might be able to see some promise in this student, but "you need to score 69% on the final exam" is likely going be more determinative.
My dad was majoring in Civil Engineering at Purdue after WWII, and he failed first semester calculus. He went to the professor and said feebly, "I actually wanted to major in math." The professor laughed and said math majors often failed calculus because they tried to figure it out without learning the formulas. And he said take it again and memorize what you need to know! And Dad got an A the second time, and ended up a math professor. But he always said if that prof hadn't been able to look past the "rule" (if you fail something, you're bad at it), he would have probably dropped out thinking he was stupid.
I've always thought that was a great example of a teacher who understood not just what but WHOM he was teaching. And understood how they think.
That's like what you mentioned: the practitioner who can see beyond consistency and appreciate the possibilities as all good practitioners do.

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: student-widgets?

Whoa! Back The truck up!
In all the readings from our esteemed colleagues, including Harasim and Ally, I cannot find any contradiction to the premise that the learner is primary in consideration.
“Consistency vs. customization” seem to be code words for “the system” vs. the “participant”. While I respect the “system” maintaining academic integrity, the ultimate test should be is the learner changed in their thinking – this is the ultimate universal notion of higher learning if not training. As practitioners, we may present material. The learner will accept or reject the material with explanation – this is the essence of didactic discourse.
Case in point, a student who “flunks” high school mathematics writes on the blackboard, “E=MC²”. While he might not have grasped the lesson (consistency), by customization, did he achieve the lesson? YES! In this instance he saw beyond the consistency and begged the customization of his science and fellow colleagues. Science and the world changed. The mitigation is the practitioner who can see beyond consistency and appreciate the possibilities as all good practitioners do.
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 6:07 PM
Subject: student-widgets?

Alicia,
You raise many good points here! I, for one, have pondered this consistency vs. customization issue for years.
So. . . . do you think we should go for consistency? IMHO, I think about how different teaching styles (and teacher organizational styles) often lead to new learning and new thinking. I think about how the teacher then gets to contribute to construction of new knowledge.
We are facing standardization at UMUC as we move our classes over to D2L or LEO.
Standardization is a drivign force in industrialization. Do we produce more student-widgets?
Customization enables teachers to become forces of learning as they "break" the rules. Do we find ways to do this online?
Why must "practice" and policy push for standardization? How can the teacher's individuality be respected?
Where does the teacher's individuality fit in this drive for student-centeredness? Is this healthy for education?
Inquiring minds want to know. . . . Cindy

Re: student-widgets?

Re: student-widgets?

Alicia Rasley - Jul 25, 2013 10:00 AM

0 unread of 1 messages - 1 author(s)

Well, he was, but he didn't pass on his math ability. Alas!
Alicia

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 10:43 PM
Subject: Re: student-widgets?

Alicia,
As usual, you have demonstated a knack for humanizing complex theory through story. Your Dad surley was an amazing fellow .

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 9:54 PM
Subject: Re: student-widgets?

Of course, the student who flunks math flunks math. A great teacher might be able to see some promise in this student, but "you need to score 69% on the final exam" is likely going be more determinative.
My dad was majoring in Civil Engineering at Purdue after WWII, and he failed first semester calculus. He went to the professor and said feebly, "I actually wanted to major in math." The professor laughed and said math majors often failed calculus because they tried to figure it out without learning the formulas. And he said take it again and memorize what you need to know! And Dad got an A the second time, and ended up a math professor. But he always said if that prof hadn't been able to look past the "rule" (if you fail something, you're bad at it), he would have probably dropped out thinking he was stupid.
I've always thought that was a great example of a teacher who understood not just what but WHOM he was teaching. And understood how they think.
That's like what you mentioned: the practitioner who can see beyond consistency and appreciate the possibilities as all good practitioners do.

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: student-widgets?

Whoa! Back The truck up!
In all the readings from our esteemed colleagues, including Harasim and Ally, I cannot find any contradiction to the premise that the learner is primary in consideration.
“Consistency vs. customization” seem to be code words for “the system” vs. the “participant”. While I respect the “system” maintaining academic integrity, the ultimate test should be is the learner changed in their thinking – this is the ultimate universal notion of higher learning if not training. As practitioners, we may present material. The learner will accept or reject the material with explanation – this is the essence of didactic discourse.
Case in point, a student who “flunks” high school mathematics writes on the blackboard, “E=MC²”. While he might not have grasped the lesson (consistency), by customization, did he achieve the lesson? YES! In this instance he saw beyond the consistency and begged the customization of his science and fellow colleagues. Science and the world changed. The mitigation is the practitioner who can see beyond consistency and appreciate the possibilities as all good practitioners do.
Authored on: Jul 24, 2013 6:07 PM
Subject: student-widgets?

Alicia,
You raise many good points here! I, for one, have pondered this consistency vs. customization issue for years.
So. . . . do you think we should go for consistency? IMHO, I think about how different teaching styles (and teacher organizational styles) often lead to new learning and new thinking. I think about how the teacher then gets to contribute to construction of new knowledge.
We are facing standardization at UMUC as we move our classes over to D2L or LEO.
Standardization is a drivign force in industrialization. Do we produce more student-widgets?
Customization enables teachers to become forces of learning as they "break" the rules. Do we find ways to do this online?
Why must "practice" and policy push for standardization? How can the teacher's individuality be respected?
Where does the teacher's individuality fit in this drive for student-centeredness? Is this healthy for education?
Inquiring minds want to know. . . . Cindy

synergism

synergism

Cynthia Whitesel - Jul 28, 2013 7:24 AM

0 unread of 5 messages - 5 author(s)

Jeep,
I think the consistency vs customization debate is "code" for the debate about intellectual freedom for teachers, not necessarily about the system vs the participants. And it is an interesting situation theoretically. Of course, teachers want each student to take away from a class experience the best learning possible for that student. And students' needs will be somewhat different.
As Alicia suggests, however, grades are still part of the equation and grades have to considered. What would happen if we focused on students' needs in learning and made grades more backgrounded?
What if we made a list of where we would like to see consistency applied and what we think ought to be customized about the learning experience? Once we see the actually application in course design and recommended teaching strategies, we may have some insights into the debate and perhaps better understanding of applying these ideas.
How do we make these two ideas synergistic?
Your thoughts?
Cindy

Re: synergism

Re: synergism

Alicia Rasley - Jul 28, 2013 12:49 PM

0 unread of 2 messages - 2 author(s)

I remember some colleges used to experiment with the elimination of grades, but I don't know what happened. Brown did for some courses at some point. But I think students complained because the best students wanted the stellar GPA for the CV, can't blame them I guess.
I really like taking the occasional pass/fail course because it takes the pressure off. I don't feel the need to achieve and can just learn. But that works more in the "passive receptacle model", where there's just a certain amount of information to learn, where the assignments are not themselves actual learning tools but just for assessment. Isn't that odd-- for me, the assessment (grade) is important to encourage me to really work on the "learning process" (writing the paper). I wonder if with a student population programmed (in the behaviorist sense) to expect the reward of a grade, we can really move to another type of motivation. Of course, in so many CoPs, there is no "grading", and still they want to be excellent. A friend of mine was saying she's in a big knitting community, and there's no grading or ranking, and yet she gets a strong sense that the most highly regarded members are those who help others the most, like sharing patterns, offering advice, being encouraging. That's kind of awesome.
Alicia

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 28, 2013 7:24 AM
Subject: synergism

Jeep,
I think the consistency vs customization debate is "code" for the debate about intellectual freedom for teachers, not necessarily about the system vs the participants. And it is an interesting situation theoretically. Of course, teachers want each student to take away from a class experience the best learning possible for that student. And students' needs will be somewhat different.
As Alicia suggests, however, grades are still part of the equation and grades have to considered. What would happen if we focused on students' needs in learning and made grades more backgrounded?
What if we made a list of where we would like to see consistency applied and what we think ought to be customized about the learning experience? Once we see the actually application in course design and recommended teaching strategies, we may have some insights into the debate and perhaps better understanding of applying these ideas.
How do we make these two ideas synergistic?
Your thoughts?
Cindy

Re: synergism

Re: synergism

George-Paul Fortuna - Jul 29, 2013 12:06 PM Last Edited: Jul 29, 2013 12:07 PM

0 unread of 1 messages - 1 author(s)

Alicia,
Regarding CoPs, I believe "grading" is a collaborative activity that is self-regulating (peer pressure?) within the community.

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 28, 2013 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: synergism

I remember some colleges used to experiment with the elimination of grades, but I don't know what happened. Brown did for some courses at some point. But I think students complained because the best students wanted the stellar GPA for the CV, can't blame them I guess.
I really like taking the occasional pass/fail course because it takes the pressure off. I don't feel the need to achieve and can just learn. But that works more in the "passive receptacle model", where there's just a certain amount of information to learn, where the assignments are not themselves actual learning tools but just for assessment. Isn't that odd-- for me, the assessment (grade) is important to encourage me to really work on the "learning process" (writing the paper). I wonder if with a student population programmed (in the behaviorist sense) to expect the reward of a grade, we can really move to another type of motivation. Of course, in so many CoPs, there is no "grading", and still they want to be excellent. A friend of mine was saying she's in a big knitting community, and there's no grading or ranking, and yet she gets a strong sense that the most highly regarded members are those who help others the most, like sharing patterns, offering advice, being encouraging. That's kind of awesome.
Alicia

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 28, 2013 7:24 AM
Subject: synergism

Jeep,
I think the consistency vs customization debate is "code" for the debate about intellectual freedom for teachers, not necessarily about the system vs the participants. And it is an interesting situation theoretically. Of course, teachers want each student to take away from a class experience the best learning possible for that student. And students' needs will be somewhat different.
As Alicia suggests, however, grades are still part of the equation and grades have to considered. What would happen if we focused on students' needs in learning and made grades more backgrounded?
What if we made a list of where we would like to see consistency applied and what we think ought to be customized about the learning experience? Once we see the actually application in course design and recommended teaching strategies, we may have some insights into the debate and perhaps better understanding of applying these ideas.
How do we make these two ideas synergistic?
Your thoughts?
Cindy

Re: synergism

Re: synergism

Alicia Rasley - Jul 28, 2013 1:23 PM Last Edited: Jul 28, 2013 1:31 PM

0 unread of 1 messages - 1 author(s)

Yes, intellectual freedom is an issue here. First, in my experience, many online courses (especially intro courses) are taught by adjuncts who don't have intellectual freedom-- the term-to-term "contract," the lack of access to materials and technology, the actual discouragement of learning more or getting another degree or going to conferences (all of which could make this teacher too expensive <G>). Often they are presented with a completely designed course and no alterations are allowed. This is a sad reality. A friend of mine said, "I think my department would like my only interaction with students to be grading their assignments... they want me to be a grading robot."
That's the extreme (but quite common) of "consistency," and probably no professor with tenure and a bit of power would allow that. Power does come into the equation, I think... and in the ever-growing conflict between faculty and administration, "consistency" is a powerful weapon for the administration, as it's so much cheaper and more standardizable and more assessible.
But avoiding that extreme of the "robot could teach this", I can see a list of where consistency would be really useful. Burgess, Barth, & Mercereau (2008) discuss the usefulness of a "template" with consistent design elements: "Student satisfaction results from a logical, consistent course design that allows them to focus on course content and interact with their instructor."
1. Logo or banner that reassures the student that this is indeed the right class/school. That familiarity is important for making the student comfortable, and the "branding" I think can subtly increase the value of this course or material by linking it to the greater collection of good stuff that is the university or department.
2. Consistency of material placement, so that students know where to find the assignments and where to find the grades and where to find the lectures. Why have students without much time waste their classroom time searching for that elusive Lecture 4?
3. Consistency of interaction possibilities. A student who knows there's always a conference set up for questions will be more likely to ask a question.
4. Modes of delivery-- I don't like "multimedia for multimedia's sake," but if the instructor/designer knows there is the opportunity and expectation of something beyond text, he/she is more likely to start looking for ways to incorporate that or aspects of knowledge that would be better conveyed by some multimedia.
5. With text-- still and probably always a primary "delivery mode"-- a consistent standard font will train students to expect something different when a different font or color are used. The consistency can set up the mental equation that "different=important" which can help students focus on new material or better grasp complex material.
I keep seeing in the design lit "consistency of length," but I find that actually can restrict not just the length but the depth. This isn't a bumper sticker or tweet, it's the analysis of a complicated problem, or of a poem, and can serve as a model of how to analyze, read closely, think deeply, determine cause and effect, etc. This is not the place to require consistency, I think, though encouragement can be made to present material more cogently, maybe. But the point is to present complex material more clearly, not simplify the material so it can be presented consistently. So while I can see the advantage of breaking up complicated material into smaller parts, I think it really would interfere on a number of levels to have some requirement that, say, I have three paragraphs and 12 lines to teach thesis statements.
I have found it quite helpful though to require (of myself) a sort of consistent "mood" approach-- that is, affirmative and positive. That has really informed several aspects of creation of course material, from design (starting with easy first and progressing to more difficult, so that the student "succeeds" early on), to language, always positive (not "Avoid these bad things," but rather "try these good things"), and especially to the encouragement of experimentation-- helping the student feel free to try things and not feel like a failure if some attempts don't turn out to be effective. I'd like to work in collaboration to this, like suggesting that other students chip in with suggestions for revision of this or other ways of experimenting. I'm not sure this is "consistency," but I do want that consistent tone of encouragement and experimentation. That feels like a way of empowering the student to try things out.
I guess I like "consistency" when it adds to the student's immediate sense of familiarity and ability-- "I can do this." Inconsistency in all aspects can lead to that "overwhelm," where the student starts out feeling powerless. Consistency in certain aspects in contrast can overcome the overwhelm, and help students start out feeling capable. But I think maybe the deeper they get into the course, the more we should let complexity and individuation be important, as they'll now be feeling more able to understand.
Alicia
Burgess, V., Barth, K., Mersereau, C. (2008). Quality Online Instruction – A Template for Consistent and Effective Online Course Design. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/effective_practices/quality-online-instruction-%E2%80%93-template-consistent-and-effective-online-course-des

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 28, 2013 7:24 AM
Subject: synergism

Jeep,
I think the consistency vs customization debate is "code" for the debate about intellectual freedom for teachers, not necessarily about the system vs the participants. And it is an interesting situation theoretically. Of course, teachers want each student to take away from a class experience the best learning possible for that student. And students' needs will be somewhat different.
As Alicia suggests, however, grades are still part of the equation and grades have to considered. What would happen if we focused on students' needs in learning and made grades more backgrounded?
What if we made a list of where we would like to see consistency applied and what we think ought to be customized about the learning experience? Once we see the actually application in course design and recommended teaching strategies, we may have some insights into the debate and perhaps better understanding of applying these ideas.
How do we make these two ideas synergistic?
Your thoughts?
Cindy

Re: synergism

Re: synergism

George-Paul Fortuna - Jul 29, 2013 12:02 PM

0 unread of 1 messages - 1 author(s)

Cindy,
I think that “intellectual freedom” for teachers is constrained by their respective institutions (system). I like that our institution (UMUC) and program (OMDE) acknowledges the value of customiztion and accommodates it in its “threads” and choice of assignment medium (paper vs. video vs. PowerPoint presentation).
The real question might indeed be how one arrives at the learner’s grade (backgrounding). I posed this question to both my 17 year old daughter and wife who works for a teacher’s union - the AFT. The answer may have been revealed by my daughter who gave the example of her recent pre-calculus course. In that course, as well as all her math courses thus far, the student is required to show their work. Even though a student may get the “answer” wrong, a learner, by showing their work, demonstrates that they understand the core concepts of calculus but made a “wrong” turn. In such a case, the practitioner usually awards points for this understanding and while minimizing the penalty for getting the answer wrong.
Perhaps this is why our own grading attempts to balance “core competencies” with “discovery” activities such as our discussion threads and ePortfolios, as these represent 40% of our grade. With these activities, we, as learners, are afforded permission to get it wrong in our journey to understanding. I believe this is very forward thinking. As we move forward with DE, our own institution’s practices may well be that “grass roots” moment to which Ott and Benke allude. And yes, I may be biased – Fear the Turtle!

<<< Replied to message below >>>
Authored on: Jul 28, 2013 7:24 AM
Subject: synergism

Jeep,
I think the consistency vs customization debate is "code" for the debate about intellectual freedom for teachers, not necessarily about the system vs the participants. And it is an interesting situation theoretically. Of course, teachers want each student to take away from a class experience the best learning possible for that student. And students' needs will be somewhat different.
As Alicia suggests, however, grades are still part of the equation and grades have to considered. What would happen if we focused on students' needs in learning and made grades more backgrounded?
What if we made a list of where we would like to see consistency applied and what we think ought to be customized about the learning experience? Once we see the actually application in course design and recommended teaching strategies, we may have some insights into the debate and perhaps better understanding of applying these ideas.
How do we make these two ideas synergistic?
Your thoughts?
Cindy

Re: The debate goes on. . . MOOCS as a step on the way by Alicia

Alicia Rasley - Jul 28, 2013 3:44 PM Last Edited: Jul 28, 2013 3:45 PM