Cited by 19Evaluation of Teaching PracticesOnline and Blended LearningInnovative Teaching Methods

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

FORMAL COURSE DESIGN AND THE STUDENT LEARNING EXPERIENCE

Open access
Brown, Gary, Myers, Carrie B., Roy, Sharon·2003·Online Learning

Abstract

What impact does collaboration between faculty and professional course designers have on the student learning experience? As the use of technologies increases, educational institutions have to find ways of identifying and addressing expectations about how technologies can best be incorporated into the teaching and learning experiences. This paper reports on efforts at Washington State University to develop and assess the course design and faculty development process and the impact the process has on student learning experiences. The results of a comprehensive set of faculty and student surveys from five groups suggest that the systematic course design process improves students’ opportunities for faculty-student interaction, student-student interaction, and other elements associated with best practice. The implications of this study for faculty development and policy implementation are discussed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24059/olj.v7i3.1846

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Carlson, S. Campus survey finds that adding technology to teaching is a top issue. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 47, A46 (2000).
  2. Challis, A. T. Faculty attitudes toward distance education in Utah public colleges and universities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada, Las Vegas (1998).
  3. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. The Wingspread Journal. Johnson Foundation. And AAHE Bulletin (1987, June).
  4. Chickering, Arthur & Stephen C. Ehrmann. "Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever," AAHE Bulletin, October, pp. 3-6 (1996). http://www.tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html
  5. Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. What's the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. A Report from The Institute for Higher Education Policy, April 1999. Retrieved April 15, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ihep.com/Pubs/PDF/Difference.pdf
  6. Pierpoint, P. E., & Harnett, R. A. Faculty attitudes toward teaching in off-campus graduate program. International Journal of Innovative Higher Education, 5, 25-30 (1988).
  7. Wolcott, L. L. Tenure, promotion, distance education: Examining the culture of faculty rewards. American Journal of Distance Education, 11, 3-18 (1997).
  8. Crow, D., Parsowith, S., & Bowden Wise, G. The evolution of computer supported cooperative work-past, present and future developments. SigChi, 29 (2) (1997, April). http://www.acm.org/sigchi/bulletin/1997.2/students.html#HDR0.
  9. Lee, J. Instructional support for distance education and faculty motivation, commitment, satisfaction. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32, 2, 153-160 (2001).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Brown, G., Myers, C. B., & Roy, S.
Affiliations
  • Washington State University (US)
  • Montana State University (US)
Venue
Online Learning
Published
2003-09-01
Volume
7
Issue
3
ISSN
  • 1092-8235 (ISSN-L)
  • 2472-5730
  • 2472-5749
OpenAlex
W2168060927
Cited by
19
References
0
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Online Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PDXScholar (Portland State University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
Keywords
student learning experience, faculty-student collaboration, faculty development, educational technology integration, faculty-student interaction, student-student interaction, higher education policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review