I don’t teach anymore. I haven’t done any teaching in over two years; in fact, since I last changed jobs.
This is also partly the reason I haven’t been blogging. There was nothing to say. The majority of posts on this blog have had something to do with teaching (writing skills in an online environment) and I wasn’t doing that anymore, so what would I post about?
Some time ago I got to thinking I’d quite like to share what I’ve been up to recently that involves my experience as an online tutor and instructional designer. Whether there’s anyone left to read it as I’m no longer part of an online community is another question, but I guess we’ll see.
So, here goes. The institution I work for runs training sessions for reviewers in external quality evaluation procedures in higher ed. Pre-covid, I believe these used to be delivered in person, while a more recent development was synchronous online delivery via videoconference.
The sessions are actually ideally suited to asynchronous online delivery as the review panels are usually composed of members from Croatia and abroad, with very busy schedules, who appreciate being able to go through the training materials at their own pace, at a time which suits them best.
About two years ago my institution had the idea of adapting the training content for asynch delivery. Post-covid, the prevailing stance (and not just at my institution) has been that online training could only ever prove to be a poor substitute for in-person delivery but I think what persuaded them was that the fact that synch online delivery was severely stretching the resources of the limited staff available.
A fortuitous coincidence was that I had the necessary instructional design experience (not something I’d initially been hired for) and we were able to combine this with the content knowledge and experience in coordinating external evaluation procedures which my coworkers possess.
We set up the course on a Moodle instance run by Zagreb’s University Computing Centre; this was the logical choice as they provide admin support. We first ran a pilot course for around 100 participants from a range of countries and asked them to complete a satisfaction survey in which we focused on individual course aspects. The overwhelmingly positive feedback we received was crucial in deciding that asynchronous online delivery was the mode we should proceed with when developing subsequent training modules, and we have since developed another two which are in regular use.
Even though designing online courses is not my primary job, this was probably the task I have enjoyed the most in my current position and has allowed me to remain in touch with my teacher self. It has also made me realize how much I enjoy and miss teaching. Not sure what to do about that, if anything.
So… that’s it, I guess. If you’d like to read more about the training modules from an instructional design aspect, I might blog about that. If you used to read my blog and are still around online, let me know where I can find you!
Groupwork at the project partner meeting in Valencia, Spain
If you follow me on Twitter (or are in touch with me on Facebook) you may have noticed me occasionally sharing something from the EduFutura account such as this tweet back in September.
EduFutura is a non-profit organization which I’ve been a member of for some time now. The EDGE project (Empowering Digital Teachers) which it has been a partner on for the past two years is EduFutura’s first big project and as we’re a small organization, for some of us these project activities have been taking up quite a bit of spare time.
Groupwork at the project partner meeting in Valencia, Spain
I’ve been meaning to write up a short overview of the project for… well, basically since it started, but if you’re a reader of this blog you won’t be surprised it’s taken me this long to get around to it. Actually, I’m aiming for this to be a very brief post, just to share that one of the two chief results of the project – the Guidelines for Online and Digital Teaching and Learning – is finally available in six (project partner) languages: English, Polish, German, Croatian, Italian and Spanish. The idea is to write up a follow-up post later on, to provide a bit of background on how the guidelines were produced and what else the EDGE team has been up to.
The guidelines aim to answer a series of questions about the digital aspect of teaching and learning, grouped around the following themes:
Teaching-related questions
Social-emotional learning
School-related variables
Profession-related variables
Technical variables
There are around 30 questions overall and each is covered by about 2 pages of what we hope is practical and accessible text, including links to helpful resources.
We’d love it if you could take a quick look at the table of contents (p. 3-5) and choose a question you find relevant in your context. It would be great to hear your feedback on the answer given in the guidelines!
Also, if you find the document useful, please feel free to tell others about it!
A brief digression: have you noticed how it sounds almost strange to be describing students/courses as ‘online’? It’s like all courses now have some kind of online component and it’s hard to even imagine a time – just four semesters ago! just four course iterations ago! – when teaching a semester-long course online wasn’t exactly routine and it seemed important to note that for context. Or maybe it’s just me?
Anyway, the way my audio files are structured and presented has developed over time into a Tips on what to watch out for chapter in each unit guide (a Moodle book resource). The tips are divided into Things that were done well over the past week or so and Things to watch out for in the current unit. The ‘developed over time’ bit makes it sound as if a whole lot of development has been going on but this setup has in fact been in place pretty much since I started using the H5P course presentation (see the second link above for a more detailed account of how that came about).
One thing that became obvious pretty quickly was that a lot of the recordings in the Things that were done well category needed to be recorded over again each semester, as each group was slightly different in the things they did well and it was tricky to stay neutral in these recordings. What I mean by ‘neutral’ is avoiding any mention of something group-specific. I knew that I should strive for this in theory, if I wanted to be able to reuse the recordings, but in practice it’s surprisingly difficult to speak to a group of students without references to that particular group. Try it and go back to the recording in six months’ time. I guarantee you’ll find phrases that will make you groan. For instance, you’re commenting on forum activity and you hear yourself saying, “I can see that several people have added comments to this thread…”, whereas this semester, with your luck, no one has added anything to that thread.
The Things to watch out for in the current unit files were easier to reuse because they’re basically general advice on what to keep in mind as you complete a particular activity, so aren’t linked to any individual group. An example would be how to approach a glossary activity: if there are any areas students commonly slip up on, what to watch out for with regard to the final exam and so on.
The most time-consuming aspect of working with these files is that you have to listen to them again every six months before you re-record. I guess what you could do is just assume that all the Done well recordings need to be re-recorded and not waste time listening to those from last semester but I always hoped that I could at least use some of them again, possibly dealing with minor differences by adding an explanatory text box as in the screenshot.
Screenshot from course
Also, those in the Current unit category would sometimes need to be re-recorded as well because there would be changes to the way some activities were set up or some advice was too specific. For instance, only today I realized that advice on pair work included a 2-minute segment on how to make sure exchange students were not left out but this semester we don’t have any exchange students. This segment was somewhere in the middle of the recording, so I used 123 Apps’ trim audio and audio joiner to excise the bit that was no longer relevant.
When I’d first introduced audio files to the course, I was really curious to see what the students thought, so I added this as a possible reflection topic for their learning journals. It was actually student reflections that helped me realize one longer recording might be demanding to stay with and might be more easily processed if broken up into shorter files. Although student perspective was key to this change, I didn’t add audio as a reflection topic for the next two semesters. Then last semester I added this poll.
Screenshot from course
Just over half the group opted for “I listen to the comments and generally find them useful” and out of the rest only one person chose “I don’t listen to the comments”. The way the poll was designed basically only told me whether students listened to the audio and to some extent if they saw the comments in a positive light. I planned on following this up with a reflection topic but didn’t. The results didn’t seem overly negative, i.e. most students said they listened to the comments, so I probably didn’t see a pressing need to get more feedback, although it would definitely be useful to know more about why some felt the comments didn’t help them.
This semester I introduced another tweak, partly brought about by the fact that since I’d started recording audio comments I was aware of the fact that there was no transcript and that ideally there should beone, both in accordance with accessibility guidelines and also because it’s okay, I think, not to force people to listen at a certain speed (or even twice that speed) if you can offer them the option of glancing at a transcript and picking out the main points. The other reason for the tweak was, as is so often the case, Twitter.
I started using the tool in the tweet with the Done well comments. I realize now that it says this particular tool is aimed at social media use, which I don’t recall being in focus that much back in February. I suppose it may have been and another reason for choosing it may have been the (subconscious) idea that anything to do with social media would appeal to students. Anyway, using it didn’t address the transcript issue because what you do is add captions, which should make it easier to follow what the person is saying but you still can’t process the information the way you would with a transcript available. Also, I have since learned that screen readers can only read transcripts, not captions. This wasn’t an issue for the students I’ve had these past semesters but if you’re making a recording for a larger group of students (on a MOOC, say) it would definitely be important.
An upside I noticed is that recordings made with this tool are definitely shorter, which is great as I tend to ramble the minute I don’t prepare notes on what I want to say. The captions are generated by the software, so that’s done quickly but I still need to clean them up and it’s much quicker and easier if there isn’t much waffle. In fact, compared with the first screenshot above, in which there are three topics in the Done well section, this semester I only had one topic/video per Done well section. I really did plan on checking with the students if they noticed any difference between just audio and these recordings with a visual component, but the end of the semester is here and I don’t seem to have done that. Maybe next semester.
What are your thoughts on audio in courses which are mostly delivered asynchronously online? Do you think you would prefer engaging with the audio as opposed to going through transcripts? What strikes you as the ideal length for audio recordings?