The overall collaboration process focused on using Google to help the student self-edit. After seeking guidance and approval on content from mentor and coach through email and voice chat, the student used voice-to-text software to submit his drafts for review. The writing coach and mentor used Google Docs to highlight and comment on the student’s work, emphasizing his strengths. Their role was not to edit the document, but to encourage autonomy by highlighting problems like spelling or grammatical errors for him to fix on his own and notify the writing coach when complete. A conference call was then set up, involving two of the parties connecting via Google voice chat and the third participating using a speaker phone (cell or land line). This combination evolved after numerous technical glitches arose attempting a three-way Google voice chat. All team members could view the document online, make changes, and discuss them. Each participant had their own cursor to locate and edit discussed text, literally placing them on the same page making changes in full view of each other’s input. The process is comparable to having three people in the conferring in the same room, but with the ability to make changes in a single document that are automatically saved every few seconds.

The uniqueness of this first online learning conference was its intent. We felt that even though many faculty had been teaching online for several years, there was no organizing office or unified policy around online teaching at our University except those within departments and programs. Our University is beginning to focus on online programs with support and mission. It was time to describe the nature of quality online teaching for our campus by our own people with experience. We wanted to give our faculty the opportunity to have a dialogue about quality online teaching among those who have been teaching and those who are beginning to teach in this environment. The basis of teaching online is building community. This conference was meant to begin building our own campus community of online practitioners by the simple means of sharing ideas around a table and a meal. The value of the conference is that the faculty were heard and their experience validated as important information to share. The questions posed for this first Summit were:

• What shifts in practice seem most important for those new to teaching online?

• How does instructor role and identity change as one begins to transition to the online environment?

• How are notions of “teaching online” reshaping expectations for faculty workload?

• What role should professional development play in preparing faculty to teach effectively online? • What resources are necessary to best support faculty members who are in the process of making the transition to online teaching?

• What constitutes effective teaching practice in the online environment?

• What role does / should digital technology play as an element constituting effective practice online?

• How should effective or exemplary online teaching practice be demonstrated and evaluated?

• What practices are essential for supporting online learning regardless of discipline or content?

The papers presented were responses to these questions from these faculty's personal teaching experience. After the positions were presented, we spent an hour discussing them at tables. The moderators took notes. These notes will be summarized as part of the proceedings and posted to the Summit website. These Proceedings and the papers will be available for print.

Since eduKan’s courses required physically proctored exams and other gradable events such as discussion/participation groups and quizzes, they wanted a technology that could be used for all gradable events and meet the online student’s needs by keeping the experience online. eduKan wanted to find an online student ID verification solution that would not limit them to a single point in time but allow them to make student verification a continuous process. eduKan also wanted to have the ability to challenge their student’s identity randomly during each course to ensure their Academic Integrity was not being compromised by growing their online course offering and enrollment as this verification process would also work to deter students from cheating online. eduKan rolled out the BSI solution to all of their online students in May 2011 as their student ID authentication system. BioSig-ID(TM) has now replaced most of their physical proctoring, is used for all other gradable events, ensures compliance, and provides random periodic challenges to the students to deter cheating. eduKan administrators and instructors can access BSI’s audit trail and reporting tool to review student verifications, monitor re-set requests, compare success ratios to identify and confirm any suspicious activity during the verification process. The use of BioSig-ID(TM) ensures eduKan’s compliance issues are met or exceeded today and for the foreseeable future.

An example of the practice using the model of: * reviewing initial evidence * the decisions made based on the evidence * the preliminary results of the initiatives that were put into place * what changes were made based on these data after the implementation of the initiative is illustrated using a pilot project in MATH 1101 – Introduction of Mathematical Modeling where three primary areas of concern were addressed: 1) Attendance & Classroom Engagement 2) Unpreparedness of Students 3) Completion of Homework Seven section of MATH 1101 were part of the project in fall 2010 and 6 sections in spring 2011. Through the redesign of classroom lectures to make them more interactive and a homework management system, there has been an increase in the success rates for those sections and a decrease in withdrawal rates. Elements of the redesign of MATH 1101 have since been implemented in most sections of MATH 1101. It should be noted that this is but one example of how Macon State College is using data analytics for course redesign, program curriculum improvement, summplemental instruction, and to reengage student for degree completion.

Users are guided step-by-step in populating six sections: information, course objectives, course resources, course activities, policies and grades. An example syllabus is provided to model content and design best practices. Users are assisted in the development of course objectives. The tool computes a points-based grading scale from provided grading component values. Campus policies and federal laws relevant to education can be incorporated into the tool to ensure that every learner is informed of her or his institutional and legal rights.

The UCS was developed and implemented to: Provide students participating in an accelerated online principal preparation program a more user-friendly experience by seeing consistent formatting across program courses. Maintain program alignment to state competency requirements and university content. Deliver consistent rigor by preventing course focus drift between multiple instructor course sections. Allow subject matter experts to concentrate resource utilization on developing methods of delivering concept content instead of course delivery.

For years I have heard colleagues and friends bemoan the great change we are experiencing in higher education and society at large. “It is like we have awakened on a different planet, one where students are different, communication is different, entertainment is different, and even learning is different.” I have even seen some teachers employ practices that forbid the use of technology (laptops, smartphones & smart devices) in the classroom, and I have wondered…to what end? What greater benefit could this practice serve? I have heard colleagues say “I am just not a technology person,” and I have wondered what if my second language students told them “I am just not an English user.” From my perspective, when English teachers say “I am not a math person” or math teachers say “I am not a writer” it sends the wrong message to students. How are we modeling lifelong learning to students if we are quick to defend our lack of expertise in math, writing, or technology by dismissing these fields or worse, banning them, from our classrooms? Wouldn’t we better model to students a passion for lifelong learning if we embraced things we didn’t know and mentored new and effective ways to learn them? Following on that line of reasoning, I have embraced new practices in my classroom. I use smartphones, smart devices and a variety of Web 2.0 and smart device applications to facilitate learning. Here is a link to a Valencia produced video spot of me using smart devices with my students http://youtu.be/qRni2q8KN1w I have also found that this practice allows me to:

Better engage students: I start every semester by asking my students if they have a smartphone or smart device. I ask them how many of them use SMS text to communicate. To their surprise, I then tell them to take out their phones and devices and leave them on the desktops because we will be using them throughout the semester. Each day I try to work in problems to solve or I share apps or learning tricks utilizing various technologies. Anecdotally, I have found that by teaching and learning through these devices students have become more engaged in my classes. Students also come in wanting to share new technologies and resources they have found that have helped them learn.

Disseminate content: I use QR code, tiny URLs, and other links to share content with my students and other colleagues when I do faculty development. For example, on the first day of class, students download QR code scanners to their devices and immediately link to my syllabus via a QR code I project on the screen. The QR code takes them to the web-based document which downloads to their phone in seconds. I do the same with various handouts, readings, quizzes, and surveys throughout the semester. For students without smartphones, or phones with scanners, I give tiny URLs and embed links to content in Blackboard, our learning management system.

Provide On-Demand Learning: Also embedded in my Blackboard course is a folder called FAQ&How2 which holds On-Demand learning videos and screencasts that I have made for my students. For example, I require my writing students to scan documents using a document scanner in the writing center, so I have created a how2 video (a digital mashup of actual video and screencast) to show them how to use the resources in the lab to scan documents. They are able to watch the video instructions on their phone while they are attempting to scan the documents in the lab. After they have done this a few times, I share with them a variety of apps that would let them do the same thing with their phones. I also share with them the wonders of YouTube, Khan Academy, and a variety of other video On-Demand learning resources they can access through their phones.

Provide immediate feedback: I use cellphones to provide students with immediate visual feedback by using tools classroom response tools like Poll Everywhere and Socrative. These free tools allow students to text or click in their answers individually or in groups. Their answers are then graphed and projected anonymously to the entire class. This allows them to benefit from group think and spurs great conversations about why the answers are what they are and how we got to these answers, rather than simply what the answers are.

Assess learning: I also utilize smart devices and Google Forms to formatively assess students with what I see as the 21st century equivalent of Classroom Assessment Techniques (Angelo & Cross 1993). I have students use QR code or go to http://tinyurl.com/teachmeaskme to take a survey that asks them to either teach me back something they learned that day or ask me about something they had trouble with. Since I am using Google Forms, the responses are time stamped and arranged in a Google spreadsheet for me which allows me to see how a class went or more importantly how I can improve it. Model transactive thinking and learning beyond my classroom: Like it or not, the digital/millennial shift we are experiencing, has, for lack of a better analogy, brought us to a different planet. We, professors, are no longer the living stores of information. Everything we know and more is available via smartphone, and students have access to it for free if they know how to ask. We are no longer remembering things; we are remembering how to get to things (Sparrow, Liu, Wegner, 2011). Using smart phones and devices in my classroom allows me to model digital, transactive thinking and learning, best practices for finding information, and critical analysis, not only for content in my classroom, but for content beyond my classroom.

Sample list of smart device applications and resources I use with students:

Remind101, Google Docs, Google Forms, Google Goggles, SoftChalk, Camtasia, Poll Everywhere, SMS Text, Wiffiti, Socrative, YouTube, RSA Animate, Khan Academy, TED, QIK, Animoto, VoiceThread, Inigma, Genius Scan, Imagetotxt, speakit, hootsuite, posterous, iprompt, dropbox, and more.

BACKGROUND

In an era where online videos are viewed billions of times each day, online education—especially asynchronous learning—is quality challenged by the practice of trying to translate the physical classroom experience onto a two dimensional screen using captured lecture videos. Often these videos are produced by simply placing a camera in the classroom or by delivering a class in a video technology enhanced classroom. While this hybrid approach has distinct advantages in increasing accessibility, and minimizing content development overhead and culture clash on the production and delivery-side for faculty and institutions, product quality is highly variable and often falls far short of the rich experience possible with effective live classroom delivery. Calling on the decades-old knowledge developed in the broadcast and film industry that can create compelling, informative, and engaging presentations, an emerging pedagogical approach that has demonstrated effectiveness is an online presentation style called “doculectures.” A doculecture is a PowerPoint-free cinematic presentation, formalized in content, and supported with media such as subject descriptive film, photographs, animations, music, and text. This new approach couples the information intensity of a university lecture with the audiovisual warmth and dynamics of a documentary film. Using HD and surround-sound optimized for headphones, a cinematic doculecture approach leverages our understanding of the cognitive neuroscience of learning and memory using dynamic imagery, sounds, virtual spacial effects, as well as opportunities for disfluency that promote deeper learning.

DOCULECTURE WORKFLOW

1)  Write a lecture as a formal referenced topic paper suitable for publication keeping in mind that one thousand words is approximately fifteen minutes of oral presentation. Traditional lecture materials such as presentation slides can be good resources to provide an outline for this paper. Target subtopic title breaks in the paper at least every three to five hundred words as this is key to formatting doculecture breaks and the effective learning practice using shorter packages of information that accommodate attention span. Effective use of examples and detailed explanations of subject-specific topics, like math formulas, are written out as if providing a detailed explanation in print.

2)  Preserve the original paper as a background and citation resource. Rewrite another copy of the paper, deleting in-text citations and translating to a more informal spoken word presentation that you will be “reading” from a teleprompter. For example, many will write the word “utilize” whereas the spoken version of the verb will be “use.” This “script”, like any lecture, can be modified to focus the introduction and the conclusion, adding intensity and vocal color like alliteration, power words, and inspirational words that help frame critical concepts and learning objectives. The script can now be practiced for flow and pronunciation, and edited appropriately. Hard to pronounce words like medical terminology can be easily spelled out phonetically for smooth prompting. Script breaks at natural thematic breaks, guided by the subtopics of the written work are critical for ease of taped presentation, production, and learning effectiveness, typically yielding three to eight minute segments separated by short five to ten-second low density cognitive pauses. What you load into a teleprompter does not have to be a word-for-word script and each presenter will have a variable degree of "prompting" need. A key concept is to use a prompter to maintain eye contact and thus connection with your students on the other side of the lens.  

3)  Format the doculecture script as a transcript and captioning resource to incorporate best practices for course access by people with disabilities. Copyright the work if appropriate and desired.

4)   Load script into an on-camera teleprompter and tape the presentation in a studio, classroom or on-location in a subject appropriate location. A static wide-shot, one camera, no-operator taping can produce a very nice work product especially if a monitor is used. A teleprompter operator produces the best product, tracking the natural pace of the presentation, although hand and foot-pedal remotes for the presenter are available. Use best practices when filming including: using a room without background noises; using an “infinity” white screen background sized for wide-screen production that will serve as a digital “chalkboard” in post-production; having presenter lighting appropriate to the location; avoiding close-up camera framing unless familiar with theater make-up (HD close-ups are cruel to most of us); using full body or three-quarter presenter framing, avoiding frame cut at body joints like knees or waist; adopting presenter framing with the esthetic photographic convention of “thirds”; repeating diction flubs and fails for later editing; avoiding lavaliere microphones if possible as they are mono and produce a flat artificial sound; using a boomed stereo shotgun microphone or dual left and right channel shotgun microphones for spacial dimensionality—stereo separation allows the instructor to walk through the student’s head via headphones while walking from one end of the white screen to the other; and following basic camera screen talent techniques such as expressive presentation and avoiding tight patterned clothing which can cause screen distortions for viewers. Practicing teleprompted presentations takes some time for those new to the technique, however once familiarity and comfort is developed, it is often less difficult than other modes of digital presentation and keeps content focused, tight, and confident—respecting the viewer’s task of learning and engaging them on a more human level.

5)  Encode the spoken lecture into a non-linear video editing (NLE) software system using wide-screen HD and stereo or 5.1 formats. Although there are many levels of video NLE available, using a software product that is appropriate to skill level and the quality of the desired output is best. Edit out spoken flubs and break the presentation into script segments inserting five-second sub-title transitions between each. Add on-screen text for information dense areas of the lecture as needed, and add text for core concepts such as definitions or formulas using reveal as necessary. Smart use of a background white screen during lecture taping includes standing to one side or another and allows the other portions of the screen to be used as a digital whiteboard for text, images, or animation during the presentation.

6)  Add sound score, targeting suitable background music and matching sound to the tempo and theme of the presentation. Use royalty-free music (RFM) that is freely distributed or available from low-cost RFM production sources. Avoid “high cognitive load” distracting scores and keep any background music level well below lecture vocals (by -20 to -30 dB). Adding music swells (subtle volume increases) can emphasize transitions and heighten attention to specific content. In addition, sound can be used as an imagery resource. For example, when talking about nature, background forest sounds can heighten attention and transport students into the subject matter and aid in learning. Over-use of background music can be distracting to some and background silence for some aspects of presentation can be equally powerful in the learning process. Be cautious about using overly epic, genre-specific, and somber music, but also recognize the power of well-chosen music to create interest, maintain student attention, and add to the potential for deeper learning. Maintain subject matter objectivity and avoid biasing the content with sounds or music that emote an opinion—such as ominous background music during the discussion of material on which you have a strong personal negative opinion. The key concept of background music is that it is in the “background.” Do not use popular music, recognizable vocals, non-RFM, or non-permissioned and non-licensed music that creates considerable legal liability unless you are informed and skilled in appropriate educational “fair-use” and ready to defend such use.         

7)  Add audio-visuals into the NLE to illustrate concepts and maintain student interest. As with any presentation, dynamic imagery can assist in effective teaching and learning. Target royalty-free and freely-shared HD film and images available from a variety of sources, or produce your own. During the collection for editing, document the source of the audio-visual resources and the sharing entity or artist for proper crediting and record-keeping. A developing resource is the thousands of talented amateur photographers and videographers posting on web sites willing to share their adventures and artistic talents for educational use. Instructor-produced photos and video are an important resource in typical low-budget productions. Royalty-free commercial stock video and photos are often worth the impact but can add to production cost. Use accent images, “B-roll” film, and illustrations to illustrate concepts, to mask editing breaks or to create viewer interest and connection to the program. Do not use popular or commercial images or film, non-RF, or non-permissioned and non-licensed images or film that create considerable legal liability unless you are informed and skilled in appropriate educational “fair-use” and ready to defend such use.        

8)  Use editing features in the NLE for some subtle audio and video transitions and effects. Best practices by professionals tend to limit fancy or distracting effects. Avoid beginner mistakes with excessive zooms, flashy transitions, and long dreamy dissolves. Simple dissolves in a fraction of a second will add crispness and yield a tighter more interesting and engaging presentation.

9)  Apply titling to the beginning and end of the doculecture using standard approaches of first conveying important information and secondly crediting all of the resources used in the production including any production assistance, scholarly references and image or film credits. Copyright the work if appropriate and desired. Consistent use of appropriately permissioned, licensed or self-produced work can yield a fully open educational resource if that is desired. Proof for quality and transcode into an HD video format recommended by hosting services for web delivery. Carefully proof the doculecture production before uploading and releasing to a public or private video hosting service.

10)  Build and moderate learning management system (LMS) interactive discussion forums using the array of available approaches to integrate and support the doculecture delivery, as this will provide learning support, potential for student-student and faculty-student interaction, and vital course content discussion. In a flipped class, use live sessions to discuss and demonstrate core concepts presented in an assigned doculecture.

11)  As typical for any course, bring in scholarly reading and writing to address course content deeper than what can be efficiently presented in a lecture. Incorporate a system of learning assessment and student feedback to support student mastery of the subject matter.

San José State University’s mission is to enrich the lives of its students, to transmit knowledge to its students along with the necessary skills for applying it in the service of our society, and to expand the base of knowledge through research and scholarship. With a geographic location in Silicon Valley, the demand of technological innovation as it relates to the potential benefits for multicultural and global students define a purpose for the development of high quality online courses. The university supports the use of a learning management system (LMS) for teaching and learning online. Approximately, 55% of the faculty members were using the LMS in Fall 2011 and this process intended to help increase this percentage.

·      State the title and number associated with your course.

·      Is this course part of the General Education (GE) program?

·      How many students are typically enrolled in one section of this course?

·      Describe your experience with online courses and instructional technologies as an instructor.

·      Describe your experiences with online courses as a student.

·      Why are you interested in developing your course online?

·      Technology skill level (expert or novice)

·      Do you commit to the requirements of the various phases?

·      Proposal overall sections (strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree)

·      Proposal presentation – organized, logical, and easy to follow (5-point scale poor to excellent)

·      Proposal content – all areas addressed with adequate detail (5-point scale poor to excellent)

·      Course demand (5-point scale not important to very important)

·      Overall rank (5-point scale poor to excellent)

·      Overall quality (5-point scale poor to excellent)

·      Recommendation for participation (yes, no, not sure)

·      Comments

·      All components required were submitted and correctly formatted (including a copy of the proposed syllabus)

 Recognizing the importance of postsecondary student retention and progression in online environments, the American Public University System (APUS) routinely examines student retention and progression through a tripartite methodological lens using (1) descriptive, (2) inferential, and (3) exploratory data. APUS also collects volumes of explanatory (qualitative) data that cannot be efficiently analyzed using traditional qualitative methodologies given the exceedingly high volume of student replies (over 5,000 per month). At best random sampling provides a cursory overview that is little more than anecdotal in nature.

Toward addressing this issue, APUS developed the Text Analytics for Surveys Model--an innovative approach to assessing qualitative data related to nontraditional student retention and progression. The Model is framed by the Community of Inquiry (CoI) Framework (Garrison, Anderson, Archer, 2000), whereby keywords and phrases related to subcategories of the CoI Presences (social, teaching, and cognitive) are identified and entered into the Model. The CoI Framework is a process model of learning in online and blended educational environments and is grounded in a collaborative constructivist view of higher education (Dewey, 1933) that assumes effective online learning requires the development of a community of learners to support meaningful inquiry and deep learning.

Although libraries exist for text analytics, they are not specific to the CoI Framework or higher education. This implementation leverages the exiting business rules for text analytics against the CoI Framework. The end product is a rich, explanatory modeling system that provides clarity into APUS’s wealth of quantitative analyses.