Advertisement

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 60–77 | Cite as

A process-oriented framework for acquiring online teaching competencies

  • M’hammed Abdous
Article
First Online:

Abstract

As a multidimensional construct which requires multiple competencies, online teaching is forcing universities to rethink traditional faculty roles and competencies. With this consideration in mind, this paper presents a process-oriented framework structured around three sequential non-linear phases: (1) before: preparing, planning, and designing; (2) during: facilitating, interacting, and providing/gathering feedback; and (3) after: reflecting and considering lessons learned. Grounded on existing models and on our experience designing and working with faculty designing and teaching online courses, this framework provides a systemic understanding of the various roles and competencies associated with online teaching. Use of this framework should enable higher education institutions (HEIs) to develop comprehensive and effective faculty development programs, capable of helping faculty create and facilitate effective learning opportunities for all students.

Keywords

Online learning Online teaching roles and competencies Faculty development 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abdous, M. (2009). E-learning quality assurance: A process-oriented lifecycle model. Quality Assurance in Education, 17(3), 281–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abdous, M., & He, W. (2008a). Streamlining online course development process by using project management tools. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(2), 181–188.Google Scholar
  3. Abdous, M., & He, W. (2008b). A design framework for syllabus generator. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19(4), 541–550.Google Scholar
  4. Abdous, M., & Yoshimura, M. (2010). Learner outcomes and satisfaction: A comparison of live video-streamed instruction, satellite broadcast instruction, and face-to-face instruction. Computers & Education, 55(2), 733–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Amirault, R., & Visser, Y. (2009). The University in periods of technological change: A historically grounded perspective. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21(1), 62–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bailey, C. J., & Card, K. A. (2009). Effective pedagogical practices for online teaching: Perception of experienced instructors. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3), 152–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bangert, A. W. (2004). The seven principles of good practice: A framework for evaluating on-line teaching. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(3), 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bawane, J., & Spector, J. M. (2009). Prioritization of online instructor roles: Implications for competency-based teacher education programs. Distance Education, 30(3), 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berge, Z. L. (1995). Facilitating computer conferencing: Recommendations from the field. Educational Technology, 35(1), 22–30.Google Scholar
  10. Berge, Z. L. (2008). Instructor’s changing roles in multi-user virtual environments. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(4), 407–414.Google Scholar
  11. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., & Surkes, M. A. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bolliger, D. U., & Wasilik, O. (2009). Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with online teaching and learning in higher education. Distance Education, 30(1), 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Briggs, S. (2005). Changing roles and competencies of academics. Active Learning in Higher Education, 6(3), 256–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brindley, J., Walti, C., & Blaschke, L. (2009). Creating effective collaborative learning groups in an online environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/675/1271.
  15. Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(4), 169–189.Google Scholar
  16. Dede, C. (2008). Theoretical perspectives influencing the use of information technology in teaching and learning. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 43–62). New York: Springer Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Easton, S. S. (2003). Clarifying the instructor’s role in online distance learning. Communication Education, 52(2), 87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ehlers, D. (2004). Quality in E-learning from a learner’s perspective. Proceeding of the Third EDEN Research Workshop, Oldenburg, Germany, 4-6 March. Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2004/Online_Master_COPs.html.
  19. Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., Prosser, M., & O’Hara, A. (2006). How and what university students learn through online and face-to-face discussion: Conceptions, intentions and approaches. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 244–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eom, S. B., Wen, H. J., & Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(2), 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Feenberg, A. (1989). The written world: On the theory and practice of moderating educational computer conferences 89 computer conferencing. In R. Mason & A. Kaye (Eds.), Mindweave: Communications, computers, and distance education (pp. 22–39). Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  22. Goodyear, P., Salmon, G., & Spector, J. M. (2001). Competences for online teaching: A special report. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Graff, R. (2008). Faculty perceptions of readiness to teach online. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida. Retrieved from http://gradworks.umi.com/33/34/3334462.html.
  24. Harasim, L. (2006). A history of E-learning: Shift happened. In J. Weiss, J. Nolan, J. Hunsinger, & P. Trifonas (Eds.), The international handbook of virtual learning environments (pp. 59–94). Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hiltz, S. R. (1988). Teaching in a virtual classroom. In A virtual classroom on EIES: Final evaluation report (Vol. 2). Newark, NJ: New Jersey Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  26. Hiltz, S. R., Kim, E., & Shea, P. (2007). Faculty motivators and de-motivators for teaching online: Results of focus group interviews at one university. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 40th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences.Google Scholar
  27. Hosiea, P., Schibecib, R., & Backhausc, A. (2005). A framework and checklists for evaluating online learning in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(5), 539–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Laurillard, D. (2008). Technology enhanced learning as a tool for pedagogical innovation. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42(3/4), 521–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lee, M.-H., & Tsai, C.-C. (2010). Exploring teachers’ perceived self efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the World Wide Web. Instructional Science, 38(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lohman, J. (1996). Characteristics of exemplary teachers. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 65, 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lowes, S. (2008). Online teaching and classroom change: The trans-classroom teacher in the age of the internet. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 4(3), 5. Retrieved from http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol4_issue3/Online_Teaching_and_Classroom_Change-__The_Trans-Classroom_Teacher_in_the_Age_of_the_Internet.pdf.
  32. Mason, R. (1991). Moderating educational computer conferencing. DEOSNEWS, 1(19). Retrieved from http://www.emoderators.com/papers/mason.html.
  33. McShane, K. (2004). Integrating face-to-face and online teaching: Academics’ role concept and teaching choices. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(1), 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. US Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf.
  35. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Moore, M. G. (2002). Editorial, what does research say about the learners using computer-mediated communication in distance learning? American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 61–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Morrisett, L. (1996). Habits of mind and a new technology of freedom. First Monday, 1(3). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/483/404.
  38. Muilenburg, L., & Berge, Z. L. (2001). Barriers to distance education: A factor-analytic study. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 7–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mullins-Dove, T. G. (2006). Streaming video and distance education. Distance Learning, 3(4), 63–71.Google Scholar
  40. Murphy, J. W. (1986). Humanizing the use of technology in education: A re-examination. International Review of Education/Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft/Revue Internationale de l’Education, 32(2), 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Orr, R., Williams, M., & Pennington, K. (2009). Institutional efforts to support faculty in online teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 34(4), 257–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Paquette, G. (2007). An ontology and a software framework for competency modeling and management. Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 1–21.Google Scholar
  43. Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006-07. First Look. NCES 2009-044: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubSearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2009044.
  44. Paulsen, M. F. (1995). Moderating educational computer conferences. In Z. L. Berge & M. P. Collins (Eds.), Computer mediated communication and the online classroom, Vol. III: Distance Learning (pp. 81–89). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  45. Phillips, R (2005). Pedagogical, institutional and human factors influencing the widespread adoption of educational technology in higher education. In Goss, H. (Ed.), Balance, fidelity, mobility? Maintaining the momentum? Proceedings of the 22nd ASCILITE Conference. Brisbane, Queensland University of Technology, 4–7 December 2005. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane05/blogs/proceedings/62_Phillips.pdf.
  46. Richey, R. C., Fields, D. C., & Foxon, M., (2001). Instructional design competencies: The standards (3rd ed.). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology. ED453803. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/2b/6d/70.pdf.
  47. Roblyer, M. D., Porter, M., Bielefeldt, T., & Donaldson, M. B. (2009). Teaching online made me a better teacher: Studying the impact of virtual course experiences on teachers’ face-to-face practice. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(4), 121–126.Google Scholar
  48. Rovai, A. P. (2004). A constructivist approach to online college learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Salmon, G. (2002). E-tivities: The key to active online learning. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  50. Salomon, G. (1998). Technology’s promises and dangers in a psychological and educational context. Theory into Practice, 37(1), 4–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  52. Shepherd, C., Alpert, M., & Koeller, M. (2007). Increasing the efficacy of educators teaching online. International Journal of Social Sciences, 2, 173–179.Google Scholar
  53. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  54. Spector, M. J. (2005). Time demands in online instruction. Distance Education, 26(1), 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2010). Innovating the 21st-century university: It’s time! EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 45(1), 16 − 29. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume45/Innovatingthe21stCenturyUniver/195370.
  56. Thach, E., & Murphy, K. (1995). Competencies for distance education professionals. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), 57–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(1), 81–94.Google Scholar
  58. Wallace, R. M. (2004). A framework for understanding teaching with the internet. American Education Research Journal, 41, 447–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wallace, L. (2007). Online teaching and university policy: Investigating the disconnect. Journal of Distance Education, 22(1), 87–100.Google Scholar
  60. Wiesenberg, F., & Stacey, E. (2005). Reflections on teaching and learning online: Quality program design, delivery and support issues from a cross‐global perspective. Distance Education, 26(3), 385–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Williams, P. E. (2003). Roles and competencies for distance education programs in higher education institutions. American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Learning TechnologiesOld Dominion UniversityNorfolkUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options