You are here:

Enhance Your Online Courses by Re-Engineering The Courseware Management System PROCEEDINGS

, , The University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-64-8 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

Courseware management systems like Blackboard and WebCT have come a long way since they first appeared in the late 1990s. However, in an attempt to make these systems more powerful and inclusive, sacrifices to usability and design freedom have been made. While many courseware tools are rigid and unfriendly, a wide range of social networking tools available on the web are robust, flexible, and customizable. This paper does not propose that we eliminate courseware management systems altogether, but rather, complement them with social networking tools to create more user-friendly learning environments. This paper will present research on the social factors and best practices, as well as a description of how repurpose or replace some courseware management tools to enhance social presence, teacher immediacy, and usability in online courses. The end result, should, be a learning environment more conducive to social interaction, and therefore, learning.

Citation

Corbeil, J.R. & Valdes-Corbeil, M.E. (2008). Enhance Your Online Courses by Re-Engineering The Courseware Management System. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2008--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 296-305). Las Vegas, Nevada, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved November 15, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Arbaugh, J.B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with Internetbased MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24, 32-54.
  2. Al-Jumeily, D., & Strickland, P. (1997). Designing an interface on the web for an intelligent tutoring system; Proceeding of the 23rd EUROMICRO Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September, 1997.
  3. Brooks, D.W., Schraw, G.P. & Crippen, K.J. (2002). Performance-related feedback: The hallmark of efficient instruction. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://dwb4.unl.edu/dwb/Research/JCE-2002-0504.pdf
  4. Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended learning: Let's get beyond the hype. IBM Global Services. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://www8.ibm.com/services/pdf/blended_learning.pdf
  5. Gunawardena, C.N. (1992). Changing faculty roles for audiographics and online teaching. The American Journal of Distance Education, 6(3), 58-71.
  6. Hackman, M.Z., & Walker, K.B. (1990). Instructional communication in the televised classroom: the effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction. Communication Education, 39(3), 196-209.
  7. Lave, J. And Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Liu, X., Su, B., Bonk, C., Magjuka, R., Lee, S. (2005). Exploring four dimensions of online instructor roles: A Program level case study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(4). Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://www.sloanc.org/publications/JALN/v9n4/v9n4_liu.asp
  9. McIsaac, M.S. & Gunawardena, C.N. (1996). Distance education. In D.H. Jonassen, ed. Handbook of research for educational communications and technology: a project of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. 403-437. New York:
  10. Notess, M. & Lorenzen-Huber, L. (2007) Online learning for seniors, barriers and opportunities, e-Learn Magazine. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=research & Article=7-1
  11. Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2003). The virtual student: A profile and guide to working with online learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  12. Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Richmond, V.P. Gorham, J.S., & McCrosky, J. (1987). The relationship between selected immediacy behaviors and cognitive learning. In M. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 10 (pp. 574-590). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  13. Scorza, J.A. (2005) Do online students dream of electric teachers? Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://www.sloan-C.org/publications/jaln/v9n2/v9n2_scorza.asp
  14. Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: John Wiley& Sons.
  15. Smith, G.G. & Taveras, M. (2005, February). The missing instructor: Does e-learning promote absenteeism? eLearn Magazine. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://www.elearnmag.org/
  16. Su, B., Bonk, C., Magjuka, R., Liu, X., Lee, S. (2005). The importance of interaction in webbased education: A program-level case study of online MBA course. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 4(1). Pp. 1-19.
  17. Thomas, J.W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from https://www.bie.org/files/researchreviewPBL.pdf.
  18. Thweatt, K.S., & McCroskey, J.C. (1996). Teacher nonimmediacy and misbehavior: Unintentional negative communication. Communication Research Reports, 13(2), 198-204.
  19. Wegerif, R. (1998). The social dimension of asynchronous learning networks, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2(1). Wikipedia. Usability. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_interface
  20. Woods, R.H., & Ebersole, S. (2003). Using non-subject matter specific discussion boards to build connectedness in online learning. American Journal of Distance Education, 17(2).
  21. Malmi, L. (2004). Supporting computer science studies with automatic assessment tools. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://www.tkk.fi/Yksikot/Opintotoimisto/ajankohtaista/arkisto_2004/E4/Malmi.pdf
  22. The National Center for Academic Transformation. (2007). Five principles of successful course redesign. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://www.center.rpi.edu/PlanRes/R2R_PrinCR.htm
  23. Stein, N.L., Anggoro, F.K., & Hernandez, M.W. (2007). Making the invisible visible: Conditions for the early learning of science. In N.L. Stein& S. Raudenbush (Eds.). Developmental Science Goes to School. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.