Historically, In Colleges And Universities, Each Instructor ✓ Solved
Historically, in colleges and universities, each instructor
Historically, in colleges and universities, each instructor was able to create their own class. If there were ten sections of one course (for example, Economics 101), each section would have different books, learning outcomes, and assignments. With the evolution of online learning, it became easier to create one master course and copy ten sections of that course so that each instructor is teaching the same course with the same books, learning outcomes, and assignments. Select and complete one of the scenarios below. Explain your response and respond to at least one other student:
- I am the Professor: I have been teaching Economics 101 at ABC University for fourteen years. Nobody knows this content and how to teach it better to students than I do. I object to teaching a copied course created by someone else because…
- I am the LMS Administrator: I am in charge of a total of 440 sections for the university. I don’t have the resources to support each instructor creating their own class. I support using one master course for Economics 101 because…
- I am the President of the University: I am in charge of ensuring that we work together to respect each other’s opinions and be collaborative in our decisions. May I suggest the solution below that could work for everyone...
Paper For Above Instructions
The evolution of online learning has transformed the landscape of higher education, leading to new methodologies in course delivery and management. The debate regarding the use of master courses versus individual class designs is both complex and multifaceted, involving various stakeholders within academic institutions. As a practicing professor of Economics 101 at ABC University for the past fourteen years, I find myself in a unique position to discuss the implications of implementing a copied course structure.
Over my tenure, I have developed a deep understanding of the content and various pedagogical strategies tailored to meet the diverse needs of students. Each semester brings new faces, new dynamics, and a fresh opportunity to engage with the material and challenge students to think critically about economic concepts. My objection to teaching a copied course is rooted in the belief that standardized course content compromises the quality of education and the unique learning experience that I strive to create.
The Importance of Individual Teaching Style
Every educator has a distinctive teaching style that reflects their experiences, philosophies, and strengths. In economics, where concepts can be abstract and theoretical, the ability to relate real-world applications can significantly enhance student comprehension. My approaches include case studies, current events discussions, and interactive activities that connect theoretical content to tangible experiences. By homogenizing course content, we risk diluting these rich learning experiences and stifling creativity in the classroom.
Student Engagement and Feedback
Another major concern is the potential loss of student engagement. The unique interactions fostered in individual classes can create an environment where students feel valued and understood. I often rely on student feedback to tailor my lectures and adjust course materials to meet their interests and learning styles. A master course might lead to a one-size-fits-all approach that could alienate learners who benefit from a more personalized curriculum.
Adapting to the Changing Educational Landscape
While the logistical advantages of a master course system are undeniable, particularly from an administrative standpoint, it is crucial to recognize the risks involved. The university's administration may view standardization as a way to streamline operations and reduce costs associated with course development. However, this perspective overlooks the essential role of the instructor in facilitating student learning and the importance of fostering a dynamic educational environment.
Balancing Resources and Quality
As the LMS Administrator, I understand the challenges of managing numerous course sections. Managing 440 sections not only requires extensive resources but also implies a consistent quality of education across the university. Support for a master course could indeed address this concern, ensuring that all students receive the same foundational knowledge. Nonetheless, it is essential to explore collaborative approaches that allow for individual input while maintaining some level of consistency across sections. Perhaps a hybrid model where core components are standardized but instructors retain the freedom to adapt and enhance their courses could reconcile both parties' interests.
Collaborative Solutions
As the President of the University, fostering collaboration and respecting diverse opinions are paramount. A possible solution might involve creating a committee of instructors and administrators to develop a framework for Economics 101 that outlines essential topics and materials while allowing for adaptability in teaching methods. This collaborative approach not only promotes unity within the faculty but also empowers educators to create meaningful connections with their students.
The Role of Continuous Improvement
To ensure the effectiveness of either approach, continuous feedback and assessment would be invaluable. Regular evaluations of both the master course and individual sections could provide insightful data on student performance, satisfaction, and engagement levels. This feedback loop could drive future improvements, allowing us to refine our course offerings while balancing efficiency with educational rigor.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while the transition towards a master course model offers logistical advantages, it is essential to preserve the individuality and creativity that each instructor brings to the classroom. As educators, our ultimate goal is to cultivate an enriching learning environment that encourages critical thinking and engagement. Emphasizing collaboration and open dialogue will allow us to navigate these challenges and develop a nuanced approach that meets the needs of both instructors and students alike.
References
- Diamond, R. (2019). "A Quick Guide to Effective Online Course Design." Online Education Research Journal.
- Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2011). "E-Learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework." Routledge.
- Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). "Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education." AAHE Bulletin.
- Blaschke, L. M. (2012). "Wiley: The Role of the LMS in Student Success." Educational Technology Research and Development.
- Moore, M. G. (2013). "Handbook of Distance Education." Routledge.
- Picciano, A. G. (2017). "Theories and Frameworks for Online Education." Online Learning Journal.
- Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., & estrada, V. (2014). "NMC Horizon Report: 2014 Higher Education Edition." The New Media Consortium.
- Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Wenderoth, M. P., & Dirks, C. (2014). "Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
- Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). "Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature." Computers & Education.
- Weimer, M. (2013). "Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice." Jossey-Bass.