05.08.2013 Views

Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Telelearning: A Case Study ...

Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Telelearning: A Case Study ...

Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Telelearning: A Case Study ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Table 17<br />

<strong>Benefits</strong> <strong>and</strong> Limitations <strong>of</strong> Access <strong>and</strong> Flexibility<br />

<strong>Benefits</strong> Limitations<br />

• There was increased access to an<br />

OISE/UT degree.<br />

• There was access to diverse students.<br />

• The online format fits a flexible work<br />

schedule in terms <strong>of</strong> time <strong>and</strong> place.<br />

Teaching <strong>and</strong> Learning Functions<br />

• Technological problems can interrupt<br />

<strong>the</strong> learning process.<br />

This section will cover <strong>the</strong> following topics related to teaching <strong>and</strong> learning<br />

functions: course design <strong>and</strong> content, course objectives, course materials, time dem<strong>and</strong>s,<br />

<strong>and</strong> delivery method.<br />

Course Design <strong>and</strong> Content. Although this course had already run twice in <strong>the</strong><br />

online format using Parti s<strong>of</strong>tware, with <strong>the</strong> introduction <strong>of</strong> WebCSILE as <strong>the</strong> new course<br />

s<strong>of</strong>tware, <strong>the</strong>re were still a few issues that arose in terms <strong>of</strong> course design <strong>and</strong> content:<br />

We did [this course] twice on Parti <strong>and</strong> this was <strong>the</strong> first time we had done<br />

it on WebCSILE. So having done it twice before, we had a sense <strong>of</strong> what<br />

did <strong>and</strong> didn't work. We did different things each time to try <strong>and</strong> engage<br />

<strong>the</strong> students in interaction. (instructor 2)<br />

One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> design issues that a few students had difficulty with was having all <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> students documents posted online as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course content. Although it was<br />

intended to be a means <strong>of</strong> learning from each o<strong>the</strong>rs work, not all <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> documents were<br />

relevant to all students:<br />

[I was] unable to be spontaneous as I plowed though <strong>the</strong> pages <strong>of</strong> written<br />

material. Having all <strong>of</strong> everyone's documents was not helpful. (student 8)<br />

One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> students felt it would be more helpful to post only parts <strong>of</strong> each students'<br />

work. Particularly parts <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir work that would generate useful discussion for <strong>the</strong> entire<br />

class:<br />

Discussions have to be more clearly directed. Information that is posted<br />

should not just be a total document, perhaps, just relevant parts to discuss.<br />

(student 8)<br />

Ano<strong>the</strong>r issue <strong>of</strong> concern was <strong>the</strong> level <strong>of</strong> structure provided in <strong>the</strong> course. There<br />

appeared to be adequate structure in terms <strong>of</strong> deadlines for work to be completed:<br />

28

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!