1 / 20

Dr. Donna Harp Ziegenfuss Dr. Cynthia Furse Dr. Stacy Bamberg donna.ziegenfuss@utah

Using a MOOC as a Faculty Development Tool A Learning Community for STEM Faculty Teaching Flipped Classes. Dr. Donna Harp Ziegenfuss Dr. Cynthia Furse Dr. Stacy Bamberg donna.ziegenfuss@utah.edu http:// Teach-Flip.utah.edu. Session Agenda.

vance
Download Presentation

Dr. Donna Harp Ziegenfuss Dr. Cynthia Furse Dr. Stacy Bamberg donna.ziegenfuss@utah

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Using a MOOC as a Faculty Development Tool A Learning Community for STEM Faculty Teaching Flipped Classes Dr. Donna Harp Ziegenfuss Dr. Cynthia Furse Dr. Stacy Bamberg donna.ziegenfuss@utah.edu http://Teach-Flip.utah.edu MOOCs in STEM: Exploring New Educational Technologies Conference | SJSU June 6, 2014

  2. Session Agenda • Overview of our approach and the Canvas open course: Teaching with the Flipped Classroom • Getting MOOC teaching experience first • Then using the MOOC experience to design the TUES grant project learning experience • Working progress • Lessons learned thus far • Future plans MOOCs in STEM: Exploring New Educational Technologies Conference | SJSU June 6, 2014

  3. Round #1 Experience from teaching a Canvas.net MOOC Strengths • Interaction and guidance provided by the instructors • Course content and topic, perceptions they were learning in the course, and the overall course experience • Reported they learned valuable skills that were relevant to them, applied directly to their goals forthe courseand/or their jobs

  4. Experience of teaching a Canvas.net MOOC (cont.) Weaknesses • More student-to-student interaction (similar to what was done for the instructor-student interaction) • Confusion related to multiple navigation schemes (too many different way to get to content)

  5. Course Design/Re-Design Approach • Engage faculty in rethinking how they design and implement instruction (Fink, 2003; U of U, 2012) • Connect faculty to the educational literature (how people learn, pedagogical innovation, not just tech) • Provide flexible opportunities for interacting with each other, discussion and problem solving, mentoring each other in a learning community (Cox, 2001; Wenger, 2002) • Develop integration of existing support services with faculty needs MOOCs in STEM: Exploring New Educational Technologies Conference | SJSU June 6, 2014

  6. Our NSF TUES Grant Project (1245904) • Research university & community college partnership • Increase collaboration in engineering • Create better transitioning for engineering students • Rely on current support structures and services • Faculty development effort grounded in faculty interests and MOOC expertise • Focused on STEM but attracting interest from many other areas

  7. Open Access? Flipped? Traditional? Hybrid? MOOC? xMOOC? cMOOC? Technology Assisted? Blended? MOOCs in STEM: Exploring New Educational Technologies Conference | SJSU June 6, 2014

  8. What were we really trying to do? • Improve learning? Empower for success? • Engagement in the learning process? • Increase number of STEM students or retain STEM students through better STEM course experiences? • Guide to become more self directed learners? • Further education within the STEM fields? • What else? … What is your “dream”? MOOCs in STEM: Exploring New Educational Technologies Conference | SJSU June 6, 2014

  9. The Course Design • “Backwards Design” Collaborative process –Quality Course Framework (QCF) • Action research: • pilot – assess – redesign • Course design components • pedagogy (read/reflect) • technical implementation (try it) • experiential support and mentoring(reflect and share) MOOCs in STEM: Exploring New Educational Technologies Conference | SJSU June 6, 2014

  10. Pedagogical Phases Technical Phases Explicit in connecting pedagogy and technology pieces

  11. Fink, 2003

  12. http://Teach-Flip.utah.edu • Round #2 • Sp 2014 course: • Grounded inliterature • Active learning • Quality course design practices • The assessment cycle • Mentoring and support as they flip their classroom

  13. http://Teach-Flip.utah.edu • Round #3: Flip & Chips Su 2014 • Model the flipped environment – 2 F2F sessions • Shorter session and more room for self-directed learning • Provide opportunities for sharing – developing community • Use to engage interest for more comprehensive sessions

  14. Data Collection from Pilot #1 1. Measuring change in concerns about flipping: Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM profile) Pre-Course Group data

  15. Data Collection from Pilot #1 (cont.) 2. Analysis of faculty “threshold concept” challenges using IHMC Cmap Tools

  16. Data Collection from Pilot #1 (cont.) • Interview and pre-post survey data is under analysis • Pre-course expectations, post-course reflections analyzed • Evidence-based redesign of mini-flipping course based on pilot faculty feedback and based on: • Time constraints • Navigation simplicity

  17. Data Collection from Pilot #2: mini-course • Preliminary course data from 1-week flipped session under analysis • Canvas data, interviews underway • Pre-survey expectations, post-survey reflections Recording of change in CBAM profiles • Evidence-based redesign of fall 2014 course based on faculty feedback from 2 different pilots will be used this summer to design the first full run MOOC run this fall 2014

  18. Lessons Learned • Faculty schedules and time make it difficult to engage regularly in a predefined time frame for faculty development • The interaction of faculty and learning from other faculty is the most valuable component • Increased collaboration by campus support units due to this initiative • Identified a need for more cross-institutional collaboration with partners on the design, etc. MOOCs in STEM: Exploring New Educational Technologies Conference | SJSU June 6, 2014

  19. Round #4 Next Steps for Fall 2014 Course: A Canvas.net MOOC or a larger campus trial? Provide options: True flipped hybrid for faculty on our campus and also online MOOC modules for those off campus • Streamlining of content and modules – less time, better completion rate for faculty • Gathering and integrating the real world cases of participants’ experiences flipping • More detailed and refined research plan

  20. References • Cox, M. (2003). Proven faculty development tools That foster the SoTL in faculty learning communities.”To Improve the Academy, 21, 109–142. • Fink, L. D. (2005). Integrated Course Design. Idea Paper #42, KS: The Idea Center available online at: http://ideaedu.org/sites/default/files/Idea_Paper_42.pdf • Fink, L. D. 2003. Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. • IHMC CMap Tools Software. (2014). Main website. Available at: http://cmap.ihmc.us/ • University College London, Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, (1999–2013). Threshold concepts: Undergraduate teaching, postgraduate training and professional development: A short introduction and bibliography Available online at: http://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/thresholds.html • University of Utah (2012). The quality course framework (QCF). Tutorial and information available online at: http://tlt.utah.edu/qcf/ • Wenger, E. (2009). Digital Habitats. Portland: CPsquare. • Images: open access, hybrid car, blender, MOOC, technology tools

More Related