Online Course Design and Development among College and University Instructors: An Analysis using Grounded Theory

Authors

  • Sally J. Baldwin Boise State University
  • Yu-Hui Ching Boise State University
  • Norm Friesen Boise State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i2.1212

Keywords:

instructional design, instructional strategy, learning management system, online learning

Abstract

In this study, a grounded theory approach was used to investigate the process college and university instructors undergo to design and develop online courses. Fourteen instructors who created online courses for four-year colleges and universities were interviewed about their experience designing and developing online courses. Results showed that participants begin the process with objectives and/or with existing course outlines, typically taken from online and face-to-face courses. Next, the instructors structure the course and chunk content. The instructors interviewed rarely use formal instructional design principles, but their design tasks show a striking similarity to those formalized in the ADDIE model. Student feedback (evaluation) motivated the instructors in their development efforts after initial course delivery. The study discusses practical implications and suggests opportunities for future research.

References

References

Allen, I. A., & Seaman, J. (2016). Online report card. Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.

Alvarez, I., Guasch, T., & Espasa, A. (2009). University teacher roles and competencies in online learning environments: A theoretical analysis of teaching and learning practices. European Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 321-336.

Baran, E., Correia, A.-P., & Thompson, A. (2011). Transforming online teaching practice: critical analysis of the literature on the roles and competencies of online teachers. Distance Education, 32(3), 421-439. doi:10.1080/01587919.2011.610293

Barberà, E., Layne, L., & Gunawardena, C. N. (2014). Designing online interaction to address disciplinary competencies: A cross-country comparison of faculty perspectives. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(2).

Bawane, J., & Spector, J. M. (2009). Prioritization of online instructor roles: implications for competency‐based teacher education programs. Distance Education, 30(3), 383-397. doi:10.1080/01587910903236536

Becker, K. (2007). Wicked ID: Conceptual framework for considering instructional design as a wicked problem. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue Canadienne de L’apprentissage et de la Technologie, 33(1). Retrieved from https://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/26459/19641

Bichelmeyer, B., Boling, E., & Gibbons, A. S. (2006). Instructional design and technology models: Their impact on research and teaching in instructional design and technology. Educational Media and Technology Yearbook, 31, 33-73.

Boling, E., & Smith, K. M. (2012). The changing nature of design. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (3rd ed.) (pp. 8-16). Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Branch, R. M., & Merrill, M. D. (2012). Characteristics of instructional design models. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (3rd ed.) (pp. 8-16). Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Brown, S. C., Stevenson, R. A., Troiano, P. F., & Schneider, M. K. (2002). Exploring complex phenomena: Grounded theory in student affairs research. Journal of College Student Development, 43(2), 173-183.

Christensen, T. K., & Osguthorpe, R. T. (2004). How do instructional-design practitioners make instructional-strategy decisions? Performance Improvement Quarterly, 17(3), 45-65.

Clark, D. R. (2015). ADDIE timeline. Retrieved from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/history_isd/addie.html

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dempsey, J. V., & Van Eck, R. N. (2012). E-learning and instructional design. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (3rd ed.) (pp. 8-16). Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Ertmer, P. A., Stepich, D. A., York, C. S., Stickman, A., Wu, X. L., Zurek, S., & Goktas, Y. (2008). How instructional design experts use knowledge and experience to solve ill-structured problems. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21(1), 17-42.

Fink, L. D. (2003). A self-directed guide to designing courses for significant learning. Retrieved from http://www.deefinkandassociates.com/GuidetoCourseDesignAug05.pdf

Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence v forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G. (2009). Jargonizing: Using the grounded theory vocabulary. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Walter de Gruyter, Inc.

Gray, C. M., Dagli, C., Demiral‐Uzan, M., Ergulec, F., Tan, V., Altuwaijri, A. A., Gyabak, K., Hilligoss, M., Kozilboga, R., Tomita, K., & Boling, E. (2015). Judgment and instructional design: How ID practitioners work in practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 28(3), 25-49.

Huguet, M. C. (2008). Rethinking instructional design: Considering the instructor---A case study. [Doctoral dissertation]. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (304352638).

Jaschik, S., & Lederman, D. (Eds.). (2014). Faculty attitudes on technology. Inside Higher Ed, 1-44.

Kang, S. (2000). An investigation of instructional design processes for web-based courses. [Doctoral dissertation]. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (304613134).

Kenny, R., Zhang, Z., Schwier, R., & Campbell, K. (2005). A review of what instructional designers do: Questions answered and questions not asked. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue Canadienne de L’apprentissage et de la Technologie, 31(1). Retrieved from http://cjlt.csj.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/147/140

Kihato, M., & Bednar, C. (2004). Importance of online course components: a survey of instructors and students. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 104(40), 9-26.

Kirschner, P., Carr, C., van Merriënboer, J., & Sloep, P. (2002). How expert designers design. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 15(4), 86-104.

Koszalka, T. A., & Ganesan, R. (2004). Designing online courses: A taxonomy to guide strategic use of features available in course management systems (CMS) in distance education. Distance Education, 25(2), 243-256.

McDonald, J. (2009). Designing and implementing online discussion forums: An Australian case study. International Journal of Networking and Virtual Organisations, 6(5), 518-531.

Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., & Pratt, J. (1996). Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, 36(5), 5-7. Retrieved from http://mdavidmerrill.com/Papers/Reclaiming.PDF

Miller, J. L. (2007). The new education professionals: The emerging specialties of instructional designer and learning manager. International Journal of Public Administration, 30(5), 483-498. doi: 10.1080/01900690701205970

Morse, J. M. (2008). Confusing categories and themes. Qualitative Health Research, 18(6), 727-728.

Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.). (2013). Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=0BpDf6AkqPAC&lpg=PR1&ots=42N1MthO0B&lr&pg=PA9#v=onepage&q&f=false

Rovai, A. P. (2004). A constructivist approach to online college learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 79-93.

Rowland, G. (1992). What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65-86.

Seaman, J. (2009). Online learning as a strategic asset. Volume II: The paradox of faculty voices--views and experiences with online learning. Results of a national faculty survey, part of the online education benchmarking study. Conducted by the APLU-Sloan National Commission on Online Learning. Association of Public and Land-grant Universities.

Silber, K. H. (2007). A principle-based model of instructional design: A new way of thinking about and teaching ID. Educational Technology, 47(5), 5-19.

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2004). Instructional design (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

Straumsheim, C., Jaschik, S., & Lederman, D. (Eds.). (2015). 2015 Inside Higher Ed survey of faculty attitudes on technology. Inside Higher Ed, 1-49. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/system/files/media/Faculty%20Attitudes%20on%20Technology%202015.pdf

Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, 22(2), 306-3l.

van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1997). Training complex cognitive skills: A four-component instructional design model for technical training. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

Visscher-Voerman, J. I. A. (1999). Design approaches in training and education: A reconstructive approach. [Doctoral dissertation]. Enschede, The Netherlands: University of Twente.

Wedman, J., & Tessmer, M. (1993). Instructional designers’ decisions and priorities: A survey of design practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(2), 43-57.

West, J. A., & West, M. L. (2009). Using wikis for online collaboration: The power of the read-write web. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Worthen, H. (2013). What do we know about teaching online? Academe, 99(5), 28-33.

York, C. S., & Ertmer, P. A. (2011). Towards an understanding of instructional design heuristics: An exploratory Delphi study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(6), 841-863.

Zierer, K., & Seel, N. M. (2012). General didactics and instructional design: Eyes like twins A transatlantic dialogue about similarities and differences, about the past and the future of two sciences of learning and teaching. SpringerPlus, 1(1), 1-22.

Downloads

Published

2018-06-01

Issue

Vol. 22 No. 2 (2018)

Section

Section II

License

As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.

Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions