Search

Backward design is, as the name suggests, a process for designing curricula, courses, and lectures by working backwards from big-picture learning goals. The concept, introduced by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe (2005), suggests that instructors create assessments, activities, and course content that are explicitly aligned with the broader learning goals of the unit. This is different from the traditional content-driven approach to learning design, which focuses on course content first and only secondarily tries to align that content with learning goals.

Higher education institutions are racing to keep pace with the disruption caused by artificial intelligence (AI) tools. A 2023 QuickPoll survey by Educause found that 83% of higher education stakeholders believe generative AI will "profoundly change" the sector over the next three to five years. Additionally, 65% agreed that "the use of generative AI in higher ed has more benefits than drawbacks" (McCormack, 2023, Table 1). While institutions are exploring AI's potential in areas such as admissions, enrollment, administrative duties, scheduling, and institutional data research, this piece focuses on the overarching risks and rewards AI presents in teaching and learning.

There are many components to consider when developing an online course; a key framework to inform course development is student engagement. The Glossary of Education Reform defines student engagement as “the degree of attention, curiosity, interest, optimism, and passion that students show when they are learning or being taught, which extends to the level of motivation they have to learn and progress in their education” (Great Schools Partnership, 2016, para. 1). Developing and evaluating course content through the lens of engagement can help instructors create an environment that is conducive to learning and mastery of course outcomes.

"What I hear, I forget; what I see, I remember; what I do, I understand." –Chinese proverb

The majority of online learners seek formal education for a multitude of reasons but can be frustrated by the lack of transferrable skills. Online education can bridge this gap by utilizing authentic activities, allowing learners to gain skills that directly connect to their professional lives.

This is the second in a series of pieces exploring different types of course engagement. This piece focuses on how course developers and instructors can foster student-content engagement in online courses.

Office hours, blocks of time designated for faculty and student interaction outside of any regularly scheduled class sessions, are routinely incorporated into university courses (Briody et al., 2019; Hsu et al., 2022). Such sessions are often semi-structured and optional for students, allowing faculty to provide customized support to individual learners when needs arise. This form of faculty-student interaction can support academic achievement, retention, and engagement (Griffin et al., 2014; Guzzardo et al., 2021). That office hours attendance is often at the discretion of individual students, however, can result in underutilization of this valuable supplement to required course sessions and contents (Briody et al., 2019; Griffin et al., 2014; Smith et al., 2017). The purpose of this blog is to delineate empirically guided strategies for optimizing the inclusion of office hours in university courses. In particular, we focus on office hours hosted online, as the online modality can be advantageously employed not only for courses delivered online but also for those delivered residentially.

Multimodal courses allow for exciting opportunities in course content and activities but can be, by design, less flexible than asynchronous courses and less predictable than synchronous courses. These opportunities thus come with needs for additional logistical support and flexibility, as students need both to be able to take advantage of the opportunities of synchrony and asynchrony equitably. How can you best support students in a multimodal course, providing guidance through multiple forms of interaction? This piece gives insight into what kinds of support benefit students in multimodal courses and how to provide them. We’ll end with five quick tips for supporting students that apply to almost any multimodal course.

Faculty often express concern over how to maintain personal relationships with their students in an online course space; incorporating optional synchronous elements to an online course can help “put a face” to a name. Zoom, the video conferencing tool that allows you to create synchronous experiences for their students, has become ubiquitous in educational and businesses in the past two years.

Designing a successful multimodal course means, at each step of the process, considering what each format does well—structuring the course such that each piece of content, each activity, each interaction uses the most effective delivery method available. But what does that look like in practice? This piece describes three approaches to structuring a multimodal course. In each model, asynchronous and synchronous time complement one another and further module and course objectives. Where the models differ is in the relative importance of asynchronous activities in enabling students to complete synchronous activities and vice versa.