Online Learning: Strategies for Pedagogical Retooling

Maureen Snow Andrade

2016

Abstract

Higher education can be conceptualized as a partnership between the learner and the institution. However, this may necessitate changes in practice, such as the development of flexible learning models to accommodate individuals from a range of backgrounds and life circumstances, particularly those traditionally excluded from higher education. Flexible modes of learning may encounter resistance or fail to deliver expected outcomes, however, thus limiting adoption. Pedagogical retooling can address this. This paper reviews the current status of one type of flexible delivery—online learning—in terms of stakeholder views, the need for continued institutional responsiveness, and pedagogical strategies that support desired outcomes. The latter includes pedagogical training that involves implementing elements of effective course design, simulating the student learning experience, forming communities of practice, and sustaining practice with follow-on support.

References

  1. Allen, E. I., Seaman, J., Lederman, D., & Jaschik, S. (2012, June). Conflicted: Faculty and online education, 2012. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group and Washington, DC: Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/ sites/default/server_files/files/IHE-BSRG-Conflict.pdf
  2. Allen, E. I., & Seaman, J. (2015). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group. Retrieved from http://www. onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradelevel.pdf
  3. Andrade, M. S. (2013). Global learning by distance: Principles and practicalities for learner support. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 3(1), 66-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ ijopcd.2013010105
  4. Andrade, M. S. (2014a). Course embedded support for online English language learners. Open Praxis, 6(1), 65-73. Retrieved from http://openpraxis.org/index. php/OpenPraxis/issue/view/7/showToc. http://dx.doi. org/10.5944/openpraxis.6.1.90
  5. Andrade, M. S. (2014b). Dialogue and structure: Enabling learner self-regulation in technology enhanced learning environments. European Journal of Educational Research 13(5), 563-574. Retrieved from www.wwwords.eu/eerj/content/pdfs/13/issue13_5.asp
  6. Andrade, M. S. (2015). Teaching online: A theory-based approach to student success. Journal of Education and Training Studies 3(5), 1-9. Retrieved from http://redfame.com/journal/index.php/jets/article/view/ 904/844. http://dx.doi.org/10.11114/jets.v3i5.904
  7. Bichsel, J. (2013, June). The state of e-learning in higher education: An eye toward growth and increased access (Research Report). Louisville, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research (ECAR). Retrieved from educause.edu/library /resources/state-e-learning-higher- education-eyetoward-growth-and-increased-access
  8. British Council. (2012). The shape of things to come: Higher education global trends and emerging opportunities to 2020. Retrieved from http://www. britishcouncil.org/education/ihe/knowledge-centre/glo bal-landscape/report-shape-of-things-to-come-1
  9. Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., Caldera, L, & Soares, L. (2011, February). Disrupting college: How disruptive innovation can deliver quality and affordability to postsecondary education. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress & Mountainview, CA: Innosight Institute. Retrieved from https://www.american progress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2011/02/pdf/ disrupting_college.pdf
  10. European Commission. (2014, February). Report to the European Commission on new modes of teaching and learning in higher education. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Commission.
  11. Higher Education Academy. (2015). Framework for flexible learning in higher education. York, England: The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/enhancement/framewor ks/framework-flexible-learning-higher-education
  12. John N. Gardner Institute. (2016). Gateway courses. Retrieved from http://www.jngi.org/gateway-coursesdefinition/
  13. LeBlanc, P. (2015, July). Higher education's climate change crisis: Innovation and opportunity and a changing eco-system. Paper presented at the AAEEBL conference, Boston, MA.
  14. Lokken, F., & Mullins, C. (2014, April). Trends in eLearning: Tracking the impact of eLearning in community colleges. Washington, DC: Instructional Technology Council. Retrieved from http://www.itcnetwork.org/membership/itc-distanceeducation-survey-results.html
  15. McQuiggen, C. A. (2012). Faculty development for online teaching as a catalyst of change. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 16(2), 27-61. Retrieved from http://onlinelearningconsortium.org /read/journal-issues/
  16. Palloff, R. M. (2014). Can they flip? Teaching instructors to flip the classroom through a flipped approach. Paper presented at the 30th Annual Conference of Distance Teaching and Learning, Madison, WI.
  17. Pushing the barriers to teaching improvement: A state system's experience with faculty-led, technologysupported course redesign. (2015, October). Adelphi, MD: The William E. Kirwan Center for Academic Innovation. Retrieved from http://www.usmd.edu/ cai/sites/default/files/USMCourseRedesignReportSept2015.pdf
  18. Radford, A. W. (2011, October). Learning at a distance. Undergraduate enrollment in distance education courses and degree programs. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=201 2154
  19. Renick, T. M. (2016, February). Using data and analytics to re-image the first year for at-risk students. Paper presented at the AASCU Academic Affairs Winter Meeting, Austin, TX.
  20. Roscorla, T. (2014, September). 3 things higher education should know about disruptive innovation. Retrieved from http://www.govtech.com/education/3-ThingsHigher-Education-Should-Know-about-DisruptiveInnovation-.html
  21. Tait, A. (2015, April). Student success in open, distance, and e-learning. Oslo, Norway: International Council for Open and Distance Education. Retrieved from http://www.icde.org/assets/WHAT_WE_DO/studentsu ccess.pdf
  22. White, C. (2003). Language learning in distance education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667312
  23. Wildavsky, B. (2016, February). The Open University at 45: What can we learn from Britain's distance education pioneer? Retrieved from http:// www.brookings.edu/blogs/brown-center-chalkboard/ posts/2016/02/01-open-university-broadcast-lectureswildavsky?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRonu6TJdO %2FhmjTEU5z17e8vW6%2B3lMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUf GjI4ERMZrI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFS7jFMaxzzLgL XBM%3D
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Andrade M. (2016). Online Learning: Strategies for Pedagogical Retooling . In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU, ISBN 978-989-758-179-3, pages 85-90. DOI: 10.5220/0005749600850090


in Bibtex Style

@conference{csedu16,
author={Maureen Snow Andrade},
title={Online Learning: Strategies for Pedagogical Retooling},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,},
year={2016},
pages={85-90},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0005749600850090},
isbn={978-989-758-179-3},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,
TI - Online Learning: Strategies for Pedagogical Retooling
SN - 978-989-758-179-3
AU - Andrade M.
PY - 2016
SP - 85
EP - 90
DO - 10.5220/0005749600850090