Finally, the topic I have been looking for since the beginning of this course is here, designing an online course. Honestly, I am equally unsure (or even more) on how to approach it as I was with the previous topics. There are many reasons for that and responsibility is one of them. I have been careful to attend the webinars, participate in the discussions with the PBL group, look at the models and guidelines on how to design an online course, practical tips and tools to pay attention to… and yet again, I need to stop myself in order not to feel overwhelmed with all the extensive material and knowledge that is available. As always, taken by the enthusiasm and motivation to use all this knowledge in practice, I forget that I should take them one at a time, and the most important reflect upon integrating them into designing a course in order to meet the specific needs of the students. And this is hard to do.

Generally speaking, designing an online course requires a lot of planning in advance, analysis and the most important, an informed design. The parallelization with the informed design we are used to see in software engineering is that on the one hand, the design is based on resources, meaning that it should be informed by different resources, such as theories, best practices, teacher knowledge and by reflecting on how such resources could be applied in different teaching contexts (Oliver & Conole, 2003). On the other hand, it is based on reflections, evaluations and many many iterations, meaning that it is fundamental to also reflect and adapt to analyses and evaluations of designs to improve student learning and the quality of teaching (Zwozdiak-Myers, 2018).

Apart from the informed design, I would see parallelization with user-centric design, in that the user, e.g., student is at the core of the design, designing for the student, his needs, learning styles, competences, aspirations, etc. We all agree that designing for a student in mathematics is different from one in computer science, but cultural differences, age, technology competences, learning experiences are only some factors that should be considered as well. Hence, it is vital to anticipate diversity and to design to cater for the diverse needs of students. Martin Weller suggested the usage of learning personas that could help in this direction.

Another thing I have realized on the last two years of teaching online is the challenge of engaging students in an online environment. What makes it complex is that engagement doesn’t translate only to online participation or presence as such. Schaufeli (2013) defines engagement as a composite of involvement, focused effort, dedication, and absorption. There are seldom any well-defined guidelines how to achieve student engagement and honestly I think there shouldn’t necessarily be any. I believe that this is what effective online teaching is about, continuously reflecting on what works on your specific context and circumstances in order to improve teaching emphasized by students’ needs and lessons learned. We in PBL group 10 discussed the importance of synchronous and asynchronous learning technologies that could help in effective student interaction and in general online teaching, allowing students to interact synchronous, but without leaving behind the flexibility of asynchronous interaction, to interact at their preferred time and location.

References:

Oliver, M., & Conole, G. (2003). Evidence-based practice and e-learning in higher education: Can we and should we? Research Papers in Education, 18(4), 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267152032000176873

Zwozdiak-Myers, P. (2018). The teacher’s reflective practice handbook: Becoming an extended professional through capturing evidence-informed practice. Routledge

Schaufeli, W. B. (2013). Employee engagement in theory and practice. Routledge.

Martin Weller webinar (May, 2022)