Search

From trivia games to final exams, quizzing tools have a variety of uses for learning as well as assessment. Exams and quizzes have a particularly plentiful range of possibilities in a multimodal or hybrid course, where they can be administered synchronously or asynchronously. Research suggests that the presentation of a tool influences student behavior in response to the tool. In comparing two student discussion boards, one an ungraded discussion and one a graded replacement for a final exam, Cheng et al. (2013) found that students displayed more knowledge on the graded board, but more evidence of learning on the ungraded board. The students who participated in the study were more likely to grapple with new ideas when the stakes were low, but more eager to showcase topics they were confident about when their responses would have a greater impact on their grades. When considering quizzing tools, then, we recommend allowing your course goals to guide your usage.

Formal writing requires sustained focus on content and close attention to detail. For these reasons, written assignments can be an effective assessment tool in graduate courses when they are thoughtfully and purposefully designed. This guide provides recommendations for faculty who are looking to harness the pedagogical benefits of written assignments.

Case studies are an effective and powerful pedagogical tool. They present realistic narratives to students and require them to analyze possible outcomes or solve a dilemma or challenge associated with the narrative, and they are often followed by a series of questions or prompts that ask students to demonstrate their learning. Case studies can be based on real-world situations or fictional scenarios modeled on authentic occurrences. Regardless of the source and format, case studies provide students an opportunity to practice solving problems that they might encounter in the future.

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.

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.

When a Canvas quiz has a limited number of attempts and an availability date, there are two sets of actions instructors usually need to take to provide a student with an additional attempt or extension on the quiz. First, the instructor will need to add a new quiz attempt for the student. Second, if the availability date has passed or is about to pass, they will need to extend the availability of the quiz. This short guide will walk you through both stages of the process.

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.

Project Based Learning is learning that is organized around a project (Bell, 2010). It is a student-centered approach to learning, where students choose their topic of study and design an integrative project around the topic (Bell, 2010; Astawa, Artini, Nitiasih, 2017). This form of study promotes self-efficacy in the learning environment. Such self-efficacy enables students to perform more difficult tasks and develop confidence in their abilities (Shin, 2018). These abilities generally help students to transfer their skills to the real world.

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.