Search
There are 19 results.
Category
Tag
Tag
All (62)
Active Learning (2)
Activities (2)
Animations (1)
Assessments (2)
Asynchrony (2)
Authentic Activities (2)
Canvas (4)
Case Studies (2)
Collaboration (2)
Community (1)
Content Creation (6)
Copyright (2)
Course Maintenance (4)
Course Materials (5)
Discussions (2)
Diversity (2)
Equity (1)
Faculty Presence (1)
Feedback (4)
Formative Assessments (4)
Game-Based Learning (2)
Gamification (1)
Grading (3)
Group Work (2)
Hyperlinks (1)
Images (2)
Inclusion (1)
Infographics (2)
Learning Objectives (1)
Multimodality (3)
Page Design (1)
Peer Review (1)
Podcasts (1)
PowerPoint (2)
Presentations (2)
Representation (1)
Revising (2)
Rubrics (4)
Scaffolding (1)
Screen Readers (1)
Social Media (1)
Summative Assessments (1)
Synchrony (2)
Third-Party Tools (1)
Video (11)
Visual Accessibility (2)
Visual Design (2)
Workload (1)
Written Assignments (1)
Five Instructor Feedback Essentials
Providing student feedback is a key component of an instructor’s role and an important part of effective instruction. Research shows that ongoing feedback keeps students engaged and improves their morale, motivation, and learning (Best, et al, 2014). Yet, providing high quality feedback can be a time-consuming commitment, especially in courses with large class sizes or numerous written assessments. Instructors should keep in mind the tools, structure, and best practices that can help them provide feedback.
Improving PowerPoints
Sharing information via PowerPoint presentations is a long-established strategy in higher education. Designing PowerPoint presentations for online courses can pose unique challenges; however, best practices can help overcome these hurdles. With time and attention, faculty and instructional designers can create engaging and purposeful presentations with lasting value.
Academic Integrity in Assessment
To foster academic integrity, pair anti-plagiarism tools with clear conduct expectations and authentic low-stakes assessments. When designing and teaching online courses, maintaining academic integrity is frequently top of mind. In many cases, faculty may opt to adopt third-party tools to monitor student work. Despite the prevalence of academic monitoring software in online courses, however, the most powerful tools for promoting academic integrity are introduced much earlier in the course build process.
Discussion Best Practices Guide
Discussions are an impactful way to build engagement and discourse in asynchronous online courses. When properly designed, discussions can encompass the three pillars of engagement: student-content, student-student, and student-instructor. Asynchronous discussions allow students time to reflect prior to participating, which can lead to deeper insights and richer discourse. Moreover, when participating in discussions, students have the opportunity to collaborate with others, participate in an online learning community, and gain insights from others’ unique experiences and perspectives (Ransdell, Borror & Su, 2018). Facilitating multiple types of engagement in an online course can improve student motivation, satisfaction, and achievement (Dailey-Hebert, 2018).
Rubric Best Practices Guide
When used effectively, rubrics facilitate clear and consistent assessment, enhancing the learning experience for both students and instructors. In the online classroom environment, where students do not have the frequent, physical access that a traditional classroom provides, rubrics can provide the added benefit of increasing student engagement with course material and clarifying an instructor's expectations (Keengwe, Adjei-Boateng, & Diteeyont, as cited in Haught, Ahern, & Ruberg, 2017). In fact, according to Martin & Bolliger (2018), online learners have reported that grading rubrics are highly important for learner-to-instructor engagement. For instructors, too, rubrics simplify the grading process, promoting consistency across students and terms. Eliminating the guesswork from grade determination, well-designed rubrics can save professors precious time and energy.
Formative Assessments
Formative assessments encompass a broad range of low-stakes activities aimed at improving student learning outcomes. In contrast to summative assessments, which are intended to measure products of student learning, formative assessments are oriented towards the learning process itself (Black & Wiliam, 1998). They can provide students with opportunities to evaluate their developing understanding of key concepts, practice new skills, and prepare for summative assessments (McLaughlin & Yan, 2017; Orange, Agak, Okelo, & Kiprotich, 2018). They can also provide instructors with valuable data on student progress (Bell & Cowie, 2001; McLaughlin & Yan, 2017). The results of formative assessments can indicate where individual students are struggling or excelling, allowing instructors to provide targeted feedback and tailor their instructional delivery accordingly.
Student-Generated Content
Student-generated content — materials and tasks created by learners for other learners — can strengthen engagement by providing students an opportunity to express creativity, practice critical thinking, and increase ownership of learning. Developing student-generated content requires learners to produce an instructional artifact, demonstrating new knowledge alongside existing understanding. Student-generated content can include a variety of formats:
Data-Driven Insights for More Engaging Videos
Whether designing a fully asynchronous course or a hybrid/blended learning experience, you’re likely thinking about recording a video to explain an idea, tell a story, or demonstrate a skill. And, in many situations, you should (see the Envision piece Video Planning: To Record or Not to Record? if you are wondering whether video is appropriate for your unique situation). Most research shows that online students enjoy learning from video and that it can be an effective way to deliver content. Students often appreciate the opportunity to review material at their own pace and to pause, rewind, and rewatch content as needed (Boateng et. al. 2016; Brame 2016).