Online Psychology: Trial And Error In Course Development

Marsha Harman J*
* Professor of Psychology, Sam Houston State University.
Periodicity:August - October'2009
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.3.2.1032

Abstract

Online Courses Appear To Be The Future If Colleges And Universities Choose To Increase Enrollments With Students Who Need More Flexibility In Scheduling. The Challenge Has Been To Create A Course That Is Rigorous With The Limitations To Physical Presence Of The Instructor And The Parameters Inherent In Technological Delivery. This Article Relates The Planning And Execution Of Such A Graduate Psychology Course In The Area Of Lifespan Development. The Instructor Decided A Hybrid Course, One That Had Elements Of Both Online Delivery And Limited Campus Attendance, Would Be Appropriate For The Initial Transition From Physical Attendance On Campus To Online Delivery And Interpersonal Interaction. Important Teachable Moments For The Instructor Included Creating Community With 36 Online Students, Number And Breadth Of Assignments, And Evaluation. Logistics, Such As Having Students Submit Assignments Online, Correcting Coursework, And Returning Documents To Students With Constructive Comments, Were Some Of The Challenges To Both Instructor And Students. The Delivery Infrastructure Was Blackboard, And The Instructor Had Attended Training On The New Features To Streamline Online Teaching For Both Instructor And Students. The Successes, Challenges, And Summative Decisions For Future Courses Are Shared.

Keywords

Online Teaching, Psychology, Developmental, Graduate.

How to Cite this Article?

Marsha Harman J (2009). Online Psychology: Trial And Error In Course Development. i-manager’s Journal on Educational Psychology, 3(2), 52-59. https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.3.2.1032

References

[1]. Abuselileek, A. F. (2009). The effect of using an onlinebased course on the learning of grammar inductively and deductively. ReCALL, 21, 319-336.
[2]. An, H. Shin, S, & Lim, K. (2009). The effects of different instructor facilitation approaches on students' interaction during asynchronous online discussions. Computers and Education, 53, 749-760.
[3]. Brown, A. OL., & Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Guided, cooperative learning and individual knowledge acquisition. In L.B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 393-451). Hilssdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[4]. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, A. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. Racine, WI: Johnson Foundation, Inc.
[5]. Crouch, M. A. (2009). An advanced cardiovascular pharmacotherapy course blending online and face-toface instruction. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2009, 73(3), retrieved September 14, 2009 http://www.ajpe.org/about.asp.
[6]. Curtis, D. D., & Lawson, M. J. (2001). Exploring collaborative online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(1), 21-34.
[7]. Del Valle, R., & Duffy, T. M. (2009). Online learning: Learner characteristics and their approaches to managing learning. Instructional Science, 37, 129-149.
[8]. Edelstein, S., & Edwards, J. (2002). If you build it, they will come: Building learning communities through threaded discussion. The Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(1). Retrieved October 2, 2009 http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ ojdla /spring51 /edelstein51.html.
[9]. Eklund, J., & EKlund, P. (1996). Integrating the web and the teaching of technology: Cases across two universities. Retrieved October 2, 2009 http://ausweb .scu.edu.au/aw96/educn/eklund2/paper.htm.
[10]. Elvers, G. C., Polzella, D. J., & Graetz, K. (2003). Procrastination in online courses: Performance and attitudinal differences. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 159- 162.
[11]. Ferrari, J. R., McCarthy, B. J., & Milner, L. A. (2009). Involved and focused? Students' perceptions of institutional identity, personal goal orientation and levels of campus engagement. College Student Journal, 43, 886-896.
[12]. Frey, C. (September, 2009). Different paths to a college degree. U.S. News & World Report, 146, Issue 8.
[13]. Jorczak, R. L. (2009). The effect of task characteristics on conceptual conflict and information process in online discussion. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 1165-1171.
[14]. King, A. (1990). Enhancing peer interaction and learning in classroom through reciprocal questioning. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 664-687.
[15]. Lindsay. M. (1999). Designing assessment tasks to accommodate students' cognitive skills in a technologybased mathematics course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 30, 691-697.
[16]. Meyer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 7(3), retrieved October 2, 2009. http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ ojdla /spring51 /edelstein51.html. http://ausweb .scu.edu.au/aw96/educn/eklund2/paper.htm. http://www.sloan-c.org/ publications/ jaln/v7n3/pdf/v7n3_meyer.pdf
[17]. Newman, D. R., Webb, B., & Cochrane, C. (1999). A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer supported group learning. Retrieved October 2, 2009. http://www.qub . ac. uk /mgt /papers/methods/contpap.html
[18]. O'Callaghan, B. R. (1998). Computer-intensive algebra and students' conceptual knowledge of functions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 21-40.
[19]. Pallof, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
[20]. Payne, D. A., & Johnson, J. M. (2005). Succeeding in graduate school online: Tips from successful students. College Student Journal, 39, 117-128.
[21]. Peterson, S. S., & Slotta, J. (2009). Saying yes to online learning: a first-time experience teaching an online graduate course in literacy education. Literacy Research and Instruction, 48, 120-136.
[22]. Pickering, K. W. (2009). Student ethos in the online technical communication classroom: Diverse voices. Technical Communication Quarterly, 18, 166-187.
[23]. Preece, J., Abras, C. (2003). The challenges of teaching HCI online: It's mostly about creating community. In C. Sephanidis & J. Jacko (Eds.) Human- Computer Interaction, Theories and Practice (Part 1) Volume 1(p. 391-395). HCI International, Crete, Greece.
[24]. Sendaga, S., & Odabasi, H. F. (2009). Effects of an online problem-based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Computers & Education, 53, 132-141.
[25]. Shapley, P. (2000). Online education to develop complex reasoning skills in organic chemistry. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 4(2), retrieved October 2, 2009. http://sloan-c.org/ publications /jaln / v4n2 / v4n2_shapley.asp
[26]. Stephens, L. J., & Konvalina, J. (1999). The use of computer algebra software in teaching intermediate and college algebra. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 30, 483-488.
[27]. Stern, B. S. (2004). A comparison of online and faceto- face instruction in an undergraduate foundations of American education course. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 4(2), retrieved October 2, 2009. http://www.citejournal. org/ vol4 / iss2 /general/article1.cfm.
[28]. Suler, J. (2004). In class and online: Using discussion boards in teaching. CyperPsychology & Behavior, 7, 395- 401.
[29]. Taba, H. (1966). Teaching strategies and cognitive functioning in elementary school children (Cooperative Research Project No. 2404). San Francisco: San Francisco Sate College.
[30]. Tilidetzke, R. (1992). A comparison of CAI and trational instruction in a college algebra course. Journal of Computes in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 11, 53-61.
[31]. Vesely, P., Bloom, L., & Sherlock, J. (2007). Key elements of building online community: Comparing faculty and student perceptions. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(3), retrieved October 2, 2009. http://jolt.merlot.org/vol3no3/vesely.htm
[32]. Wang, A. Y., & Newline, M. H. (2001). Online lectures: Benefits for the virtual classroom. Technologic Horizons in Education Journal, 29, 17-21.
[33]. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[34]. Wynegar, R. G., & Fenster, M. J. (2009). Evaluation of alternative delivery systems on academic performance in college algebra. College Student Journal, 43, 170- 174.
[35]. Yang, Y.-T. C. (2008). A catalyst for teaching critical thinking in a large university class in Taiwan: Asynchronous online discussions with the facilitation of teaching assistants. .Educational Technology Research Development, 56, 241-264
[36]. Young J.R.(2008). Short and sweet: Technology shrinks the lecture. Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(41), A9.
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.