LR+draft

Communication and Interactivity
The ability to communicate effectively and facilitate interaction (Principle One of the Seven Principles) is perhaps the most important and fundamental to ensure online teaching efficacy and central to the Seven Principles and the various roles of faculty mentioned earlier. Various studies have shown that interaction among students and instructors is instrumental to create an effective online learning environment (Bannan-Ritland, 2002; Leh, Kouba, & Davis, 2005; Zheng & Smaldino, 2003). Topper (2005) noted the existence of a “strong relationship between student perceptions of learning, quality of instruction, and their participation or interaction in a course” (p. 56). Moreover, multiple research findings assert faculty satisfaction can stem from improvement in the quality of communication with students (Hartman & Truman-Davis, 2001; Smith, 2001; Thompson, 2001).

Bannan-Ritland, B. (2002). Computer-mediated communication, elearning, and interactivity: A review of the research. //Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3//(2), 161-179.

Leh, A., Kouba, B., & Davis, D. (2005). Twenty first century learning: Communities, interaction and ubiquitous computing. //Educational Media International, 42//(3), 237-250.

Zheng, L., & Smaldino, S. (2003). Key instructional design elements for distance education. //Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4//(2), 153-166.

Topper, A. (2005). Facilitating student interactions through discursive moves: An instructor’s experience teaching online graduate courses in Educational Technology. //Quarterly Review of// //Distance Education, 6//(1), 55-67.

Hartman, J. L. & Truman-Davis, B. (2001). Factors relating to the satisfaction of faculty teaching online courses at the University of Central Florida. In Bourne, J. & Moore, J. C. (eds.) //Online education. Vol. 2: Learning effectiveness, faculty satisfaction, and cost effectiveness (pp. 109-128)//. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.

Smith, L. C. (2001). Faculty satisfaction in LEEP: A web-based graduate degree program in library and information science. In Bourne, J. & Moore, J. C. (eds.) //Online education. Vol. 2: Learning effectiveness, faculty satisfaction, and cost effectiveness (pp. 87-108)//. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.

Thompson, M. (2001). Faculty satisfaction in Penn State's World Campus. In Bourne, J. & Moore, J. C. (eds.) //Online education. Vol. 2: Learning effectiveness, faculty satisfaction, and cost effectiveness (pp. 129-144)//. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education. Back to the top

Who stand to benefit? Why? || (Allen & Seaman, 2007) || The number of students subscribed to online courses in higher education in 2006 has increased from 1.6 million since 2002 to 3.5 million. This represents a rise of more than twice the enrollment figures over a span of four years (Allen & Seaman, 2007). Current economic situation. || design and development principles || (Batts, 2008) || The principle (seven principles) that had a largest proportion of low responses was time on task. The instructors had four low means and one medium mean; however, the matching students had five medium means (Batts, 2008). This result mirrored Taylor’s (2002) and Batts, et al. (2006) findings that reported the lowest score of the seven principles was time on task and the only principle to report in the low score category. || teaching large online classes || (Batts, 2008) || Administrators can also assist in ensuring quality education. Areas where administrators can assist faculty are with release time for professional development, criteria for hiring and promoting faculty members, keeping class size low enough to create a sense of community, and the needs for institutional commitment to support and train faculty and to assess distance education courses (Batts, 2008). ||
 * **Theme** || **Author(s)** || **Details** ||
 * Definition of //Best Practices//. || (Batts, 2008) || The Seven Principles assert that good practice in undergraduate education (a) encourages student-faculty contact, (b) encourages cooperation among students, (c) encourages active learning, (d) gives prompt feedback, (e) emphasizes time on task, (f) communicates high expectations, and (g) respects diverse talents and ways of learning (Chickering & Gamson, 1987). ||
 * || (Keegan, 1986) || Keegan (1986) defines distance education as a learning system that must artificially recreate the teaching-learning interaction and re-integrate it back into the instructional process. It offers the distance learner an experience as much like traditional, face-to-face instruction, via intact classrooms and live, two-way audio-visual interaction. ||
 * || (Perraton, 1988) || Perraton (1988) defines the role of the distance teacher as a facilitator of learning rather than a communicator of a fixed body of information and meets the distance students face-to-face using the most effective choice of media. ||
 * Impetus for moving classes online.
 * Effective online course
 * ||  || Successful distance education systems involve interactivity between teacher and students, between students and the learning environment, and among students themselves, as well as active learning in the classroom (Sherry, 1996). A study conducted by Millbank (1994) on the effectiveness of a mix of audio plus video in corporate training revealed that real-time interactivity raised the retention rate of the trainees from about 20 percent (using ordinary classroom methods) to about 75 percent. Interactivity represents the connectivity the students feel with the distance teacher, the local teachers, aides, and facilitators, and their peers (Sherry, 1996). Without connectivity, distance students becomes autonomous and isolated, procrastinates, and eventually drops out. Effective distance education should approach Keegan's (1986) ideal of an authentic learning experience. ||
 * Effective structure and conduct of
 * || (Sherry, 1996) || The most important factor for successful distance learning is a caring, concerned teacher who is confident, experienced, at ease with the equipment, uses the media creatively, and maintains a high level of interactivity with the students (Sherry, 1996). ||
 * Evaluation of online teaching ||  ||   ||

Back to the top

Background
In 1987, there was an initiative to establish strategies that would result in quality undergraduate education. Led by Chickering and Gamson, a working framework was developed to evaluate and improve undergraduate teaching in university classrooms (Chickering & Gamson, 1991). Called //Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education//, Cross (1999) stated that it was “the best known, certainly the most widely distributed list" (p. 256) employed for assessing face-to-face instructions in the university classrooms then. With the growing demand for online courses, there is interest to examine if the Seven Principles also extend to distance education. Studies by Taylor (2002) and Batts, Colaric & McFadden (2006) indicated that the application of the Seven Principles, on the whole, is evident in online undergraduate courses and both the students and instructors agreed on the perception of use of these principles.

Effective learning occurs in social groups where individuals share meaningful exchanges about practice and in so doing create social configurations (communities) that have the power to change individual identities: Learning takes place in a participation framework, not in an individual mind. (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 15). Cooperative learning shares many similarities with what is known as conversational learning (Pask, 1976, p. 23).

Axelrod (1990, p. 173) proposes Cooperation Theory as a model for social interaction. Cooperation Theory when applied to situational learning environments can result in greater collaboration between learners, sharpened judgements and extended knowledge (Cowie & Ruddick, 1998, p. 13).

Through communication participants are able to articulate their understandings and try them out with others, thus building on their knowledge using the social support of the virtual community (Browne, 2003).

Methodology - Cyber-ethnographic data (Browne, 2003). Data analysis - Laurillard’s (2002) categories (Interactivity, Adaptivity, Discussion, and Reflectivity) were used to support greater understandings of the data.

//**Interactivity**// in virtual learning environments requires skill from university lectures to create the appropriate situation in which students feel supported and at the same time liberated enough to test out ideas for themselves. Interactivity requires the tutor to structure the learning experience to inspire and motivate the participants whilst at the same time encouraging independent approaches to learning (Browne, 2003). Virtual learning environments are said to enhance the opportunity for collaborative learning. It is possible to encourage group responses to tasks and to give group feedback. The former is seen to support the learning process for many, the latter to be less threatening to the underachieving few (McConnell, 2000, p. 12).

Adaptivity occurs when "the teacher uses the relationship between their own and the student’s conception to determine the task goals for continuing dialogue in the light of the topic goals and previous interactions (Laurillard, 1993, p. 100). The emphasis is on the experiential nature of learning requiring participants to test out ideas through discussion with others (McConnell, 2000, p. 112). A learning environment that fosters adaptivity does not just occur; it requires involvement and commitment (Laurillard, 1993, p. 101).

Back to the top

Background

 * Role change.
 * Online interaction leads to different paradigms for teaching and learning, as compared to teaching in a traditional classroom, with both unique problems of coordination and unique opportunities to support active, collaborative (group or team-based) learning (Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). //Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online//. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.).
 * In particular, the instructor/facilitator must reconceptualize their role as a teacher and create a set of situations and reward structures that encourage students to look upon their interactions with their peers as valuable resources for learning (Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. //Journal of Management Information Systems, 18//(4), 169-189.).
 * An ALN learning environment differs in terms of its communication dynamics, not only from the traditional classroom, but also from technology-enhanced classrooms where synchronous (same time) computer-mediated communication (CMC) is used in conjunction with face-to-face interaction (Webster, J., & Hackley, P. (1997). Teaching effectiveness in technology-mediated distance learning. //Academy of Management Journal, 40//(6), 1282-1309.).
 * Challenges.
 * Many obstacles have been documented for instructors who are beginning to teach online. Instructors face the challenge of the preponderance of online courses, a distinct set of online student needs (e.g., independent learning, unlimited access to course content) and the need to promote interaction in distance learning environments. This certainly has placed a burden on experienced instructors who have taught exclusively in face-to-face settings. (Sugar, W., Martindale, T., & Crawley, F. E. (2007). One professor's face-to-face teaching strategies while becoming an online instructor. //The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8//(4), 365–385.)
 * With this new teaching role, faculty members have expressed “concerns for loss of personal and intimate interactions” with their online students (Campbell, 2006, p. 378). (Campbell, T. (2006). Evolution and online instruction: Using a grounded metaphor to explore the advantageous and less advantageous characteristics of online instruction. //Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26//(5), 378-387.)
 * Some veteran faculty members who are new to online instruction have stated concerns about their lack of ability to teach skills requiring “hands on” instruction at a distance (Nelson & Thompson, 2005). (Nelson, S. J., & Thompson, G. W. (2005). Barriers perceived by administrators and faculty regarding the use of distance education technologies in pre-service programs for secondary agricultural education teachers. //Journal of Agricultural Education, 46//(4), 36-48.)
 * There is a “steep learning curve associated with learning to teach online” (Gerlich, 2005, p. 8). (Gerlich, R. N. (2005). Faculty perceptions of distance learning. Distance Education Report, //9//(17), 8)
 * Becoming a successful online instructor requires a change of the instructor’s perspective and role as well as effective professional development (Lee & Busch, 2005). (Lee, J., & Busch, P. E. (2005). Factors related to instructors’ willingness to participate in distance education. //Journal of Educational Research, 99//(2), 109-115.
 * Incentives.
 * Despite known extrinsic incentives (e.g., exposure to new technologies) and intrinsic incentives (e.g., flexible teaching schedule) to teach online (Parker, 2003), it is imperative to address instructors’ concerns and obstacles to teaching at a distance. (Parker, A. (2003). Identifying incentives for faculty who teach at a distance: An analysis of the literature. //College & University Media Review, 10//(1), 9-15.)
 * In summary, faculty members who are experienced teachers in a face-to-face environment face a major transition to teach online. While preserving the core of one’s established instruction and activities, faculty members are faced with the question of how to convert well established face-to-face curricula to an online environment and, at the same time take advantage of the affordances of electronic media. (Sugar, W., Martindale, T., & Crawley, F. E. (2007). One professor's face-to-face teaching strategies while becoming an online instructor. //The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8//(4), 365–385.)

Impetus for implementing online courses

 * Current trend.
 * In a recent Sloan Report survey of over 1,000 higher education institutions, Allen and Seaman (2006) reported that online course enrollment increased 18.2% between 2003 and 2004. This growth is expected to continue. Fifty-six percent of the university administrators noted that online education has become a critical long-term strategy at their respective institutions (Allen, I. E. & Seaman, J. (2006). //Growing by degrees: Online education in the United States//. Retrieved from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/growing_by_degrees.pdf)
 * Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, and Zvacek (2006) reported that “1,680 institutions offered over 54,000 online courses” during 2005 (p. 10). (Simonson, M., Smaldino, S. E., Albright, M. J. & Zvacek, S. (2006). //Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (3rd ed.)//. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.)
 * Nearly 35% of all higher education institutions in the United States are considered fully-engaged in offering online courses and programs. That is, they believe that their online offerings are strategic for their institution and they have fully incorporated online into their formal long-term plan (The Sloan Consortium, 2007). The Sloan Consortium. (2007, October). Online nation: Five years of growth in online learning (4th annual report). Needham, MA: I. Allen, & J. Seaman
 * Wilson (2002) asserted that online education is not just an alternative educational method, but has “shaken up the educational establishment, especially at higher education and corporate levels” (p. 91). (Wilson, B. (2002). Trends and futures of education: Implications for distance education. //Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3//(1), 91-103.)
 * What about trend in SDSU?
 * Benefits of online instruction.
 * For example. Wade and Power find that students in ALN environments receive more in-depth exposure to the course content area (Wade, V. P. & Power, C. (1998). Evaluating the design and delivery of WWW based educational environments and courseware. //ACM, ITICSE 30//(3), 243-248.).
 * Boume et al. show that ALN is more effective than the traditional lecture or laboratory and that peer-to-peer learning is enhanced through ALN (Bourne, J. R., McMaster, E., Rieger, J., & Campbell, J. O. (1997). Paradigms for on-line learning: A case study in the design and implementation of an asynchronous learning networks (ALN) course. Retrieved from http://www.aln.org/alnweb/joumal/jaln_Vollissue2.htm#Boume-Mc.)
 * Alavi finds that final grades of students using computer-mediated collaborative learning are significantly higher than those of students who do not use computer-mediated learning (Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. //MIS Quarterly, 18//(2), 159-174.
 * It is not that ALN alone causes better learning, but rather ALN used in conjunction with skillful pedagogy can create an effective learning environment (Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. //Journal of Management Information Systems, 18//(4), 169-189.).
 * Enabling online tools.
 * Switching over to an online environment certainly does have advantages and can potentially enhance the examined face-to-face class activities. Students in the instructor’s proposed online course could have their own blog. Students and the instructor can view and write comments on a particular student’s blog. Emulating this activity in a face-to-face environment would be cumbersome. Wikis and other collaborative writing tools enable students to easily compose a document together. Students can easily share documents and resources in a common online space. Also, the shared artifact that the students and instructor create can persist and be available to all long after the course has concluded. This online collaborative environment is an obvious enhancement over its face-to-face counterparts. (Sugar, W., Martindale, T., & Crawley, F. E. (2007). One professor's face-to-face teaching strategies while becoming an online instructor. //The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8//(4), 365–385.)
 * Characteristics of online learners.
 * Accommodating the independent and self-disciplined student in an online environment also is a distinct advantage. Instead of having face-to-face students, who potentially may withdraw from interacting the instructor and other students, all online students are virtually required to interact with the instructor and often with other students. Interacting with an entire class of self-disciplined learners is a clear benefit. (Sugar, W., Martindale, T., & Crawley, F. E. (2007). One professor's face-to-face teaching strategies while becoming an online instructor. //The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8//(4), 365–385.)
 * Downside of online learning.
 * Of concern, however, is the fact that many students are not successful in completing courses in the online environment; consequently, dropout rates are higher than in comparable face-to-face classes (Diaz, 2002). Diaz, D. (2002, May/June). Online drop rate revisited. The Technology Source. Retrieved January 10, 2008, from http://technologysource.org/article/online_drop_rates_revisited/
 * There is a need to understand empirically student behavior and performance online to discover what actually happens in the online environment and to establish research-based linkages between student behavior, faculty behavior, and student persistence and success online. (Morris & Finnegan, 2008) Morris, L. V. & Finnegan, C. L. (2008). Best practices in predicting and encouraging student persistence and achievement online. //Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 10//(1), 55-64.

Design

 * Interaction.
 * One of the key elements in ensuring an effective online learning environment is interaction among students and instructors (Bannan-Ritland, 2002; Berge, 2002; Leh, Kouba, & Davis, 2005; Zheng & Smaldino, 2003).
 * Topper (2005) noted the existence of a “strong relationship between student perceptions of learning, quality of instruction, and their participation or interaction in a course” (p. 56). (Topper, A. (2005). Facilitating student interactions through discursive moves: An instructor’s experience teaching online graduate courses in Educational Technology. //Quarterly Review of////Distance Education, 6//(1), 55-67.)
 * Online learners who collaborated with each other performed significantly better on an ill-defined problem than did learners who solved the problem by themselves (Uribe, Klein, & Sullivan, 2003). (Uribe, D., Klein, J., & Sullivan, H. (2003). The effect of computer-mediated collaborative learning on solving ill-defined problems. //Educational Technology Research and Development, 51//(1), 5-19.)
 * Student characteristics.
 * Coupled with the need for learner-to-instructor interaction and learner-to-learner interaction are the preferences and characteristics of adult distance learning students. (Sugar, W., Martindale, T., & Crawley, F. E. (2007). One professor's face-to-face teaching strategies while becoming an online instructor. //The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8//(4), 365–385.)
 * Dillon and Greene (2003) observed online learners “typically learn in more independent environments” (p. 235). (Dillon, C. & Greene, B. (2003). Learner differences in distance learning: Finding differences that matter. In Moore, M. G. & Anderson, W. G. (Eds.), //Handbook of distance education (pp. 235-244)//. Mawah, NJ: Erlbaum.)
 * Successful distance learning students are often described as “independent” and self-disciplined” (Connick, 2004). (Connick, G. (2004). //The distance learner's guide//. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.)
 * Realizing the profile and needs of an independent and self-disciplined distance student is critical to developing effective curriculum and activities that are delivered in an online environment. (Sugar, W., Martindale, T., & Crawley, F. E. (2007). One professor's face-to-face teaching strategies while becoming an online instructor. //The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8//(4), 365–385.)
 * Case study on interaction. (Sugar, W., Martindale, T., & Crawley, F. E. (2007). One professor's face-to-face teaching strategies while becoming an online instructor. //The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8//(4), 365–385.)
 * Instructor interactions. We identified nine distinct forms of instructor interactions: information, question, summary, advice, comment, example, experience, assertion, and challenge. The instructor used each of these forms to teach the students about course content and enable them to apply this knowledge. Questioning (16.8% of class time instructor interaction) was the “engine” of his instructional approach with General (20.5%) and Application (19.3%) being asked most often, and Synthesis (1.9%) and Polling (2.0%) being the least often type of questions asked. The next highest form of interaction was providing example (6.8% of class time instructor interaction).
 * Student interactions. This include student-to-student interaction, discuss assignments, student providing comments, sharing experiences, participating in-class activities, demonstrations, and engaging in class discussion. The top two interactions are class discussion (9.2%) and demonstration (8.6%) with student interaction(0.5%) and assignment (1.0%) being the least two.
 * Class activities. Include (1) video presentations, (2) discussion of course assignments, (3) presentation of an overview of an upcoming lesson, (4) class discussions (teacher-to-student, student-to-student, student-to-teacher), (5) in-class activities, and (6) student demonstrations. Approximately 90% of the instructional time, with Student demonstrations (35.8%) and in-class activities (27.0%) as the top two activities and video (2.5%) and course assignments (2.7%) as the least used activities featured per class session.
 * Introduction: Provide overview, outline assumptions and expectations, orient course information and syllabus, self-introductions which include sharing of relevant experiences.
 * During the course: instructor refer to these experiences and integrate them with course content.
 * These instructional activities performed in our observed face-to-face course could technically be conducted with existing online tools such as web pages, RSS feeds, discussion boards, chat, instant messaging, blogs, wikis, synchronous audio, synchronous video, simulations, and games.
 * We identified four main categories of instructional activities:
 * Activities that are simple to translate: Content-based information that is generally static and easily sequenced for synchronous and asynchronous communication.
 * Activities that require some effort to translate: In-class analysis and discussion of real-time multi-media content. Will require skill to produce/upload materials, create one using simulation authoring tools, or search for relevant and useful material online.
 * Activities that are quite difficult to translate: It would be difficult to entirely encapsulate the dynamic nature of this instructor’s interactions with his students that occur a face-to-face setting. Another missing element in current text-based online environments is the ability to convey verbal, nonverbal and visual cues.
 * Activities that can be potentially enhanced when translated:

Conduct/Experience

 * Communication/Interactivity.
 * For example. Smith surveyed 18 faculty in an online graduate program in library science at the University of Illinois. Among the sources of satisfaction reported are improvements in the quality of communication with students. (Smith, L. C. (2001). Faculty satisfaction in LEEP: A web-based graduate degree program in library and information science. In Bourne, J. & Moore, J. C. (eds.) //Online education. Vol. 2: Learning effectiveness, faculty satisfaction, and cost effectiveness (pp. 87-108)//. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.
 * Hartman and Davis surveyed 75 faculty experienced with ALN at the University of Central Florida, finding that the amount and quality of interactions with students has the highest correlation with faculty satisfaction. (Hartman, J. L. & Truman-Davis, B. (2001). Factors relating to the satisfaction of faculty teaching online courses at the University of Central Florida. In Bourne, J. & Moore, J. C. (eds.) //Online education. Vol. 2: Learning effectiveness, faculty satisfaction, and cost effectiveness (pp. 109-128)//. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.
 * Thompson interviewed 15 faculty at Penn State's "World Campus." They also found that one of the major sources of satisfaction was a greater level of interaction, with high-quality, highly motivated students. Thus, these studies all point to the need to understand how the role of the instructor changes to support such interaction. (Thompson, M. (2001). Faculty satisfaction in Penn State's World Campus. In Bourne, J. & Moore, J. C. (eds.) //Online education. Vol. 2: Learning effectiveness, faculty satisfaction, and cost effectiveness (pp. 129-144)//. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.).
 * Role change.
 * Although universities plan expansion of Distance Learning by increasing bandwidth and by training the instructional staff in Web design, there has been little attention paid to changing professorial roles. Our research suggests professors using the virtual classroom will need better instructional skills. Those skills that need to be focused on include communication, organization, and motivation (via the affective role).(Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. //Journal of Management Information Systems, 18//(4), 169-189.).
 * We often hear the change in instruction characterized as moving from the "Sage on the Stage" to the "Guide on the Side" (Coppola, N. (1997). Sage on stage or mentor in MUD: Changing roles for teachers of technical communication. //INTERCOM, 44//(1), 6-9.). This suggests that faculty who are accustomed to being performers in the classroom will need to adjust their role expectations and behaviors to suit a different instructional environment.
 * Other researchers, who report on their own experiences with online teaching, described their role shift from facilitators of student acquisition of knowledge to moderators of student activity in collaborative groups. (Collis, B. & Nijhuis, G. G. (2000). The instructor as manager: Time and task. //The Internet and Higher Education, 3//(1), 75-97.)
 * This paper presents a qualitative study of role changes that occur when faculty become online or "virtual" professors. In 20 semi-structured interviews of faculty, coded with pattern analysis software, the authors captured role changes enacted by instructors in ALN settings—cognitive roles, affective roles, and managerial roles. (Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. //Journal of Management Information Systems, 18//(4), 169-189.).
 * Cognitive role. Those processes that were discussed in the interview relate to learning, information storage, and thinking. The cognitive role, which relates to mental processes of learning, information storage, and thinking, shifts to one of deeper cognitive complexity for virtual professors.
 * Affective role. The affective role includes instructor behavior related to influencing student's relationships with the instructor and with other students and the virtual classroom atmosphere. Faculty are required to find new tools to express emotion, yet they found the relationship with students more intimate.
 * Managerial role. This role includes instructor behavior related to course planning, organizing, leading, and controlling. It requires greater attention to detail, more structure, and additional student monitoring.
 * Persona. The cumulative roles may be described as a persona. Overall, faculty reported a change in their teaching persona. One thing they noted was more need for precision and a certain formality in laying out expectations for students. (Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. //Journal of Management Information Systems, 18//(4), 169-189.).
 * Frustrating experience. One is the amount of time required; almost all faculty say that teaching online requires substantially more time and effort. This is also true for findings at other universities (Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. //Journal of Management Information Systems, 18//(4), 169-189.) & (Lorenzetti, J. P. (2004). Changing faculty perceptions of online workload. //Distance Education Report, 8//(20), 1-6.)
 * Typing and Technological Glitches.
 * The unexpected workload.
 * Fulfilling experience. It includes convenience and efficiency; the fun and challenge and opportunity to work with new technologies; and most of all, the improved communication with students (Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. //Journal of Management Information Systems, 18//(4), 169-189.).

Case study
Morris, L. V. & Finnegan, C. L. (2008). Best practices in predicting and encouraging student persistence and achievement online. //Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 10//(1), 55-64.

Findings from four studies conducted with students and faculty in fully online undergraduate general education courses offered by the institutions in the University System of Georgia (USG) to generate best practices for teaching online. The studies investigated the relationship of student background variables and online behaviors to student persistence and achievement in the online environment. Faculty members from across the 35 institutions within the system with assistance from instructional designers and multimedia experts designed the courses using a consistent template and design standards. Through this standardization, it is assumed that course design issues are minimized as a factor in student persistence and achievement. The four research studies focused on student experiences and persistence in the online environment and faculty experiences and practices.

STUDY 1: TRACKING STUDENT BEHAVIOR AND ACHIEVEMENT ONLINE
//**Context**//. This first study investigated student behavior by tracking what they do online and how long they spend on each activity. Over 400 students were tracked, and slightly over 200 were successful completers; that is, the student finished the course with a passing, transferable grade. Others withdrew from the course or exited with a lower than passing grade. Each piece of data included a timestamp that allowed researchers to calculate time spent on a task. Data were coded into the number of times (frequency) an action was taken, and how long (duration) the student spent in the activity. Frequency and duration for the variables of participation were calculated for each student. Individual data were then aggregated by and across courses for successful completers, unsuccessful completers, and withdrawers. Statistical analyses (e.g., t-tests and regressions) were conducted to explore the relationship of student participation to persistence and achievement.

//**Best practices**//
 * 1) Using the tools available to track where students are going in the course, how often, and when;
 * 2) Giving students feedback on their participation vis-à-vis other students in the course;
 * 3) Using aggregated data collected over time to establish course norms for student behaviors (i.e., instructors could inform students of how much time the average, successful student spent in the online environment and the behaviors they exhibited).

STUDY 2: PREDICTING STUDENT RETENTION ONLINE
This study focused on the relationship of nine student academic and demographic background variables and student locus of control in predicting completion or withdrawal from online courses. Researchers and program administrators hoped to learn whether data collected as part of a student’s admission to a program or course could be used to predict how well they would perform in courses, and thus be used as an advisement tool. The participants in this study were students across five semesters who enrolled in online courses covering the humanities, natural sciences, and social sciences. Study participants were asked to complete Rotter’s (1996) internal-external (I-E) locus of control instrument, and data on demographic (e.g., gender, age) and previous academic performance (e.g., high school GPA and SAT scores) were collected from the student information system. Using only students’ demographic and academic variables, a two-group Predictive Discriminant Analysis (PDA) was able to predict whether a student would complete or withdraw from a course with an accuracy of 62.8%. High school achievement (high school GPA) and mathematic ability (SAT-M) were found to be the most important predictors in this analysis. A subsequent analysis focusing on locus of control and availability of financial assistance predicted students’ group membership with 74% accuracy. (Rotter, J. (1996). Generalized expectations for internal versus external control of reinforcement. //Psychological Monographs, 80//(1), 1-28.)

//**Best practices**//
 * 1) Faculty should be aware of student’s prior academic experiences and that students with lower grade point averages may need individual assistance within the course and academic assistance outside of the online course to succeed.
 * 2) Instructors need to be aware of the role of student attitude and motivation to successful completion. Best instructional practices would include helping students understand the “non-academic” reasons, such as technological issues, for failure to persist and providing steady guidance and encouragement early in the term.
 * 3) Identify weaker students through pre-assessment and other less assertive students may help faculty identify students who will need individual assistance early on.

STUDY 3: STUDENT PERSISTENCE AND SATISFACTION IN THE ONLINE ENVIRONMENT
This study was designed to examine student satisfaction and persistence in the online environment from the perspective of the student. In particular, researchers were interested in learning directly from the student why some students dropped out of online courses while others remained, and in identifying strategies that might be employed to improve the likelihood of student retention. A survey probing instructional reasons for withdrawing from a course was mailed to 230 students who withdrew from online courses and to 275 students who completed online courses. Twenty-five percent of withdrawers and 19% of completers responded. Telephone interviews were conducted with 16 students, eight who withdrew and eight who completed the courses. Findings suggest completers tended to view problems with online courses as something to overcome, while withdrawers tended to view problems as a rationale for leaving a course.

//**Best practices**//
 * 1) A comprehensive orientation at the beginning of the semester may reduce confusion about the course layout and expectations.
 * 2) An explicit and repeated online discussion about the course goals and procedures may be useful in the first weeks even when these are clearly stated in the course syllabus and on the Website.
 * 3) The instructor’s enactment of social and managerial roles may be more important to some students than pedagogical feedback.
 * 4) Early in the semester faculty should maintain consistent contact with all students and encourage them to build their self-reliance and group reliance (perhaps affecting their locus of control orientation).
 * 5) Faculty may also need to act as a liaison to technology assistance for the students in order to limit dropouts and encourage persistence. Basic rules of good Web design should be followed in online courses.
 * 6) Discussions are important and should be considered carefully as tools for retaining students.

STUDY 4: PERSPECTIVES OF FACULTY TEACHING ONLINE
This final study examined the roles that faculty enact while teaching online. This study relied on two primary data sources: semi-structured interviews with faculty teaching online and an analysis of archived online courses taught by those interviewed. The interviewed instructors represented 11 institutions and seven disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. Ten of the 13 instructors had taught online for three or more terms (experienced), and the remaining three were in their second online course at the time of interviews (novice). Class sizes averaged 20 students. In addition, the discussion boards of 10 archived courses were analyzed for evidence of faculty roles in the online environment. Researchers wanted to learn how instructors perceive their roles in the online environment and, based on their behaviors, the roles the instructors enacted. This study used Berge’s (1995) taxonomy of faculty roles as its theoretical framework. Berge postulated faculty enact four different roles when teaching courses: a social role, a pedagogical role, a management role, and a technological role. Because faculty were provided with a technological advisor when teaching these courses, this study did not focus on that role. (Berge, Z. L. (1995). Facilitating computer conferencing: Recommendations from the field. //Educational Technology, 35//(1), 22-30.)

This study found that there were distinct differences in the roles enacted by experienced online faculty as compared to novice online faculty. Novice instructors most frequently enacted a management role to a limited degree, and rarely posted a comment classified as “pedagogical.” Experienced faculty, however, enacted multiple roles—social, managerial, and pedagogical—to engage students and increase student persistence and success.

//**Best practices**//
 * 1) Social role: Welcome students to the class, encourage them to share photos and experiences, and acknowledge the myriad pressures that might impact their class performance.
 * 2) Managerial role: Provide directions for completing assignments, recommendations for getting help with finding examination sites, and reminders of sources of technical and tutorial assistance. Students need active faculty involvement early in the course in order to understand the course layout, assignments, and expectations.
 * 3) Pedagogical role: Give course related feedback, asking questions, and engaging students with the content. Discussion is a useful tool to enact this role.
 * 4) Faculty members who are new to the online environment would benefit from being paired with an effective online instructor for an initial course to understand these roles.

Seven Principles Faculty can consider adopting the following strategies based on the Seven Principles to teach online effectively (The Teaching, Learning, and Technology Group, n.d.):

Encourage contact between students and faculty.

Make available class email list and use emails to send feedback and encouragement to students individually and collectively throughout the course. Set aside and make known online office hours outside of class time to address any issues students may have. Encourage the use of video communication or displaying of digital photo to bridge the virtual distance between the faculty and students, and among the students. Encourage the use of online chat, instant messaging, and blogs to facilitate interaction.

Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students.

Cater group projects and assignments that use the discussion board to solicit multiple student inputs and comments. Consider using Webquests to foster collaborative learning. Provide virtual break-out rooms to organize group presentations, brainstorm ideas, and group discussion. Encourage the use of Web 2.0 tools and applications, such as wiki or Google sites, for collaboration and sharing of resources required for the group work. Include peer appraisal as part of the group work evaluation to set expectations on student participation and individual contribution. Encourage students to form their own support group to learn from one and other.

Use active learning techniques.

Encourage students to find material relevant to course content and share them online. Get students to research online for studies related to the course assignments. Introduce simulation programs or online applications which students can manipulate data and observe outcomes to gain deeper understanding of the content. Leverage videos, images, case studies, and other online resources to support reflective, and open-ended tasks that focus on application of theory to practice. Have students read an article and argue for one of the perspectives and have them comment on other positions.

Provide prompt feedback.

Use polling tools, such as a hand-held Personal Response System or Twitter, to solicit quick response to a topic. Summarize the teaching points and concerns students have and post them on the discussion board immediately after the class is over. Encourage students to become involved in the feedback process by specifying the type and person they want feedback from. Create self-graded practice quizzes that give immediate individual feedback based on the student's answers. Allocate sufficient time to grade assignments and give feedback.

Emphasize time on task.

Provide links or access to relevant articles and readings, such as electronic reserves, save students' time to search for materials. Prepare agenda and manage the time required to cover the critical parts of the content to limit off-topic online conversation. Upload read-ahead class notes and summary of key points from previous lesson for student review, thus saving time for the instructor to cover the material during class. Leverage the calendar function to manage assignment deadlines and post reminders to inform students. Factor in time for students to revise and consult materials after class before requiring them to post assignments online. Orient students to the technology used in the online classroom and provide job aids or performance support tools to assist students in using the technology. Provide assistance or guide students in resolving potential information technology issues to reduce student downtime. Provide an estimated time needed to complete a task, during or outside class, so that students can manage the time given to complete the task.

Communicate high expectations.

Use rubrics to communicate the expectations of exemplary work. Have students commit to a learning contract that includes learning objectives and course deliverables. Promote value in student projects by having them upload online for public viewing or use. Set high expectations by linking objectives to real world standards. Solicit end-of-course feedback and present findings to students of incoming course. Upload exemplary student work for reference and set expectations. Make clear of expectations during the course orientation.

Respect diverse talents and ways of learning.

Design projects that allow students to determine the content topic of their choice. Allow multiple ways for students to present their work, such as demonstration, visual aids, audio aids, multi-media, etc. Make provision to archive online sessions and all presentation material for students who could not attend the class. Leverage technology, such as voice recognition software, to address the needs of students who have disability. Design different kinds of assignment to appeal to various student learning styles. Self-assessments allow students to discover their strengths and focus them on their weaker areas. Provide multiple communication means, such as emails, discussion boards, and online office hours, to allow students the flexibility to interact with each other and with the instructor.

Best practices for teaching online Morris and Finnegan (2008) conducted four different studies with over 400 students and faculty in fully online undergraduate general education courses offered by 35 institutions in the University System of Georgia (USG) to determine best practices for teaching online. These studies focused on student experiences and persistence in the online environment and faculty experiences and practices. The courses utilized a consistent template and design standards to mitigate the influence of course design on student persistence and achievement. The following are the proposed best practices for faculty teaching online:

Tracking student behavior and achievement online. This relates to monitoring the online activities students are engaged in and the time they spend on each activity:

Leverage tools within the online learning management system to track student online activities, frequency and time of access. Provide feedback on student participation. Use aggregated data collected over time to determine course norms for student behaviors, such as the average time successful students spent in the online environment and the behaviors they exhibited.

Predicting student retention online. This pertains to faculty using student demographic background variables and locus of control to predict whether students will complete or withdraw from online courses. Suggested approaches include:

Find out student’s prior academic experiences. Provide academic assistance within and outside of the online course to help students with lower grade point averages succeed. Help students understand challenges they may faced in the online environment and render support and encouragement. For example, provide assistance on technological issues. Identify weaker students through pre-assessment who will require additional attention from the beginning of the course.

Student persistence and satisfaction. Understand the factors that lead to course withdrawal and completion. Strategies to enhance student retention from the beginning of the course include:

Provide clear and detailed orientation of the course to mitigate confusion about the course structure and expectations. Use online discussion to emphasize course goals and procedures repeatedly in the first weeks to allow time for students to internalize the information. Maintain consistent contact with all students and encourage them to create their self-support network.

Enacting various faculty roles. Faculty should enact the following roles, based on the model proposed by Berg (1995), to engage the students at multiple levels.

Social role: Provide a conducive environment for students to interact and share personal thoughts and experiences with one and other, and acknowledge the challenges they will face throughout the course. Managerial role: Set course expectations from the beginning of the course, give directions for completing assignments and relevant references, and provide all necessary technical and academic resources for students to succeed. Pedagogical role: Provide timely feedback on assignments and engage students constantly to discuss the course content. Technical role: Act as a liaison to technology assistance for students facing technical issues in the online environment. Novice faculty who are new to the online environment should pair with an effective online instructor for an initial course to understand these roles.

Virtual Classroom Best Practices These are the best practices adapted from webinar material on virtual classroom during ASTD Techknowledge 2009 :

Be passionate. Instructors need to be excited about the content and technology through their visual and vocal communication during class. This will lead students to feel energetic as well. Limit lectures and encourage more interaction.

Use annotation tools. Maximize the use of annotation tools, such as a marker to highlight a portion of the shared screen, to support instruction.

Leveraging demonstrations. Use demonstrations, such as directing students to relevant online resources, can enhance learner attention and motivation. Faculty will need to rehearse prior to the class to ensure the demonstrations run smoothly.

Polling. Use the polling function to initiate discussion and solicit comments. Thereafter, present the results to keep the students engaged in the discussion.

Drive participation. Participation is key to keep the students engaged in an online environment. Have students lead the discussion and share learning experience. Faculty should impress upon the students that they need to take some ownership in the knowledge transfer.

Regulate instructor involvement. Allow time and opportunity for students to engage in their own learning and discussion during class.

Rehearse for class. Faculty should run through the proceeding prior to the start of the class to make sure that all required interactions are working.

Be comfortable with the technology. Instructors should optimize their environment by having working head-set, speakers, etc. before class. It is a common practice to have another computer showing exactly what students will see during class.

Practice. Delivering an online class is very much different than a face-to-face setting. Practice to ensure efficient time allocation for different stages of the lesson.

Create a community. Apart from congregating the students to the online classroom, facilitate ways to build community and network so as to create a sense of belonging and group cohesion.

Best Practices for Delivering Virtual Classroom Training These suggestions for effective virtual classroom are adapted from a white paper by McKinnie, R. (2008):

Ensuring the class runs smoothly. When preparing for an online class, there are three basic areas to consider:

Be aware of the students' academic background to ensure they have the necessary pre-requisite knowledge. Be prepared prior to the start of the online session by having an agenda with cues for demo, slides or multimedia ready, demonstration application windows open and ready, and run through the materials to verify everything is where it should be and functioning. Rehearse to mitigate and anticipate any technical issues that may occur during class.

Developing an Online Teaching Style. Teaching in an online environment is very much different from a face-to-face setting. Some ways to create personal style include:

Tell brief anecdotal stories or use analogies to demonstrate a point. Practice to ensure delivery is clear and succinct. Inform students on what to expect when the information and material changes on the screen. Use the web camera for self introduction and bring a personal touch to the online session.

Engage the students constantly. Allow students to interact and provide opportunities for everyone to contribute by:

Showing students how to use emoticons and feedback tools such as laughter, applause, agree and disagree icons, and encourage their use. Soliciting comments and inputs from all the students through specific questions and providing direction on how they should respond. Using Breakout Rooms for group work, brainstorming, discussion, and role-playing.

Be responsive. In an online class, faculty must be able to respond to questions and feedback timely. This can be done by:

Scanning constantly and acknowledging new questions or comments on the screen. Using a moderator or co-instructor for a large group to tackle multiple issues that may arise during class Holding complicated or tangential questions for comments later so that they do not distract the class. Allowing and informing students on the use of the private and public messaging options during the online class. Having a second computer to maintain visual awareness of both the host and the participant view.

Deliver meaningful fun. An online session can be more interesting and effective when fun is injected. Faculty can consider:

Incorporating relevant multimedia and games to enhance the the learning experience. Introducing games during ‘off-teaching’ times to keep the students occupied.