please dont rip this site

Online Education

List of Classes Immediately Available From MassMind's James Newton

What affects the likelihood that a student will benefit from new information?

- Acceptance (do we believe it?),

- Connection (how it ties in with what we already know),

- Multiplicity (understanding from different points of view),

- Explicitness (precision)

A good class is:

- Well paced. Cognitive limits require that we take small steps from existing knowledge, great leaps in understanding are rare. At the same time, covering information the student already knows limits motivation. Letting the students set their own pace in an online class avoids this issue entirely. 

- Interactive, where the teacher will continually assess and be responsive with guidance as needed, and the student has the support and interaction of other students in the class.

- Threaded. Connects back to prior points, reinforcing them, and looking at each subject from different points of view. 

- Impactful. Make it relevant with a public outcome.

- Safe and kind. Because text often fails to convey tone, it is critical to use personal language and to foster a sense of connection and encouragement with the students.


Life and real applications are complex, teaching simplified versions fails to prepare students for reality and tends to produce workers who oversimplify and are frustrated in their attempts to solve real issues. Reasoning and critical thinking are skills which must be learned, and taught, just like any other subject. Good tools for this are complex computer simulations (including video games), project based learning (PBL), and real world case studies.

A concern for simulation is that it must accurately capture the complexity and distractions of the real world. It has been said that "Simulation is doomed to succeed" because it's oversimple and will always work as expected, were reality is far more complex.

In my own experience, this becomes very obvious when working with programmers of software for "pure" computing vs control software for hardware / robots. Academic or data science programmers often create complex and powerful programs which, when interfaced with real world hardware or robots, fails miserably. Those failures are almost always traced to the robot not performing as expected by the software author, and therefore, no compensation for that unexpected response being included in the program. A good challenge to the programmer which helps them understand the complexity of mechanical hardware is: "Imagine your program was being altered in small ways on a daily basis; nothing large, just a change to one letter somewhere in the entire program. How long would the program continue to operate as expected?" The answer is, not long, of course! "So then, imagine a mechanical system, in which every moment, some new bit of dust, fleck of worn material, or other slight change is always being added." Hopefully, the programmer comes to understand that he or she must compensate for complexity. In the same way, students must learn to navigate the real world, rather than expect clean, perfect, classroom problems.

However, overly complex teaching environments may leave students unable to navigate or find a path to learning. Some form of guidance or learning how to learn is necessary. Students in overly complex situations often lock up and can not progress.

Perhaps part of that paralysis comes from fear of failure? Teaching students the 4F's Fail, First, Fast, Fix could help. The following is an excerpt from prior classes:

Fail: Of course success is the goal, but success through luck is not reproducible. Failure along with success teaches us the reality of the world and allows us to better predict successful actions in the future. If you try something and luck out, you don't know WHY it worked. You can try to reproduce those exact conditions, but you don't know which conditions are important and which are not.

More than that, you have to CARE enough to TRY even though you may FAIL. The willingness to fail shows motivation.

What is your motivation for being here? Write it down.

First: Take on the hardest, least known, parts of any job first. The last thing you want to do is complete all the easy stuff, only to find that the hard parts are undoable. This is a critical error which is common in business, design, and life. Can you see how a fear of failure would (mis)guide a person to make this error?

Can you share a time when you turned away from trying something that you felt was simply too difficult, scary, or likely to result in failure? If you aren't comfortable doing that, can you admit that your lack of comfort is informed by a fear of failure?

Think of a major goal you have in life. Write down what you think is the most difficult part of that goal.

Fast: Make small, incremental, steps towards the larger goal, testing after each step to look for failures. Failing fast means you can fail a lot and that means you will stop failing and succeed faster. Rapid development cycles are the key to rapid progress.

This is the opposite of procrastination. Can you share your favorite activity to do instead of making progress on your goals?

Making small attempts quickly is also a great way to avoid the fear of failure, and the need for perfection.

Dans ses écrits, un sage Italien Dit que le mieux est l'ennemi du bien. -- Voltaire. (In his writings, a wise Italian says that the best is the enemy of the good)

"A man's reach should exceed his grasp." Words from a poem by Robert Browning,

Fix: Once you have failed enough, you know exactly how to fix new failures when you see them. Experience is the result of many many failures.

Success without experience leads to "Impostor Syndrome" which is the feeling of being a fraud and an irrational fear of anyone finding out how unsure you are. People who have this issue are very easy to see. They can never admit what they don't know, or that they have made any mistake, no matter how small.

Please proudly document your failures, and what you've learned from them, as well as your successes.

"My high school chemistry teacher always put questions on the tests that he didn't expect us to be able to answer. When we objected, his reasoning was that you can not measure a thing with a ruler that is shorter than the thing you are measuring."

Another option is the use of computer or online games to provide a safe learning environment. Games, because they can easily be reset, encourage the player/student to try things without concern for failure. They are also commonly shared and strategies for success are traded between students. Of course, games ultimately suffer from a lack of real world complexity, but as technology improves, they are getting less and less distinguishable from the real world. The development of good, fun, and educational games is a critical business and learning opportunity.

Account for student starting point, assessment, sequence (from student POV) by linking to prior knowledge is critical. This reminds me of the ALEKS math program.
which uses an initial assessment test to find which topics the student already understands, then presents the student with the option to learn any new topic which is adjacent to one they have already mastered. The student is not allowed to take on a topic for which they have not mastered the foundational requirements, and they are given many choices in the path they take towards complete understanding of the subject. A quiz at the end of each lesson tests their understanding, and another quiz tests their retention of a prior topic. Multiple versions of each lesson are made available, so that repeating a topic provides a different point of view. One serious failing of that system is that there is NO teacher to ask for help if you are having problems with the user interface or with a technical issue. 


Retention comes from application and repetition. Collaboration can help with this, offering a chance for students to practice with each other, and reenforce the value of one anothers contribution.

The group, and hopefully the teacher, also provide multiple points of view and support cognitive flexibility; a skill sorely needed in our internet cliquish society.

Learning in different ways, from different media also supports repetition and so retention. It also enables students who have different preferred learning methods.


Motivating students is always key and often difficult. It is extremely difficult when the teacher has an arbitrary set of expectations for students and a lack of flexibility in assessing work. I have personally experienced this many times, and the teacher almost never understands how inflexible they are being. I'm sure I've also shown inflexibility to my students without realizing it and working to detect and correct that is a lifelong struggle.

This behavior is enabled when the grading is subjective (e.g.essays or written assignments) and is least prevalent when the grading is based on the success or failure of a project (e.g. engineering, math), automated (as in multiple choice or simulation) or when the grading is turned over to the community (e.g. based on external review, number of "likes" or other group feedback). Of course, essay is necessary in many subjects, and can not be avoided entirely; best to simply watch carefully for bias when grading the students written word. 

Note that this has nothing to do with affect or presentation; inflexible teachers are often very polite, complimentary, and outwardly nurturing. They just react poorly to conclusions other than their own and grade that work down.

A good teacher can motivate students by:

- Being very clear as to the grading criteria. Rubrics help, but must be worded in a way that leaves no room for personal interpretation. E.g. "Demonstrates understanding..." is useless unless the method of demonstration of understanding is clear. Specific statements like "Can recount the key points outlined..." or "Given a random sample problem, is able to resolve it." are far more likely to be seen as fair and provide the student with a hope of passing, which then enables the freedom to direct their own learning.

- Automating or mechanizing the grading. Multiple choice, or other non-essay assignments demonstrate the removal of personal bias from the testing. Project based learning is an excellent example as noted in Driscoll, M.P. (2005). Constructivism. In Psychology of Learning for Instruction (pp.384-410). Toronto, ON: Pearson. Ch 11 where students were asked to teach lower grade students by producing instructional material. Hopefully they were graded on the results of that material rather than on the subjective expectations of the teachers. E.g. the key point is, did the lower grade students learn to manipulate fractions vs did the video use a background color, music, or language the teacher found undesirable.

- Demonstrating the same reflexivity, or openness to thinking from other points of views, that they are asking of students. Instead of avoiding a students unexpected or obviously incorrect response, they take on the new idea and explore it openly with the student, asking questions to better understand, and offering alternative views for consideration without demanding the student justify their idea. e.g. instead of "This is wrong", approach with "How interesting! What exactly do you mean by...." and "Have you considered this well known case and how it does or does not fit with your understanding?"

- Enforcing good behavior in the class group. This is fantastically important and also very difficult to accomplish without seeming biased. Of course, teachers are often biased, as they are human. (I admit I am) but we can take steps to avoid appearing to be biased and can limit the effects of our own bias. Specific rules, carefully enforced are important. e.g. "No personal statements, only generalizations of ideas, not of people." Students will quickly oppress or stifle each other if not carefully regulated and repeatedly encouraged to form a social unit that depends on it's own cohesiveness. The teacher as an "adversary" (although a friendly and fair one) is helpful in building this idea.


Often, each person holds some part of the truth, and we are most efficient if those parts are different, because that allows us to assembly the most complete understanding through sharing and discussion. Individual research followed by reporting to the group and discussion is a valuable learning method; students are appreciated for their part, they learn to work as a whole, and the effort is divided.

In reality, group projects suck. Some students always drop the ball and others (often just one) have to pick up the slack. In many cases, even if multiple students try to pull their weight, a single overachieving student may reject their work and re-do everything. Making group projects work is a huge challenge for the teacher and one I certainly need help with.

The idea that learning is meaningful only in the scope of a social activity bothers me. I can see that it gains meaning when the group values the contribution of the individual, but there are many cases where learning also has great meaning on an individual basis. This bias on my part may well be directed by the fact that in programming or other technical skills, we find ourselves interacting with a complex device which provides feedback, positive or negative, without the need for others. E.g. when the goal was to provide a light and the LED lights up, I don't need someone else to see it. Of course, it gains additional meaning if I can share that light with someone else who may be walking in the dark. But that is not the only source of meaning; my lighting my own way is also valuable to me. I certainly do agree that classes where the other students are appreciative and inspiring are my favorite, and perhaps that is the only point I need to take away.

What I like most about working with other students is that it better models the real world in work environments and life in general. While individual learning in a class environment fosters competition, in fact, competition is often more of a problem than a benefit on the job and in life. The goal is to advance the product or care for the customers in a business; not to find the employee who is best at doing any of that alone. Working against each other damages the company; working together raises it. So fostering social cooperation in a classroom environment can only be good training for life.


All of this together provides for learning, and perhaps for learning how to learn, but we still must rise up one more level and reflection how we have learned to learn. Understanding where we best fit in the group, what skills we have and which we depend upon in others come from practice, role play, debate, social negotiation, and collaboration. Project based learning is again, an excellent source of this. Also, we need to think about how we learn to better model new approaches and ideas. 

The idea of "self-coding" or thinking about how you are thinking may raise students awareness of flaws in their own method and help them to improve their own learning ability. The instructor should provide direct instruction and model self-coding. In this regard, it may be helpful for the instructor to provide a metacognitive commentary as to what they are doing and why. This is clearly a teaching presence issue and challenge.


It has always struck me as silly to think that any mear human can possibly know the actual, objective, truth. At best, we can claim that our understand leads us to make predictions which are more or less accurate when tested in reality. In the same way, a teacher declaring that there is only one correct answer, that their own "perfect" understanding is to be "copied" into the student exactly has always seemed arrogant at best. Certainly, our ultimate goal is to reach objective truth, but to claim more than partial success or to expect complete attainment is untenable. As Robert Browning points out, our reach should exceed our grasp.

One thing I question is the idea that there is no objective truth. I grant that it could be the case that we all live in our own constructed world and that there simply is no common, single, over arching truth, but the fact that wide ranging experiences, tests, experiments, most often converge to one common understanding, even without any prior communication or sharing of ideology, leads me to believe that there is a single, actual, truth; we just can't fully know it.


Of course, humans are fallible and it comes as no surprise that we will probably never have a perfect understanding of the objective truth. It is through study, testing, error and correction that anyone gains even a partial understanding of reality. The true value of a teacher is in providing a path for the student to study, test their knowledge, and then hopefully correct their errors. Any quiz or test is best if it models reality more accurately than the students initial understanding, but the best test is reality itself! This, again, leads us to project based learning. If it works, reality / truth, have graded it and it passed. Of course, physical projects are not always possible, but software simulations, games, discussions, sharing, and case studies can provide useful substitutes.

The Theory of Multiple Minds

from Howard Gardner, Ph.D., Professor of Education at Harvard University. This also applies to emotional drives / motivations.

1. Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence (think "learn by doing" not watching interpretive dance)

2. Existential Intelligence (Philosophical, deep questions)

3. Interpersonal Intelligence (Leaders, performers, lecturers, etc...)

4. Intrapersonal Intelligence (Inward looking, "old soul", grounded)

5. Linguistic Intelligence (poet, writer, speaker, journalist, crosswords, word games, codes)

6. Logical-Mathematical Intelligence (engineering, science, detective, etc... Online experiments?)

7. Musical Intelligence (often reaches younger people? relates to math and kin)

8. Naturalist Intelligence (Nature. Ecological Systems. Hunting / gathering)

9. Spatial Intelligence (pilot, sculptor, architect... mazes, daydream.)

Learning styles / VARK

from Neil D. Fleming include:

- Visual. In "Describe the Different Learners VARK Identifies", Neil D. Fleming said they should probably be called "Graphic" not Visual. Use maps, diagrams, charts, storyboards, etc... They work from the top down. Not so much into still pictures, but direction in pictures implied by lines, etc... They can be engaged by acting, CGI, animation, and anything that involves imagination. They often fail to pay attention. Let them outline, draw, arrange their surrounding space, and daydream.

- Aural aka "Speak". Use lecture, discussion, Q&A, interactive writing / emails / stories, etc... They "know after saying" and tend to processing things sequentially and from the bottom up. Let them outline, ask questions, and take their time.)

- Read/write aka "Lists". Use presentation, dictionaries, articles, internet research, diagrams w/ labels, and charts w/ words. Make lists and glossaries. Let them be alone with the book.

- Kinesthetic (Use demo, simulations, games, case studies, real world applications, and internships. The are reality based. Let them do it, practice, move, and mime)

Most people use a mix of styles. Try to use as many as you can, but understand the content may limit your breadth. Don't talk all the time.


Learning Styles are not the same as Multiple Intelligence according to Gardner. Basically, he rejects the idea of Learning Styles entirely saying that they are "incoherent" and will confuse others. He seems to argue that each of the "multiple minds" might be approached via a different style of learning in the same person. "Both spatial information and reading occur with the eyes, but they make use of entirely different cognitive faculties. Similarly, both music and speaking activate the ears, but again these are entirely different cognitive faculties." VARK descriptions try to counter that, by addressing the type of visual or aural or other stimulus; saying that a picture of a map may inspire a visual learner, but a picture of a sheet of music might inspire an aural learner.

In "The Theory of Multiple Intelligences" Katie Davis, Joanna Christodoulou, Scott Seider, and Howard Gardner say that learning styles are about how a person approaches a given subject where MI is about how that person processes that subject. Students may have different learning styles with different subjects. Also, the style may be more attuned to the method by which the information is acquired, but MI will work the same no matter the means of input. This idea has obvious limits: Data coming in through the ears will be processed differently than data coming in through the eyes. Musicians know this. Sheet music is not sound and the intelligence which processes it is not the same. Reading sheet music and playing "by ear" are vastly different.

As learning style relates the senses, or input, skills relate to output. Skills may be developed by learning, but they are shaped and judged by society, and they operate in set domains. Domains may share a name with an intelligence, e.g. Music, but they are not the same. Several intelligences may be used to operate in a single domain. Domains are reshaped by creative advancement, intelligence abides.

"Both, in fact, combine insights from biology, anthropology, psychology, medical case studies, and an examination of art and culture. But learning styles emphasize the different ways people think and feel as they solve problems, create products, and interact. The theory of multiple intelligences is an effort to understand how cultures and disciplines shape human potential. Though both theories claim that dominant ideologies of intelligence inhibit our understanding of human differences, learning styles are concerned with differences in the process of learning, whereas multiple intelligences center on the content and products of learning. "


By Howard Gardner's "Five Minds for the Future" May 1, 2007

Disciplined mind: This provides you with a profession and enables honing your skills. Without it, you are unemployable or low on the ladder.

Synthesizing mind: Masses of incoming data must be filtered and put together in a way that makes sense and can be conveyed to others

Creating mind: Thinking outside the box of the prior two Discipline and Synthesys. Often seen in younger minds.

Respectful mind: Get along with others, give them the benefit of the doubt.

Ethical mind: See a positive place for yourself in the group, hold yourself to high standards. Citizen. Without this, you may be rejected / disrespected.

Being good at all of these is difficult, and they must be nurtured and not falsified.

Dr. Gardner says that Education and the ability to develop a Disciplined, Synthesizing, Creating mind is more difficult as the socioeconomic level decreases, but he feels Respect and Ethics should be a part of every life no matter their struggle. This seems unlikely. How can an oppressed person learn to respect themselves or others when they are not respected? How much ethics can they afford? "Rules for Ruler"

Practices Supported by Research: ^

- Provide multiple ways to access content increases learning.

- Accepting multiple ways of demonstrating learning increases motivation and learning and provides teachers with a better assessment of the student.

- Instruction should be tailored to the student.

I need to work more to understand visual learners. I thought I understood that, but comments from "Learning styles and online education" make me question my understanding.

Teachers vs Facilitators

Teachers: Teach, instruct, guide studies.


Honestly, we do NOT need to create content in most cases. The internet is awash in content. Simply curating the content, and then organizing it and facilitating learning is the more important work. 

The Community of Inquiry (COI)

provides collaborative critical discourse and reflection; personal meaning with mutual confirmation in three forms:


There are different levels of teacher effort before start of class (prep), then during the first week (onboarding), thru the course (for student support), and in the last week (to wrap up, improve course).

Hitting the first week very hard gives students who aren't fully prepared the chance to drop early and not take a grade hit.

Staying involved without being able to interact face to face can be done through:

"Deadly Sins of Online Education" Topcast Episode 37

  1. Being absent vs being present
  2. Aloofness versus engagement
  3. Being teaching-focused vs Being learning-focused
  4. Rote learning centered vs meaning learning centered
  5. Review vs Coaching
  6. Individualist versus interventionist,

Matthews G. and Doubler, S. (2000)

"A good facilitator is someone who can step back and allow participants to build understandings together, yet who also knows when to come in gently and redirect a conversation or provide encouragement. "

Students "do not look to the instructor for validation" but instead take responsibility for their own learning and support each other in the group.

Teachers should:

  1. Set expectations; regular schedule, define systems for interaction, check up often. Let students know when you will be gone.
  2. Start off strong: Check more often the first week, respond quickly, be ready to ask for help and get past the tech issues.
  3. Be open: Introduce yourself, motivations, related experiences, careful humor, conversational tone, empathy / mirror brain, call / PM / 1 on 1 video chat if needed.
  4. Have a steady rhythm: Regular feedback at consistent times. min twice a week; e.g. mid week / friday. Let students know you read their message. End of week: check participation / follow up on missed assignments / absence, archive last week, bridge past to next week. Midweek: Feedback, guidance. Neutral stance. Questions to encourage public discussion.
  5. Optimize messages: Concise, address themes / discrepancies / concerns, direct to core ideas, set an example, imagine reactions.
  6. Give constructive feedback: It is easy for students to misinterpret poorly worded or neutral messages. Use first person ("What would happen if...") Start positive but always be genuine, then move to criticism, and finish with a complement.
  7. Move things forward: What's needed? Hand holding? Be a cheerleader? Focus? Time? Feedback to an individual or the group?

Always nudge discussion in positive directions. Delete messages as a last resort, and check with colleagues before booting a student.

Wilson, A (2013) Feedback:

Challenges of providing feedback

Purpose of feedback

"Online Discussion Tips Infographic" MacMeekin, M (2014)

1. Read early

2. Feedback: taylored, (private or public)

3. Address writing issues early?

4. Participate often

5. Follow the rubric

6. Encourage discussion. Open ended, 1st person questions.

7. Real. Relatable, personal (limited), genuine

8. Empower sharing. Safe space. Polite

9. Keep alive.

10. Praise in public

11. Punish in private (with specific direction for improvement)

12. "Never wait too long to stimulate the discussion"

13. Don't take sides. Open mind. Neutral stance.

14. Never discount a students experience.

15. Fact check.

16. Praise, correct, encourage on each post.

17 "Can you clarify?"

18 "You you need anything else to answer this?"

19 "Do you think..."

20 "Do you agree with..."

21 "Are you saying... "

22 "Have you seen..."

23 "I saw something similar..."

24 "What do you hear from your friends?"

25 "Is there someone you can ask?"

26 "Where did you hear that?"

27 "Do you have a reference for that?"

"Engaging with Students on Discussion Boards..." 

Richard Schwier: We may want to start the conversation and get out of the way because the teacher has a louder voice, and we may worry that this will stifel conversation. Actually, the instructors conversation can promote discussion and students will continue to engage. Don't be afraid to stay in the conversation.

Shelley Kirychuk: Provide increasing or decreasing involvement as needed. Guide and encourage, but step back if not needed. Prompt from news of the real world. 

Michelle Prytula: Teacher involvement over-focuses the discussion but under-involvement leaves students feeling abandoned so we need to find the middle ground.

Dirk Morrison: Use variable involvement, as needed. Not too much or too little. Too much can be intimidating so when it's possible, let lively, engaged, deep discussions build community and exchange ideas. Just add info, encouragement, etc... when that is dying down.

"4. Providing Feedback" Bonk, C

Students may need more feedback in online environments because we are alone. Feedback should not be just "wrong" or "right" but instead try to be thought provoking. Group, individual and self feedback are all important in appropriate amounts, at the right times. Issue an announcement once a week. The instructor can batch feedback to improve efficiency and you can cut and paste prior feedback. Don't hit every post in the discussion as it comes out; instead, allocate time, once or twice a week. Students with too much will feel overwhelmed but with too little will feel abandoned. Don't try too hard; set expectations with students for the amount of feedback you know you can provide. International online education is even harder because of time differences and additional organizations  and people between you and your students. Refer to students by name to foster group / peer feedback. Pair up students if they aren't forming their own groups.   Bring in outside resources. Respond inside a day. Respect, care, and good feedback keeps the system running.


"rubrics" (an in-word which is dislike) are simply checklists, and rubrics for course design are very helpful in the design and improvement of an online course. The OEI and QLT checklists really do a great job of outlining all the things weIneed to be thinking about to put a course together.

Building from Content to Community: [Re]Thinking the Transition to Online Teaching and Learning [White paper]

Watwood, B., Nugent, J. and Diehl, W. (2009).

Online learning is not only about quality content. The internet is an ocean of content from the very best sources (MIT OCW, et all) but "access to information does not lead to knowledge." Faculty enable mastery of content through course design and facilitation of learning. Mainstream .edu's with name recognition (important to students who remain at local institutions) are transitioning online by

  1. augmenting face to face with some online resources, providing
  2. totally online classes and
  3. hybrid classes.

SOCIAL: "Online courses require the social presence of the faculty in order for the course to be effective."

COMMUNITY: "Students need to form a learning community in order for the course to be effective"


  1. Student-Faculty contact
  2. Cooperation among Students
  3. Active Learning
  4. Prompt Feedback
  5. Time on Task
  6. High Expectations
  7. Diversity (talents and ways of learning)

CVC-OEI California Virtual Campus-Online Education Initiative Course Design Rubric

Section A Content Presentation

A1. Objectives are included,

A2. clear, student centered ("demonstrable learning outcomes"), and

A3. content and activities align with unit objectives.

A4. Navigation is clearly labeled.

A5. Unit Chunking: Consistent structure and sequence.

A6. Page Chunking: Headings, subheadings.

A7. CMS tools streamline learning.

A8. Student centered learning styles.

A9. Instructions are embedded in content / activity.

A10. Individualized, remedial, extra credit, multiple options.

A11. Anonymous student feedback for instructor and content, during and after.

A12. Institutional policies (rules, tech and disability support) where relevant.

A13. Student services (disability, library, counseling, tutor, etc...) where relevant.

Section B Interaction

B1. Instructor is available for, and contacts, students before course and...

B2. ...during course

B3. Tech support is made available.

B4. Instructor can be reached in several ways.

B5. Student initiated interaction is encouraged.

B6. Inter-student interaction is enabled and encouraged.

B7. Learning community responsive to multiple styles.

B8. Participation required and evaluated at clear intervals and levels.

Section C Assessment

C1. Assessments mimic authentic environments.

C2. Valid assessment of, and connection to, objectives.

C3. Variety of formative and summative methods of feedback.

C4. Frequent, regular, and timely assessment.

C5. Rubric / checklist provided with examples of "good work."

C6. Assessment instructions are clear and detailed.

C7. Feedback is accessible and can be applied to student improvement

C8. Self-assessment: Multiple opportunities for students to seek timely additional help.

CSU QLT (Quality Learning and Teaching) Course Review Instrument

1. Course Overview and Introduction: 1.1 clear overview, 1.2 instructor info/contact, 1.3 course info, purpose, format, prerequisites, 1.4 etiquette, 1.5 code of ethics, 1.6 tech requirements, 1.7 samples, 1.8 "how does this fit with your goals?"

2. Assessment and Evaluation of Student Learning: 2.1 Objectives/outcomes Bloom’s Taxonomy. 2.2 grading policy, 2.3 activities -> outcomes, 2.4 multi-method assessment, 2.5 frequent feedback, 2.6 instructor feedback

3. Instructional Materials and Resources Utilized: 3.1 student prep time, 3.2 materials list, 3.3 materials -> outcomes, 3.4 procure materials, 3.5 materials vark, 3.6 content -> materials links

4.Students Interaction and Community: 4.1 student intros, 4.2 student readiness, 4.3 content nav, 4.4. COI / peer-peer encouraged, 4.5 clear peer requirements, 4.6 define inst role, 4.7 real world applications.

5. Facilitation and Instruction: 5.1 POV managed, 5.2 connect content, activities, experiences, 5.3 presentation, 5.4 exploration, 5.5 focus, 5.6 timely feedback, 5.7 communicate goals, topics, opportunities, 5.8 timely reminders, due dates, tasks.

6. Technology for Teaching and Learning: 6.1 content -> objectives/outcomes, 6.2 apply LMS tools, 6.3 tools -> engagement, learning, 6.4 clear info to access tech/resources, 6.5 accept multi-format

7. Learner Support and Resources: 7.1 Instructor supports, 7.2 tech support, 7.3 school support (disability, tutoring, etc...) 7.4 counseling

8. Accessibility and Universal Design: 8.1 accessibility policy, 8.2 vark / MI, multi-format vs disability accommodation, 8.3 Disability Support, 8.4 Instructor supports DSS, 8.5 content assessable, 8.6 use accessible tech.

9. Course Summary and Wrap-up: 9.1 closure / insight questions 9.2 summative grading 9.3 eval growth

10. Mobile Design Readiness: 10.1 multi-platform, 10.2 multi-media, 10.3 two clicks, 10.4 declutter.


file: /Techref/other/online-ed.htm, 40KB, , updated: 2020/5/8 15:12, local time: 2024/7/20 00:30,

 ©2024 These pages are served without commercial sponsorship. (No popup ads, etc...).Bandwidth abuse increases hosting cost forcing sponsorship or shutdown. This server aggressively defends against automated copying for any reason including offline viewing, duplication, etc... Please respect this requirement and DO NOT RIP THIS SITE. Questions?
Please DO link to this page! Digg it! / MAKE!

<A HREF=""> Online Education</A>

After you find an appropriate page, you are invited to your to this massmind site! (posts will be visible only to you before review) Just type a nice message (short messages are blocked as spam) in the box and press the Post button. (HTML welcomed, but not the <A tag: Instead, use the link box to link to another page. A tutorial is available Members can login to post directly, become page editors, and be credited for their posts.

Link? Put it here: 
if you want a response, please enter your email address: 
Attn spammers: All posts are reviewed before being made visible to anyone other than the poster.
Did you find what you needed?

  PICList 2024 contributors:
o List host: MIT, Site host, Top posters @none found
- Page Editors: James Newton, David Cary, and YOU!
* Roman Black of Black Robotics donates from sales of Linistep stepper controller kits.
* Ashley Roll of Digital Nemesis donates from sales of RCL-1 RS232 to TTL converters.
* Monthly Subscribers: Gregg Rew. on-going support is MOST appreciated!
* Contributors: Richard Seriani, Sr.

Welcome to!