Module 4: Design and Development of online courses

This module is one that takes a deeper look into comparing DE and F2F learning experiences. I used Moore and Kearsley for the class discussion this week but I also wanted to use the reading by Anderson in some way. I thought that this would be the perfect way to express what this module taught me and what I enjoyed.

This module asked that we read one chapter from part 3 of the book. While reading the chapters the one that caught my eye was The Quality Dilemma in Online Education Revisited.  My thoughts on the chapter are that they bring a lot of information on how technology has influenced DE and if it will be a long-term success. As mentioned by Anderson (2008), “[T] he Internet have overturned traditional roles of the college or university as the leading (1) research source and knowledge creator, (2) archivist and gateway to knowledge, (3) disseminator of advanced knowledge, and (4) reference and evaluator of truth”(p.310).  I am please over all with all the advances of DE and all the great tools UMUC have started to use to incorporate both technological learning but as well as the regular discussion area and objectives that I used to remember. Technology has become the latest in DE and will continue to blossom as year go on. For my own example I have been away for only two years and I see so much has changes. For example the introduction of LEO, social media tools, and email assignment verification are now being sent. Those are just a couple of advance DE had made at UMUC yet a learner always craves the connection with educators and other peers.

This week’s discussion had a lot to do the difference between F2F and DE educators perform. I enjoyed this week due to the fact that it was necessary to see how DE influences both F2F and DE learners. In the discussion section this week classmates as well myself favor connecting with classmates and professors. Online F2F is still a feature that has not been incorporated at UMUC. I thought how interesting would it be if LEO carried a online face to face function for groups and learning office hours. This would close the gap and could enhance the possibility of students understanding of certain tasks or assignments as well as a deeper peer influence.  On the contrary Anderson(2008) states, “Some have suggested that these shortcomings are the result of trying to replicate the classroom environment, instead of maximizing the new configurations of knowing the community formation possible in an interactive online environment”(306).

It was a great reading and I guess time will tell how fare DE will advance in technology and what the future research will show.

Read any one of the 4 chapters, Part 3, Design and development of online courses. In Anderson. & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning (Second Edition). Retrieved July 29, 2008, fromhttp://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/second_edition.html