University of Michigan Dental Hygiene: Online Program Development and Integrated OSP Portfolio (Sakai 2009 Conference, Thursday 9:45am session)

1. Development of an Integrated
Online Program Using Sakai
Anne Gwozdek, Program Director, University of Michigan
Emily Springfield, Instr. Designer, University of Michigan

2. Session mechanics
• One hour
• We’ll stop
periodically for
questions

3. Background
• Dedicated, clinically
experienced students
• Asynchronous, active
learning
• Competency-based
curriculum

4. Program Overview
Courses
Portfolio
18 months planning and research
Reflection

5. Program highlights - interactivity
Field experiences
Extensive online
discussions
Peer and faculty
feedback
Presentations

6. Program highlights - curricular
cohesion
Future of Dental Hygiene
Competencies
Course 1 Course 2 Course 3 Course 4

7. Program highlights - curricular
cohesion
• Example: Community Project
482 – Study the
481: Identify relationship of oral 483 – Learn to do a 487 – Identify
community-related health to systemic literature review community agency
resources in their health AND the and analyze and make contacts
county impact it has on the sources for doing project
population
485 – Create 484 – Advocacy for
comprehensive target populations 486– Implement the
community program (Many students plan, evaluate it, and
plan, including saw advocacy as present it to peers in
community profile and part of their a poster presentation
needs assessment community projs.)

8. Program highlights - Metacognition
Learn – review – contextualize
Course Field
content exp.
(x11) (x2-3)
Cognition Portfolio Reflection
reflections assignments
(x10) (x18)
Class
Discussions
(x35)
Portfolio Final
Metacognition Discussions Portfolio
(x10) (x1)
Meta-meta-cognition

9. Course Development
Course Field
content exp.
(x11) (x2-3)
Cognition Portfolio Reflection
reflections assignments
(x10) (x18)
Class
Discussions
(x35)
Portfolio Final
Metacognition Discussions Portfolio
(x10) (x1)
Meta-meta-cognition

10. Team approach
Instructor
Program Instructional
director(s) designer

11. Linear plan, circular reality
• Plan
• Course outline --> create assignments -->
write discussion questions --> finalize
readings --> rubrics --> pfolio question
• Reality
• Many, many iterations
• People get stuck on content delivery
• “Aha” moments when elements fall into place

12. Timeline is critical!
Month 1 1. Instructor outlines course
1 2. Meet with instructional
Month 2 designer
2 Month 3
3. Meetings with full team
4. Build course online
3 3 Month 4
3
Ru
3 is sh
no ing
4
Month 5 op t a
tio n
Month 6 n
5. Faculty review
5
6. Final revisions
7. “Open house” 6 7
8. Course begins 8

13. Design principles
• Competency-based
• Build on knowledge and skills
• Course content
• Research/professional skills (lit search before
research paper before project)
• Technology – e.g., PPT
• Consistency in function and look
• Active learning techniques
• Rubrics and feedback

14. Learning activities
 No tests
 No fact-level
assessments  Writing – many
(definitions, types
dates, etc.)
 Focus on
application and
synthesis
 Group work  Project
 Discussion development,
implementation,
 Peer evaluation evaluation
 Field
experience
 Presentations

15. Course templates

16. Left Navigation Panel
• Consistent through
every course
• No cognitive load
wasted on finding
information
• Uses tools and web
links

17. Modules
•Orientation
•One screen
of content
per topic
•Don’t rehash
readings
•Embedded
reading links
•Activities
overview

18. Forums

19. Assignments
•All associated
resources
linked here
•Submitted as
“attach only”
•Feedback
provided on
rubrics and
attached
•Discussion
feedback rubric
also housed
here

20. Quirks and workarounds
• Students never click on
“Resources”
• Our forum feedback is
too complex for the
Sakai Forums grading
mechanism
• Many clicks to get links
into Modules, and they
break on course
duplication or
export/import

21. Rubrics
• Nearly 50 total • Large, multi-part paper/proj
• Discussion* • Small paper
• Critical analysis journal
• Portfolio*
• Poster
• Peer evaluation*
• PowerPoint presentation
• Reflection assignment
*used verbatim in multiple courses

22. Questions?

23. Portfolio and Reflection
Course Field
content exp.
(x11) (x2-3)
Cognition Portfolio Reflection
reflections assignments
(x10) (x18)
Class
Discussions
(x35)
Portfolio Final
Metacognition Discussions Portfolio
(x10) (x1)
Meta-meta-cognition

24. Portfolio activities
• End of this course: • Beginning of next
• Self-assessment on course:
program • Discuss those reflections
competencies
• Discuss how last course
• Reflect on this pertains to next course
course

25. Competency matrix

26. Competency reflection form

27. Final reflection

28. Final reflection form

29. Portfolio reflection example
1. Take a “big
picture” look
back at what you
learned.

30. Portfolio reflection example
2. Apply it to a
context outside
of class

31. Portfolio reflection example
3. Discuss these
applications with
your classmates

32. Portfolio reflection example
4. How does that
fit with the next
course?

33. Portfolio reflection example
1. Take a “big
picture” look
back at what you
learned.
2. Apply it to a
context outside
of class
3. Discuss these
applications with
your classmates
4. How does that
fit with the next
course?

34. Things to notice
Reflection ≠ therapy Critical analysis
Graded very
seriously

35. Questions?

36. Final portfolio
Course Field
content exp.
(x11) (x2-3)
Cognition Portfolio Reflection
reflections assignments
(x10) (x18)
Class
Discussions
(x35)
Portfolio Final
Metacognition Discussions Portfolio
(x10) (x1)
Meta-meta-cognition

37. A whole new portfolio
1. Review
2. Write
3. Publish

38. Final self-presentation portfolio

39. Benefits of CTools ePortfolio “tool”
• Better reflection guidance than old
spreadsheet
• Tab within CTools keeps portfolio activities
academically related
• Student familiarity with CTools
• Customization and CTools support
• Pilot project initiative and follow up
reporting/sharing within UM community

40. Questions?

41. Results
Student and program outcomes

42. Benefits to faculty and admins
• Formative program evaluation
• Are students learning what I expected them
to learn?
• Is there lingering misinformation?
• Are students prepared for upcoming
projects?
• Summative program evaluation via
competencies

43. Benefits to students
• Consistency (keeps focus on learning, not
course mechanics)
• Content (relevant, applied)
• Metacognition (repeated opportunities to
self-assess how material fits into their
personal and professional worlds)
• Students graduate as leaders in the
profession

44. Quantitative results
• We’ve retained all Average forum posts per student per thread
but 1 student in 2 10
cohorts 9
8
• Almost no questions 7
6
about Sakai 5
4
functionality after 3
2
first class 1
0
481 482 483 487 485 484 486 488 Ave.
Course number
Cohort 1 Cohort 2

45. Faculty survey results
• n=7; surveyed after teaching to compare
online to face-to-face
• 100% of faculty believe students learned
more and more active learning took place
online, compared to face-to-face courses
• 71.5% believe the same or more interaction
happened online
• It’s more work, but faculty enjoyed it
• Full list

46. Any Final Questions?

47. Thank you!
University of Michigan Dental Hygiene Program
Program Director: Anne Gwozdek agwozdek@umich.edu
Instructional Designer: Emily Springfield espring@umich.edu

48. Application Worksheets

49. Model 1 – new project weekly
• Portfolio discussion
• Read and discuss content material each week
• Write a paper, short report/presentation, or
worksheets (solo or group) each week
• Portfolio reflection question and competency
self-assessment

50. Model 2 - one large project
• Portfolio discussion
• Readings and discussion about how to complete
each section of the project each week
• One section of project/paper due each week;
faculty feedback
• Week 6: revise all sections and produce final
project/paper
• Week 7: Peer review of project, plus portfolio
reflection and self-assessment

51. Model 3 - practical course
• Portfolio discussion
• Student is on-site implementing an
individualized project or “student teaching.”
• Critical incident reflective journal required
• Discussions (discuss content, and general check-
in and sharing of experiences)
• Portfolio reflection question and competency
self-assessment

52. Other metacognition
• Peer eval of groupmates and self
• Discussions about course material
• Peer review of final assignments
• Critical incident journal (Community II and
Practicum)

53. Other metacognition, con’t
• Reflection assignments
• In addition to portfolio reflections
What leadership Having had the For the first two weeks of the
style/approach have you opportunity to explore course you have been
used during the group health resources in your keeping track of your
project? What might you county, begin thinking progress toward your
want to modify or ahead to your Special personal behavior change.
change? Populations and Re-assess how successful
Community II Field you were at this change by
During the Peer Review Experiences. Respond to completing the Personal
Process you were asked the following: Health Behavior Change
to identify group Form - Part 3. Also use the
members' attributes. * What field placement Personal Health Behavior
How comfortable were possibilities might serve to Change-Part 3 Rubric to
you evaluating someone benefit your community as guide you with the
else? well as your educational development of this
experience. assignment.