The process of designing for [online] learning: response to Bennett et al.

Abstract

This article examines practical implications of the work by Bennett et al. (Educational Technology Research and Development 65( 1):125-145, 2017) entitled, "The process of designing for learning: Understanding university teachers' design work". It addressed the knowledge gap of design practices of university faculty by conducting an extensive qualitative study with 30 interviewees. Three design practices reported that are incremental and iterative. Understanding these common design practices is critical to effectively and efficiently support faculty with transferring their instruction online when many institutions face the challenge of supporting a large number of inexperienced faculty with transferring instructions online. Based on the findings, three stages of support can be devised for before, during, and after sessions. Given the non-systematic cyclic design process of the teachers, need-based, just-in-time support and resources may be helpful. Although the reported process is not specifically for online learning design, the findings may contribute to establishing best practices for supporting faculty's online learning design.

Digital competence for emergency remote teaching in higher education: understanding the present and anticipating the future

“…However, the significance of this competence during the intense shift to ERT was critical due to disruptions to supports usually available during design cycles. This is similarly reinforced by Lee (2021) who notes that a break from systematic design during ERT called for teachers to have both available and needs-based support resources for online delivery. It is important to recognise, however, that in practice teachers faced significant uncertainty about the types of development opportunities they should undertake to be prepared during this time.…”

Preliminary Results on the Online Lessons of IDPE Department of University of West Attica 2019-2020

“…Since course design is a key quality indicator in online learning (Valai et al 2019) the second limitation posed a harder to handle problem. Of course, less rigid methods based on actual everyday practice have risen, even before the pandemic (see for example Bennett et al, 2017) and those were actually applicable under pandemic conditions (Lee 2021) equally in developing material, for the first iteration of changing the delivery mode, and in revising it. Course modularity was also helpful (Lightfoot, 2006;Makrygiannis et al, 2020).…”

Application Technology on Collaborative Training of Interactive Learning Activities and Tendency Preference Diversion

“…Researchers have made clear the importance f learning behavior preference, and put forward the key problems(Jovanovi et al, 2021; D. Lee, 2021), which are mainly reflected in two key aspects: the first one is the support of education big data.…”