Lori: I agree with your observation; the 'look and feel,' i.e., the design, of a course is only one aspect, and has to do both with first impressions on the part of the student and a continuing sense that the institution 'cares enough' to provide an engaging interface design. Beyond that 'surface' dimension, there's no course if there's no instructor! -- What matters here, surely, is the sense that there's a knowledgeable and interested humam being 'on the other side' of that interface, one who cares both about the subject material and the student who is attemting to learn something new. And it is in the practice of providing timely, useful, and highly individuated 'feedback' that the online insructor can differentiate the online course from both a corresondence course and a traditional on-campus course. Kelly
It seems to me that you have left an important component out of the eequation--the facilitator/instructor. I think excellent online education/courses provide a balance of a "good" look and feel, quality content, and quality facilitation/instruction. Without the facilitator/instructor (the human element), what separates an online course from a correspondence course?
I would agree.
I would also say that appropriate site design utilizing modern software design lends the institution more credibility. If the site depends exclusively on simply HTML and Flash embeds, for example, rather than leveraging AJAX or .NET server-side components - um, like this site - then that could impart a significant lack of credibility. Absolutely.
R
The book "Do You Matter?: How great design will make people love your company," by Robert Brunner and Stewart Emery (FT Press, 2009) is actually very useful for a little 'consciousness- raising' in these matters.
There are several 'software' packages (which I won't mention just now) that are popular and have their own value for use for interactive classrooms; but it's nice if an institution can 'go the extra mile' and add that element of design, including an appealing and, in particular, a dynamic interface.
I agree completely. It's been my experience that if a course's structure or the virtual environment in which it is facilitated is lack-luster or ill-prepared, the student will perform in a like manner. That is, if the online classroom is disorganized, then the student will perceive that the instructor is unprepared or unconcerned. The student, in turn, will perform based on his/her perceived expectations.
In contrast, if a non-traditional student logs into a well-prepared, dynamic virtual classroom that houses a defined, structured curriculum prepared by a passionate and organized instructor, he/she will most likely perceive that the instructor has high expectations for his/her performance.
Correct - or if they can't figure out how to navigate, they could give up.
Jon
I absolutely agree. Students need structure and navigational simplicity then same as in the on ground class. Universities need the same structure throughout the university to reduce the "noise" of structure that interferes with access.
Agree because if it looks "sloppy" or poorly designed, the student may not be motivated enough to do any work.
Joshua,
Great post - thanks! MK is actually a customized version of Moodle (there is a lot that can be done with it).
Best,
Jon
I agree - it is really helpful if you know this up-front when you are designing. I've seen one class work internationally, or different classes for different areas.
Jon
Your 'objections' are extremely well-taken; one of the issues with the early use of Flash and other multimedia devices for Web sites was that, ultimately, they were so 'hot' as to be distracting. Appealing and interesting is one thing; annoying (music, overladen design, files slow to load) is another.
Robert: I should have read your post before posting my note; precisely what I mean, but with greater detail! Kelly
The issue is like any other question of 'design': how inviting the surface presentation is; to what extent it engages with the visitor, drawing him or her further into the 'experience,' and utilizing various sensory channels to accomplish that aim. One can't rely on the student, or 'visitor,' assuming that what the presentation has to offer is worthwhile -- the presentation, through its style, through its design, has to create that impression itself. A barren, ugly, or uninviting 'surface' suggests that there isn't much 'inside'; while a visually stimulating design suggests that something beckons from within.
I agree as well - a great instructor can compensate, but why when you can just make it right from the beginning? - Jon
I agree and definitely the most eloquent course can be poorly taught by an inexperienced professor or vice versa. I like the idea of humor too.
