College Teaching

My article this week focuses on the design of online learning environments for learners who are or have been participants in the military. The paper discusses characteristics that are commonly associated with military personnel along with the caveats of blindly acting on such inferences. Moreover, the article provides a framework for the design of courses with the populous in mind. The value of this study is two-fold. At face value the research provides insight into the mindset, habits, and psyche of military learners. Accordingly, instructors who have a high concentration of these students can better serve them through the results of the study. Secondly, and most importantly, the article examines the methodology of fostering an environment for learning based on the students and not an objective, dry, universal process. The deep learning involved in reflection of this paper allows an instructor of any subject, socio-economic, cultural, or occupational demographic to be successful in refining their methodologies.

The article begins by expressing the need for research and attention towards the demographic of military learners. A coupling of the generous government funding for military education along with the recession compels military to pursue education. Furthermore, it is noted that “[t]he Department of Defense examines programmatic and instructional quality when contracting with an educational provider or in disbursing tuition assistance payments.” (pg 148). The influx of military learners is a great opportunity for universities to build or further ties with the military and bolster enrollment, but the onus is on the university to put forth a quality program where military can be successful and thus garnering the funding of the DoD.

The three pillars of an online distance learning environment are: pedagogical framework, educational setting, and organizational context. Each component acts to frame the other two while building the entirety of the environment. The alignment of the three components speaks volume to the effectiveness of a program.

Before elaborating on the characteristics of military learners, the article was explicit in stating that stereotyping a group of people can be detrimental and preached caution in approaching course design from this angle. Not all military will share these characteristics and so it is best practice to poll your class to gain a better understanding of each individual student to assess how closely to the “military profile” they fit.

Military learners were qualitatively assessed into the following categories: maturity and experiential richness, international and intercultural awareness, high levels of motivation, organizational commitment and sense of community, scheduling difficulties, and limited Internet accessibility. These traits each formulate their own learning opportunities such as an ideal setting for deep learning due to the higher levels of maturity from military learners along with their ability to provide personal experiences, relating concepts to practice. Limitations of teaching military learners circled around accessibility, both of time and logistics. Military have the always looming possibility of being deployed suddenly or having scheduling conflicts that are inflexible. Thus when designing a class it is beneficial to incorporate leeway in assignments and participation. For me personally this was of interest since I teach a night class, meaning most of my students have full-time employment and run into similar struggles. The second limitation was the sporadic and difficult access to the Internet in circumstances of deployment or relocation. This characteristic also makes collaborative efforts very difficult to effectively implement.

Ultimately, the ability to glean insight off of your students and adapt accordingly is the true value gained from this study. We’ve discussed how the first meeting and resulting first impression can be critical in setting the proper tone and context for the proceeding semester. This further spotlights the immediacy of day 1, not only letting your students learn about you, but learning about your students.

Starr-Glass, David. “Military Learners: Experience in the Design and Management of Online Learning Environments .” MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 7.1 (2011): 147-158. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. Web. 11 Apr. 2011.

Abstract. Adult-learning theory challenges faculty to adapt their teaching to certain characteristics of adult learners, including self-direction: if adults direct the bulk of their lives outside of school, they should be permitted to direct their own educational experiences. To what extent is self-directed learning an optimal, or even realistic, methodology for seminary teaching? Does it matter what subjects we are teaching? This essay details an experiment with self-directed learning in a seminary ministry class: what worked, what might be improved, and how it challenges our view of ourselves as faculty to teach in this way. Student feedback from the course in question enhances our understanding of the best (and most challenging) features of the experiment.

I found this a fascinating article about how one professor took to heart what we have been learning about how adults learn to redesign a course she was teaching in seminary. It’s a good example of how we can get adults (even young adults?) to take more responsibility for their own learning (self-directed learning). Continue reading →

Zeichner, K. (2010).Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education 61(1-2) 89–99.

What happens if a pre-service early childhood teacher attends college, graduates with a degree in teaching, but has never worked with children? If the teacher has little or no experience with young children, chances are the first few years of teaching will be difficult for him/her and the children. Studying child development, theories, best practices, standards of learning and teaching, and curriculum is important, but experience with children is imperative. Would you take your car to a mechanic who has never been under the hood? Would you go to a doctor who never served an internship? Of course not.

Now that I’ve had my say, I will turn to Zeichner. He discusses the newer model of early childhood education classes at many colleges where field experience and interships are a key piece of the learning process. Zeichner points out that traditional college-based teacher education was once considered to be the best source of learning for education students.  Zeichner shares this sad but true observation:

Staffed with graduate students, temporary and part-time faculty and with few resources to develop field placements, U.S. teacher certification programs are the Cinderellas of the American university. Ideas and money are rarely spent on coordinating what is learned on campus with what goes on in schools.

(Featherstone, 2007, cited in Zeichner. 2010, p. 89)

In the early childhood education courses I’ve taken at George Mason University (GMU), fifteen hours of field experience and internships are required each semester. Fortunately, many of my fellow students are already working at a child care center or preschool, so the requirements are not too painful. GMU has a coordinator who organizes placements for other students who need them. All placements have to be approved be the education department.

Zeichner examines the quality of initial placement and monitoring of students and finds a lack of consistency and reliability. Some colleges outsource placements to a central placement office where the staff are not trained about early childhood education. Other colleges use grad students from other departments. When students arrive at the chosen schools to observe, there is little or no consistency in how they are treated or utilized in classrooms. I have heard reports by returning students that they were asked to “take over” a class so that the teacher could run an errand, or conversely, the student teacher is sometimes ignored and not allowed to participate with the children. To be fair, the schoolteachers are asked to mentor and teach student teachers on top of their normal work with the children, which seems unfair to me. Additionally, while most college courses require student field experience, there is no standard method of reporting observations or accountability for the learning in the field. Zeichner concludes that unless universities and colleges find ways to prepare future teachers more efficiently, schools will be looking to other sources for new teachers.