Abstract
This is a response to Bennett et al.’s (2016) “The Process of Designing for Learning: Understanding University Teachers’ Design Work.” We examine this study of faculty approaches to course design in order to connect the authors’ findings to implications for course design practices in the current context of shifting courses online. The design processes of experienced faculty are the primary subjects of the study, which may have implications for how institutions approach supporting faculty efforts to design courses under time constraints. However, research shows that less experienced faculty may be unprepared to effectively redesigning courses under time constraints. The primary approaches to course design are the individual approach, where a faculty designer follows his or her own design process and the centralized or team approach, where a subject matter expert joins an instructional designer and/or additional educational design or technology specialists to develop courses. Institutions need to consider how much of their faculty have 10 years or more of experience in order to determine which approach would work best.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bennett, S., Agostinho, S., & Lockyer, L. (2017). The process of designing for learning: Understanding university teachers’ design work. Educational Technology Research & Development, 65(1), 125–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9469-y.
Kumar, S., Martin, F., Budhrani, K., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2019). Award winning faculty online teaching practices: Elements of award-winning courses. Online Learning, 23(4), 160–180.
Martin, F., Budhrani, K., & Wang, C. (2019). Examining faculty perception of their readiness to teach online. Online Learning, 23(3), 97–119. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i3.1555.
Perreault, H., Waldman, L., Alexander, M., & Zhao, J. (2008). Comparing the distance learning-related course development approach and faculty support and rewards structure at AACSB accredited institutions between 2001 and 2006. Journal of Educators Online, 5(2). https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ904051
Restauri, S. L. (2004). Creating an effective online distance education program using targeted support factors. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 48(6), 32–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02763580.
Thackaberry, A. (2020). Remote in a time of pandemic: Six considerations as we adapt to COVID-19. The EvoLLLution. Retrieved July 21, 2020, from https://evolllution.com/revenue-streams/distance_online_learning/remote-in-a-time-of-pandemic-six-considerations-as-we-adapt-to-covid-19/
Funding
They have received no funding in support of this manuscript nor do they have personal affiliations with the authors’ whose research is the subject of this paper. They are also not affiliated with the Association for Educational Communications & Technology other than holding standard membership to the organization.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Dr. Kanjanapongpaisal and Dr. Antee declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Informed consent
As this manuscript is a response to an article previously published in Educational Technology Research & Development, Dr. Kanjanapongpaisal and Dr. Antee did not engage in a direct study of human participants, and therefore had no subjects from whom to gain informed consent.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kanjanapongpaisal, .G., Antee, A. University teachers’ design work: implications for an urgent shift to digital. Education Tech Research Dev 69, 273–276 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09881-3
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09881-3