Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i31Dsom19610; Thu, 1 Apr 2004 08:55:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 08:55:00 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <221E918332E818488687199E5CBD74CEFDD29E@keats.keats> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: kgongora <kgongora@proliteracy.org> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1300] FW: Scheduled On Courses VS Open Entry-Open Exi X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Status: O Content-Length: 3276 Lines: 74 Debra, This is exactly what we are currently doing on Verizon Literacy University. It does pose a unique challenge. One of the strengths of online learning, as has been discussed at great length here, is the creation of a community of learners. However, we cannot guarantee that there will ever be concurrent users in a class at any one time. Furthermore, since the courses are 'open' there is not a facilitator actively engaged in the course while students are proceeding through it, making the learning experience an individual experience rather than a community one. It's really forcing us to think about 'interactivity' in our courses, as a separate idea from 'activity' and how to get around the prescribed course model of our learning management system. As one example, the LMS has a discussion board feature. We tend to use this in certain courses as more of a 'message board' where students can post ideas/responses to a question and read what others have offered. I consider this more activity than interactivity, since there is no immediate reward or feedback for the learner specific to their post. Regarding the retention rate for courses such as this, it is my experience from working in online learning in a variety of disciplines that in cases like ours, offering some type of prescribed curriculum, credits or CEUs is the only way to ensure higher levels of course completion. (It's something we are currently investigating with VLU.) Another point is to offer shorter courses specific to a very manageable objective, where learners can take a quick course/tutorial that meets a pressing need, then use that information on the job immediately. Even so, retention rates are generally low for these types of courses, unless it's directly tied to something else in their professional development. Reasons for this run the gamut from poorly designed courses to a wrong student/course match. I'd be curious to hear what the expectations are in this field on CEUs, credits, etc from literacy programs. What ongoing professional develop requirements do you have for the different types of staff, administrative staff, instructional staff, et al.? Kristine Marane Góngora, Instructional Designer ProLiteracy Worldwide kgongora@proliteracy.org -----Original Message----- From: Dlhargrove@aol.com [mailto:Dlhargrove@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 8:22 AM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1298] Scheduled On Courses VS Open Entry-Open Exit Hi group, As I read NIckie's response on her strategies for engaging students, I realize that most of the online PD everyone is talking about involves a set class time period... that is, students sign up and the online class begins on a certain date and ends at a certain date. All of the web-based trainings that we offer on the Florida TechNet website are open entry-open exit. After I heard the positive results that the Center for Literacy Studies had after adopting one of our trainings, I thought it might increase our retention if we scheduled the online trainings for certain time periods. No one in our state wanted a set schedule. My question is, has anyone else used the open entry-open exit process for their online PD? Debra Debra Hargrove Florida TechNet
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:45:46 EST