Written By Kortney Y. Watkins February 2024, All Rights Reserved
Kortney Watkins
Consultant for Formal & Creative Writing; Assistant Professor of English
Many educators find that the classroom is evolving at the rate that technology influences it (Batanero et al., 2019).? Because of this, how administrators and educators engage with courses and students that include a virtual component must evolve timely as well (Burgess, 2015; Karakaya, 2021; Richardson et.al., 2020).? This may mean that best practices undergo reflection and revision often.? Here are ten best practices that educators, K-12 and college, may wish to consider when a virtual component is included in the classroom, whether face-to-face, online, or a hybridization of both.
For Equity in Accessibility
It is absolutely necessary for all stakeholders to have a clear idea of what is required regarding successfully completing assessments.? This is especially the case when dealing with a student who has, for one reason or another, issues with e-course accessibility (Altinay, et.al, 2018; Dobransky and Hargittai, 2016).? One way to accomplish this is to provide a document that outlines, in detail, components of assessments as well as a method of categorization/scoring of said method.? This document can be in the form of a guideline, and more specifically, a rubric.? Rubrics, though not always used nor are always found to be necessary for every assessment, can be helpful for learners and observers in that they can provide clarity of scoring; this helps the learner to have a clear understanding of not just the expectations to successfully complete an assessment, but to also excel within assessment parameters.? More, concise rubrics provide details about what was done above, on par, or below skill set/concept mastery.
For many educators (as personally observed), clarity of course shells is often overlooked and/or less prioritized.? Issues with accessibility can be further compounded if clarity within the e-evniron is not taken into account.? Not unlike the traditional, physical space, the virtual classroom space sets the tone for the course itself.? The Digital Divide (DD) explains in its theory the issues that some demographics of students experience, as their disadvantaged status outside of the classroom translates to issues within the classroom (Altinay, et.al, 2018; Dobransky and Hargittai, 2016).? It is easy to conclude that removing any barrier possible so that all students can approach the course in an equitable fashion is necessary. ?This may become difficult, however, because so many “hands are in the pot”, so to speak.? In many public K-12 systems, the formatting of teaching and learning documents or virtual spaces are outlined on the county/city level, with some manipulation allowed for administrators and teachers based upon clearance.? For example, a county may use branding as well as a template for their chosen Learning Management System (LMS) with certain features defaulted, and others locked.? School level administrators may be granted permissions to modify some options, while teachers may only be allowed to add some content whilst deleting other content.? In this example, educators may find themselves constrained by what is allowable at the sacrifice of what best benefits their classroom—virtual or in-person.? The final decision for what a course is supposed to look like is not solely at the educator’s discretion.? If possible, a joint effort of administrators and teachers working together for their needs, along with student input (since they are end-users) would be ideal.
Though this may seem as obvious for many, the fact of the matter is that course calendars/pacing guides may not by used by many educators, nor by many students who eschew rigidity of structure within a course.? Course calendars offer a centralized space for teachers, students, and other stakeholders to view upcoming assessment due dates as well as other assignments.? Students can manipulate the calendar to their advantage and customize by activity or class (of course, this is dependent upon whether or not administrators allow for such an option).? Course calendars are often part of Learning Management Systems (LMS’s).? Course pacing guides, though inclusive of dates, are slightly different.? They allow for educators and other stakeholders to view proposed course content, materials, and assessments/assignments.? Viewing course pacing guides allow all stakeholders to see the overall content and the tempo by which content is addressed.? Not only is such a best practice ideal for students in general, it also offers support for students who are disadvantaged.? Remember that students may need support for many reasons, including but not limited to challenges with consistent access to the course (Altinay, et.al, 2018; Dobransky and Hargittai, 2016).
This is an absolute for every institution and every professional within the institution.? For the modern classroom especially, where communication is heavily done via electronic means, communication is often asynchronous.? Modes include, emails, texting, and voicemails, for example (Burgess, 2015).? Though not always ideal, asynchronous communication can be less frustrating when there is clarity of communication standards.? If standards are not maintained on the institutional level, consider posting availability on the course shell of your LMS and/or syllabi.? Also consider posting this information as part of a Welcome Announcement at the beginning of the course in the LMS.? Announcements are typically archivable and make it easy for students and parents to retrieve previous information.
For Differentiated Instruction and Learning
It is important to acknowledge that everyone learns differently, and that also everyone may provide proof of learning in a multitude of ways—though such ways may also be prioritized, depending upon the concept to be learned and the assessment to test understanding of the concept (Baleni, 2015; Perera-Diltz and Moe, 2014; Vonderwell and Boboc, 2013).? An example of this would be a student needing to have access to an annotated bibliography example.? The student may need a literal example, but may also benefit from a video where construction of the annotated bibliography is documented.? The visual and audio components work together to demonstrate the concept as well as undergird the potential to master the concept.? If an educator does not include Web 2.0 tools for the classroom, the opportunity to engage with students in multiple ways can be missed, along with more opportunities of learning.
Though differentiated learning may seem focused on delivery of course information, differentiated learning also takes into account the types of assessments used to measure concept mastery and course progress.? It is important to consider what would be appropriate assessments (Baleni, 2015; Perera-Diltz and Moe, 2014; Vonderwell and Boboc, 2013); such considerations may include 1. If the assessment is high-stakes, or low-stakes; 2. If the assessment is an accurate representation of what a learner should be able to reasonably demonstrate in terms of understanding and applying concepts; 3. If the assessment adds value to both the individual learner and class as a whole by encouraging an engagement with other skills such as critical thinking and collaboration, for example.?
Learning, in general, takes buy-in from learners.? This is especially the case when virtual learning (whether asynchronous or synchronous) is at play (Burgess, 2015; Karakaya, 2021; Richardson, et. al., 2020).? When a student finds it difficult to engage with course materials—and sometimes the course itself—learning can become cumbersome and stymied.? It is crucial, then, that educators find a way to encourage their students to take ownership of their learning experience, as this, according to some, aids in student concept mastery as well as positive performance on correlating assessments, and if nothing else intrinsic gains in learning, even if not outwardly expressed (Andone, et al., 2020).? The usage of wikis, for example, allows for students to initially contribute to a course, and even allows for student revision, enabling students to engage in an additional skill set.? Activities like wikis provide learners with the opportunity to approach learning individually as well as corporately, fostering a sense of direction and purpose in which the student has choice/investment within the course.
For Responsible Teaching and Learning
The modern classroom has a digital component; this is undeniable, as technology in the classroom is no longer limited to old-school overhead projectors and slide shows.? Today’s classroom incorporates things like learning management systems (LMS’s), smart boards, and student-issued chrome books.? To that extent, the digital world has melded with the traditional tools of teaching and learning—arguably forever taking a foothold in education.? This said, it is a given that teaching tools are both housed and accessed in digital spaces.? Open educational resources (OER) provide educators with the means of being able to extend their resources beyond the class textbook and there are many sites that can be found on the web (Blomgren, 2018).? However, like with any other traditional course tool, it is incumbent upon the educator to select those tools that are most appropriate to course content as well as to the learners themselves (Burgess, 2015; Karakaya, 2021; Richardson, et. al., 2020).
The ease with which the modern educator finds herself able to secure course materials by a simple mouse click can lead to bad habits, if one is not careful.? Because much information is now easily accessible in a digital format there has been serious concern about intellectual property piracy (Grose, 2023).? Whether books, movies, music, articles (common and scholarly), etc., embattled claims over intellectual property rights are commonplace within the courts.? This is further complicated by federal and state copyright laws.? Add to it a growing sentiment by some that all knowledge should be freely accessible, and then fraudulent/scamming entities, available knowledge resources can be cumbersome when determining if using certain resources are actually legal.? A best practice would be to ensure that sites which host collections of materials are legitimate.? Though this can still not be guaranteed, sites with acknowledgment of the original source as well as a statement that indicates permission to use the source by either law or the original creator of said source are best.
领英推荐
Academic honesty is an issue from elementary through higher education (Grose, 2023).? Arguably, cultural influences, including broad-range acceptance appropriating formal and creative endeavors without acknowledgment, further exacerbate this issue.? In social media, for example, influencers will “stitch” videos of an original poster’s content while sometimes not giving credit to the original creator.? Other instances of social media dishonesty can include posters using accounts that are similar to the identification of the original poster who pass off content that is not their own, but still collects traffic via shares, likes, and follows.? With widespread exposure, social media, then, becomes both a reflection of and model for social behavior—a model that many students use in both the personal and academic sphere. ?Due to the advent of generative artificial intelligence (AI) becoming more accessible in recent years, students who use the negative aspects of social media by which to model (i.e. dishonesty for failure to credit non-original content), may be more inclined to use generative AI in the classroom.? The debate between the positives and negatives of generative AI aside, the exclusion of crediting its use is a form of academic dishonesty that needs to be addressed with students.? In fact, the Modern Language Association (MLA) has citation guidelines specifically for generative AI, which implies that the omission of credit even in this instant is categorized as academically dishonest—something that no student should find acceptable, nor find by other educational stakeholders to be tolerable.? Thusly, it is imperative that teachers of the modern classroom make a point to formulate a plan for teaching students responsible and ethical honesty for (hopefully) all endeavors, but particularly for those that are academic.
?
?
?
?
?
References
Altinay, Z., Altinay, F., Ossianilsson, E., & Aydin, C. H. (2018). Open education practices for learners with disabilities.?BRAIN: Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence & Neuroscience,?9(4), 171–176.
Andone, D., Mihaescu, V., Vert, S., Ternauciuc, A., & Vasiu, R. (2020). Students as OERs (Open Educational Resources) co-creators [Conference presentation]. 2020 IEEE 20th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 34–38.
Batanero, C., De-Marcos, L., Holvikivi, J., Hilera, J. R., & Oton, S. (2019). Effects of new supportive technologies for blind and deaf engineering students in online learning. IEEE Transactions on Education, 62(4), 270-277. https://doi.org/10.1109/te.2019.2899545
Baleni, Z. G. (2015). Online formative assessment in higher education: Its pros and cons. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 13(4), 228–236.
Blomgren, C. (2018). OER awareness and use: The affinity between higher education and k-12. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 19(2), 55–70.
Burgess, O. (2015). Cyborg teaching: The transferable benefits of teaching online for the face-to-face classroom.?Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, 11(1), 112–121.
Dobransky, K., & Hargittai, E. (2016). Unrealized potential: Exploring the digital disability divide. Poetics, 58, 18-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2016.08.003
Grose, T. K. (2023). Disruptive Influence. ASEE Prism, 32(3), 14–17. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48734149
Karakaya, K. (2021). Design considerations in emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: A human-centered approach. Educational Technology Research and Development: A Bi-Monthly Publication of the Association for Educational Communications & Technology, 69(1), 295-299.?
Perera-Diltz,?D.?M., & Moe,?J.?L. (2014). Formative and summative assessment in online education.?Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching,?7(1), 130-142.
Richardson, J. W., Lingat, J. E. M., Hollis, E., & Pritchard, M. (2020). Shifting teaching and learning in online learning spaces: An investigation of a faculty online teaching and learning initiative.?Online Learning, 24(1), 67–91.?
Vonderwell,?S.?K., & Boboc,?M. (2013). Promoting formative assessment in online teaching and learning.?TechTrends,?57(4), 22-27. doi:10.1007/s11528-013-0673-x
?
?