Name: Amanda L.

Wilson

Date: March 21, 2011

Email: ah65928@appstate.edu

Home: 336-682-1116

Work: 828-262-7513

Problem: Case #2 Online Education

Degree: EdS

Concentration: Leadership

Formatting: APA
114 Kimberly Dr. #12
Boone, NC 28607

March 21, 2011

Dr. Ignacio Fernandez

101 College Street
University, USA 10101

Dear Dr. Fernandez:

Congratulations on your appointment to provost of North Central State University.

I understand that your Board of Trustees has presented you with a set of challenges for the
University to meet. I am writing you concerning their second challenge to establish an online
education initiative at North Central State University in order to provide more online courses,
especially in the humanities.

In order to maintain the same standards of content and rigor already present in face-to-face
courses, it is necessary to understand how best practices of online education can inform an
initiative that convinces reluctant faculty to engage in the development of these courses. It is also
important to consider the necessary network of support needed to establish and maintain
additional online courses.

The following report outlines my assumptions concerning higher education, the problems you
will need to account for, and a plan to establish a successful online education initiative at North
Central State University. I hope you find the information in this report to be a valuable tool as
you begin to tackle the challenges set before you.

Thank you,

Amanda L. Wilson

Enclosures
 Wilson 1

Section A. Values, assumptions, and/or beliefs

As an educator I believe I carry a heavy and vital responsibility to facilitate the learning

of my peers and fellow citizens. My studies of higher education have gifted me with insight into

reaching and engaging others. Living in a democratic society, it is vital that the general populace

be equipped with the necessary skills to understand and process the world around them. This

understanding will then enable them to make informed decisions in a variety of contexts. The

best educators recognize that the value of learning extends beyond the classroom setting. This

approach to facilitating learning, while challenging, is invaluable to our continually growing

global culture.

It is the responsibility of educators to not only pass on information but also to facilitate

learning in the best ways possible. A vital part of making this approach a reality is the

willingness of educators to both promote and practice lifelong learning. Staying up-to-date with

the latest research and best practices in the field of education is essential to educators in all

disciplines. The latest research and best practices in education enable educators to be fluid in

methodology and open-minded with pedagogy. Adaptability within educational settings is

crucial to the ever expanding global culture’s demand for collaboration across all boundaries.

Global collaboration of learning, be it educator-educator, educator-student, or student-student

collaboration, is the future of our society as our world continues to shrink.

Technology is an indispensible tool for educators to employ when facilitating the process

of helping learners connect to the world. Never before has it been so easy to connect to the vast

knowledge and experience of the entirety of our species’ cultures. The way we communicate

every day opens up possibilities that were impossible for previous generations. At this very

moment, with very little effort, I can connect with people all over the world. The potential for

learning and growth is immeasurable, and it is important for educators to explore and embrace
 Wilson 2

this potential. The tools that technology presents, properly wielded, provide opportunities to

improve the way we facilitate learning and to help our students exceed their perceived

limitations.

Section B. Identify and describe the problem you have chosen to focus on

Online education is quickly becoming a more prevalent part of higher education (Morris

& Finnegan, 2008, p. 55). While many programs at North Central State University are doing

cutting-edge work in the delivery of courses online, some programs, such as those in the

humanities, could do more to embrace and promote online education. Programs such as

computer science, education (especially instructional technology), and some in the school of

business have their own internal locus of interests and motivations for being the leaders in the

field of online education. Faculty in these programs, by the practice of their fields of study, see

more obvious benefits in adopting and pursuing the tools technology provides in the

development of their curriculum. However, there are many benefits for faculty in the arts and

sciences, as well as to the institution at large, for embracing and learning to implement online

courses in their programs. For a successful implementation of an online education initiative,

faculty must be convinced that this form of delivery is valuable. This process begins with what

Wang (2006) referred to as a “strong institutional commitment” and “sufficient faculty support”

(p. 270). A strong institutional commitment does not come solely from the administration of the

university. It is necessary to build a culture of faculty support as outlined by Marek (2009) to

include incentives, training, and assistance (p. 287). An online education paradigm that supports

a learner-centered environment where faculty serve as the facilitator of student learning is a

worthwhile pursuit with many valuable benefits for programs in any field and in the university as

a whole.
 Wilson 3

Online education is the future for many reasons, including economic ones, though some

of the reasons for moving toward more online education may not always be pedagogical in

nature, there are overwhelming benefits to properly employing these technologies that help

faculty embrace best pedagogical practices (Boettcher & Conrad, 2010; Carmean & Haefner,

2002; Fish & Wickersham, 2009; Lewis & Abdul-Hamid, 2006; Mehlenbacher, 2010; Morris &

Finnegan, 2008; Reushle & Mitchell, 2009; Rizopoulos & McCarthy, 2009; Wickersham &

McGee, 2008). Online courses must contain the same content and rigor that characterize face-to-

face classes in order for an online education initiative to be successfully implemented. Wang

(2006) highlighted the need for “adequate curriculum and instruction that fit the new delivery

medium and match the rigor and breadth of equivalent on-campus programs” and “consistent

learning outcome assessment” (p. 270). Fish and Wickersham (2009) emphasized the need for

faculty to rethink the way they plan and develop curriculum for online courses (p. 279). While an

online education paradigm that centers on best practices and the creation of a learner-centered

environment can provide the tools necessary to “match the rigor and breadth of equivalent on-

campus programs,” in the words of Wang (2006, p. 270), the institutional commitment to

provide faculty the necessary support to accomplish this task is imperative. Simply training

faculty to use the software is not enough. Faculty must also be coached to embrace best practices

of online education in order to develop and facilitate online courses that meet the standards

established for a quality educational experience. The online environment provides opportunities

to facilitate ongoing learning outcomes assessment, to maintain accreditation, and to allow

faculty to gauge student learning and to evaluate the curriculum. Faculty need a support network

that has the capability to train them on the technical aspects of using these tools and that informs

and guides them to choose and use the tools that will support their content and intended learner

experience.
 Wilson 4

Finally for a successful implementation of an online education initiative, it is important to

remember and plan for the financial and personnel cost needed to develop the necessary

infrastructure and support network. While technology can be expensive, some careful

forethought and planning can prevent unnecessary cost and wasted labor. By recognizing and

utilizing the assets your campus already employs, you may find that promoting more online

courses costs less than you might think. It is important to not only focus on the technology but

also the personnel who comprise the support network. This network must include those who will

work to ensure the efficient progress of the systems and software, those who will work to assist

faculty in learning to use the systems and software, and those who can facilitate faculty

understanding of best practices in online course development. A cost effective network of

technology and experts can provide the necessary support for faculty to enhance their

understanding of how to use the available tools to develop online courses that embrace best

practices, provide valuable learning experiences, and enrich the lives of their students.

Section C. Analysis and Recommendations

Situation

The situation, as I see it (and as I have illustrated in Figure 1 below), is that while online

education is a priority for the university, faculty need to see the initiative as a valuable endeavor

that enables the development of courses with equivalent rigor though the support of an effective

network of technology and personnel. The priorities that drive and focus the initiative, which will

be explored in greater detail later in this report, include (1) best practices to support rigor; (2)

faculty buy-in and support; and (3) the development of a cost effective network.
 Wilson 5

Figure 1: Logic Model of the Online Education Initiative at North Central State University

Inputs Outputs Outcomes-Impact

Activities Participation Short term Medium term Long term

Leadership team Plan and Leadership team Faculty Humanities Learner-

organize & Experienced receive faculty centered
Experienced mentoring Faculty training, develop online rigorous online
Priorities: Faculty
Situation: program resources, and courses using courses are
Online education an experienced campus offered
1. Best Existing Determine
is a priority for mentor technology
the university, practices to technology technology
faculty need to support needs
see the initiative rigor Inexperienced &
as a valuable Reluctant Faculty Establish faculty Leadership Additional Faculty are Students are
endeavor that 2. Faculty training Team &
Existing Faculty technology, if supported and supported by
enables the buy-in & Existing Faculty
Development needed, is encouraged by faculty and
development of support Streamline Development
courses with Staff, Facilities, acquired a network of have
support network Staff
equivalent rigor 3. Develop and Equipment staff, mentors, successful
though the cost- Develop and and resources learning
support of an effective provide experiences
effective network network additional
of technology
resources
and personnel

Assumptions: External Factors:

Online education supports a pedagogically sound learner- The speed at which faculty are able to grasp and implement
centered environment. the new technology.

The institutional commitment to supporting faculty as they The willingness of students to enroll in online courses.
learn and develop in these technologies is essential.
The reliability and functionality of the technology.
 Wilson 6

Inputs and Outputs

Keeping the situation and priorities in mind, assessing the existing resources on your

campus, or inputs as referred to in the logic model (see Figure 1), facilitates understanding of

where the online education initiative really begins. Your leadership team, the experienced faculty

already working with the existing technology, the inexperienced and reluctant faculty members,

and any existing faculty development staff, facilities, and equipment make up the resources with

which the program begins. Your leadership team can coordinate with the more experienced

faculty to plan and organize a mentoring program for the less experienced faculty members. The

experienced faculty can also help your leadership team understand what technology needs are

not yet being met by the existing systems. Any existing faculty development staff can assist your

leadership team to establish or improve faculty training sessions, streamline a support network

for faculty questions, and develop and make available to faculty any additional resources to

facilitate their development of online courses.

Assumptions

The following two assumptions must underlie the implementation of this initiative: online

education supports a pedagogically sound learner-centered environment and the institutional

commitment to supporting faculty as they learn and develop in these technologies is essential.

As discussed earlier in this report, Wang (2006) pointed out that online courses must

have equivalent rigor and content as face-to-face courses (p. 270), which also echoes the

concerns of your Board of Trustees. The online environment can in fact provide more tools to

facilitate best pedagogical practices of a learner-centered environment. Carmean & Haefner

(2002) demonstrated that best practices of online learning offer unique opportunities to facilitate

this type of learning by providing tools capable of the same, and sometimes more, functionality
 Wilson 7

as compared to the face-to-face counterparts (p. 29). In a traditional face-to-face classroom, the

essential components in a classroom are tables and chairs or desks; a chalkboard, whiteboard, or

SMART Board; an overhead projector or a computer with a projector; and students. Instructors

also bring in various necessary teaching aids, such as textbooks and PowerPoint presentations.

Each instructor employs different strategies, such as rearranging desks to group students as

needed. Comparable tools are available in the online environment.

An instructor may begin by writing announcements or homework on the board as

students file into the classroom. In an online environment, tools such as news and announcement

forums and homework calendars offer the online instructor the same functionality. Additionally

because the online environment is asynchronous, or occurring at any time and place, the

instructor has the option to set up this feature in advance, allowing students to access it at any

time. An instructor may wish to administer a quiz to assess whether students understand the

material. In a face-to-face classroom, the instructor would need to distribute copies of the quiz.

Once students have completed and handed in the quizzes, the instructor would then later grade

those quizzes, delaying feedback. In the online environment, the quiz could be set up in advance

to be self-correcting, giving both the instructor and the students immediate feedback on the

students’ understanding of the topic. In the online environment, a low quiz grade here could

prompt the student toward additional resources to aid their understanding. This example allows

students to learn from quick feedback what they do not understand while guiding them to

discover what they need to know with context-rich online resources that allow them to take

ownership of their learning.

Class discussions are common activities in most humanities courses. Many traditional

face-to-face courses already employ discussion forums, sometimes referred to as threaded

 Wilson 8

discussions or message boards, to extend class discussion beyond the classroom. Rizopoulos and

McCarthy (2009) emphasized the use of threaded discussions “to promote critical thinking and

reflection outside the 1-hour domain constraints of the classroom” (p. 374). These forums are set

up by the instructor, just as s/he might conduct a discussion in a classroom. Students respond to

the original prompt, as well as add to the comments made by their peers. Rizopoulos and

McCarthy (2009) cited many advantages to this type of discussion as opposed to a face-to-face

class, such as 24-hour access, more time for reflection, and a more conducive environment for

reluctant, shy, and ESL learners (p. 377).

Collecting papers and projects from students can easily be satisfied with the online

environment’s capacity for uploading files. Once an instructor has a chance to evaluate these,

feedback can be posted directly to the document itself, in a rubric, or simply in the online grade

book. Many online grade books provide space for rich feedback to give insight regarding

potential for improvement. Students have access to this feedback whenever they need to.

Additionally, the teacher can post resources, such as video or audio clips, images, or any other

such materials, for students to access on their schedule. The appropriate use of the tools in an

online course environment supports a pedagogically sound learner-centered environment capable

of promoting the same, if not enhanced, content and rigor available in a face-to-face classroom

(Carmean & Haefner, 2002).

The second assumption supporting the proposed logic model (see Figure 1) is that an

institutional commitment to supporting faculty as they learn and develop in these technologies is

essential. An institutional commitment to foster what Marek (2009) called a “culture of support”

for faculty that can provide the needed training and incentives to get reluctant or inexperienced

faculty prepared and motivated to develop rigorous online courses is necessary (p. 275). Fish and
 Wilson 9

Wickersham (2009) pointed out that poorly trained faculty are unable to use online tools

effectively, which undermines any attempt at developing successful online courses (p. 279). It is

imperative that the institution invest in the infrastructure of technology and the ongoing support

network that faculty need in order to be successful (Fish & Wickersham, 2009, p. 280; Marek,

2009, p. 288). The final piece is ensuring that the administration shares the responsibility of

networking and learning about online educational technology with the faculty (Fish &

Wickersham, 2009, p. 280). An institutional commitment to the creation of a cost-effective

network of support, steeped in best practices of online education, for faculty as they learn and

develop online courses is essential to the successful implementation of the online education

initiative at North Central State University.

Priorities

Three priorities drive and focus the efforts of the online education initiative. These

priorities are (1) best practices to support rigor; (2) faculty buy-in and support; and (3) the

development of a cost effective network. A vital need to emphasize the best practices of online

education is at the forefront of developing a cost-effective support network and gaining faculty

buy-in to the online education initiative.

Priority 1: Best practices to support rigor.

Best practices should involve course development that supports a learner-centered

environment. A learner-centered environment in education shifts the pedagogical focus from an

instructor as a storehouse of information for students to an instructor as a facilitator of student

learning. Carmean and Haefner (2002) tied together the research of Chickering and Ehrmann’s

“Implementing the Seven Principles” and the research of many other scholars to synthesize the

overlapping concepts of effective learning that they called “Deeper Learning Principles” (p. 28).
 Wilson 10

The five concepts that mark these principles are that learning needs to be social, active,

contextual, engaging, and student-owned (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p. 29). Their contention is

that these principles, founded in the research of best practices, have the potential to be well-

supported in an online learning environment.

Social learning encompasses the idea of cooperation between faculty and students, as

well as amongst students (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p. 29). It also encompasses the ideas of

continuous, constructive feedback to students on their progress (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p.

29) and informal feedback from the students to faculty regarding their experiences (Boettcher &

Conrad, 2010, p. 37). Lewis and Abdul-Hamid’s (2006) research supports the principle of social

learning by emphasizing the need for faculty to foster interaction and involvement amongst

learners more intentionally in the online environment (p. 87). Morris and Finnegan (2008) spoke

to the faculty’s responsibility to “maintain consistent contact with all students and encourage

them to build their self-reliance and group reliance” (p. 60). Reinforcing the feedback aspect of

Carmean and Haefner’s (2002) social principle, Lewis and Abdul-Hamid (2006) emphasized that

faculty must explicitly communicate with students how much and what types of communication

and collaboration they expect (p. 88). In addition to making expectations clear to students,

Boettcher and Conrad (2010) cited the need for faculty members to facilitate community

building and group work in online education (p. 37). When students are encouraged to work

collaboratively with their peers, their learning becomes more active and engaging.

Active learning occurs when students are engaged in solving real-world problems to

practice and reinforce learning (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p. 29). Boettcher and Conrad (2010)

pointed out that online courses differ from face-to-face courses because they require learners to

be more active (p. 7). In the online environment, it is the responsibility of the students to access
 Wilson 11

readings and materials. The students must then, following established expectations of

participation in the course, respond to prompts or submit assignments. An instructor can then

easily track each individual student’s participation. In a face-to-face classroom, students can

potentially come in unprepared and have their lack of participation go unnoticed if, for example,

their peers are especially engaged in class discussion; therefore, the constructs of the online class

environment compel the student to engage in ways that are easier for an instructor to track and

manage. The potential for more reflective, active engagement in online discussions and

assignment submission provides a richer learning experience (Rizopoulos & McCarthy, 2009). In

addition to online discussions and assignment submissions, Carmean and Haefner (2002) also

pointed out the value of interactive testing tools to facilitate active student learning (p. 30). These

tools allow students to receive feedback on their learning and to be directed to additional

resources to promote contextualized active learning (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p. 30).

Contextual learning occurs when students are able to build on their previous knowledge

by adding and applying new knowledge (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p. 29). Boettcher and

Conrad (2010) suggested that best practices of online education include providing digital content

resources that allow customization and personalization of learning based on core content (p. 37).

In a presentation that he gave on Universal Design for Learning on February 16, 2011, Dr. Terry

McClannon, an instructional technology professor at Appalachian State University, pointed out

the ability to link to additional information and include multiple types of media. Placing course

content into a context using multiple types of media is a way of engaging learners within a larger

context. Online environments, therefore, allow instructors to make use of many tools to

contextualize material and engage all types of learners, building on their existing knowledge and

synthesizing their learning.

 Wilson 12

Engaged learning occurs when diverse talents and ways of knowing are appreciated and

accounted for, when the environment provides supportive challenges, and when motivation

becomes intrinsic (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p. 29). Taking into account research on

technology and learning styles is one way to ensure that some of the various ways students learn

are present in the online environment (Saeed, et al., 2009, p. 103). Rizopoulos and McCarthy

(2009) also pointed out that forums allow diverse learners, like ESL students, shy students, and

reflective thinkers, as well as all other students, more time to process and engage in discussions

that promote learning (p. 377). Various and flexible resources used to contextualize learning

allow students to make learning personal by finding connections to their interests (Boettcher &

Conrad, 2010, p. 37). Prompting self-discovery of additional information related to the course

content and their interests promotes engaged learning (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p. 33). As

students become engaged and discover their interests in relation to course content, they become

motivated intrinsically by learning what they want to know and what faculty want them to know.

Student-owned learning occurs when students have choices and control that promote

seeking out learning opportunities for reflection and synthesis (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p.

29). As students become more intrinsically motivated learners, they move toward becoming

lifelong learners that can continue to grow and innovate beyond the classroom and the university

and into their individual lives and roles in society. Online learning best practices must emphasize

this process as it leads towards students who are not passive receivers of knowledge but active

constructors of societal understanding. The online environment offers tools for learners to create

spaces where they assume ownership through collaboration and creation.

Carmean and Haefner (2002) presented that Course Management Systems (CMS) have

many available tools to support these “Deeper Learning Principles,” which are social, active,
 Wilson 13

contextual, engaged, and student-owned (p. 29). Adapting their research as well as the research

of others, Table 1 below outlines each principle, the online environment tools available to

support it, and additional benefits of this online tool.

Table 1: Principles and Tools

Deeper
Learning Online Tools Benefits
Principles*
Social Email Makes information always available; students can
ask questions at any time
Announcements Keep students up-to-date; non-oral learners don’t
miss important information
Forums More accessible than face-to-face class
discussions for diverse learners, shy students, and
reflective thinkers; makes information available
to students 24/7 whenever they study best
Chat Allows for late-night peer collaboration
Group-specific resources Build team work and collaboration
Grade book Keeps students informed of progress with rich
feedback from formative and summative
assessments
Active Interactive testing tools Give students immediate feedback and redirection
to contextualized content
Contextual Linked/embedded text, Allow students to contextualize new information
audio, video, images, and in the frame of real-world contexts and previous
additional resources experience and knowledge
Forums Engage and promote contextual learning
Engaging Linked/embedded Engage students with multiple formats of input to
resources encourage a variety of learning styles
Prompted self-discovery Help motivation become intrinsic as students
searches focus on personal and professional interests in
relation to course content
Student-owned Forums/Chat Allow students to collaborate and share with their
peers to integrate knowledge and understanding
Online submission of Synthesizes reflection and learning; allows
work students to demonstrate their knowledge and
interests in the course content through creation
*adapted from the research of Carmean and Haefner (2002)

All of these tools—forums, chat, embedding and downloading tools, submission tools, the grade

book, and the calendar—are basic parts of any good CMS. Effectively using these tools, with
 Wilson 14

consideration to best practice of effective learning, will enable faculty to develop and facilitate

online courses that meet the criteria of quality assurance in online programs (as outlined by

Wang (2006) and previously discussed) to promote the success of the online education initiative

at North Central State University.

Priority 2: Faculty buy-in and support.

It cannot be overstressed that selling the faculty on the benefits of online education and

supporting them as they progress is vital to the success of this initiative. The establishment of

some incentives and the development of a cost-effective support network that emphasizes best

practices of online education can motivate the faculty to engage in the development and

facilitation of online courses. An incentive program will be the hook to get the faculty’s

attention. There are many options for establishing an incentive program. Determine which of the

following options are best for your situation. Kaplin and Lee (1995) emphasized the need for

administrators in higher education to be actively engaged in what they referred to as preventative

law in order to avoid and limit lawsuits (p. 45). Therefore, be sure to have the university lawyers

check over the policies in order to look for any potential issues that may arise later and correct

those.

A common incentive for faculty is a course release (Fish & Wickersham, 2009; Marek,

2009). This time away from teaching an additional course will feel like a break for faculty and

boost their moral. During this time, they would have the opportunity to attend training

workshops and take full advantage of the support network that will facilitate their development

in the technologies provided for online courses.

Marek (2009) cited the need for “positive components in retention and tenure policies” as

another incentive to motivate faculty (p. 288). These policies will encourage tenure-track faculty
 Wilson 15

to get involved and may even attract valuable new faculty members. This is another area where it

is vital to consult with the university’s legal staff to prevent any policies from creating future

legal issues.

Other reward options include offering financial incentives in the form of grants for

outside research or conference attendance (Fish & Wickersham, 2009; Marek 2009). With the

current financial crisis in mind, and being aware that your leadership team is also dealing with

budget cuts, grant funds may not be available to distribute. However, rather than dismiss the

possibility entirely, it would be prudent to investigate grant possibilities from sources outside the

university. Professional organizations, like the International Society for Technology in Education

and others, may be sources of information on private grants for the development of online

courses and research associated with such courses. Within various disciplines, there are

specialized organizations and publications as well. For example, Bowling Green State University

in Ohio publishes a journal called Computers in Composition for faculty in the department of

English. The professional organization International Association for Language Learning and

Technology serves as a resource for foreign language faculty. While some faculty in various

disciplines may already be familiar with some of these organizations, pointing them out or

providing a list of them and encouraging faculty to look for grants to facilitate the development

of their courses will be a great incentive to motivate them and may bring unexpected resources to

your campus.

Priority 3: Development of a cost-effective network.

The most important incentive for faculty will be a support network that enables them to

learn about developing these courses. There are several potential elements of this network to

consider that can help make it successful: the technology infrastructure, administrative
 Wilson 16

organization, development and gathering of additional resources, a schedule of training

workshops, a mentoring program, and a student assistantship program. As with the incentive

program, these options need to be chosen with care and well coordinated for the situation on

your campus.

The technology infrastructure needs to be sound and fulfill the needs, current and

anticipated, of the faculty. Determining the needs of the infrastructure is an essential first step.

Begin with the experts on your campus’s current Course Management System. This will most

likely be the faculty in your computer science and education departments. The Course

Management System, or CMS, is the software your university employs to house the interactions

of online courses. You might think of your CMS as both the classroom and the tools faculty have

use of in their classroom. There are many of these systems on the market, but it is important to

remember that “CMSs do not provide a pedagogical platform any more than chalk, chairs, and

tables provide the classroom learning experience” (Carmean & Haefner, 2002, p. 28). Any CMS

that affords faculty members the basic needs for facilitating learning will suffice. The faculty

members in your computer science and education programs must already be employing an

effective CMS, since their work has been referred to by one consultant as “leading-edge.” The

advice and experience of these faculty members will be invaluable to planning and promoting

online education to other departments. Some basic features that any CMS should contain are:

• Some type of forum (also referred to as message board or threaded discussion board)

• A chat and/or instant messaging (IM) feature for synchronous communication

• The capacity to embed and link to websites, slideshows, pictures, audio, and video

• A feature to allow instructors to post files for downloading

• A feature to allow students to submit assignments

 Wilson 17

• A grade book

• Some type of calendar for due dates of assignments

The experienced faculty on your campus should be able to discuss the existence and functionality

of each of these features. They may also be able to advise your leadership team on additional

features that may need to become part of the training for inexperienced faculty. Pay careful

attention to the comments of the experienced faculty regarding the current system. If they are

complaining about the current system, some alterations may need to occur, because frustrating

technology will drive your faculty and your students away from the online courses.

As you gather and organize all this information and plan to move forward with this

support network, remember that some administrative organization will be necessary. Faculty will

need people with the knowledge to answer their questions, the ability to point them to resources,

and an empathetic ear to hear their frustrations (Marek, 2009, p. 288). There are many ways to

structure the staff that will be in charge of the day-to-day operations of the support network.

Sometimes full-time faculty members from the computer science department are offered part-

time teaching loads and part-time staff positions to handle faculty support. This is a less effective

but sometimes more financially manageable solution than attempting to hire new staff. Another

option is to assess what types of faculty development programs already exist on your campus.

These existing structures can help to initiate new workshops and resources for technology-

specific development. The most ideal situation is to have a department specifically devoted to

handling the technology aspect of faculty development. The program could be as large or small

as the needs and funds necessitate and allow. At Appalachian State University, for example, the

department of Learning Technology Services (LTS) exists within the library and under the

administration of the Hubbard Center (ASU’s faculty development facility). LTS employs
 Wilson 18

fourteen staff members whose jobs range from consultants and trainers to web, system, and

instructional developers. The mission of LTS is not only to train, consult, and assist with the

development of technology-enhanced instruction, but also to advocate and promote technology

on-campus, to collect, analyze, and disseminate information on best practices, to provide a focal

point for the university’s efforts and initiative on learning and technology, and to be a liaison for

the state administration on information resources (Learning Technology Services).

Once whatever system of administrative support you choose is established, it will then be

the basic function of that network to develop, collect, and disseminate information on the

technology and training available on-campus. Faculty email lists and campus mail

announcements can be used to alert the faculty to the initiative and the incentives and support

systems in place. The primary means of educating faculty will most likely be through training

workshops. These can be handled online but to begin might be better received as small

workshops somewhere on campus. These training workshops can be supported by additional

resources such as handouts and websites that faculty can refer to later when they begin

developing their courses. Fish and Wickersham (2009) pointed out that properly trained faculty

are most likely to be productive, engage students, and promote student learning outcomes (p.

281). Some good resources to start with are EDUCAUSE’s website: http://www.educause.edu/

(an non-profit association that specializes in promoting technology in higher education), the

National Learning Infrastructure Initiative’s site: http://www.west.asu.edu/nlii/learningmap.htm

(an online resource about how to create a learning space that includes Carmean’s Deeper

Learning Principles), and the Instructional Design and Technology Studio:

http://idtstudio.blogspot.com/ (a blog from Fort Hays State University focused on web-based

teaching and learning).

 Wilson 19

Another good option for supporting faculty is the development of a peer mentoring

program (Marek, 2009; Morris & Finnegan, 2008). Lewis and Abdul-Hamid (2006) drew on the

experiences of thirty exemplary faculty members to develop a few of innumerable insights that

experienced faculty can add to the resources for inexperienced faculty just beginning to develop

online courses (p. 83). By harnessing this asset already present on your campus, inexperienced

faculty will learn some best practices in online education as well as tips and tricks that have been

gained and honed by their experienced peers. Additionally, like course releases and retention and

tenure policies, any incentive policies developed to motivate inexperienced faculty to participate

and develop new online courses can be extended to experienced faculty members in order to

motivate them to participate in the mentoring program. A mentoring program may also cut back

on the demand for as much administrative support.

A final consideration to the support network might be a student assistantship program.

Properly designed, this program will cost the university little to no additional funding and will

also provide another layer of support to faculty as well as additional benefits to students. Marek

(2009) cited the support of skilled students as “highly valuable” to faculty members (p. 288). At

the graduate student level, this normally involves a stipend, but for undergraduate students it is

more typically a one-hour, pass/fail course credit that can add to their learning experiences and

resumes. Students in the computer science program will benefit by adding technical support to

their list of experiences while students in instructional technology can add instructional technical

support. The potential for learning for both the student and the faculty is great, and the resource

drain for the program on the university will be small, if existent.

 Wilson 20

Outcomes

Outcomes that you can expect to see in the short term for these efforts include faculty

receiving training, resources, and mentoring to begin acquiring the skills they need to develop

courses. Also, any additional technology can be acquired and put into place within the campus’s

current infrastructure. Medium-term outcomes will include faculty developing online courses

using campus technology and faculty being supported by the network your team establishes and

reinforces. This will make the following long-term outcomes possible: the ability to offer

rigorous, learner-centered, online courses; and offering students a support network of faculty to

help them succeed.

External Factors

Some external factors beyond your control that may affect outcomes and should be

considered to get a realistic picture of how long the process may take include: the speed at which

faculty are able to grasp and implement the new technology, the willingness of students to enroll

in online courses, and the reliability and functionality of the technology. All of these factors will

be less likely to interfere with progress if the priorities of the initiative are kept as a focal point of

all administrative efforts.

Section D. Conclusions and closing thoughts

In a recent article in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Randy Bass, the executive

director of Georgetown University's Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship, was

cited as discussing a need for professorial focus on hands-on student learning activities that serve

to link to skills learned in class as the future of the educational paradigm, which is already being

“driven by student demand, a better understanding of how students learn, and a new generation

of faculty members trying tech-infused teaching methods” (Young, 2011). Technology, while
 Wilson 21

feared and misunderstood by many faculty members, provides a necessary shift in curriculum

planning that reinforces a learner-centered paradigm. Mr. Gardner Campbell, a professor and

education-technology official at Virginia Tech, emphasized the collaboration of students and the

need for instructors to become guides to, not gate keepers of, knowledge (Young, 2011).

Higher education must evolve to facilitate collaborative learning, using best practices and

the technology available, in an effort to connect students to the ever shrinking global culture.

North Central State University can play an important role in facilitating this collaborative

learning process as the online education initiative is successfully implemented. The problems of

faculty buy-in to the initiative, maintaining the same content and rigor as face-to-face classes,

and the creation of a cost-effective network of technology and experts are not insurmountable.

While online education is a priority for NCSU, faculty need to see the initiative as a valuable

endeavor that enables the development of courses with equivalent rigor through the support of an

effective network of technology and personnel. Evidence has been offered to support the

assumptions that online education supports a pedagogically sound learner-centered environment

and the institution is committed to supporting faculty as they learn and develop in these

technologies. Therefore allow the priorities of this initiative—1. Best practices to support rigor;

2. Faculty buy-in and support; and 3. Development of a cost effective network—to drive and

focus the online education initiative to promote the successful development of effective online

courses at NCSU.
 Wilson 22

References

Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R. M. (2010) The Online Teaching Survival Guide: Simple and

Practical Pedagogical Tips. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Carmean, C. (2002) Mapping the Learning Space. Retrieved from

http://www.west.asu.edu/nlii/learningmap.htm

Carmean, C., & Haefner, J. (2002). Mind over Matter. Educause Review, 37(6), 26.

Fish, W. W., & Wickersham, L. E. (2009). Best Practices for Online Instructors: Reminders.

Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(3), 279-284. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Kaplin, W.A., & Lee, B.A. (1995). The Law of Higher Education: A Comprehensive Guide to

Legal Implications of Administrative Decision Making (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-

Bass.

Learning Technology Services: Appalachian State University. Retrieved from

http://lts.appstate.edu/

Lewis, C. C., & Abdul-Hamid, H. (2006). Implementing Effective Online Teaching Practices:

Voices of Exemplary Faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 31(2), 83-98.

doi:10.1007/s10755-006-9010-z

Marek, K. (2009). Learning to Teach Online: Creating a Culture of Support for Faculty. Journal

of Education for Library & Information Science, 50(4), 275-292. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

McClannon, T. W. (February 16, 2011). Universal Design in Learning [PowerPoint slides].

Retrieved from http://www.appstate.edu/~mcclannontw/Candidate.ppt.htm

Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Instruction and Technology: Designs for Everyday Learning.

Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

 Wilson 23

Morris, L. V., & Finnegan, C. L. (2008). Best practices in predicting and encouraging student

persistence and achievement online. Journal of College Student Retention: Research,

Theory and Practice, 10(1), 55-64. doi:10.2190/CS.10.1.e

Reushle, S., & Mitchell, M. (2009). Sharing the journey of facilitator and learner: Online

pedagogy in practice. Journal of Learning Design, 3(1), 11-20. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

Rizopoulos, L., & McCarthy, P. (2009). Using Online Threaded Discussions: Best Practices for

the Digital Learner. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 37(4), 373-383.

doi:10.2190/ET.39.4.c

Saeed, N., Yun, Y., & Sinnappan, S. (2009). Emerging Web Technologies in Higher Education:

A Case of Incorporating Blogs, Podcasts and Social Bookmarks in a Web Programming

Course based on Students' Learning Styles and Technology Preferences. Journal of

Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 98-109. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Wang, Q. (2006). Quality Assurance--Best Practices for Assessing Online Programs.

International Journal on E-Learning, 5(2), 265-274. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Wickersham, L. E., & McGee, P. (2008). Perceptions of Satisfaction and Deeper Learning in and

Online Course. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(1), 73-83. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.