| Higher Education Course Migration from F2F to Online Instruction: Problems for Instructors |
||||
Reflection #6 The goal of this project is to define faculty needs arising in the process of migrating instruction from F2F to online environment, and to suggest possible approaches for addressing those needs from an array of available solution models. At this point it is clear that the issues surrounding faculty needs in the Distance Education environment must be considered within the larger context of the mission, needs, and resources of the institution as a whole. It is pointless to perscribe a solution set for DE faculty that exceeds the goals and resources of the institution. It is also possible that the institution may not have a clear picture of either its DE goals or its capabilities for attaining those goals. A review of the literature reveals a wide range of DE models, many of which derive from an a set of programs and resources unique to the individual institution. The Delaware program, for example (de Vey and Watson, 2003, in Tech-Source) began as a collaboration between a committed group of innovator/early adaptor faculty and the technology support unit. At the University of Toledo, rapidly expanding demand for DE precipitated the adoption of a corporate client services model (Fink, 2002, in Syllabus.) Penn State developed its comprehensive World Campus DE program that clearly required a decision-making process involving all levels of the institution. Assiniboine Community College adapted a generic model to its specific needs, in-house, ( Downes, 1997, available at http://www.atl.ualberta.ca/downes/naweb/am.htm). While these programs differ in many ways, each was crafted within the institution to meet a unique set of institutional needs and goals, and each program required the input and cooperation of participants at all levels of the instutition, from administration to faculty to support staff. Thus, it seems to me, the first step in addressing faculty's course migration needs is a clear assessment of the institution's goals for DE and the resourses available for commitment to achieving those goals. It occurs to me that an initial assessment may reveal serious deficits in planning and available resources that may take some time to remedy. Comprehensive assessments take time and require input from a broad range of participants. In the context of the overall assessment, faculty needs regarding course migration to the DE environment could be ascertained, and a plan of action to address those needs should be incorporated into the overall assessment. To avoid leaving faculty in limbo while the assessment process is undertaken, a short term interim plan might be helpful in addressing immediate faculty needs. At least some clarification could be provided regarding immediate expectations for DE course development, with concommitant resources specified, thereby lifting the burden of uncertainty. When the institutional assessment is completed, when goals are clearly delineated, and resources are allocated, then it is possible to address faculty course migration needs in a comprehensive manner. Obviously the wherewithall to address those needs will vary among institutions; some DE programs will be large-scale and integral to the overall mission of the school, others will be more tangential or adjunct to institution's defined purpose. In either case, faculty, both in and out of DE, need to know where they stand vis a vis Distance Education and have a clear understanding of the resources and support available to pursue DE. |
||||