[ARCHIVED] Maintaining consistency, while still being flexible

[jcole3]

I have worked in two different types of programs at this point - one in which each individual instructor had pretty much complete control over their course, and one in which courses are developed as a master and all sections are taught using that particular course (no alterations allowed).

I have seen the headaches caused with every single course being a different build (a nightmare when trying to evaluate courses and support students). But I am also aware that faculty feel like their hands are tied when it comes to teaching a pre-determined course (as if students are just taking part in a faceless MOOC).

Is there a middle ground that can provide the students with some level of consistency in their educational experience, instructors the freedom to teach in their own style, and some level of sanity for the online/elearning department that supports everyone involved?

[DeletedUser]

The middle-ground model that we use in our fully online program is to supply course developers/instructors with a course template. The navigation is therefore fairly consistent, with menu items in a particular order and Assignments, Discussions, Pages, etc. hidden in favor of guiding students through Modules.

Our first two modules are Course Resources and Pre-Course Activities. Within the weekly modules, the template has certain elements that we want to see in every course, such as Overview, Devotions, and Reflections/Evaluation. What activities come between those bookends are pretty much up to the instructor, but I advocate using a consistent naming convention and pattern. I also think it helpful to use Text Headers so students know when activities and assignments should be complete.

I hope this helps!

Crystal

[jcole3]

Thanks for the reply! How do you handle course evaluations?

[cadatko]

We've had a similar situation here. Mostly we built master (what we call 'model') courses when we had a big enrollment push. At first we recommended that faculty only alter a few minor things to make the courses their own, but we always kept the edit button option for almost all of the course elements (barring a few content items built in an external tool). We felt this was important, since faculty could still feel like they have control over their courses, and also because we didn't have the funding to maintain the courses after the initial build.

Now we use the courses primarily as templates for instructors in a particular discipline and encourage faculty to update and share with others. This has resulted in several of our courses becoming more robust based on student feedback/demand, and the discipline faculty feel a greater sense of ownership of the courses as a whole.

We also have a template with blank content that we offer to our instructors to give them some direction when building. We let all of them know that this is really to help maintain consistency in our course navigation and has a positive impact on the students.

Unfortunately we do not have a course review process yet at our institution, as it is a negotiated item. However, because many instructors have either participated in our model course program or have asked for the template, there is an overall shape to our courses that many instructors use.

[Stef_retired]

For anyone interested in this topic, be sure to RSVP to the CanvasLIVE Twitter Chat #CanvasChat: Managing Masters (2/14) which is coming up this Tuesday, February 14, 2017. RSVP “yes” if you will be there--and if you’re interested, but your schedule doesn’t allow you to attend in real time, RSVP "no" or "maybe" to receive all event updates. Your RSVP ensures that you will receive a notification should the event be cancelled or changed.