Getting Online: The GO Project

Getting Online: The GO Project Distance Education Promising Practices in the Canadian Literacy Field

Getting Online A national project designed to research trends, technologies and promising practices in online and distance learning in Canada “Being online is different – you can’t see facial expressions, body language, get the feel of the class, but it is one of the most efficient ways to learn.” (Survey respondent)

Where the idea came from • Target group: • Canadian literacy practitioners – specific demographics • Experience with Writing Out Loud training • Desire to learn what other online training was being offered in literacy field

Need for the project • Growing interest in using computer technology • Readiness to use technology • Desire to establish a consistency of practice Based upon an increasing need within the literacy field for professional development

The Proposal • National Literacy Secretariat was the matchmaker • Joined up with CLO – Nov. 2005 • Initial three year proposal submitted May 2006 • Final approval and two year project started May 2007

Partners The GO Project is hosted by the Research Centre at Athabasca University Project partners: • Writing Out Loud (Alberta) • Capilano College and Literacy BC (British Columbia) • Community Literacy of Ontario (Ontario) GO is funded by the Office of Literacy and Essential Skills (HRSDC)

Research Team Pan Canadian Team Communicate and work using online and distance methods: Elluminate, First Class, email, teleconference Have had two face to face research team meetings “I love the cross-Canadian team of literacy based researchers/writers/ facilitators we have put together for the GO project.”

Goals of the project To strengthen and enhance the capacity of the Canadian literacy community by informing literacy practitioners of the use and value of distance education as a personal and professional development tool.

Project deliverables • Research Report • Interactive online training courses • Website including self–directed learning modules • Promising Practices manual for literacy practitioners • Conference presentations, newsletters and publications

The GO Project Research “The sky is the limit and an open mind goes a long way! We don’t get stuck in old technologies, just because they are comfortable. We try to look to the future: like the youth we serve.” (GO research participant) 10

GO Research Goals To research how the Canadian literacy community is using online learning technologies in their practice To research how organizations external to the literacy community are using online learning technologies To research what forms of online learning technology are being used “Online training can be used by anyone, regardless of their political beliefs, their location, their income or their physical ability.” (GO research participant) 11

Research Methods • First Research Team meeting -- May 2007 • Created six key research questions • AU’s Research Ethics Board approved • Data gathering: July to November 2007 • Second Research team meeting – Nov 2007 • Data analysis and writing – first draft complete May 2008

Research Questions Asked about: • Demographics • Training tools and methods • Training objectives • Results/evaluation • Differences noted • How the training was introduced • Future trends

Surveys • Surveys sent out from July to October 2007 via personalized emails • Active follow-up • 127 relevant responses • Pan Canadian • Diverse organizations • Diverse levels of practitioner experience • Diverse technologies 14

Key Informant Interviews 46 interviews Identified through website research, surveys and knowledge of field Structured interviews Survey questions explored in more depth Telephone /in person Two focus groups (20 people in total) 15

Analysis / Write-Up Data analysis – Atlas TI Research report written: February – May 2008 Final editing and production – Summer 2008 On GO website in fall 2008 “We have had excellent results with online learning – this has made college programs accessible to students who cannot attend the campus in person every day. Most of our students have full time life responsibilities in addition to being students.” (GO research participant) 16

Demographics of respondents Number of years of work experience Educational credential Province Number of learners enrolled Number of tutors Organizational type and size

Training Interests - ranked Online course curriculum development Using/choosing distance education technologies Providing learning support in e-learning environment Developing online facilitation skills Creating an online community Introduction to online learning

Question 1 What online or distance tools or methods do you presently use? Learning Management Systems Self-study web-based modules Online meeting / conferencing Blended learning Supplemental technologies 19

Question 2: Practitioners What are the objectives or purposes of the online or distance practices you use? Establishing and maintaining connections Doing work Saving time and money Getting and keeping up to date Gaining access to formal and informal training opportunities Honing computer skills Innovation and technology

Question 2: Organizations What are the objectives or purposes of the online or distance practices you presently use? Content specific Reduce barriers Innovation and technology Broader access Delivery of accredited educational courses Members only 21

Question 3 - Evaluation What results, good or bad, have you obtained with your online or distance learning or support practices, and how did you determine this? Formal evaluation • Surveys • Success, retention and failure rates • External evaluator • Research study • Measuring outcomes • User-testing 22

Question 3 – (continued) Informal evaluation • Informal participant feedback • Increasing demand • Real world success • Advisory group / volunteers No evaluation 23

Evaluation Results Positive results • Geographically accessible, any time / anywhere training, reduced cost; reduced time pressures; access to new client groups, great outcomes, meeting student needs Mixed results • Ability to adapt, interactivity, technology 24

Evaluation Results (continued) Negative Results: • Challenge getting people online and used to the technology • Technical glitches • Insufficient hardware/software needed to do the task • Learning mode: • Learning styles not addressed • Social and group dynamic aspect of learning not being met

Question 4 Do you find online or distance training or support methods produce different results from face-to-face methods or strategies? If so, what are the differences? Positive results with online: Reduction in geographic barriers Convenient and flexible learning Reduced costs More in-depth training experience Personal preference Access to specialized knowledge /experts Increased instructor time and access Easier to update and keep content current 26

Question 4 (continued) Negative results with online learning: Less interactivity Lack of depth Personal preference Less networking / information sharing More difficult to instruct More difficult to create content Misunderstandings occur online Visual/emotional learners struggle with online Don’t get immediate feedback (asynchronous) 27

Question 5 How were online or distance training or support methods or tools introduced? Participant support Marketing Training for online instructors Providing user-friendly technology Effective content development Continuous improvement Piloting Adequate funding and organizational capacity Having high level organizational support 28

Question 6 What future do you see for the use of online or distance training or instruction, support or professional development methods? Exploring new technologies Expanding current opportunities Increasing the quality online learning Need for adequate resources Increased access to training Offering “just in time” training Challenges to future growth Offering more blended learning 29

Question 6 (continued) Combination of excitement and resignation about the use of technology “If we can arrive at a way for people to have equal access to practitioner training, then we can get somewhere. The use of technology could assist in achieving this goal.” (Interview respondent.)

Findings Computer literacy, like other literacy skills are a continuum of skills There is significant capacity currently being developed in the Canadian literacy community However, there are many pockets where practitioners have a lack of experience with and therefore confidence in online learning Regional variance in use and experience It is more a workplace learning challenge than an adaptation to technology one

In Conclusion... “Online has much wider access and can go to areas we could never dream of going with face-to-face”. (GO research participant) 32

Getting Online: Pilot Purpose: • Introduce online learning as an optional tool for professional development for literacy practitioners Audience: • Group of 10 literacy practitioners from across Canada

Course Supports • Moodle (Athabasca and GO staff) • Teleconferencing • Elluminate Sessions • Email • Mail • Resource Material

Curriculum Unit 1: Getting Started Unit 2: Welcome to Online Learning Unit 3: Online Learning Communities Unit 4: Online Learning and Literacy

Unit 1: Getting Started To gain personal and technical readiness for the course Activities • Teleconference • Post a picture and bio • Research GO on the NALD website • Post on Hopes and Fears

Unit 2: Welcome to Online Learning To identify and discuss common characteristics, requirements, roles, and attitudes in online learning Activities • Elluminate meeting • Discussion of group guidelines • Reading and Responding to Questions

Unit 3: Online Learning Communities To summarize the key components, attributes, and behaviours of a well functioning online community Activities • Online Learning Styles Inventories • Partnering activity related to readings and discussion on “community”

Unit 4: Online Learning and Literacy To consider how online distance learning might benefit literacy practitioners and the broader literacy field Activities • Internet research on literacy and online learning • Elluminate meeting

Course Findings • Relaxed approach works • Interaction between participants did not happen until mid-point • Expectation for interaction needs to be clear at the onset of the course • Early engagement necessary for success • People did not catch up when they missed the first sessions • Facilitators energy was affected by lack of group participation

Course Findings (continued) • Participants have a need to know who is around them • Isolation disappears when the community emerges • Participants enjoyed the technology • Participants are eager for more learning • Collaborative learning creates enriched learning

Course Findings (continued) • Moodle features all functioning • Elluminate meetings, Email, and Moodle working together • Don’t assume anything about participants’ technical knowledge skills • The only way to learn about online learning is to be an online learner • Participants and facilitators learned together

Recommendations • Pre-course orientation and partnering • Extend course from 6 weeks to 8 weeks • Keep curriculum and materials • Establish expectations for interaction immediately • Clarify expectations for online interaction • Involve pilot course participants as mentors for new course participants

Summary “I really appreciated being able to get my toes wet with all this technology. I had read about online learning, but I really didn’t get it. This course has been a really helpful experience.” (Pilot course participant)

Sharing Knowledge Papers and publications Conferences Contact information www.nald.ca/gettingonline

Getting Online: The GO Project