BAGWELL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Ed.D. Program
Instructional Technology - ITEC 9420
Designing and Facilitating Online Learning
Kennesaw State University
Bagwell College of Education
Department: Instructional Technology
Department phone number:
Semester: XXXX
Credit Hours: 3
INSTRUCTOR:
e-mail:
Web page:
Office Phone:
TEXTS:
Required:
Aragon, S. R. (2003). Facilitating learning in online environments: New directions for adult and
continuing education. Jossey-Bass. ISBN: 0-787972-68-1
Kuhn, B. (2001) Web-based Training. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology
Publications.
Recommended:
Ko, S. and Rossen, S. (2003). Teaching online: A practical guide (2nd Ed.). Houghton Mifflin
Co. ISBN: 0-618298-48-7
COURSE CATALOG DESCRIPTION:
Prerequisites:
Admission to the Ed.S. or Ed.D. program in Instructional Technology or approval of the
Instructional Technology Department to enroll in this course as an elective course.
This course provides an overview of theories and research currently guiding most online learning
programs and assists students in applying these principles to design and develop high-quality
online learning experiences for educators and/or students. Unique challenges facing virtual
learning, including assessment and facilitator support for distance learners, are also addressed.
PURPOSE/RATIONALE:
Today’s instructional leaders must understand how to facilitate online learning for K-12 students
and for practicing educators. This course provides a fine-grained analysis of current online
learning practices and helps candidates build a framework for decision-making in their own
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 1
of 11
educational programs. It also helps them tackle the unique issues such as supporting online
interaction, assessing online learners, adhering to copyright laws, and ensuring a safe online
learning environment for teacher and students.
KSU CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK SUMMARY
Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching and Learning
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to
developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders
who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their
students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and who enhance
the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the development of
candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and
leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued
development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace
the notion that teaching and learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of
validated practices can all students construct meaning and reach high levels of learning. In that
way, candidates at the doctoral level develop into leaders for learning and facilitators of the
teaching and learning process. Finally, the PTEU recognizes, values, and demonstrates
collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the
community-at-large. Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public
and private schools, parents and other professional partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of
assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning.
Knowledge Base:
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases:
preservice, induction, in-service, renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg
(1996) believes that the concept of expertise is central to analyzing the teaching-learning process,
the teacher education faculty at KSU believe that the concept of expertise is central to preparing
effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during the continuum
phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward becoming
Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that
expertise is not an end-state but a process of continued development.
Use of Technology:
Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master
teacher preparation program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve
student learning and meet Georgia Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses,
candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore and use instructional media. They will
master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel
confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
Field Experience:
While participating in all field experiences, you are encouraged to be involved in a variety of
school-based activities directed at the improvement of teaching and learning. Activities may
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 2
of 11
include, but are not limited to, attending and presenting at professional conferences, participating
in leadership activities, attending PTA/school board meetings, and participating in educationrelated community events. As you continue your field experiences, you are encouraged to explore
every opportunity to learn by doing.
Diversity:
A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of the
different learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an
understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective instruction and
assessment within multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is raising candidate
awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second element is to cause candidates to explore
how multiple attributes of multicultural populations influence decisions in employing specific
methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are ethnicity, race,
socioeconomic status, gender, giftedness, disability, language, religion, family structure,
sexual orientation, and geographic region. An emphasis on cognitive style differences
provides a background for the consideration of cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons
defined as disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of services are available to support students with disabilities
within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students
must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (770-423- 6443) and develop an
individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
Please be aware that there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State
University that address each of the multicultural variables outlined above. For more information
contact the Student Life Center at 770-423-6280.
Doctorate of Education (EdD)
The knowledge, skills and dispositions (KSD’s) of the graduates of the The Kennesaw
State University Doctorate of Education program of the Bagwell College of Education reflect the
unique aspects of this degree. Collaboratively developed by faculty from across the university
and in consultation with community/school partners, these outcomes and proficiencies delineate
the high expectations we have for graduates who will be Leaders for Learning. Clearly, the
proficiencies reflect the complex nature of student learning in advanced degree programs leading
to a terminal degree. Consequently, many of the proficiencies listed below incorporate aspects
of knowledge, skills and dispositions within a single proficiency. These proficiencies are clearly
linked to our conceptual framework, The Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching,
Learning and Leadership.
Graduates from the Doctorate of Education Program at Kennesaw State University
1. Demonstrate leadership as advocates for students and education. Candidates
a. synthesize and apply the latest research on learning, leadership, developmental theory
advocating the implementation of best practices and assist colleagues to do the same to
ensure all students learn.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 3
of 11
b. are knowledgeable, articulate and think critically about educational practice, policy and
issues on national and international arenas.
c. understand, respond to , and influence the larger political, social, economic, legal, and
cultural context in matters related to education.
d. are knowledgeable about the factors contributing to safe physical environments for
education.
e. develop, articulate, implement, and steward a vision of learning supported by the
school community
2. Demonstrate leadership as agents for change, collaboration and collegiality. Candidates
a. understand the complexity of schools and the ambiguous nature of educational issues.
b. act in concert with and/or on behalf of colleagues to improve teaching and learning in
the classroom as supported by effective school, district, state level policies and
operations.
c. facilitate shared-decision making and teamwork.
d. improve teaching and learning by intentionally and systematically building networks of
influence at local, state, national and international arenas.
e. impact student learning for all and mentor other educators to do the same by effectively
working within the structures and culture of schools, families and communities.
f. support the teaching and learning process by soliciting all sources of funding and
educational resources.
3. Demonstrate leadership as mentors. Candidates
a. support and guide teachers to improve teaching and learning for all.
b. are committed to improving student learning by improving teaching and the learning
environment.
c. model routine, intentional, and effective use of technology while mentori8ng and
encouraging others to do the same.
4. Demonstrate leadership as expert teachers and instructional leaders. Candidates
a. are creative and flexible in their thinking and in seeking solutions to educational
challenges.
b. are knowledgeable of assessment, evaluation and accountability practices and critically
synthesize and utilize the data to improve student learning.
c. are master-teachers and instructional leaders possessing and demonstrating content and
pedagogical expertise who are able to make international comparisons in both areas.
d. develop and/or support appropriate, meaningful curricula that positively impact student
learning for all and assist others to do the same.
e. facilitate and support curricular design, instructional strategies, and learning
environments that integrate appropriate technologies to maximize teaching and
learning.
f. use technology to collect and analyze data, interpret results, and communicate findings
to improve instructional practice and student learning.
5. Demonstrate leadership as models of professionalism. Candidates
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 4
of 11
a. effectively design and conduct educational research which positively influences
educational practice or policy.
b. exhibit ethical behavior in all professional and personal interactions.
c. respect others, value differences and are open to feedback.
d. believe that for every problem there is a solution and actualize that belief when
engaging colleagues, students, families and community partners.
e. seek out responsibility and are accountable for their actions.
f. maintain current knowledge and best practices through continued professional
development.
6. Demonstrate leadership in meeting the needs of diverse constituents. Candidates
a. value and recognize the strength and power of diversity.
b. incorporate global perspectives and cultural richness in curriculum planning and
decision making.
c. address exceptionalities in planning, teaching, and assessment and respond to diverse
community interests and needs by mobilizing community resources.
d. proactively and intentionally advocate for and work to build educational environments
that are inclusive and supportive of diverse students, families and colleagues
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: (ALIGNED TO CONTENT STANDARDS)
Candidates will support the adoption and effective use of online in education. (ELCC Standards
1-6; Nets A Standards II-VI, ISTE/NCATE TL Standards I-VIII).
In pursuit of these goals, the learning objectives of this course include:
1. Developing, articulating, implementing, and stewarding a vision of how online learning
can improve instruction and support the school or district’s overall vision, mission, and
goals. (TL VIII)
2. Understanding basic theoretical principles related to the design and delivery of highquality online instruction (TL II, III)
3. Applying the basic theoretical principles to design developmentally appropriate, highquality online learning (TL II, III)
4. Locating and evaluating current research on online learning (TL-II, III)
5. Categorizing and understanding the different types of virtual learning experiences
available to K-12 students and educators (TL II, III
6. Illustrating how online learning can support the diverse needs of learners (ISTE-TL-II,
IV)
7. Understanding the history of virtual learning in education (TL-VII)
8. Locating and synthesizing current legislation, trends, and policy on online learning (TL
VII)
9. Projecting future developments of online learning for education (TL-VII)
10. Understanding the basic differences between face-to-face and virtual instruction (TL-II,
III)
11. Exhibiting fluent use of technology, including distance learning opportunities, to provide
learning opportunities for students, teachers, administrators, and staff (TL-I, II, III)
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 5
of 11
12. Exhibiting fluent use of telecommunications tools and resources to foster and support
information sharing, remote information access, and communication among students,
school staff, parents, and local community (TL-V)
13. Developing online learning environments that are aligned with theoretical and researchbased principles (ELCC 2; NETS-A-II; TL-V)
14. Understanding and proposing solutions to various social and legal issues that surround
virtual learning (ELCC 2, 5, 6; NETS-A-VI; ISTE/NCATE TL VI)
15. Researching and recommending systems and processes for implementing online learning
learning facilities and infrastructure (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TL-VII)
16. Providing examples of how to manage student learning in a virtual environment (ELCC
2; NETS-A-II, V; TL II)
17. Evaluating the potential of online learning experiences to enhance student learning and
professional learning (ELCC 2; NETS-A-V; TL I, IV)
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: (Aligned to Program Standards)
The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares learning facilitators who understand their
disciplines and principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply these
understandings to making instructional decisions that foster the success of all learners. As a
result of the satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of these courses, the candidate will
demonstrate the following outcomes:
Course objective
Doctoral
KSDs
1. Developing, articulating, implementing,
and stewarding a vision of how online
learning can improve instruction and
support the school or district’s overall
vision, mission, and goals.
2. Understanding basic theoretical
principles related to the design and
delivery of high-quality online instruction
2c, 4a
3. Applying the basic theoretical
principles to design developmentally
appropriate, high-quality online learning
1a, 4c
4. Locating and evaluating current
research on online learning
1a, 5a
5. Categorizing and understanding the
different types of virtual learning
1a, 1b, 4e
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
1a, 4c
Distributed
School
Leadership
Roles*
Performance
Leader
PSC/NCATE
Standard
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.5
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Page 6
of 11
experiences available to K-12 students and
educators
6. Illustrating how online learning can
1a, 6a, 6c,
support the diverse needs of learners
6d
7. Understanding the history of virtual
learning in education
1c
8. Locating and synthesizing current
legislation, trends, and policy on online
learning
1b, 1c, 2a
9. Projecting future developments of
online learning for education
1b, 1c, 2a
10. Understanding the basic differences
between face-to-face and virtual
instruction
4e
11. Exhibiting fluent use of technology,
including distance learning opportunities,
to provide learning opportunities for
students, teachers, administrators, and
staff
12. Exhibiting fluent use of
telecommunications tools and resources to
foster and support information sharing,
remote information access, and
communication among students, school
staff, parents, and local community
13. Developing online learning
environments that are aligned with
theoretical and research-based principles
3c, 5f
14. Understanding and proposing
solutions to various social and legal issues
that surround virtual learning
15. Researching and recommending
systems and processes for implementing
online learning learning facilities and
infrastructure
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Assessment
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5
3c, 5f
Relationship
Development
Leader
1.6
4f
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1c, 4a
4e, 5a
Learning &
Development
Leader
Process
Improvement
Leader
Process
Improvement
Leader
1.5
1.5
Page 7
of 11
16. Providing examples of how to manage
student learning in a virtual environment
4e
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
17. Evaluating the potential of online
learning experiences to enhance student
learning and professional learning
5f
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Learning &
Development
Leader
*Georgia’s Leadership Institute for School Improvement & Georgia Committee on Educational
Leadership Preparation’s Distributed School Leadership Roles
COURSE OUTLINE:
1. Review of theoretical principles associated with high-quality online instruction
2. Review and critique of online portals and learning management systems, currently used
in online learning
3. Review of research and trends pertaining to online learning
4. Overview of the benefits and challenges of online learning
5. Review of the history of online/distance learning in K-12 settings
6. The projected future of online learning
7. Comparison of online learning to face-to-face learning
8. Comparison of adult online learners to K-12 online learners
9. Characteristics of successful online learners and teachers
10. Social, ethical, and legal issues related to online learning and teaching
COURSE REQUIREMENTS/ASSIGNMENTS:
1. Candidates will participate in a series of online discussion forums and in-class activities
responding to assigned readings, recommended websites, and critical issues related to the
online learning. Candidate responses should relate not only to the question(s), but also to
the comments made by classmates and/or instructor. These responses should clearly
demonstrate that candidates have read the required articles, thoroughly examined
recommended websites, and participated fully in course assignments and exercises.
Responses should be relevant to the topic and should serve to move the discussion
forward—not simply agree or disagree with what has already been stated. Candidates
should interact with classmates constructively and respectively, allowing for everyone to
participate. Candidates should follow the rules of netiquette to be provided in class.
2. Candidates will design an online course for students, parents, or educators. The course
should include learning objectives; assignments/deliverables; assessments; and
materials/resources. Candidates must provide instructor and peers with a rationale of how
the online learning course is supported by theory, research, best practice in the field.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 8
of 11
Candidates must identify an intended audience for the course and explain how the course
will be implemented. A budget detailing costs associated with implementing the online
course also must be included. The course and supporting materials must be made
available to the instructor and peers at the end of the semester.
-or3. Candidates will design online learning experiences to augment face-to-face instruction in
a K-12 classroom. Specific learning standards, assessments, and
assignments/deliverables must be included in the online learning experiences.
Candidates must provide instructor and peers with a rationale of how the online learning
activities are supported by theory, research, best practice in the field. The online learning
experiences and supporting materials must be made available to the instructor and peers
at the end of the semester.
4. Based on the theoretical principles presented in this class, candidates will review and
compare online portals, learning management systems, courses, and web-based learning
resources. Results of their comparisons will be presented in class.
EVALUATION AND GRADING:
Online and In-class Discussion of Readings (30% of grade)
Research paper on online learning (45%)
Comparison of online portals, LMS, and courses (25% of grade)
A:
B:
C:
F:
92% - 100%
84%-91%
75%-83%
74% or lower
Note: All written work should reflect careful organization of material and the high standards of
investigation associated with college-level studies. Papers should be typewritten, on 8 1/2 x 11 in. paper.
Action research work submitted should follow APA format. Manuscripts must be proof read to ensure
accuracy in spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Written work should be attractive and neat -ESPECIALLY WITH MATERIALS INTENDED FOR STUDENT USE.
ACADEMIC HONESTY STATEMENT:
The KSU Graduate Catalog states “KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their
academic programs in an ethical, professional manner. Any work that students present in
fulfillment of program or course requirements should reflect their own efforts, achieved without
giving or receiving any unauthorized assistance. Any student who is found to have violated these
expectations will be subject to disciplinary action.”
PROFESSIONALISM: CLASS ATTENDANCE/PARTICIPATION POLICY:
Attendance is required for each class session, and candidates are expected to be on time. Part of
your success in this class is related to your ability to provide peer reviews and feedback to your
group members regarding group projects. Furthermore, responding effectively and appropriately
to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s professionalism. Since
each class meeting represents one week of instruction/learning, failure to attend class will impact
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 9
of 11
your performance on assignments and final exams. Class discussions, group work, and activities
require that everyone be present. There is no way to “make up” this class. Please be prepared
with all readings completed prior to class. You are expected to ask insightful and pertinent
questions.
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Campbell, K. (1999). Learner characteristics and instructional design. Academic Technologies
for Learning.
http://www.findarticles.com/CF_0/m0961/2000_Annual/61855625/print.jhtml
Conrad, R. & Donaldson, J. (2004). Engaging the online learner. Activities and resources for
creative instruction.
Conway, J. (1997). Educational technology’s effect on models of instruction. Educational
Technology. http://copland.udel.edu/~jconway/ESDY666.htm.
Covington, M. V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative
review. Annual Review of Psychology.
http://www.findarticles.com/CF_0/m0961/2000_Annual/61855625/print.jhtml
Feldstein, M. (2004). Informational cascades in online learning. eLearn Magazine.
http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=best_practices&article=25-1
Freeman, R. (1994). Instructional Design: Capturing the Classroom for Distance Learning. The
Association of Christian Continuing Education Schools and Seminaries [online].
http://www.fuller.edu/swm/faculty/freeman/,L525/lectures/idmono.html
Hite, J. & Ewing, K. (1997). Guerrilla instructional design or design methods for the busy
instructor. Instructional Technologies. St. Cloud State [online].
http://lrs.stcloudstae.edu/cim/courses/pine/inst.html
Huitt, W. and Hummel, J. (2003) Cognitive development. Educational Psychology Interactive.
http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/cognsys/piaget.html.
Jacobson, C. (2000) Instructional design theories. MindMaps.
http://carolyn.jlcarroll.net/index.html
Kordalewski, J. (1999). Incorporating student voice into teaching practice. ERICDigest. ERIC
Identifier: ED440049. http://ericfacility.net/ericdigests/ed440049.html.
Kruse, K. (2002). Gagne's nine events of Instruction: An introduction. e-Learning Guru.
http://e-learningguru.com/articles/art3_3.htm
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 10
of 11
Kruse, K.. (2002). The magic of learner motivation: The ARCS model. e-Learning Guru.
http://e-learningguru.com/articles/art3_5.htm
McInnes, M. (2002). e-Learning: Bridging the apathy gap. e-Learning Guru. http://elearningguru.com/articles/art8_1.htm
Neal, L. (2005). eLearning and fun: A report from the CHI 2005 special interest group. eLearn
Magazine. http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=best_practices&article=31-1
RCM, Inc.. (2000). The teachers internet use guide. http://www.rmcdenver.com/useguide/
Shanley, D. B., & Kelly, M. (No date). Why Problem-Based Learning?
http://www.odont.lu.se/projects/ADEF/shanley.html
Wang, C.M. & Ong, G. (2003) Questioning techniques for active learning. SCTL’s Ideas on
teaching.1(February). http://www.cdtl.nus.edu.sg/Ideas/iot.htm
Zibit, M. (2004). The peaks and valleys of online professional development. e-Learn Magazine.
http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=research&article=3-1
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 11
of 11