Recent Changes - Search:

Articles

Conference Reviews

Kairos

K.36 Understanding State-of-the-Art Online Writing Instruction

K.36 Understanding State-of-the-Art Online Writing Instruction: Results from the CCCC Committee’s National Survey on Best Practices
Reviewed by Terry Carter
tcarter@spsu.edu

The focus of this session as a whole was online writing instructor training and online writing course instructional design for traditional and non-traditional students. To gain a full picture of the overall importance of the session, one needs to understand that the presenters who are members of the Committee on Best Practices for Online Writing Instruction (OWI) have been active since 2008. Their three years of work culminated with the completion of a nation-wide electronic survey about online writing practices at colleges and universities. The presenters’ challenge for this year was to provide a concise yet comprehensive view of their three-year journey toward an understanding of national practices for online writing instruction using the survey data as the focal point. To overcome the limitations of the 75-minute forum, the chair made sure at the outset that attendees knew how to access a full-report of the raw survey data that would be available via CCCC’s website after Executive Committee approval. In addition to the session chair, there were four speakers; listed below are their names, professional affiliations, and presentation titles as provided at the convention session and the order in which they spoke:

  • Beth Hewett, University of Maryland, University College, Adelphi, Session Chair
  • Christa Ehmann Powers, Smarthinking, Inc., Washington, D.C., “National Survey Results about State of the Art Practices in Online Writing Instruction: Fully Online Contexts”
  • Deborah Minter, University of Nebraska Lincoln, “National Survey Results about State of the Art Practices in Online Writing Instruction: Hybrid Contexts”
  • Sushil Oswal, University of Washington, Tacoma, “Looking Ahead: Best Practices for OWI”
  • Webster Newbold, Ball State University, Muncie, IN, “Looking Ahead: Best Practices for OWI”

Each of the speakers presented for approximately 10 minutes. One possible commonality that surfaced from each of the presenters was that current institutional support is directed more towards on online technology training rather than online technology pedagogy for particular student populations. Online technology training focuses on preparing teachers to make use of online courseware applications such as Blackboard, whereas online technology pedagogy focuses on how to teach in the online course environment. Highlights gleaned from the individual presentations are listed below.

National Survey Results about State of the Art Practices in Online Writing Instruction: Fully Online Contexts

Christa Ehmann Powers provided nuggets of information that highlighted “emergent themes” and faculty concerns relative to teaching fully online courses:

  • Some administrators mandate that faculty teach online sections.
  • Training for online course delivery is often limited; such limitations indicate that continuous professional development for online faculty needs improvement.
  • Faculty often move traditional courses to online venues without significant pedagogical changes for online delivery.
  • Specific supplemental support for online writing instruction is lacking
  • Two-year and four-year institutions—some of which often face monetary challenges for the support of online course delivery—appear be offering more fully online courses than research institutions.
  • Lack of pedagogical considerations by faculty for users whose home language is not English.

Her brief overview indicated that faculty teaching fully online courses may face more challenges and may express more dissatisfaction than faculty teaching hybrid courses.

National Survey Results about State of the Art Practices in Online Writing Instruction: Hybrid Contexts

Deborah Minter presented a synopsis of parallel “emergent themes” and faculty concerns about hybrid courses similar to those presented for the fully online courses. There were many commonalities among survey responses for the fully online and hybrid context survey data. With the exception of the last bulleted item, the following list represents unique points that were highlighted:

  • Training for teaching courses in hybrid contexts is often not mandated.
  • A significant number of faculty report experiencing some type of mentoring, which was a positive finding.
  • Students tend to report that hybrid courses offer flexibility in a manner that is positive, which possibly indicates a significant level of student satisfaction for courses taught in this format.
  • Students enrolled in hybrid contexts often struggle with technology use within the course, which may indicate that hybrid course instructors impose usage of more sophisticated technologies.
  • Lack of pedagogical considerations by faculty for users whose home language is not English.

Based on the results presented above, one could sense that faculty who teach in hybrid contexts have a tendency to report a slightly greater degree of positive experiences in comparison to faculty who teach in fully online contexts.

Looking Ahead: Best Practices for OWI

Sushil Oswal’s initial speaking role, as he explained, was to report on best practices relative to meeting the needs of students with disabilities who were enrolled in online courses. Unfortunately— as evident by his tone—the survey results indicate that a large percentage of faculty who teach online courses do not have a purposeful focus on teaching or designing their courses for students with disabilities.

Below are select highlights of quantitative findings that he was able share:

  • 53% of survey respondents stated that they had knowledge of a disabled student being enrolled in one their classes.
  • 27% of survey respondents admitted that they were not able state whether or not a disabled student had been enrolled in one of their classes.
  • 26% of survey respondents said they were not sure if their courses were ADA compliant.

One should note that the speaker himself has a visual impairment, so his concern about the needs of other students with disabilities was quite evident. He summarized his presentation by making the point that any “best practices” for meeting the needs of students with disabilities are “at best questionable” because the nation-wide electronic survey about online writing practices reveals that most faculty are poorly informed about ADA pedagogical issues.

Looking Ahead: Best Practices for OWI

Webster Newbold focused on possible future guidelines that might be offered to help develop sound online pedagogical practices and to support the needs of online faculty. A select listing of future issues to be addressed include:

  • Providing a pedagogical framework for teachers
  • Articulating course management guidelines
  • Advocating for emphasis on student-centeredness
  • Suggesting guidelines for work load issues
  • Making statements about online faculty teaching in relation to tenure and promotion policies.

The speaker emphasized in closing that the committee’s national survey only captured the information provided by faculty instructors of online courses; therefore, a future study is needed in order to capture student perceptions of their experiences in online courses

Comments and Questions from Attendees

The chair of the session made it known that the brevity of individual presentations was purposeful to allow an abundance of time for questions and comments from the audience members. The number of attendees filled the majority of available seats and some individuals stood due to lack of easy access to the few available open seats. The number of individuals wanting to asks questions, offer comments, or respond to questions posed by other attendees still exceeded the number of minutes that were available. Listed below are some of the issues brought to the attention of the committee:

  • Students' ability to read and comprehend written instructions need to be a focus because of the nature of online course delivery.
  • Long-term successful online students tend to be above average writers and readers.
  • Audio and audio-visuals should be used to deliver information and instruction when possible to ensure that instructors respond to the learning styles of students.
  • Dropout rates are high, thus multiple orientations and recursive communication are a must in online courses.
  • The complexity of online instruction often hampers student success; simplicity in online course delivery should not be viewed as “less rigorous.”
  • One of the challenges for a significant number of online faculty instructors is teaching courses designed by others.

The large number of people and the many questions and comments that were shared demonstrate that the issue of online writing instruction is of significant concern to many CCCC members.

Concluding Thoughts

This presentation by members of the Committee on Best Practices for Online Writing Instruction provides a clear indication that online writing instruction will be an important concern for CCCC in the coming years. It also indicates that future research and analysis needs to take place to ensure that online writing and learning pedagogy receives the needed attention and support that it deserves.

2011 CCCC Reviews Index

Edit - History - Print - Recent Changes - Search
Page last modified on August 14, 2011, at 01:54 AM