During a webinar hosted by Dr Martha Cleveland-Innes she commented on the variety of learning theories and design models available.[1] She mentioned that one Canadian university which had started to maintain a database of these, has well beyond 50 entries in their collection, and updates and additions are continuously being done. But why has so many theories or models developed, so much time and research been dedicated to this? In short, why does design really matter?
The answer appears to lies in its relevance for student success or student retention. And the latter is critical in the education context. Even more so in the South African distance learning space where studies show that students studying in this manner, often take much longer to complete their studies, and that the vast majority never complete their studies. Much of these courses are supported by blended/online learning and increasingly substantively offered online. As a recent study by the Department of Higher Education (March 2018) summarizes,
“The cohort studies reveals in very stark terms that students entering into distance higher education, while gaining access to higher education, have a very low chance of success. Distance education and new open learning modes have been identified as a possible way to enable growth in the higher education sector and to create greater access to post-secondary studies at universities and technical and vocational education and training colleges. However, access without a reasonable chance of success is not productive for the individual or the country.”[2]
On a previous occasion, the Department had also stressed this principle: access is not meaningful unless it offers a reasonable chance of success.[3]
Success is however impacted by many factors in the online learning environment, of which design is but one, and it should not be seen as the predominant or decisive factor. Indeed in an article by van Ameijde, Weller and Cross, after reviewing literature on the many factors that have been identified in previous research and studies , they group the various factors into four main themes, namely the design of the course , secondly presentation (which links to the design, as being aspects during the presentation, such as communication with the institution, facilitator, technical or environment issues), thirdly personal ( which covers personal/family and work demands, the student’s own motivation, knowledge and skills etc) and lastly contextual (which refers to the environment in which the education takes place eg political/economic happenings).[4]
During this topic the focus was on the design of the course and we had an opportunity to look at some of the models/designs available– Gilly Salmon’s 5-stage model, the 7C’s of learning design, the ICEBERG seven design principles, but even an attempt to only summarize the main features here of all them would quickly expand this blog into a multi-paged essay. So instead in my view, the golden thread that seems to run through all of them is to ensure that there is a sufficient human element from the opening of the course right through to the end – that it allows for a connection to be formed between students and educators, and between students themselves, and gradually becomes a community wherein learning, knowledge construction, and collaboration takes place via strategically designed and spaced assessments.
Yet it should be noted in this new arena, the responsibility for carrying the baton to the finish line, doesn’t solely resort with the educator. This is evident from the role the educator plays – as Vaughan aptly describes it has evolved from: a traditional “sage on stage” in face to face teaching, to a “guide on the side” in distance education, to being “collaboratively present” in the blended/online environment. He stresses that there is now a shared responsibility between all participants – students and the educator, and in all respects (teaching, social and cognitive).[5]
During this topic, our group’s discussions and presentation, focused on the challenges an educator is faced when setting up a new online course – and we identified possible solutions to apply. And to add to it to in closing, whichever way a course is structured, there are two aspects that stand out to be me as critical: ensuring the human element of interaction is sufficiently embedded and that responsibility is shared.
This blog is part of a series written as participant of the ONL 181 course.
[1] Dr M Cleveland- Innes “Teaching Presence: Facilitation in online and blended learning” (14 November 2018) recorded, webinar available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu4s4C1hQvQ&feature=youtu.be.
[2] Department of Higher Education and Training, “2000 TO 2015 First Time Entering Undergraduate Cohort Studies for Public Higher Education Institutions” (March 2018) available at www.dhet.co.za. See pg 136 – 138.
[3] Department of Higher Education and Training “Policy for the provision of distance education in South African Universities in the context of an integrated postschool system.” (July 2014).
[4] van Ameijde, J., Weller, M. and Cross, S. (2018). Learning Design for Student Retention. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp.41-50 at44.
[5] Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. Edmonton: AU Press at pg 3 and 14.