Skip to content

Consistency is key in online learning: Evaluating student and instructor perceptions#

Scutelnicu, G., Tekula, R., Gordon, B., & Knepper, H. J. (2019). Consistency is key in online learning: Evaluating student and instructor perceptions of a collaborative online-course template. Teaching Public Administration, 37(3), 274--292. https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739419852759

Area of inquiry#

Research questions#

To what extent are online course templates beneficial to student learning and instructor teaching experiences?

In particular, a template designed using Quality Matters principles

This online-course template design was intended to facilitate student learning through consistency of access to course materials and effective and efficient instructor utilization of Blackboard throughout the public administration department.

Methodology#

Multi-informant survey. Pilot tested on 10 individuals knowledgable on subject

Asked

familiarity and usability of the online template, its consistency and standardization, its impact on learning and/or teaching experiences, and recommendations for useful features not currently present in the online template.

graduate Students n=123, response=41%#

  • 57% part-time
  • 63% campus 1
  • 31.5% campus 2
  • 5.5% fully online

Faculty 3 full-time, 11 part-time, response=71%#

3 full-time staff are the authors of the study.

Findings#

  • Students and faculty perceive template's consistency positively.
  • Students found template more helpful to learning than teachers to teaching

Students#

62.5% were neutral on whether the template was better than the previous

Overall low numbers (perceived by me) on other factors.

Students comment

  • faculty still used the template inconsistently in parts.
  • a more user-friendly interface would be helpful

Faculty#

Not all faculty were aware of the template. Those who were could identify it.

Discussion#

Three contributions (questionable)

  1. suggest that online-course templates may be drivers of online learning communities with the potential to reduce transactional distance
  2. notes that online-course templates may serve as online tutorials for first-time students and help students successfully navigate (a need identified in Naylor et al, 2016)
  3. online-course templates have the ability to contribute to lower online student drop-out rates

Practical Recommendations#

  • online templates have benefits
  • Value in developing them using a collaborative, bottom-up approach that engages faculty and academic technology experts

Weaknesses and limitations#

Low external validity (p. 282) and under-represents female faculty

Relationship to other research#

Online is everywhere

Online course templates - definition#

Online course templates standardise navigation (Ley and Gannon-Cook, 2014) and lighten cognitive load

Benefits

  • early student engagement (Borgemenke et al 2013)
  • comfort (Dykman and Davis, 2008)
  • success (Miller, 2012)

Conditions for embracing consistency#

Three conditions necessary for consistency in online course design

  1. the transactional distance between teacher and the learner is menimised through increasing engagement;
  2. the course template is the result of a collaborative effort
  3. consistency in online learning is unlikely to infringe upon academic freedeom

Cites Moore on transactional distance. And argues that a sense of familiarity (afforded by consitency) helps reduce transactional distance. Also helps create sense of belonging (Gigliotti, 2016)

(Caplan, 2004) online course development too complex for instructors to develop courses alone.

Issues with LMS#

Many options which

These options can be overwhelming for faculty and staff and confusing for students who try to navigate different courses using varied course template approaches.

Further research#

Three questions from the paper#

  1. How should universities bridge student and faculty needs and preferences at a time when technology is rapidly evolving and the new generation of students possess advanced technological skills and expectations while faculty may not?
  2. What role could course design play in balancing student learning and faculty teaching preferences?
  3. How best should online-course template consistency be managed without unduly infringing upon academic freedom?

The first is a little questionable given tacit assumption of "digital natives". But the difference in needs and preferences is a point to consider.

The last might point to the need for an ateleological approach. Enabling change to happen.

Teaching staff who are not researchers/developers#

The 3 authors of this paper are also the full time teachers into the courses that had the template applied. Hence large bit of bias? What do staff who were not directly involved think?

But the 3 authors "were not involved in designing the template as they joined the department at a later time"

Quality versus consistency: Is consistency really the thing#

As reported in this study, there is no doubt that consistency has benefits for online learning (p. 289)

It's not clear that they haven't really made the case (to my mind). Does the nature of a survey from teaching staff asking questions about a course actually support this. THey liked the template, but was it the consistency of the template that made the difference?

Students suggested that a more user-friendly interface would be helpful (p. 286). Also a comment about the template not being as interactive as elsewhere. Only 37.5% strongly/somehow agreed that the new template was better than before. 62.5% were neutral

One faculty considered the online template non-functional on mobile devices.

Suggesting that the template wasn't of the highest quality. What is the relationship between the quality of a template and consistency?