online learning in csd grad programs

Running head: BEST PRACTICES FOR ONLINE LEARNING IN CSD PROGRAMS 1

Review of the Literature:

Best Practices for Using Distance Learning in Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD)

Graduate Programs

Katie Millican

SLPA 6784 - Fall 2011

Dr. Haarbauer-Krupa

December, 2011

BEST PRACTICES FOR ONLINE LEARNING IN CSD PROGRAMS 2

Introduction

As more universities incorporate distance learning into graduate programs, such as

Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD), there remains a need to provide best practice

guidelines for the online educator. As defined by the University of South Florida’s Center for

Instructional Technology, distance learning (or education) is “(1) a teacher and student being

separated by distance, (2) instruction is delivered via print, voice, video, or other technology,

and (3) communication is interactive since the student receives support and feedback from the

teacher immediately or on delay”(Barron, 2009). The convenience and increased access of

distance learning increases its use; LaPointe and Reisetter (2008) discuss a 33% increase in

enrollment of graduate classes using distance learning. Currently, the American Speech-

Language Hearing Association’s (ASHA) EdFind shows eight ASHA certified programs in the

country who offer a total distance education degree in CSD; additionally, many university based

CSD programs incorporate distance education within their coursework. While the literature

surrounding general online learning is extensive, CSD distance learning courses are unique in

content and application; understanding what instructional factors are instrumental in online

learning needs to be explored further.

CSD graduate program instructors are required to have a doctoral degree and clinical

application experience; many professors do not have a teaching background where they learn

instructional methods. While continuing education courses are available in the area of CSD

instructional design, it is merely optional and to the instructor’s discretion to attend. ASHA

provides academic information related to content of graduate courses, curriculum resources, and

teaching tools (American, 2011). ASHA also provides resources for using distance learning, and

how to implement educational technology such as chat rooms, discussion boards, e-mail,


portfolios, and platforms such as Blackboard and WebCT. Currently, when clicking on the

links, individuals are sent to outside websites, where some no longer work while others are

strictly informational rather than implementation techniques for CSD professors. While ASHA

attempts to provide CSD instructors with distance education resources, there remains a gap in

the literature for distance learning guidelines in CSD programs.

Best Practice Guidelines

One best practice guideline in distance learning pertains to online learning communities

with peers; many instructors use discussion boards, public opinion sharing, and online group

work as effective means to build online communities. LaPointe and Reisetter (2008) note

effective learners are more cognizant to seeking out and engage with their peer community to

expand their learning experience; therefore, examining if online communities are important to

the distance education student helps educators design online courses. Reisetter, LaPointe and

Korcuska (2007) discuss how online learners learn content equally compared to campus-based

learners; the researchers compare a traditional, face-to-face class to a distance learning course

with the same content to discover the effectiveness of an online learning community. As

students complete online courses, do they need or expect to create online community of peers,

which is usually developed in face-to-face courses? Reisetter et.al. use a “Importance of

Belonging – online” survey where researchers ask participants to rate the importance of items

based on a scale of one to five: five being very important and one being not important. The

survey reveals participant’s value for online peer interactions measures 3.61 of 5. The

quantitative findings expose conflicts to previous emphasis on online communities; the study

indicates students show little value for peer interaction online, but see more value in instructor


interaction as key to their success. Considering the limited evidence for online communities,

CSD programs should be critical when deciding to implement online communities.

Reisetter et.al also looks at the elements of online learning which impact success for

students. Structure for distance learning is different than campus based classroom design.

Structure should include “good organization, clear procedures and expectations, clear timelines,

understandable texts, helpful supplementary materials, and quickly accessible technical

support” (as cited in Reisetter et.al, 2007, p. 56). Successful learners in CSD graduate programs

should be able to apply the content learned in distance education courses and implement into

clinical practice; structure and ease of access to resources is essential to a competent CSD

graduate student.

In addition to structure, another important practice for distance learning is course design.

Reisetter and Boris (2004) look at what students perceive as necessary to be successful online.

95% of participants believe structure and coherence are very important; professors using clear,

explicit expectations are essential to coherence. 96% of students also noted how additional

online resources related to content are helpful (Reisetter & Borris, 2004). Most students credit

some of the success in the course to their own initiative seeking and time management qualities;

CSD professors using distance learning should be aware that not every student will possess

these qualities. Reisetter & Borris also list time management as a barrier to success; in fact, 25%

of participants note difficulty in completing tasks on time due to the amount of time required for

each assignment. Still, emphasizing the importance of both keeping up with course work and

personal time management skills can help students enjoy the course; 88% of students found the

online medium an enjoyable way to learn. Considering Reisetter and Borris’ findings, CSD

programs can benefit from well organized, explicitly stated course design and instructions.


A more comprehensive understanding of best practices for general distance learning is

evaluated by Suzanne Levy (2003). She lists several factors to consider with distance education,

but two specifically relevant to CSD programs - vision and plans for implementation and staff

training and support. The vision and plan for distance learning cannot be based off the same

visions and plans for campus based programs; Levy points out the importance of instructor

facilitated organization so students have a clear understanding of expectations and guidelines

for assignments. Even as program administrators make different types of technology available

to instructors, some still feel lectures and group activities are the only way a student can be

taught. While certified clinicians assume instructor roles in CSD graduate programs, staff

training and support is even more important; universities should develop guidelines to develop

instructors’ roles as “planner, designers, guides, mentors, and facilitators” instead of strictly

instructor (Levy, 2003, p. 3).

The nature of distance education lends itself to four factors regarding transactional

distance identified by Chen (2001): learner-learner, learner-content, learner-interface, and

learner instructor. Transactional distance is “the physical distance that leads to a

communications gap, a psychological space of potential misunderstandings between the

behaviors of instructors and those of the learners” (as cited in Chen, 2001, p. 460). The four

factors can impact CSD programs and should be evaluated in each course. Learner-learner

transactional distance evaluates the access to peers within the online course, how they

communicate, whether others agree with comments, understanding perspectives of peer ideas,

and quality of interaction. Learner-content deals with how well material is understood, use of

discussion questions, requirements of assignments, additional resources, addition of instructor

opinions and comments, and how needs are met during the course. Learner-interface accounts


for how user friendly the course is, ease of viewing materials, searching resources, taking an on-

line exam, use of chat rooms and discussion boards, and communicating with instructor using

the interface. Learner-instructor includes how accessible the instructor is, communicating with

the instructor, and overall quality of interaction with instructor. Transactional distance can

interfere with how well a CSD course is delivered; acknowledging the degree to which each

factor is accounted for can increase the success of CSD students’ overall learning experience

and instructor effectiveness.

While there is much evidence on how online learning can be effective, there is no

specific application suggestions for CSD graduate program instructors. Due to the hands-on

nature of the field, learning content is important, but learning how to apply knowledge using

distance learning creates new barriers to learning. Using the above criterion for enhancing

distance learning, future study should look at how CSD programs can make application of

content more effective for distance education students. Best practices for using distance learning

in CSD graduate programs should include:

Organized course structure

Clear procedures and expectations,

Clear timelines

Understandable texts

Helpful supplementary materials

Quickly accessible technical support

Limited use of online communities (instructor discretion)

Emphasize time management and turning in assignments on-time

Differentiating content instructional methods – video, electronic presentation (i.e.

PowerPoint), supplemental material, audio enhanced presentations, and web-links)

Evaluating effectiveness of learner-learner, learner-content, learner-interface, and learner

instructor factors in course design.


Methods

Participants and Training

The group comparison study includes 56 university professors from ASHA accredited

universities across the Southeast and 175 students recruited from each of the professors’ online

courses. Professors were recruited via e-mail and flyers for implementation during the 2011-

2012 school year; table 1.1 shows a comprehensive list of the universities, number of professors

participating, and semester year where the Millican Model was incorporated. Professors who

Table 1.1

University Semester # of participating

professors

Alabama A&M University Spring 2012 2

Appalachian State University Spring 2012 2

Armstrong Atlantic State University Spring 2012 5

Auburn University Spring 2012 3

East Carolina University Spring 2012 2

East Tennessee State University Spring 2012 1

Eastern Kentucky University Spring 2012 2

Florida Atlantic University Spring 2012 4

Florida International University Spring 2012 5

Florida State University Spring 2012 4

Georgia State University Spring 2012 4

Nova Southeastern University Spring 2012 10

University of Alabama Spring 2012 3

University of Georgia Spring 2012 2

University of West Georgia Spring 2012 3

Valdosta State University Spring 2012 4

would be teaching a course which was 95 – 100% online were included in the study. Once

professors agreed to participate in the study, they received an “Explanation of Guidelines” via e-

mail with further instructions for implementation and training (see APPENDIX I). Ten

instructional videos were used to train professors in each of the guidelines; each tutorial video

included strategies, implementation suggestions, and exemplar courses correlating with the

Millican Model. Professors were asked to view each tutorial before implementing the guidelines


within their semester course. Professors who participated in the study were asked to blind their

students to their implementation of the Millican Model.

Group Comparison

Two weeks prior to the end of the current semester, professors were asked to send their

students an e-mail with a survey, separate from the university end-of-course evaluations (see

APPENDIX II). Participation from students was voluntary and completely anonymous.

Professors who participated in the study were also asked to fill out a survey regarding their

implementation of the Millican Model (see APPENDIX III). Both surveys used a Likert scale

to collect information regarding the Millican Model guidelines. An additional qualitative

analysis survey critiquing the Millican Model for future implementation was collected from

professors (see APPENDIX IV). Professors were asked to mail their quantitative and qualitative

survey, and student response surveys to the researchers conducting the study once the semester

concluded. All data was collected in an SPSS data database. Comparisons were made between

the professors’ analysis on how well the guidelines were implemented, if at all, and the

students’ blinded perception of the online course. Researchers want to find students, who were

blinded to the Millican Model, still recognized a more organized, easier to navigate course if the

professor self-rated successful implementation of guidelines.


References

American Speech-Language Hearing Association (2011).Information for academic programs

and faculty. Retrieved October 31, 2011, from http://www.asha.org/academic/

Barron, A (2009) A teacher’s guide to distance learning. Retrieved October 27, 2011, from

http://fcit.usf.edu/distance/chap1.htm.

Boris, G. & Reisetter, M (2004). What works: Student perceptions of effective elements in

online learning. Quarterly review of distance education 54(4); 277 – 291.

Chen, Y. (2001). Dimensions of transactional distance in the world wide web learning

environment: a factor analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(4), 459-

470.

LaPointe, L., & Korcuska, J.& Reisetter, M. (2007). The impact of altered realities: implications

of online delivery for learners’ interactions, expectations and learning skills.

International Journal of Electronic Learning, 6(1) 55-77.

LaPointe, L. & Reisetter, M. (2008). Belonging online: Students’ perceptions of the value and

efficacy of an online learning community. International Journal on E-Learning, 7(4),

641-665.

Levy, S. (2003). Six factors to consider when planning online distance learning programs in

higher education. Journal of Distance Learning Administration. Pp 1-19.

http://www.asha.org/academic/

http://fcit.usf.edu/distance/chap1.htm


APPENDIX I – EXPLANATION OF GUIDELINES

Explanation of 10 Guidelines and Suggestions for Implementation

1. Visually organized course structure

As a student logs on, the course Home Page should be organized into clearly marked

folders.

Within each folder are either single, clearly titled files or more folders for designated

assignments and readings.

Each week or assignment should have its own folder for supplemental materials, web

links, videos, and instructions.

Example of Home Page:

2. Clear Procedures and expectations

A syllabus should give an overview of an assignment, not be the only explanation for

what is desired. The syllabus should have a reference or link to supplemental

materials where further instructions are given.

A rubric should be given for each assignment, even if it is basic.

Since grading is objective and online courses rely solely on what is produced either

written, orally, or visually, students need clear objectives to meet.

3. Clear timelines

Students always need to know when things are due throughout the course. Student’s

success can be increased through clear knowledge and reminders of due dates.

Use a calendar feature either through the medium such as WebCT, BlackBoard, or a

personal website.


A syllabus usually contains the due dates for the course; however, the Millican Model

incorporates these by being more accessible using other modes to keep track of the

dates.

i. Google Calendar offers ways to create reminders for students

ii. Edmodo (www.edmodo.com) is an educational social media tool that allows

professors to remind students via text message when things are due.

iii. E-mail and announcements are other tools to send a simple reminder 1 to 2

weeks before a due date.

4. Understandable texts

If there is to be a required textbook or book to be purchased, ensuring it is available

via online stores and campus bookstores is essential.

Choose an appropriate book based on the content of the course and learning

objectives for students.

If no textbook/book is used, making sure all relevant supplementary materials are

relevant and add to the knowledge base is essential.

5. Helpful supplementary materials

Supplementary materials can be professor notes (via Word, PPT, or PDF), reliable

websites, video links, journal articles, or other material that adds to the main content

of the course.

6. Accessible technical support

Most universities have a student informational technology service.

Ensure that the syllabus includes contact information, links, and available times for

the services to ensure students can trouble shoot problems at their convenience.

There should be a policy for if/when students encounter difficulties that interfere with

submitting assignments or trouble with exams.

7. Use of online communities

An online community is created when students and instructors interact by sharing

opinions, commenting on other’s opinions, networking, chatting, group projects, or

conversation via chat room or discussion board.

Evidence both for and against the use of online communities is relevant. The Millican

Model does not encourage the use of instructor facilitated peer communities.

However, students may want to converse regarding assignments or course work.

Having a place, such as a discussion board, that is available voluntarily can help

online learners interact if they choose.

8. Instructor facilitated time-management

Time management for online courses involves students setting aside time to work on

their online assignments.

Instructors can facilitate time management skills of students by using a calendar

feature, reminder e-mails, or announcements to encourage consistent involvement in

the course.


Just as a teacher might take attendance to encourage coming to a face-to-face course,

an online instructor should encourage weekly participation in readings, assignments,

and/or research.

9. Varying instructional methods

Instructional methods include the professor’s own idea on how best to present content

to students.

Online courses should include, but not be limited to the following methods:

i. Podcasting lectures with audio and video

ii. Case study with student reflection and evaluation

iii. Project based learning

1. Example – creating a fictitious private practice and discussing types of

clients, business related issues, and other relevant information

iv. Weekly or bi-weekly reflection application and content questions from

required and supplemental reading

10. Reducing transactional distance effects

Transactional distance is “the physical distance that leads to a communications gap, a

psychological space of potential misunderstandings between the behaviors of

instructors and those of the learners”.

4 Transactional distance factors: learner-learner, learner-content, learner-interface,

and learner instructor; the following are ways things to keep in mind when

overcoming the barriers caused by online courses.

Learner-learner transactional distance evaluates the access to peers within the online

course, how they communicate, whether others agree with comments, understanding

perspectives of peer ideas, and quality of interaction.

Learner-content deals with how well material is understood, use of discussion

questions, requirements of assignments, additional resources, addition of instructor

opinions and comments, and how needs are met during the course.

Learner-interface accounts for how user friendly the course is, ease of viewing

materials, searching resources, taking an on-line exam, use of chat rooms and

discussion boards, and communicating with instructor using the interface.

Learner-instructor includes how accessible the instructor is, communicating with

the instructor, and overall quality of interaction with instructor


APPENDIX II – STUDENT SURVEY

Circle one response for each of the following items.

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree

Strongly Disagree

1. The design of my online course was easy to navigate.

1 2 3 4

2. I noticed the course was visually designed for student ease of access.

1 2 3 4

3. Assignments had clear procedures and expectations.

1 2 3 4

4. The course timelines were visible and accessible.

1 2 3 4

5. The required texts were understandable and relevant.

1 2 3 4

6. Supplementary materials were offered. 1 2 3 4

7. Supplementary materials were easy to access.

1 2 3 4

8. I used the supplementary materials that were offered.

9. Technical support was offered. 1 2 3 4

10. I used the technical support offered. 1 2 3 4

11. I interacted with my online peers in chat rooms, e-mail, or other form.

1 2 3 4

12. My professor reminded me of assignments or other deadlines during the semester.

1 2 3 4

13. A variety of instructional methods such as video, audio, or websites were used.

1 2 3 4

14. I understood the content presented in the course.

1 2 3 4

15. The technology was a barrier to my success in the course.

1 2 3 4

16. The instructor was available for questions and comments.

1 2 3 4

17. The instructor gave timely feedback and responses to questions.

1 2 3 4

18. The overall design of my online course made my experience online experience better.

1 2 3 4


APPENDIX III – PROFESSOR SURVEY

Circle one response for each of the following items.

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree

Strongly Disagree

1. I used the Millican Model for online learning.

1 2 3 4

2. My course structure was visually easy to navigate.

1 2 3 4

3. Assignments had clear procedures and expectations

1 2 3 4

4. The course timelines were visible and accessible to all.

1 2 3 4

5. The required texts were understandable and relevant.

1 2 3 4

6. Supplementary materials were offered to students.

1 2 3 4

7. Supplementary materials were easy to access.

1 2 3 4

8. Technical support was offered to students. 1 2 3 4

9. Online peer communities were used. 1 2 3 4

10. I used e-mail or other reminders to facilitate time management.

1 2 3 4

11. I used a variety of instructional methods. 1 2 3 4

12. My course design facilitated effective learner to content.

1 2 3 4

13. My course design facilitated effective learner to interface.

1 2 3 4

14. I was available for effective learner to instructor course design.

1 2 3 4


APPENDIX IV– PROFESSOR QUALITATIVE SURVEY

To evaluate the effectiveness of the Millican Model, please answer the following as

thoroughly as possible.

1. How easy was the Millican Model for Online learning to implement in your online course?

2. Please evaluate each of the guidelines:

Guideline Ease of

implementation? How it was achieved?

1. Organized visual course structure

2. Clear procedures and expectations

3. Clear timelines

4. Understandable texts

5. Supplementary Materials

6. Technical Support

7. Online communities

8. Emphasize time management and due-dates

9. Varying Instructional Methods

10. Accounting for transactional distance factors (4)

online learning in csd grad programs

Documents

csd distance learning

distance learning guidelines

csd programs

online learning communities

learning experience

general online learning

online learning needs

csd instructors