Language learning OR language Imposition

Language learning OR language Imposition

Author:  Associate Professor Rozina Jumani

http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/14791571/1533473352/name/The+Education+Watch+Part+1.pdf

WE are all aware that learning is an arbitrary act and it can take place “anywhere,” “anytime,” and at “any pace”, (Shachar & Neumann 2003). Likewise, language learning is also an uninformed, subjective act where the children are provided the stimulus to communicate in their mother tongue, also known as the child’s first or native language. Language learning is a natural process where the child does not face any problems in learning his mother tongue because his whole environment provides him with the scaffolding. 

Learning a language through his receptive skills, he later applies his productive skills to communicate in and write that language. Noam Chomsky in his book Language and Mind (1968) discusses the “innate abilities” of children’s brains and shares that each human brain has a language acquisition device (LAD) that enables the learner to learn any language with ease. It is important to underline that “first language learning is an unconscious learning process, and usually learnt joyfully where as second language acquisition requires a conscious effort from the learners to learn a language with all its complexities, grammar and structures, etc.” 

Commenting on the recently announced education policy that aims to teach all concepts of mathematics, sciences, social studies, etc., in the English language from grade one onwards, seems a tall claim. Being an educationist, though I belong to the progressive school of thought and intend to connect all our students with the global society using the global language, i.e., English, I am not for distorted learning. 

Linguists and educationists, for many years until now, have been debating over the suitability of instructional language. They confront questions such as whether the concepts to teach a foreign language since the early years of learning are right or not.  On the other hand, other linguists and educationists believe that learning during early years is critical as that is the stage where children comprehend the concepts based on the stimulus and develop their own patterns of learning, which usually last forever and guide them throughout their lives.  Thus they claim that the meaning might be lost when teaching children the concepts in a foreign language like they are taught in the first language (mother tongue). Most of the time the translation of certain concepts, too, cannot be made available in a second or foreign language.  Still all the educators, linguists and parents can come to one consensus for the sake of the policy about using the English language from grade one in all schools, rural or urban, across Pakistan. 

We might ignore for a while the private sector as according to Dr Shahid Siddique, 33 per cent of the education provision is in the hands of the private sector. They might handle it on their own. Still what will happen to the remaining 67 per cent students’ population in the government schools? 

According to the official statistics available from the Ministry of Education’s website, in 2005-2006, there were 137,751 primary schools, 14,982 middle schools and 9,110 high schools in the public sector. A majority of them are in the rural areas. Therefore, what will be our strategic intervention to at least cover the 137,751 primary schools where the curriculum will be taught in the English language exclusively from next year? How can we even ensure the approachability of the federal or provincial education ministries in the rural areas of Pakistan to oversee the effective implementation of the announced education policy when there are apprehensions about the state of several government schools operating as ghost schools in the urban areas where accessibility and monitoring is easily manageable? 

We also need to reflect on the following questions prior to the implementation of the policy to see whether we even have the answers to some of them. Are we prepared to implement the policy? Do we have enough trained English language teachers, competent in teaching conceptual knowledge in a foreign language? Do we have an enabling environment for our children to learn their conceptual knowledge and skills in a foreign language? What kinds of resources are required to teach conceptual knowledge in a foreign language, and do we have enough of them or not? Will conceptual teaching be done through grammar translation as is done in many government as well as semi-private or private schools or would other pedagogical methods be explored and the teachers be equipped accordingly?

These are just a few of the questions that come up in one’s mind. M o v i n g ahead further for the implementation, we will certainly face more hardcore realities that we may be unaware of now.  We can have various perspectives but who among us is willing to think out the implementation plan for the announced policy from the learners’ point of view? Will the policy make our students linguistically rich? 

Despite all deliberations, I still hope that the entire process of new language learning would become an enriching and enjoyable process for all our young learners in the main cities or the remote rural areas. Otherwise, it will be nothing more than a language imposition, which has its own negative repercussions on children’s personalities as it said in such cases: “Jack of all trades and master of none”. 

http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/14791571/1533473352/name/The+Education+Watch+Part+1.pdf

Language learning or language imposition

 Language learning or language imposition

Rozina Jumani, 20.09.2009

Dawn Newspaper 

Active Learning - A Key To Success

Active Learning - A Key To Success http://www.starteaching.com/RozinaJumani.htm

In the words of Christensen, Garvin & Sweet, “To teach is to engage students in Learning.” However the engagement of students is possible in various ways. My school teachers use a traditional way of teaching as they think the course content can not be finished otherwise.  On the other hand, there are quite a few teachers who believe that using innovative approaches and presenting concepts in the form of activities helps students to develop the taught concepts gradually and also seeks confidence in participating and communicating their ideas with their colleagues in a better way. Thus, they advocate that through employing such methods, students' learning can be improved and teaching remains stimulating work. My own association with the teaching profession is for more than a decade; I began my journey as an average teacher who had basic teaching skills. Other than that, I had nothing to offer until I received professional training and certificate programs that enabled me to think about teaching and learning, and with this my role expanded as ‘Teacher Educator”. As Senge (1990) says, ‘Through learning we recreate ourselves’. This paradigm shift in my thinking and teaching brought many changes in me and I embarked on a whole new arena where as a researcher I investigated how children learn. Though I was sure that merely listening to the lectures and copying from the board won’t bring any learning and excitement among students, I started employing innovative activities, and that engagement brought a significant change in my students . In the words of ‘Felder & Brent (1999); Hannula (2003); McConnell, Steer & Owens (2003) “Active learning incorporates strategies that require students to participate directly in their learning- to apply newly acquired knowledge to solve problems, to question and test theories, brainstorm, solve problems, hypothesize, summarize, or to critically think and interact with colleagues”. As the term ‘Activity based learning’ encompasses a wide range of aspects - thus it is considered a relative term where every reader infers the meaning as per his/her own experience. In order to avoid the ambiguity, the understanding of the term is required to be shared. The term ‘activity based learning and teaching’ means students and teachers both are considered ‘Learner’ and all play an equal role in constructing a new idea/concept about things. Hence both are active and mutually support each other in the process of learning. The motivation of initiatives brings confidence among learners and they construct their own meaning about the concept/idea. According to Roth (1990) “Learning is enhanced when it is built on student’s prior knowledge and experiences allowing learners to link what they already know to new information to be learned” Activity based learning can be viewed as following: 1.        Active Learning is defined as any strategy "that involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing". 2.        “Constructivism” it usually means encouraging students to use active techniques (experiments, real-world problem solving) to create more knowledge and then to reflect on and talk about what they are doing and how their understanding is changing “Hands-on and learning by experience are powerful ideas, and we know that engaging students actively and thoughtfully in their studies pays off in better learning”. (Rutherford, 1993, p. 5). Thus it is more important to enable students to think for themselves then to merely fill their heads with the right answer .

Multiplicity of Educational Systems in Pakistan: A Critical Review

Multiplicity of Educational Systems in Pakistan:  A Critical Review

http://www.starteaching.com/RozinaJumani.htm It is said that ‘one mind is better but two are best’ because it provides an opportunity for sharing and interaction among people of different socio-economic and educational backgrounds, diversifying learning would enable them to view from different aspects; hence this diversity brings a richness of ideas and thoughts which is indeed crucial in refining the final thought. This notion could be dangerous if the same analogy would be replicate in other context, where a pluralistic approach is not advisable hence seen as a threatening phenomenon to others. An Educational and developmental issue that I have identified for my assignment is ‘multiplicity of educational systems in Pakistan ’ in relation with the higher education system of the country. In this paper, I would discuss the ‘multiple education systems’ and its impact on students’ lives in particular and on the country in general. Being an Educational Counselor, I have had several opportunities to interact with students’ from ages 15-20 from various regions of Pakistan , in order to discuss with them their career preferences and further to guide them on how to prepare their portfolios. Hence, the issues of multiplicity of educational systems stem out from there that further invoke in me for additional deliberations. According to Isani and Virk (2005), ‘the nation is divided because we are running three parallel systems of education’. However, these three systems are: ¨         Public Education System:  State provides a system where education is offered in students’ mother tongue, besides Urdu as a national language, and English as a foreign language taught. In public schools, the teaching of the English Language begins in Grade 6. Minimum school fees are very low as not all people can afford them;  hence only those with little money send their children to public schools. ¨         Private Education System: Few entrepreneurs who wish to bring reforms in the education sector have opened their own schools and colleges. These entrepreneurs consist of educationists, political affluent leaders, reformists, activist, and conscience members of civil society and others. These private schools are English Medium schools, where students pay a high amount as a school fee that could range between Rs. 150/=- 4,000/=. It is therefore evident that some private schools are identical to public schools and offer average education whereas there are others who charge heavy fees to maintain the standard and frequently invite parents and other monitoring bodies to evaluate their performances. ¨         Cambridge Education System: Cambridge Education System existed in South Asia before independence; hence with the advent of the new state, i.e. Pakistan , because at that time state did not have an alternate to it, Cambridge education system continued its proceedings in Pakistan .  At present, there is a huge network of schools registered with it.      With the colossal differences in the above educational systems, one should think about the many kinds of students it breeds. For instance, the Public Education System caters to common masses which produces clerks who serve the Public office and bureaucracy. On the other hand, the Cambridge Education System reaches to rich, established people and thus produces elites who either become entrepreneurs or travel to developed countries for higher education and ultimately do settle there. Students who opt for Private Education systems aspire for the excellence. Despite the indefinite struggle, they do not succeed entirely but keep switching their roles to prove themselves. Despite the fact that the process of education cultivates manners, behavior, bearing and mind, and prepares for complete living, the multiplicity of educational systems inculcates ranks and levels among students that not only cause harm to students holistically but also damage the nation at large. However, according to Isani and Virk (2005), ‘higher education is recognized as a Capital Investment’. They further say, “Higher education is viewed as a source of great potential for socio-economic and cultural development of the country and it is our conviction that through quality higher education the nation can be transformed into a developed nation within the lifetime of a single generation.” Keeping the whole debate in mind, the question arises about the implications on students’ lives in particular and on the country in general.  In this regard, few suggestions are as follows that could be implemented gradually: ¨         It is indeed very important to bring reforms in education, which eliminates differences and class system and inculcates self-understanding and analysis, it invites discussion and debates that help student become confident, it allows students to present their point of view and enable them to view the world with their perspective. ¨         To bring synergy among all three parallel systems is possible with the agreement of educationists and the ministry of education as we have many good things to replicate. For this reason, conscious deliberations are required to study all three systems thoroughly and then team would suggest the practicality to replicate most or some of it.  ¨         It is imperative that teachers and educators would make an effort to revamp the curriculum, by devising the common benchmarks for each grade. In this way, the colossal difference among students from different systems would minimize. Nevertheless the uniformity is not required but it helps bridge that enormous gap exist among three systems of education. ¨         Another implication of curriculum revamping would lead to practical activities, research activities and presentation of ideas, etc. and relating it with students where s/he extracts the information and interprets as s/he understand and  develop the confidence to question idea, text etc, as nothing is sacred so the students will find themselves as life long learners. ¨         Revisiting our examination system will be critical and with summative exams, it is suggested to follow formative assessment that will enable teachers to develop individual relationships with each student and help him/her develop smoothly. Providing constructive feedback can also make learners concentrate in their work efficiently and would improve further. ¨         Training of teachers, faculty and caregivers is essential as well, because they are catalyst to bring any transformation, as it is said ‘Teachers are Leaders’ therefore teachers training regarding instructional pedagogy and awareness about student’s psychology is important for them. ¨         School administrators are responsible to create enabling environment for learning once the conducive learning environment is provided , they initiate new ideas, to make it happen it is indeed required to arrange for the proper infra structure that ensures positive and effective learning. Above-mentioned steps are a few indications of required change. Reference: Isani U.A.G. and Virk Mohammad L. (2005) Higher Education in Pakistan : A historical and futuristic perspective. Roohani Art Press Islambad Bibliography: George Paul S., McEWIN C. Kenneth and Jenkins John M. (2000) The Exemplary High School. HarcourtCollege Publishers Jenkins John M. (1996) Transforming High Schools: A Constructive Agenda. Technomic Publishing Co. Inc. Taneja V R. (1990) Educational Thought and Practice. Sterling Publishers Private Ltd.

what is literacy? defining literacy

Defining Literacy http://www.starteaching.com/RozinaJumani.htm

The definition of literacy is context specific. The parameters of literacy may vary from one geographical region to another and from one era to another. It can be as simple as just recognition of the alphabets, or signing of one’s own name, or may be broader in order to include the handling of equipment by studying manuals. Literacy has multiple meanings ranging from the simple ability to read and write, to interpreting and implementing ideas, knowledge and skills that a person may have required. Some definitions of literacy focus on perception and decoding. For example, Spache (1964: 2) described literacy as “a series of word perceptions i.e. reading only”. Kaestle (1985: 34), described literacy as “the ability to decode and comprehend language at a rudimentary level, that is the ability to look at written words corresponding to ordinary oral discourse, to say them, and to understand them.” These two definitions emphasize the aspect of skills to read the printed symbols and to map these symbols into the understanding of oral language. It is observed that initially, the definition of literacy was confined to the acquisition of the basic skills of the 3 R’s (reading, writing and arithmetic). Over a period of time, basic literacy was upgraded to functional literacy, expanding further into knowing to do things by using insight.  This transformation of literacy is, in fact, associated with its importance for the society as a whole, and to enable a person to effectively participate in the life Though defining literacy is a very complex notion, it is important to deliberate upon it since the definition has far-reaching implications.  Some experts have emphasized cognitive processes in describing literacy, some more generally and others more specifically. For example, Goodman (1976: 51) suggested that “reading is a psycholinguistic guessing game”.  Venezky (1991:22) states, it is “a cognitive skill.” Calfee and Nelson-Barber (1991:13) describe it as “the capacity to employ language as a tool for oral communication.” These definitions are consistent with teaching reading and writing as a cognitive process that involves the processing of information through such strategies as activating background knowledge, encouraging readers to make predictions, or writers to organize their ideas into categories.   The below cited definitions from different countries indicate that despite the broadening of the description of literacy in literature, the working definition of literacy, as adopted by different countries has remained fairly simple at the skill level. S# Country Definition 1. Bangladesh Ability to read and write in any language 2. Canada In Canada 9th grade pass is considered as literate and according to this definition illiterates are only 1 % in that country. 3 India Literate is defined as the one who can read with accuracy at a speed of approximately 40 words per minute and write or copy at a speed of 10 words per minute and take dictation at the speed of not less than 7 words per minute in any language. 4 Indonesia A person is considered as literate who can recognize alphabets, read simple words, signs his / her name (eligibility for voting) able to read and understand a letter, or able to read certain part of certain magazine or of a certain newspaper. 5 Nepal Literacy is defined as the ability to read and write in any language, a short statement on every day life of 06 years and above persons 6 Vietnam The definition of literacy consists of three components viz-a viz. 1.      Reading and writing the printed materials without spelling each word. 2.      Writing 80 words in 45 minutes without making too many mistakes. 3.      Reading four digit numbers and write legibly the first ten numbers. According to UNRSCO (2002), It is currently estimated that about twenty percent of world's population aged fifteen and above is illiterate and that about 115.4 million school-age children are not in school.

Integrated Reading Program For Primary Teachers

Integrated Reading Program
For Primary Teachers

By Rozina Jumani

http://www.starteaching.com/RozinaJumani.htm

Reading is vital to all learning; it plays an important role in the child’s learning process, as it is one of the key ways of learning. It is an essential skill to be acquired by children and also a basic skill that influences other skills like writing, spelling, vocabulary, punctuation etc. unless they are able to read, they will not understand and comprehend the text. Although, reading and understanding go together as it makes the learning process more effective and meaningful but there comes the role of teachers along with those instructional strategies through which all children eventually comprehend the text, no matter how difficult the text would be. The selections of appropriate activities that can play a key role in facilitating students understand the meaning of the text.  

During schooling, I did not understand the purpose of reading, it was activity for me like other instructional activities when teachers asked us in the classroom to read and then follow questions/exercises at the end of the text, and I used to take reading activity as fun. Richards, J.C (1997) shared the reasons for reading, he mentioned, “there are three major reasons for preparing students to read: (1) to establish a purpose for reading a given text, (2) to activate existing knowledge about the topic and thus get more out of reading the text, and (3) to establish realistic expectations about what is in the text and thus read more effectively (pp.64) 

As a language teacher, the study helped me to revisit my teaching experience; I went through my previous experiences. I reflected on the phase I of my teaching career there I continued what I learned as students and then phase II of my professional when for the first time I enrolled for a language course, I reviewed my teaching practices and took appropriate actions to teach language in a better way. I also requested my Coordinator to provide reflection and feedback about my lesson plans and classroom practices, as I was novice in the teaching profession. 

As a Teacher Educator, I continued working with all teachers whether they were experienced or novice. In our regular monthly meetings we discussed issues related to  classroom teaching syllabus issues, challenges which students faced etc. there we discovered that teachers have to prepare their own reading activities, as they are not provided in the textbooks, I chose this study to review only reading activities in the text books. 

What is reading? 

The ability to read is the remarkable type of expertise most humans develop among themselves. In TESOL journal, reading is defined as follows:

“Reading is acquiring information from a written or printed text and relating it to what already know to construct a meaning for the text as a whole” (pp..6). 

According to Grabe and Stroller (2002), Reading is an ability to draw meaning from the printed page and interpret this information appropriately.

Even Gough, Hoover and Peterson (1996), view that skilled reading requires decoding and comprehension. That student who cannot read it means they cannot decode and comprehend either. For sufficient reading s/he must know both decoding and comprehension. 
 

Models of Reading 

As for as the models of reading are concerned Eskey (2002) is of the opinion, scholars have developed various models of reading process. Model based on the idea that reading is just taking meaning from the text are calledbottom-up model. Models based on the idea that reading is directed by the brain and that the brain makes predictions about the meaning of the text and confirm these predications are called top down model. Models based on the idea that reading is best thought of combining information from the text with knowledge supplied by brain are called interactive model.  

Pre, While and Post Reading Activities 

Bernhardt (1991) says, reading as an interactive process; recommend authentic texts of interest to Students therefore, reading materials in terms of a three-phase approach: pre-reading, while reading and post reading activities. 

Interactive models of reading suggest that readers reconstruct the text information, based on the text, and on the prior knowledge available to them most researchers including Carrell (1998) and Barnett (1989) have emphasized the need for schema activation before reading. Moreover, if students lack the appropriate schemata, they should be given them. Thee are fact, the two main functions of pre-reading activities, which ask for students’ involvement, interest, and motivation basically, they are a means of incorporating the student’s knowledge of the world, their ideas and opinions, before checking them against the text and at the same time, they generate vocabulary on the related topics, this further assist in their vocabulary development. 

Pre-reading activities provide opportunities for students to activate their background knowledge; it helps students to establish the purpose for reading. Little (1988) mentioned; an authentic text is one created to fulfill some social purpose in the language community in which it was produced’ (pp.27). Pre-reading activities also encourage the linking of prior knowledge with text. It also allows students to predict about the content and discuss reasons for individual predictions 

Whereas, the main goal of the while reading activities to help students to understand the writer’s purpose, and some time the text structure and content, several techniques help to achieve the goals. While reading activitiescomprises direct reference questions, which mainly practice language, rather then comprehension, since sometimes they can be answered without understanding the text; indirect reference questions, usually employed to recognize text cohesion where the reader has to identify the text the words or pronoun refers to; and inference questions which require an understanding of vocabulary, and make the reader think about eh text; comprehension can be checked and developed eventually. 

While-reading activities help students locate answers, it provides opportunities for students to anticipate ideas, it also encourages students to organize new information and integrate it with old information. Students can summarize the text in their own words.

The post reading activities helps students to merge what they have read and, at the same time, related the text to the students’ experience, knowledge, and opinions etc. Barnett (1989) have proposed different activities, which contribute to the integration of reading with the other language skills, and which are similar to ‘real’ activities performed by readers, such as listening facts, summarizing, describing or providing information, as well as discussion, and writing compositions, new versions, or endings etc.  

The aim of the post-reading activities are to provide a greater amount of activities that help reflect on the texts; as well as a greater variety of creative tasks that help students to relate their experience, views, and knowledge to the texts. The variety of activities can be integrated with other skills in integration of reading with writing so students relate their creativity and imagination to the texts. 

Post-reading activities provide opportunities for students to summarize text in their own words, it encourages them to seek additional information from outside sources. It also develops the link among pre reading and while reading activities and also encourage students to evaluate their predications, purposes and questions, etc. identify main gist of the text, and also provides extension to hands-on-activates that involves students actively in creative endeavors. 

To summarize, individual reading lessons consist of three stages pre, while and post reading activities, that should be connected. Individual reading lessons include activities that prepare students for passage, guide them during their reading and follow up after the reading. 

Teachers As Change Agents

Teacher As Change Agent

By: ROZINA JUMANI

http://www.starteaching.com/RozinaJumani.htm

How many of us want to glorify the image of teacher as Moral practitioner, who could bring such a huge difference in the lives of learner?. Few people are really born teachers and have an urge to enlighten others.  To become a change agent, they must possess five basic fundamentals: personal vision building, inquiry, collaboration, mastery, and management.

1. Personal vision building

This is a teacher’s own conceptual and perception level about teaching which can be observed through gestures, body language and through other communication tools. It can be seen and observed by children very easily as well.

2. Inquiry

Inquiry is the second component of teaching.  It assists the whole process of teaching and learning and also polishes personal vision; it inculcates the questioning and reasoning and fosters achieving holistic image building.

3. Mastery

Without having mastery or command, one cannot be confident.  Mastery is a huge umbrella and it covers not only conceptual understanding but also proper implementation strategies - i.e. pedagogical skills.

4. Collaboration

John Billing says “Life consists not in holding good cards but in playing those you hold well.”  It is necessary that a teacher should be open minded and work in collaboration with others as in learning organizations or communities.  The phenomenon of the ‘one man army’ cannot be possible. Learning is a process which requires socialization, as people learn from each other.

5. Management

One cannot achieve the desired result if the whole process is not well planned and implemented.  Therefore the teacher being a leader and change agent would create an impact, but if s/he is a good manager, s/he would plan well, implement well. and achieve well.

Indeed teachers are the nurturers, and if these nurturers can envision where they would lead these children, then they would definitely help support change and become agent of the change.

A Guarantee To Bring Improvement

A Guarantee To Bring Improvement

By: ROZINA JUMANI

http://www.starteaching.com/RozinaJumani.htm

Have we ever thought about the question, ‘What is the purpose of the classroom observation?"  If it is an informal visit to a classroom, or if we are guests and want to see the classes, or we are donors and want to investigate the infrastructure, etc., then certainly we would get in and out very quickly. But if we are teachers and are engaged in a process of learning, then our response would be entirely different.

If it is first agreed between observer and the observee then there are also other points to be determined.  For instance, whether the teacher initiated the process of observation by suggesting his/her name voluntarily, or it is enforced on him/her?  Does s/he willingly accept the visitor in the classroom? Then s/he must have thought about both positive and negative (improvement) areas to be highlighted by the visitor or observer. Thus all would be based upon the mature relations with each other, the purpose of the observation, and it would enable us to determine the outcome of the observation.

In my professional career as teacher and then teacher educator, I have had many opportunities to be observed and then observe others. Many times it was institutional policy, control and enforcement, but there were quite a few times when new teachers invited me to become their critical partners.  Furthermore it was to suggest to them how to be more effective in various aspects such as handling of content knowledge, pedagogical skills, time and resource management, classroom management, etc.

Furthermore, there are many other informal ways to provide feedback to teachers for instance:

·        Sharing opinions in an informal ways projecting oneself at his/her place using structure like, “If I was at your place, I would have…..’.

·         Invite him/her for observation of my own or another teacher’s class and discuss wanted and unwanted behavior and its impact on students learning

·        Audio or video recording of the taught lesson could be analyzed either individually (there s/he get more time to reflect) or together

·        Engage him/her in an open discussion on taught plan and its execution plan, etc.

·        Modeling and/or peer coaching could be another way to invite comments

Taking down observation notes is a skill that matures with time in the life of a teacher or teacher educator. In my career I have seen myself growing in that skill; initially I used to take down what is good or bad in the lesson, then gradually I noted down how the objective/s of the lesson are achieved. In the later years as teacher educator, I started observing a lesson with two major themes focusing on ‘What was the teaching saying?’ and ‘What were students saying?" Then I fine tuned my own observation by linking teachers’ instructions, explanation, and discussion points with students’ learning and outcome. I used to highlight my analysis (positive and areas to be improved) about each lesson.

Classroom observation and feedback process becomes demoralizing when the element of force directs the process, when the mutual coordination and trust building seems impossible due to misunderstanding. This culture creates a bossy attitude among the observers which cause humiliation and lack of trust, and eventually fosters hatred, jealousy, and unwillingness to work. To avoid such a condition where colleagues would play ruler and subordinate role, it is necessary to understand and practice a diversity of perspectives; to respect other ideas and avoid unnecessary impositions on a fresh teacher; rather it is suggested to inspire them by modeling one’s role appropriately when unconsciously s/he learns and adapt where necessary.

Teaching leads to inspiring other young people and adults.  It is a voluntary process and no one can dumb his/her ideas on others’ heads; thus it is suggested to keep this (classroom observation  and giving feedback) process lively when both the partners show willingness to share and create new knowledge.

Further it is suggested to create a friendly bond between observer and observee by co-planning and peer coaching.  As one cannot be perfect in knowledge, it is therefore important to remind all those who are TEACHER EDUCATORS to become nurturing and not be perfectionists;  And above all, avoid creating model of imposition and enforcement.

ENHANCING STUDENTS’ PARTICIPATION THROUGH PRACTICAL CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES

ENHANCING STUDENTS’ PARTICIPATION THROUGH PRACTICAL CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES

By: ROZINA JUMANI

http://www.starteaching.com/RozinaJumani.htm

All teachers will surely agree on the reality of dealing with diverse learners ( who have different intelligence levels) in their day- to- day teaching: no doubt, it some times helps the facilitator to bring varieties in class to respond to various needs; on the other hand, it sometimes diverts the focus of the class as well.  

Educationists firmly believe when students don’t get interaction and an environment of learning with fun, they usually get depressed and begin ill-behavior. A conscious teacher always keeps in mind the effective use of teaching which could be done through different teaching methods including a variety of teaching strategies. However these approaches bring out the learning environment as C.R.Christian and D.A Garvin mentioned, “To teach is to engage students in learning.”  Although the active engagement of learners is possible through various ways, all the suggested strategies have meaningful effects that facilitate students to take part in such activities and enjoy learning.  

Morally, teachers are responsible to engage their pupils in the learning experience, particularly in relation to the quality of the instructions and activities. No doubt, the ultimate purpose of any activity is learning, which can be obtained through doing. Hence it may be either ‘Minds-on’ or ‘Hands-on’. “Hands-on” learning by doing is a powerful idea, and we know that engaging students actively and thoughtfully in their studies pays off in better learning”. (Rutherford, 1993:5) Hand-on activities include arts & crafts, creative writing, role play, drama, problem solving.  “Minds-on” activities usually have students engaged in imagination, mind mapping, concept mapping, reflective thinking, brainstorming, higher order questioning, discussion, Think-Pair–Share, interviews, PMI, and analytical thinking. A qualified teacher may link these activities with proper lesson management and organization where learning takes place during the lesson to maintain pupil attention, interest and involvement. 

Having said that, the function of classroom activities is to maintain misbehavior at minimum level and sustain their interest. It also provides opportunities for children to explore & engage with the content in a creative and dynamic way. Furthermore, it encourages learners to express their thoughts, feelings, and responses. Jean Piaget (1896-1980) believed learning occurs by an active construction of meaning, rather than by receiving it passively. He states “when we, as learners, encounter an experience or situation that conflicts with our current way of thinking, a state of imbalance is created”. When a teacher allows learners to  construct their own knowledge, it automatically enhances their critical thinking which further leads him or her to take decisions  for their  self- development.  

No doubt this whole process makes learners motivated and active and takes them toward the constructivism where learners themselves partake in learning and make meaning.

This approach fosters in them the use of critical thinking; enabling students to learn through constructing their own understandings that make them active and motivated learners. 

Also, the constructivism theory suggests a simple and effective sequence called “the 5 E Model” where participants initiate their learning through personal Engagement, and Explore new knowledge through inquiry and experiences and connect their knowledge by Explanation. Moreover they practice and apply new context thorough Elaboration. Thus their understanding could be assessed through Evaluation even during the process or while getting the end result.

Here the most important question arises: ‘Why do we need to do all such things in our classes?' The most suitable response is that our teaching should move around the holistic development of the child or learner who is the center of attraction and if in case, as teachers, we couldn’t attract these children towards learning, then surely we ruin their natural instinct to learn and discover life.

Fortunately or unfortunately, there is no single magical formula to motivate learners or students towards learning. Many external and internal actors affected student's motivation and they were willing to work and to learn (Bligh, 1971; Sass, 1989); their interest in the subject matter, perception of its usefulness, their desire for greater achievement, self-confidence and self-esteem, as well as patience and persistence. Moreover, not all students are motivated by the same values, needs, desires, or wants; some students will be motivated by trial and error, other influenced by case studies, etc.

Researchers have begun to identify those aspects of the teaching situation that enhance students' self-motivation (Lowman, 1984; Lucas, 1990; Weinert and Kluwe, 1987; Bligh, 1971). To encourage students to become self-motivated independent learners, instructors can do the following:

• Give frequent, early, positive feedback that supports students' beliefs that they can do well.
• Ensure opportunities for students' success by assigning tasks that are neither too easy nor too difficult.
• Help students find personal meaning and value in the material.
• Create an atmosphere that is open and positive.
• Help students feel that they are valued members of a learning community.

     Keeping in mind the milestones of every physical and cognitive age, it is also important how learners participate in learning within and outside classroom.  Also important are the types of tasks assigned to make their learning more meaningful. Vygotsky has discussed two types of student’s development in his thesis, "Zone of Proximal Development” as cited by Crowl, Kaminsky & Poldell (1997:71), “The level of actual development is the level at which an individual can function independently, whereas the level of potential development is the level at which the person can perform when working with a teacher or a group of students”

As a teacher and learner myself, it is my conviction and experience that when we perform teaching as a conscious act, we not only enjoy but also become satisfied. It all depends upon the teacher who could be motivated intrinsically and/or extrinsically and can MAKE A DIFFERENCE in students' lives and their own lives as well.  

Non Conventional Education Deivery Methods of Higher Education by Rozina Jumani

 Non Conventional Education Deivery Methods of Higher Education
by Rozina Jumani

http://www.amazon.com/Non-conventional-Educational-Delivery-Methods-Education/dp/3659203483/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1345361540&sr=8-1&keywords=Rozina+Jumani

A Paradigm Shift for Education

“Some people change their ways when they see the light, others when they feel the heat” – Caroline Schoeder

Mirror, mirror…
This post was delayed by a trip to a conference on creativity in education in Shanghai, China. It was not only a good opportunity to explore new ideas and hear about various projects developed in different parts of the world, but also a valuable chance to think about education in Asia in one of the most vibrant Asian cities. I had to place my presentation there in the context of a plenary session revolving around a story about a perfect world of universities. An American team of scholars presented their university as a mythical place where students and faculty engagement is harmoniously interwoven with civic involvement, critical thinking, creativity and innovation. The “inconvenient truth” of decline in study time, of realities revealed by research such as “Academically Adrift” or the worrying decline of civic values. To give just one example, “A Crucible Moment: College Learning & Democracy’s Future” – a report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education and released in early 2012 – is offering a challenging set of “indicators of anemic US civic health”:

1. US ranked 139th in voter participation of 172 world democracies in 2007.
2. Only 10 percent of US citizens contacted a public official in 2009‐10.
3. Only 24 percent of graduating high school seniors scored at the proficient or advanced level in civics in 2010, fewer than in 2006 or 1998.
4. Less than one‐half of 12th graders reported studying international topics as part of a civic education.
5. Half of US states no longer require civics education for high school graduation.
6. Among 14,000 college seniors tested in 2006 and 2007, the average score on a civic literacy exam was just over 50 percent, an “F.”
7. Opportunities to develop civic skills in high school through community service, school government, or service clubs are available disproportionately to wealthier students.
8. Just over one‐third of college faculty surveyed in 2007 strongly agreed that their campus actively promotes awareness of US or global social, political, and economic issues.
9. A similar percentage (35.8 percent) of college students surveyed strongly agreed that faculty publicly advocate the need for students to become active and involved citizens.
10. One‐third of college students surveyed strongly agreed that their college education resulted in increased civic capacities.

My paper and presentation there was more focused on new ways to approach the “inconvenient truth” than solutions to feed a “reassuring lie” and this is not too often a wise approach. Therefore, this was another good opportunity to reflect on the tension between unpleasant facts and unfortunate factors affecting universities and the pressure to be cheerfully “positive” as a good messenger of encouraging news from our “industry”. My problem is that I find this insidious form of delusional reassurance as one of the most dangerous approaches for what is at the core of my passion, interests and efforts: higher education. No space to reflect here on arguments supporting the idea that the current European debacle is caused by the same adversity to face inconvenient facts as the immediately gratifying denial seemed to work so well for decades. However, this conference in China offered new reasons to think that soon will be impossible to blame an honest look at “what we all know about our education, but don’t have the courage to speak out loud about it” – as one colleague said passionately in a panel discussion. The change is already unavoidable and the still-inflating bubble is under tremendous pressure. It is a time when Academia will have no other choice but to have a serious and honest look in a clearer mirror. At that point we have to do our best to ensure that the increasing noise of glorified ignorance and anti-intellectualism will not be taken as a serious alternative. Education is already called to provide solutions for crucial social, economic, cultural and ecological crises and a failure masked again as a profitable success can be devastating.
In this second part we briefly explore some of the most important tensions for universities in the Western world.
The foreseeable change of commercialization of higher education
The dispute on higher education as a common good or commodity is in a sense almost obsolete since GATS and WTO transformed decisively education into a tradable service. The adoption in 1995 in Marrakesh of General Agreement of Trades and Services was the moment to include “educational services” as part of commercial agreements. Just a year later in Seattle, the World Trade Organization included educational services in discussions under “Millennium Round” of multilateral trade negotiations. The new market was officially organizing higher education and new legal, commercial and ideological mechanisms gained control over universities. The impact is extensive and profound and it seems to escape the logic of too many experts that these policies and systems are less than a decade old in a field known (as a curse) to show results on a long term.
In this new context, a logic shaped by concepts and procedures alien to the very nature of education and educational institutions turned aggressively as the only possible solution for universities. Unfortunately, the well known conservatism and resistance to change mixed rapidly with a simplistic one-dimensional obsession with profit and return on investment. Students became “customers” and the value of education was measured only in simple quantitative terms, such as number of students getting a job (not clear for how long, anyway.. and the financial meltdown proved fast and clear that this was/is a misleading indicator). The aim to nurture educated minds was completely lost or ridiculed in the context of a commercial rationale where students turned into customers that must be pleased and offered tangible and immediate deliverable, such as jobs and careers. A genuine focus on sustainability was left for trees and somehow esoteric ecological studies placed at the periphery of academic life (and funding).
Frank Donoghue, a professor in the department of English at Ohio State and the author of The Last Professors: The Corporate University and the Fate of the Humanities (2008) recently said that poorly paid adjuncts with heavy teaching loads “don’t have a reason to be loyal to the universities they work for and not much reason to be loyal to the students.” Jeffrey Bowman, professor of history at Kenyon College, thinks the debate over whether tenure is good or bad misses the point. “No single system of tenure is going to be right for all institutions.” I agree with this point, but it seems obvious that this logic of immediate profit and thinking about education and the extremely difficult job of nurturing an informed, critical, flexible and adaptable mind in the same terms we think of making cars and organizing universities in the same way we managed car factories is immediately destructive and devastating on a long-term.
It is extremely important and equally difficult to create a system able to replace the stubbornly mediocre and arrogant with dynamic and intellectually productive scholars, able to cope with new and serious challenges of a fast changing reality. However, taking into consideration immediately quantifiable results and simplistic measures doubled with a strange understanding of profitability in managing universities’ human capital is just a source of dissolution of loyalty, effort and commitment for the institution, for students and for the shared values. Working in an environment of immediate uncertainty where people are tempted to see colleagues mainly as potential impediments to get a new contract than as comrades-in-arms united in the difficult task of teaching, learning and research cannot be productive or sustainable for students and academic community. It is for sure profoundly damaging the fabric of our humanity.
Since the obsession of profit gained ground in universities with substantial changes involved by the GATS and WTO agreements, the neoliberal position is undoubtedly the ideological winner and education is finally a saleable commodity. University is now an integrated part of a service industry based on commercial trade. Ironically, vast implications of the global financial crisis seriously question the… profitability of this model. It also questions its sustainability. Moreover, less than a decade after these important changes (including the obsessive and methodologically scandalous international rankings of universities) it became clear that – to paraphrase a discussion with a scholar I profoundly respect – universities are becoming more like businesses of the past, while businesses are changing more in line with classical university ideals: opened to courageous explorations, focused on giving stability for “out-of-the-box” teams and researchers, blurring boundaries and actively interested to create and use wide networks of collaboration and knowledge to advance science and innovation. It became clearer in recent days that this predominance of pre-crisis corporate model was driving higher education in a wrong direction.
University in search of identity and… financial troubles
As GFC painfully revealed that the promise of neoliberal capitalism is a mirage and the road to sustainable prosperity is much more difficult and complex (and the “invisible hand” of the market is just an irrational myth), commercial groups turned their attention, many for the first time, to their core values and asked themselves “what do we stand for?” This shift in focus was much more profound than the old corporate exercise to promote “organizational values” to customers. Most universities are in this sense very much behind the business world: it is not clear how sustainable is their profitability priority, not clear anymore what are the core values and the shift in focus causing a serious introspection on “what are we standing for” is still limited to some (elite) institutions.
There are strong arguments to support the idea that universities rapidly increase the price while the quality of what “customers” get is declining. Student debt reach unprecedented levels  in many countries; in US, student debts are counted in trillions (see graph below), higher education in UK is under unprecedented financial pressure and Australia is on the same trend with $22 billion in HECS debts and student loans. This is why scholars like Glenn Harlan Reynolds write that there is a higher education bubble created by similar reasons with those causing the housing bubble. In The Higher Education Bubble, Reynolds explains that tuition and fees in United States have risen more than 440% in 30 years and schools lowered standards to have more satisfied “customers”.

Is unclear (and worrying) where the current model and embraced market ideology is leading the university, but seems to be already clear that it is the time to reconsider the direction. The most powerful argument can be that the financial implications of this model have no sustainability for institutions, graduates and society.
When the commendable call “universities should learn from business” is repeated by an academic with a serious face I am amazed to see that what follows is just a dull recitation of the old mantra on profits and customers, with some depressingly simplistic variations. It is true that universities can learn a lot from business and markets: it can learn from GFC that obsessive greed was devastating, that markets don’t have any “invisible hands” to balance excesses and fix errors, that profit as the single most important priority is leading to profound crises on a long-term. It can also learn from the European financial crisis, from Wall Street and use a bit more imagination in thinking seriously about possibilities and traps of the future. It can learn from a business like Apple what is the courage to innovate or from Google why is so important to have secure, satisfied and loyal employees in a culture where genuine critical thinking and creativity is awarded. It can learn from Nokia what is the price of being rigid and afraid to change… and many other lessons. However, the only obvious reference in these mantra-like mentions of business for academia is a simplistic model of factory-profit too similar with what was the solution for the industrial revolution… over a century ago.
Valuing education
Unfortunately, these hazards add to a dangerous view shared by many citizens, politicians and media. This perception was synthesized for me by a nice Canadian woman who asked in one of those inescapable long flight discussions what I am doing and when I answered that I work in education she smiled and said that this is not a respected field of work: “teachers are now just glorified babysitters”. In this view it makes perfect sense to talk about casualisation in higher education. Teaching is across the Western world (with the notable exception of Finland) a job under tremendous pressure: a low social status, very high demands and responsibilities and low incomes. Add to this that all think that since we all went through school for a while, we all know how to do education – here you find the largest number of “experts” in the world. To take just one example on the pressure on the teaching job we can see that the 28th annual MetLife Survey of the American Teacher, released in March this year, teacher job satisfaction to its lowest point in more than two decades, to less than half. We tend to value education – as parents, students and citizens – just in discourse.
The consequence is that education is left to often at the hand of dilettantes, passionless amateurs with too many answers and no questions or doubts, and to equally ignorant politicians. Influential groups promote education in two binary opposite forms: either a profitable business or as a parasite institution that is wasting too many resources. Another recent and interesting example is offered by the US presidential candidate Mitt Romney when he publicly derided President Obama: “He says we need more firemen, more policemen, more teachers.” Then he declared, “It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.” This reflects clearly that citizens must be helped by getting rid of all these wasters, such as teachers. The fact that a politician seeking votes reflects on teachers as a waste going to be solved if he is elected in office speaks on itself about the current environment. It is a (too) long chapter here to reflect on the constant decline of importance and respect for education, but we stop just by saying that this is one of the most serious dangers facing education today.
The challenge of innovation and change
Students – instrumental customers – are prepared now for jobs that change very fast. Moreover, many of these jobs will not exist at all at the time of their graduation due to economic pressures or simply as a result of advance of technology and globalization (outsourcing). Thomas Friedman noted “Those who are waiting for this recession to end so someone can again hand them work could have a long wait” and Sir Ken Robinson writes in “Out of Our Minds” that “rebuilding the communities that have been left bereft by the recession will depend on imagination, creativity and innovation.” The problem is that engaging imagination to cultivate genuine creativity and innovation is much more complex and far from the current arrangements governing universities.
If European universities have to find a solution for the ongoing problem of dying meritocracy and nepotism, of insidious forms of corruption, mediocrity and political bureaucracy, Anglo-Saxon institutions have to balance the neoliberal dogma with the civic and social responsibility of academia in the knowledge economy.  Higher education may be soon forced to move focus from immediate profit and investments, from the obsessive ‘bean-counting’ culture, to long-term benefits of equity in education and flexible collaborations with commercial entities for the common good. A serious and genuine concern for high quality and relevant in-depth knowledge have to be followed by a constant effort to create learning environments capable to nurture creativity and innovation. The specter of ecological, social, economic, political and cultural (see the recent rise of extreme right/left in many European countries) may challenge universities and politicians to rethink priorities and the paradigm for what can be the source of real solutions for the future. A first step is an honest and serious discussion about the inconvenient truths.
The trip in China offered me many arguments to think that this set of innovative solutions will not come from this increasingly important power… (but more on this topic on later posts)

Conflicted: Faculty and Online Education, 2012

Conflicted: Faculty and Online Education, 2012

Faculty members are far less excited by, and more fearful of, the recent growth of online education than are academic technology administrators, according to a new study by Inside Higher Ed and the Babson Survey Research Group.

But professors are hardly the luddites many still assume them to be. Nearly half of the 4,564 faculty members surveyed, three-quarters of whom are full-time professors, said the rise of online education excites them more than it frightens them. And while more than two-thirds of instructors said they believe that students currently learn less in online courses than they do in the classroom, other findings suggest that their estimation of online education quality stands to rise as the technology improves and more professors get firsthand experience with the medium.

For example, 60 percent of professors at institutions that offer online courses have recommended one to a student or advisee -- a proportion that holds true even among tenured and long-serving faculty members.

Find Out More -- a Free Webinar
Inside Higher Ed will sponsor
a webinar on the survey's
results on Tuesday July 10,
at 1 p.m., featuring the study's
authors and Inside Higher Ed
reporters and bloggers. To
register, please click here.

The study was based on a pair of related surveys about online education, co-designed by Inside Higher Ed and administered and analyzed by the Babson Survey Research Group, which has studied online education for more than a decade. The surveys garnered responses from representative samples of 4,564 faculty members (of about 60,000 who were sent invitations to participate) and 591 academic technology administrators, from all types of institution. The surveys asked a wide range of questions of both groups about their perceptions of online quality, institutional support and training in instructional technology, and compensation, among other things. The response rates for both surveys were below 10 percent.

A PDF copy of the study report can be downloaded here. To read the text of the report, click here.

The surveys asked an overarching question intentionally designed to cut through all the hemming and hawing to faculty members’ core attitudes about the outlook for higher education, and its purveyors, in an inexorably online world: On balance, does the growth of online education excite or frighten you?
A solid majority of faculty members (58 percent) described themselves as filled more with fear than with excitement, although there were some differences based on gender, type of institution, and the like (see charts in the accompanying report). Meanwhile, academic technology administrators -- defined as “individuals with responsibility for some aspect of academic technology at their institutions” -- were overwhelmingly enthused; 80 percent said the online boom excited more than frightened them.


This was not the only case in which the administrative perspective deviated optimistically from the faculty one. Asked whether their institutions were “pushing too much online,” nearly 30 percent of faculty respondents agreed, and another 30 percent declined to disagree, giving a neutral response. Academic administrators overwhelmingly disagreed, at a rate of 79 percent. Administrators also tended to believe that their institutions were paying their online instructors fairly, whereas most faculty members either disagreed or opted not to weigh in.
The faculty and administrative respondents were in closer agreement on how well their institutions do to recognize and reward online teaching. Both groups generally said that their institutions “respect teaching with technology (in person or online) in tenure and promotion decision" -- only 18 percent of faculty and 17 percent of administrators disagreed with that statement (although more faculty opted for a “neutral” stance instead of agreeing outright). And professors and administrators held similarly mixed views on whether their institutions “have a fair system of rewarding contributions made to digital pedagogy.”
The Impact of Exposure
The dubiousness among faculty members may be attributable, in part, to the makeup of the sample. About 75 percent of the respondents were full-time faculty members, many of whose teaching careers predate the online boom. And 61 percent of them were not teaching a fully online or blended course at the time of the survey.
Those who were teaching online at the time of the survey, meanwhile, seemed to hold online education in higher esteem than their classroom-bound colleagues. And the greater the proportion of their teaching that occurs online, the more optimistic they are.

Nearly 70 percent of faculty members who taught only in the classroom said they feared the online boom. Those who taught a blended course (where between 20 and 80 percent of the content is delivered online) feared the boom at a rate of 52 percent.
The majority of those who taught a fully online course, meanwhile, were more excited than fearful, at a 59 to 41 percent rate. Faculty members who taught both an online and a blended course were the biggest boosters of all, with 67 percent saying they were more excited than fearful.

Professors who were teaching online at the time of the survey also had a more positive estimation of the effectiveness of online instruction relative to the face-to-face kind.
Over all, the faculty view of online quality was bleak, with 66 percent of respondents saying learning outcomes are inferior compared to traditional courses, and only 6 percent saying online is superior. “The level of concern about learning outcomes among faculty members is far greater than either the previously surveyed chief academic officers or the academic technology administrators,” write Jeff Seaman and I. Elaine Allen, the co-directors of the Babson Survey Research Group, in the report. The pair has conducted surveys of each group in recent years.
Even among faculty members who teach online, 39 percent say online courses produce inferior learning outcomes. (Nearly half said online and traditional courses produced equivalent outcomes.) That is still a high rate of dubiousness for a group with “the most vested interest in online education,” write Seaman and Allen. But the link between online teaching and faith in the medium’s effectiveness is nevertheless strong.
That pattern extends to the faculty members’ belief in the potential of online education. The question about the promise of online learning brought out the most dramatic difference between professors who teach online and those who don’t. Asked whether online education can be as effective as the face-to-face kind, only 29 percent of respondents who did not teach online said it can. But among those who do teach online, 66 percent said online is capable of matching face-to-face instruction on learning outcomes.

Seaman and Allen warn against reading too much causality into the correlation between exposure to online instruction and the belief in its promise. “What we are observing can be a self-selection effect,” they write. “…[T]hose faculty with more positive views of online education are more likely to volunteer for such teaching assignments, and are more likely to be selected for such assignments by academic administrators.”

In other words, it is unclear whether the enthusiastic faculty members in the survey believe in the effectiveness of online education because they teach online, or vice versa. Only a small portion of the faculty respondents were from for-profit institutions, where instructors have little say in decisions about technology. Because most of the respondents were full-time faculty at nonprofit institutions, it stands to reason that many of the 29 percent who taught either blended or fully online courses did so voluntarily -- a leap that might have been based on pre-existing optimism.

That optimism did not extend to online education offered by for-profit institutions, about which the faculty respondents (few of whom teach at for-profits) possess a transcendent skepticism. Nearly 80 percent of all faculty said they were concerned about the quality of online instruction at for-profit universities, with only about 7 percent actively defending those institutions. Part-time instructors and those with online teaching experience were less harsh in their assessments of for-profits, but not by much. Administrators viewed for-profits less negatively, but two-thirds of them still said they were concerned about the quality of online instruction there.

One small subgroup of the faculty respondents who were markedly more excited about the growth of online education were adjuncts. Part-time instructors were still pretty evenly divided on the excitement/fear question, but a slim majority (52 percent) said they were excited. By contrast, 39 percent of full-time professors were excited. Instructors at two-year institutions are more excited about the growth of online education than are their colleagues at four-year institutions, by rates of 49 percent to 40 percent, perhaps because two-year colleges tend to rely more on adjuncts.

About This Study
"Conflicted: Faculty and Online
Education, 2012" is a joint project
of Inside Higher Ed and the Babson
Survey Research Group. It is
designed to inject the voice
of the faculty into the growing
national discussion about
online education. Download
a copy of the report here.
The study was made possible in
part with the financial support of
CourseSmart, Deltak, Pearson
and Sonic Foundry.

All decisions about the nature
and wording of the surveys
were made by BSRG and
Inside Higher Ed.

Jack Longmate, an adjunct professor of English at Olympic College, says that adjuncts “could very well see online instruction as a source of new teaching opportunities and view it positively, and it could likely reflect the felt need by adjuncts for additional work.” The relative apprehension of full-timers might also be explained by self-interest, says Longmate, who is a member of the board of New Faculty Majority, an adjunct advocacy group.
The full-time professors were, however, more positive about the potential of online education than they were about its current effectiveness. About 40 percent said online learning has the potential to match classroom learning, with another 14 percent saying they held a neutral opinion, putting the naysayers under 50 percent -- not a home run in the eyes of online advocates, but not a strikeout either. When contemplating the potential of online education, “The overall pattern for faculty members is still more negative than positive, but not nearly as negative as their responses on the quality of learning outcomes,” write Seaman and Allen.
As for the quality of their own outcomes from participating in online education, with respect to compensation and career advancement, professors held mixed opinions. About 30 percent of faculty respondents believe their institutions pay fairly for online teaching, with 31 percent disagreeing and the rest remaining neutral. The professors were similarly mixed on the question of whether their institution properly rewards "contributions made to digital pedagogy," with slightly more disagreeing than agreeing. And they were positive, over all, about whether their institutions had fair systems for recognizing teaching with technology (not just online) when it comes to promotion and tenure reviews, with only 19 percent disagreeing.
Administrators held somewhat more positive views on their institutions' incentive structures for online teaching. The greatest difference was on the subject of pay, with 58 percent of administrators submitting that their institutions compensate online instructors fairly (nearly twice as high as the proportion of instructors who believe this to be true). But the differences between faculty and administrators on the other types of recognition were smaller. That's a good sign, says Matthew Gold, an assistant professor of English at the New York City College of Technology, part of the City University of New York.
"These numbers are not as bad as they might have been," says Gold, who advises the provost of CUNY's Graduate Center on digital initiatives.
"It’s encouraging and a bit surprising to hear that almost 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed believe that their institutional evaluation processes reward teaching with technology," he said. "Given the lip service often paid to teaching and pedagogy in tenure and promotion processes, this is something to build on."
Instincts and Data
While many faculty respondents held strong opinions on the quality -- and potential quality -- of online education, only 25 percent agreed that their institutions “have good tools in place to assess the quality of online instruction.” By contrast, 50 percent believed their institutions have good tools in place to assess the quality of in-person instruction (with only 28 percent actively disagreeing).

This might strike some as odd given the scarcity of analytical measuring sticks for quality in classroom instruction, says Curtis Bonk, a professor of education at Indiana University who teaches courses and workshops to faculty about online teaching. The “tools” for evaluating in-person instruction are limited to student feedback, peer observation and adherence to checklists supplied by curriculum departments, says Bonk. Meanwhile, online courses tend to generate more data from which instructors and their overseers can glean quantitative insights on student engagement and the degree to which a professor has succeeded in meeting specific learning objectives.
Administrators seemed more confident that their institutions were indeed supplying their online instructors with good quality-assessment tools; more than 50 percent of administrators believed their institutions had such tools in place, compared to 25 percent of faculty members.
That disconnect might be due to a lack of awareness or training, says Bonk. “Administrators might be aware of new programs for quality assessment systems that have recently been put in place, or are about to be, that faculty have not heard about,” he says. “They might be proposing innovative online courses and programs and are putting in place assessment systems and tools” of which faculty have not yet been apprised.
But there is a larger confounding variable at play as well, he says: the lack of agreement on what constitutes “tools” or, for that matter, “quality.” A more in-depth research project -- albeit a more tedious one, perhaps prohibitively so -- would ask faculty and administrators to list what they consider to be the available “tools” for assessing instructional quality in online and face-to-face courses; and then evaluate how “good” each tool is according to a standard rubric.
Such an exercise would not necessarily help faculty members and administrators understand whether online education is “better” or “worse” than the traditional kind, says Bonk. But it might just help each understand more precisely what the other believes about online education, and why.
While the data in the survey provide a sense of general attitudes toward online education, broad questions about the quality of "online" and "classroom" education fail to bring out the nuance that comes with making crucial distinctions within those categories, says Hank Reichman, professor emeritus of history at California State University at East Bay and a first vice president of the American Association of University Professors. Online and classroom education comes in many forms, some of which are fair to compare side-by-side and others of which are not, he says.
"In-person instruction takes a wide variety of forms," wrote Reichman in an e-mail. "An online class of 30 students may well be more effective than a lecture class of 300. But if we compare a similar online class to a small discussion seminar, or if we compare a 'live' lab with an online one, the comparison is quite different."


Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/conflicted-faculty-and-online-education-2012#ixzz1yUrjgESX
Inside Higher Ed