English Composition I is a course that combines high-quality Open Education Resources (OER) and innovative course design to promote active learning and successful community building. Central to the writing community is the use of collaborative writing spaces where students provide mutual support and engage in grammar reports, reflective assignments, and peer reviews. Innovations for English Composition I include: cross-referenced learning outcomes and topics for course alignment transparency; interactive grammar reports; a visual learning arc explaining course rationale and methods as well as explicit expectations for student success; guided, interactive pre-writing/note-taking; a virtual presence badge to indicate instructor availability for conferences/chats. All materials are ADA compliant. The presenter will discuss student success results with the new course design and provide a demo in Sakai CLE of key course components.
Daryl O'Hare, 2012 TWSIA Award Presentation, Jasig-Sakai Conference Atlanta, GA
1. Daryl O’Hare
Instructor
Chadron State College
June 10-15, 2012
Growing Community;
Growing Possibilities
2. rSmart and Wiley
TWSIA judges
Chadron State College
Kaleidoscope Project
Dr. Susan C. Hines
Family
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 2
3. English Composition I:
Taught on-ground in sixteen week sections
at Chadron State College
Students bought a textbook that cost
approximately $75
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 3
4. Chadron State College teamed with the
Kaleidoscope Project to develop a new eight-
week English course in a fully online format.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 4
5. English Composition I should be developed:
collaboratively
to serve “at risk” students
to reduce textbook costs by using OER
in ways that challenge and innovate
for reuse and adoption by other institutions
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 5
6. I worked with Dr. Susan C. Hines—a fellow English
professor. We divided our labors for a more effective
development strategy. My role was principally that of
Subject Matter Expert (SME), content author, and
instructor.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 6
7. The course should use high-quality OER, and if the
resources did not exist, we would create them.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 7
8. The course should have content that would engage
students from at-risk populations who enrolled in
Composition I with a certain amount of dread or
anxiety.
Video
Still
Images Diverse Podcasts
Contemporary
Materials
OER
Websites
Textbooks
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 8
9. The course should leverage collaborative writing
spaces to address composition from a process-
oriented perspective and to include students in a
larger writing community.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 9
10. The course should align outcomes with activities
and assessments in ways that are resoundingly
clear, both to faculty and to students.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 10
11. The course should meet compliance standards for
ADA/508, both to meet accessibility standards but
to assure the course addresses a variety of learning
styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic), as well.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 11
12. The course should:
have a modular design, so it is easy to navigate.
meet or surpass online course design standards,
such as those advocated by Quality Matters.
have interoperable features and a clear information
architecture, so that it can be used by other
institutions who may operate different LMSs.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 12
13. Student Engagement and
Community Building
Communication
Learning Materials and Strategies
Learning Outcomes & Assessments
Learner Support
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 13
19. Kaleidoscope course textbooks costs were reduced by 98.7%.
Textbook costs of English Composition I were reduced by 100%.
111 Students took the Kaleidoscope online course (fall 2011-
Spring 2012); the cost savings were $8,325. Non-Kaleidoscope
students (286 students) spent approximately $21,450.
Students responded positively to the ways in which the
embedded materials engaged their interests.
Of the students completing Kaleidoscope surveys following the
fall term 2011, 97% found the course materials to be of equal or
higher quality than those used in their other courses.*
*(see: Bliss, TJ, John Hilton III, David Wiley, Kim Thanos. The Cost and Quality of Online Open
Textbooks: Perceptions of Community College Instructors and Students. Submitted for
publication.)
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 19
20. Learning Outcomes and Assessments
The central goal of Composition I is to improve upon student reading and
writing skills. So, one of the goals was to demonstrate a process to my
students by which they may succeed. The weekly learning arc provides
students with a rationale for the methods introduced in the course.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 20
22. Assessments
Each week, students are required to achieve learning outcomes through the
following outcome assessments:
a series of reading quizzes, delivered in each module. Quizzes were intended
to reinforce reading knowledge/ability as well as assess reading
knowledge/ability
discussions and writing assessments requiring careful textual analysis or
peer editing
discussions and writing exercises that require a response to and/or analysis
of podcasts, screencasts, and/or web video
discussion forums and w riting exercises geared toward attitudes about
writing and self-reflection on essays
writing exercises and essay drafts
A series of grammar reports, which include error analyses, research on
errors, and articulated remedies
A series of secondary -response discussion assignments that require peer
feedback on written content
A series of essays, including narrative, descriptive, reflective, and analytical
expression—essays from the course are included in a portfolio
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 22
23. Learner Support
In addition to linking to institutional support services (academic and
technical) in my syllabus, I also developed the habit of linking to services
in places throughout the course where such support might prove
immediately helpful.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 23
24. One of the students who enrolled
in my course had not just one,
but two disabilities. She was
legally blind as well as hard of
hearing. In fact, she was referred
to the online version of the
course because it struck the
institution’s administrators as
more accessible than the on-
ground version. Thus, our
decision to make the course ADA
compliant was immediately
useful.
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 24
25. Course Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Spring 2012
Historical Low-Income Low-Income
ALL Success ALL Success
Success Success Success
Business Fundamentals 59% 65% 67% 61% 59%
Biology 62% 70% 72% 67% 78%
Chemistry N/A N/A 50% 53%
Geography 74% 69% 71% 66% 68%
Dev. Math 41% 61% 61% Awaiting Data
Interm. Algebra 22% 62% 58% 12% 38%
College Algebra N/A N/A 86% 57%
Psychology 46% 56% 61% 48% 54%
Dev. Reading 37% 45% 65% 85% 72%
Dev. Writing 74% 83% 81% 70% 69%
English Composition 43% 36% 43% 64% 58%
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 25
26. You can visit English Composition I at:
http://shines.courseagent.com/kscope
https://academic.rsmart.com/~Kaleidoscope-English-Composition-I
2012 Jasig Sakai Conference 26
Hinweis der Redaktion
Thank you to Sakai, the Award Sponsors,rSmart and Wiley Publishing, the judges, to Chadron State College and the Kaleidoscope Project, Dr. Susan C. Hines, my family who is here with me today.
collaboratively; faculty from at least two institutions would work together to design and test the course;to serve “at risk” students; courses would be designed for students who participated in transitional or remedial studies; to reduce textbook costs; Open Education Resources (OER) and/or publicly available materials would be leveraged within the course;in ways that challenge and innovate; online course designs would need to maintain or exceed student success rates;for reuse and adoption by other institutions; the course would feature an open Creative Commons license so that others may adopt its use; additionally, it would be designed in such a way that it could be installed easily in to any learning management system (LMS), including Sakai CLE.
collaboratively; faculty from at least two institutions would work together to design and test the course;to serve “at risk” students; courses would be designed for students who participated in transitional or remedial studies; to reduce textbook costs; Open Education Resources (OER) and/or publicly available materials would be leveraged within the course;in ways that challenge and innovate; online course designs would need to maintain or exceed student success rates;for reuse and adoption by other institutions; the course would feature an open Creative Commons license so that others may adopt its use; additionally, it would be designed in such a way that it could be installed easily in to any learning management system (LMS), including Sakai CLE.
have high-quality OER, and if the resources did not exist, we would create them. Additionally, the content would have to engage students from at-risk populations who enrolled in Composition I with a certain amount of dread or anxiety. To capture their attention, we made a effort to select from diverse, contemporary materials: textbooks, websites, videos, podcasts, and still images. We agreed the course should leverage collaborative writing spaces in order to address composition from a process-oriented perspective and to include students in a larger writing community.We agreed the course should align outcomes with activities and assessments in ways that are resoundingly clear, both to faculty and to students.We agreed the course should have a modular design, so it is easy to navigate.We agreed the course should meet compliance standards for ADA/508, both to meet accessibility standards but to assure the course addresses a variety of learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic), as well.We agreed the course should meet or surpass online course design standards, such as those advocated by Quality Matters (see: http://www.qmprogram.org).We agreed the course should have interoperable features and a clear information architecture, so that it can be used by other institutions who may operate different LMSs.
have high-quality OER, and if the resources did not exist, we would create them. Additionally, the content would have to engage students from at-risk populations who enrolled in Composition I with a certain amount of dread or anxiety. To capture their attention, we made a effort to select from diverse, contemporary materials: textbooks, websites, videos, podcasts, and still images. We agreed the course should leverage collaborative writing spaces in order to address composition from a process-oriented perspective and to include students in a larger writing community.We agreed the course should align outcomes with activities and assessments in ways that are resoundingly clear, both to faculty and to students.We agreed the course should have a modular design, so it is easy to navigate.We agreed the course should meet compliance standards for ADA/508, both to meet accessibility standards but to assure the course addresses a variety of learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic), as well.We agreed the course should meet or surpass online course design standards, such as those advocated by Quality Matters (see: http://www.qmprogram.org).We agreed the course should have interoperable features and a clear information architecture, so that it can be used by other institutions who may operate different LMSs.
have high-quality OER, and if the resources did not exist, we would create them. Additionally, the content would have to engage students from at-risk populations who enrolled in Composition I with a certain amount of dread or anxiety. To capture their attention, we made a effort to select from diverse, contemporary materials: textbooks, websites, videos, podcasts, and still images. We agreed the course should leverage collaborative writing spaces in order to address composition from a process-oriented perspective and to include students in a larger writing community.We agreed the course should align outcomes with activities and assessments in ways that are resoundingly clear, both to faculty and to students.We agreed the course should have a modular design, so it is easy to navigate.We agreed the course should meet compliance standards for ADA/508, both to meet accessibility standards but to assure the course addresses a variety of learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic), as well.We agreed the course should meet or surpass online course design standards, such as those advocated by Quality Matters (see: http://www.qmprogram.org).We agreed the course should have interoperable features and a clear information architecture, so that it can be used by other institutions who may operate different LMSs.
have high-quality OER, and if the resources did not exist, we would create them. Additionally, the content would have to engage students from at-risk populations who enrolled in Composition I with a certain amount of dread or anxiety. To capture their attention, we made a effort to select from diverse, contemporary materials: textbooks, websites, videos, podcasts, and still images. We agreed the course should leverage collaborative writing spaces in order to address composition from a process-oriented perspective and to include students in a larger writing community.We agreed the course should align outcomes with activities and assessments in ways that are resoundingly clear, both to faculty and to students.We agreed the course should have a modular design, so it is easy to navigate.We agreed the course should meet compliance standards for ADA/508, both to meet accessibility standards but to assure the course addresses a variety of learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic), as well.We agreed the course should meet or surpass online course design standards, such as those advocated by Quality Matters (see: http://www.qmprogram.org).We agreed the course should have interoperable features and a clear information architecture, so that it can be used by other institutions who may operate different LMSs.
have high-quality OER, and if the resources did not exist, we would create them. Additionally, the content would have to engage students from at-risk populations who enrolled in Composition I with a certain amount of dread or anxiety. To capture their attention, we made a effort to select from diverse, contemporary materials: textbooks, websites, videos, podcasts, and still images. We agreed the course should leverage collaborative writing spaces in order to address composition from a process-oriented perspective and to include students in a larger writing community.We agreed the course should align outcomes with activities and assessments in ways that are resoundingly clear, both to faculty and to students.We agreed the course should have a modular design, so it is easy to navigate.We agreed the course should meet compliance standards for ADA/508, both to meet accessibility standards but to assure the course addresses a variety of learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic), as well.We agreed the course should meet or surpass online course design standards, such as those advocated by Quality Matters (see: http://www.qmprogram.org).We agreed the course should have interoperable features and a clear information architecture, so that it can be used by other institutions who may operate different LMSs.
have high-quality OER, and if the resources did not exist, we would create them. Additionally, the content would have to engage students from at-risk populations who enrolled in Composition I with a certain amount of dread or anxiety. To capture their attention, we made a effort to select from diverse, contemporary materials: textbooks, websites, videos, podcasts, and still images. We agreed the course should leverage collaborative writing spaces in order to address composition from a process-oriented perspective and to include students in a larger writing community.We agreed the course should align outcomes with activities and assessments in ways that are resoundingly clear, both to faculty and to students.We agreed the course should have a modular design, so it is easy to navigate.We agreed the course should meet compliance standards for ADA/508, both to meet accessibility standards but to assure the course addresses a variety of learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic), as well.We agreed the course should meet or surpass online course design standards, such as those advocated by Quality Matters (see: http://www.qmprogram.org).We agreed the course should have interoperable features and a clear information architecture, so that it can be used by other institutions who may operate different LMSs.