Enhancing my face-to-face SPC1600, Fundamentals of Speech course with WebCT has, at times and for some of my students, been a frustrating experience. My brief one or two in-class demonstrations of what and how to use WebCT tools (calendar, learning modules, etc.) required for my course is by some accounts too brief and/or insufficient for some students. Through classroom discussion and one-on-one interaction with students regarding course content available on WebCT, it has been discovered that many students have no or little experience using WebCT (as either an enhancement to a course or as an online learner). For example, students express difficulty with knowing “where to go” in WebCT to get information which leads to dissatisfaction with and avoidance of WebCT.  Other comments include a general discomfort with technology or the need to “remember to log-on” to WebCT. On the other hand, students who succeed in navigating WebCT have indicated, “Everything on WebCT and student work examples,” as a positive aspect of the course when completing student engagement surveys given at the end of the semester.

Faculty who have prepared students to use WebCT as a course enhancement frequently approach teaching WebCT to students in the same way I have in past semesters: review WebCT functions and tools in class, provide no hands-on experience or follow-up assignments but rather teach WebCT in a “show and tell” session. Others have indicated the use of an entry quiz. For example, the student can gain access to a course once the student has passed an entrance quiz with 100% completion (traditionally used in an online class). In speaking with a variety of colleagues at Valencia, both in and out of discipline, who use WebCT as an enhancement, generally state students often spend the first several weeks or even half of the semester trying to navigate or learn WebCT. The lack of structure in teaching students how to effectively use WebCT for a particular course commonly results in some students spending untold hours fumbling through WebCT hindering student learning and performance. When a learner views a task as insurmountable, time consuming, irrelevant, and so forth, the tool fails to enhance teaching and learning.

Generation Y also labeled Net Generation, Echo Boomers, Millennium or Trophy Kids are young adults who grew up during the growth of technology and are usually 18-32 years old. Generation Y uses the internet to play games, form social networks, contribute to and write blogs and download entertainment. Approximately 70% of Generation Y homes have broadband access representing an increase of over 30% since 2005 (Jones & Fox, 2009). Today's college student crosses generational labels and the use of technology does too. For example, Jones and Fox report the older generations (Generation X, Baby Boomers) dominate the use of the internet while Generation Y is infatuated with technology devices. With the prevalent use of the internet to daily living across the generations, incorporating purposeful technology in the face-to-face class seems appropriate for all learners.

One purposeful use of technology to teaching and learning is the use of WebCT. WebCT is a platform that can be used for fully online courses or used to enhance a traditional face-to-face course. In SPC 1600, Fundamentals of Speech, WebCT augments classroom instruction and is also a tool to which, once learned and utilized by the user can enhance self-regulation.
“Regulation of behavior is an aspect of self-regulation that involves individuals’ attempts to control their own overt behavior. Models of intentions, intentional planning, and planned behavior have shown that the formation of intentions are linked to subsequent behavior in a number of different domains,” (Pintrich, 2004, p. 398). Levin and Hansen (2008) studied the form (inside or outside of classroom use and active or passive use) of technology using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). TAM has been shown to “explain and predict a person’s intention to use technology” (Levin and Hanson). The researchers defined blogging as an active outside of classroom activity and “clicking” on a response (e.g., multiple-choice question) as an inside passive class activity. The results found when students have a positive perception of the relevancy and usefulness of technology performance (grade) is enhanced. WebCT is an enhancement to the face-to-face speech course. One purpose of the WebCT technology is to make available course content, calendar, assignments, grades and the community (classmates and professor) at a time convenient for the learner. Jason, Kenney and Taylor (2001) researched Web-based instructional materials embedded into an undergraduate Applied Psychology course. The findings revealed “Eighty-two percent of students accessed the coming week’s assignments at least weekly, with 35.3% of students looking at these materials more than once a week” (p. 158). Additionally, students reported they did not feel inconvenienced with the technology and reported a positive association with Web-based course materials and visual displays.
 
The intention of a student using WebCT to manage course requirements must not be assumed no matter how relevant the content in the learning environment is to the face-to-face class. Additionally, a professor should not assume intention of the learner without prompts. For example, participants in the Levin and Hansen (2008) study were asked to self-report intention. Those who reported higher intended use of technology had lower technology use than participants who were not asked about intended use which is in opposition to the majority of research on behavioral intention. The relationship between Levin and Hanson’s findings and the WebCT Tutorial may lie with incorporating additional features such as blogging in the online learning environment or incorporating prompts (e.g., reminders through the use of the announcement or calendar feature). By introducing such strategies to the learner, routine use or a positive relationship from intention to actual use may shift behavior.

Azevedo and Cromley (2004) conducted a study using hypermedia (e.g., audio, video, text, etc.) to investigate “whether students could be trained to regulate their learning in these [hypermedia environment] learning situations” (p. 523). Based on the research questions and findings, two implications of this research is: teachers may find greater success when learning strategies are taught to students during training with hypermedia, and incorporating online prompts may cultivate planning. For example, teaching students how to use the calendar feature in WebCT for planning goals. Keeping course content open rather than creating a linear learning environment provides students with an opportunity to use strategies that optimize his or her learning (Azevedo & Cromley, 2004). For example, keeping student speech video examples, grading rubrics, student work samples and even assignments accessible to the learner may provide the learner with a sense of internal control over tasks. In addition, opening up course content may lead the learner to help-seeking behaviors prior to assignment due dates within and among other learners in the WebCT environment to include peers and/or teacher.
Larkin and Belson (2005) conducted a study to measure if using the chat feature in the Blackboard Learning System (WebCT) would increase student motivation and learning in an undergraduate physics course for non-majors. In addition to participation in chat discussions the researchers also examined grade, learning style and gender as variables. While statistical significance across the study was not found, the data did reveal some interesting and useful findings. For example, students who participated in chats had higher end of semester GPA scores as did male student participants. Additionally, students who participated scored higher in tactile and visual components, and learning with an authority figure as reported from the Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model questionnaire results (see Price, Dunn and Dunn, 1990 for additional information).

The use of the discussion board as part of the WebCT tutorial may have helped students advance interest, motivation and achievement in learning how to navigate WebCT in SPC1600. For example, students had the option of when to post (within a specific time frame) and what environment (e.g., home, school, work, etc.) to post from. The student had the opportunity to communicate to a diverse group of students representing various skill-level in using WebCT. The student also engaged in a learning strategy that called for students to think about what they already knew and what new skill was obtained after participating in the tutorial session. The online discussion board also provided students who tend not to participate in the classroom with an opportunity to participate in an alternative way which may be less threatening. By utilizing the discussion feature from the start of the semester, students may be more likely to refer back to the questions and answers posted on the WebCT tutorial discussion board as a means to seek help in navigating the course. Additionally, students may be more likely to use the Ask the Instructor discussion board (a place to post questions throughout the semester) to ask general course questions, and the Speeches discussion board that serves to remind students of his/her speech delivery date, and speech assignment requirements. While learning style was not considered for this LO, consideration to the unique learning strategies of different learning styles may prove beneficial to designing a WebCT tutorial session in the future.

Other communication features taught and used in the WebCT learning environment include the mail feature, and announcement feature. The instant message (IM) feature was not part of the tutorial because it was not deemed as a critical component to navigating course content nor viewed as a means to routine building. However, it may be beneficial to include in the tutorial to advance student help-seeking strategy and as a means to build community.

During the course of the first year I had the opportunity to attend several workshops to help me formulate the learning outcome. Two workshops led by Patrick Nellis, the Course Design (CD) workshop and the Virtual Reading Circle (VRC) online course that examined the book Diversity and Motivation by Wlodkowski and Ginsberg (1995) were of particular significance in developing how to design an activity with student learning and motivation in mind. Specifically, the CD workshop helped me identify the learning outcome, develop assessment methods, design the learning activities, and construct the plan for implementation. The VRC presented the opportunity to discuss issues and share ideas with colleagues about motivation and the culture of students in an academic setting.  In addition to these workshops, I had the opportunity to build knowledge by attending the following Teaching/Learning Academy workshops: (a) LifeMap presented by Wendi Bush, (b) L-C Teaching Strategies presented by Dr. Susan Ledlow, (c) Assessment presented by Dr. Chuck Walker, and (d) TVAC presented by Phillip Bishop.

~References

Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J.G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3). Retrieved March 27, 2009, from Academic Search Complete database.

Jason, L., Kennedy, C., & Taylor, R. (2001, September). Development and evaluation of a Web-based classroom. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28(3). 155-160. Retrieved March 27, 2009, from Academic Search Complete database.

Jones, S., & Fox, S. (2009, January). Generations online in 2009. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/Generations-Online-in-2009.aspx

Larkin, T. L., & Belson, S. I. (2005, June). Blackboard technologies: A vehicle to promote student motivation and learning in physics. Journal of STEM Education, 6(1, 2). Retrieved March 27, 2009, from Academic Search Complete database.

Levin, M., & Hansen, J. (2008, June 15). Clicking to learn or learning to click: A theoretical and empirical investigation. College Student Journal, 42(2), 665-674. Retrieved March 29, 2009, from Academic Search Complete database.

Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), pp. 385-407. Retrieved March 27, 2009, from Academic Search Complete database.

~Additional Resources

Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bean, J. C. (2001). Engaging ideas. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Price, B., Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1990). Productivity environmental preference survey: An inventory for the identification of individual adult preferences in working or learning environment. Lawrence, KS: Price Systems, Inc.

Silberman, M. (1996). Active learning: 101 strategies to teach any subject. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Wlodkowski, R. J., & Ginsberg, M. B. (1995). Diversity and motivation: Culturally responsive teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Over the past year my face-to-face classes have been enhanced with WebCT. All grading rubrics, supplemental readings, course calendar, assignments and due dates are available to students from the first day of class. The general discomfort with using a different form of technology other than the Internet among students is perplexing. Today’s traditional college student was practically born with a mouse in one hand, a cellular phone in the other hand, and ear buds dangling from the lobe. The resistance to embracing technology may stem from a lack of experience with technology, a desire to only use what is necessary to get by in today’s techno-environment, or simply a behavior that has yet to be developed. Students who view having all course materials available to them at any time and at all times, find WebCT truly enhances the class and his or her learning. Part of the philosophy of the learning-centered college is to have students take responsibility for his or her learning. WebCT is a tool that can offer students an opportunity to manage and monitor course requirements with personal learning goals. It is a tool within the educational environment to which students will likely be required to use numerous times during his or her educational career. Learning to use the tool may enhance learning beyond my class, and better prepare the student for other courses using WebCT. Also, by having students learn to use a platform that may be unfamiliar, it may help prepare the student by way of understanding the benefits of learning new platforms. For example, when entering his or her chosen profession he or she may be required to learn to work in unfamiliar platforms (e.g., software programs) which are used within a specific occupational field.

The sample used for this study consisted of 102 undergraduate students enrolled in a face-to-face Fundamentals of Speech, SPC1600 course during the fall 2008 semester. Fifty students were enrolled in a 50 minute, three times a week (Monday, Wednesday, Friday) section and 52 students were enrolled in a 75 minute, twice a week (Tuesday and Thursday) section at the start of the 15 week long semester. On the first day of class, students were asked to complete a Survey of WebCT Experience (N = 102). The survey allowed me to gauge the experience/knowledge of the students’ and solicit student mentors prior to attending the tutorial session. The WebCT tutorial session took place on the last day of class, during the first week of the semester (Thursday for the twice a week sections; Friday for the three times a week sections). The training took place at a Valencia computer lab allowing students to participate in navigating and using WebCT tools along with the Professor. One training session was filmed. The filming of the session served several purposes: first, it allowed a student to view the session if he or she was unable to attend the WebCT tutorial. Second, it was used for self-reflection by the professor to evaluate instructional strategies and third, it modeled a learning strategy. All course tabs utilized in the course were demonstrated and assignments were given either during or following the tutorial session. All homework assignments given at the WebCT tutorial were graded for completion. On the first class meeting following the tutorial session, students were ask to complete the Survey of WebCT Training Session (N = 94). This survey, along with the discussion board homework assignment and the in-class discussion of the tutorial, provided instructional feedback on the tutorial session and the online homework assignment from the student’s perspective.

• Students will be able to log-in and use WebCT on a routine basis to manage established and personal learning goals.
• Students will be able to navigate WebCT to obtain, submit and print course material.
  
• Students will be able to use WebCT to communicate with others.
  
• Students will be able to use WebCT to access internal and external resources.

To help identify the specific qualities or evidence of student learning and achievement of the WebCT tutorial the following performance indicators were established.

• Completion of Survey of WebCT Experience in class.
• Attendance at WebCT tutorial session.
• Demonstrating the completion of activities during tutorial session including: sending an e-mail, printing an assignment and grading rubric.
• Observing the student engaging in tasks, asking or responding to questions, or lending assistance to others during the tutorial session.
• Completion of graded assignments during and after the tutorial session including: attendance, course policy and student consent assessments, discussion board posting, submitting Relational Individual Cultural Questionnaire assignment.
• Completion of Survey of WebCT Training Session in class.
• Observing student preparedness. Student exhibits the likelihood of routine use with WebCT (weekly learning modules, accessing Web links, using the calendar to obtain due dates, reading reminder announcements and discussion board postings, and having printed material on appropriate dates) when he/she is prepared for in-class class lesson or assignment and/or communicates with professor in a timely manner when e-mailed in WebCT.
• Completion of the graded online group discussion board assignment occurring later in the semester.
• Completion of the graded plagiarism assignment occurring later in the semester.
• Student is aware of grades posted and/or monitoring grade book.
  
  

Students enrolled in the face-to-face Fundamentals of Speech (SPC1600) course during the fall 2008 semester attended a hands-on WebCT tutorial (training) the first week of the semester at a Valencia computer lab. During the tutorial students were introduced to course content stored in WebCT, the WebCT tools used in my course and had the opportunity to manipulate all course tools. Students were shown how to use tools such as the calendar and discussion boards for self-planning and direction, and were encouraged to log-in to WebCT daily in an effort to build routine use.

To help prepare my students for mastery with using WebCT following the tutorial session, students had the opportunity to complete homework assignments to reinforce logging into the course, using the discussion board, assessment tab, assignment tab (uploading a file) and downloading and printing a file. The homework assignment allowed students to rediscover content, at his or her leisure, and to formulate any remaining questions about any course tool or course design (e.g., where do I find…).

Surveying the class about his or her experience using WebCT provided me with a snapshot of the skill level and/or knowledge each particular class had with WebCT and it allowed me to solicit student mentors for the tutorial session.  At the tutorial students were provided with a WebCT Orientation Tutorial handout outlining the objective, learning module outcomes, learning activities and graded activities stemming from the tutorial session. During the tutorial session the following occurred:

1.	Students learned how to and signed on to WebCT (directions also appear on syllabus).
2.	Students read welcome announcement that popped-up at start of training session to familiarize students with announcement feature.
3.	Students took an attendance assessment (True or False) to demonstrate tool.
4.	Students sent the professor an e-mail during the tutorial (the professor responded back to student after the tutorial session).
5.	Students opened the Learning Modules tab.
	a.	Demonstrated how to download and print from WebCT (printed first speech assignment and grading rubric).
	b.	Demonstrated use of green arrows to navigate through module and the green asterisk indicating new information added.
	c.	Pointed out Table of Content for navigating through module.
6.	Students opened the Calendar Tab
	a.	Demonstrated Course & Personal Features (links to modules)
	b.	Monthly, week and day features and print functions demonstrated
	c.	Students inputted personal note on calendar
7.	Students opened the Discussion Tab:</ Ask the Instructor.
	a.	Demonstrated how to post and respond to prepare students for discussion board homework assignment.
8.	Students opened Syllabus Tab.
9.	Students given homework to complete the Course Policies and Student Work Consent (both explained) located in the Assessment tab.
10.	Open Grade Book Tab.
	a.	Grading Rubric shown and explained (viewed grading comments and indicators) and how assignments with no grading rubric would appear (e.g., exam score).
11.	Open Assignment Tab.
.	a.	Demonstrate how to download and upload Microsoft Word document and how this feature was the same when uploading or downloading a file using the Mail feature
	b.	Students were assigned the Relational Individual Cultural Questionnaire homework to be uploaded as a Word document in the assignment drop box.
12.	Students opened the Web Links tab and reviewed online resources (e.g., internal sources such as the library and external sources such as an online outline builder).

To put students at ease during the tutorial session, I attempted to monitor student response while navigating the course by using student mentors, asking for questions prior to moving forward, asking summary questions, and attempting to promote relevancy of learning WebCT with educational goals and other technological devices (e.g., e-mail, You-Tube, blogging, etc.) that are commonly used outside of education.

Responding to the student e-mail immediately following the tutorial session served to acknowledge the student individually. The WebCT discussion board homework assignment allowed students to learn about the tools and course content from each other. The discussion board postings allowed the instructor to address lingering concerns during the next class session and to offer additional guidance to those who wanted to meet the professor personally. (For students whom may have missed the tutorial a video of one session was available for viewing.) The Survey of WebCT Training Session, administered after in-class review of the homework assignments, provided the instructor with the students’ perspective on the tutorial session, homework assignment, and provided the student with an opportunity to make suggestions.  The Relational Individual Cultural Questionnaire homework assignment related to the next class lesson on Diversity and served to signified to the learner the relevancy of having the skills, knowledge and/or understanding to navigate WebCT in effort to manage personal learning goals (e.g., completing assignments on a timely basis, being prepared for class, etc.). Together, the tutorial and homework assignments attempted to began the process of building a community of learners.

The survey results assisted in recognizing and addressing any deficiencies with the teaching approach. Student completion of assignments, and students being prepared for class (accessing and having materials) provided insight into routine use of WebCT. Designing additional discussion board assignments (a plagiarism assignment and an online group discussion assignment on the Florida Amendments up for vote) allowed students to continue to use WebCT tools. 

To help measure or gauge student performance in relation to the indicators in the student learning outcome, grading rubrics were often utilized to assess performance from both a formative and summative approach to learning. Grading rubrics were used to inform students of the criterion objectives and performance indicators to which his or her work was evaluated or graded. Below is the list of assessments.

1.	Formative Assessment: Discussion board post assignment in WebCT (grading rubric).
2.	Formative Assessment: Completion of Relational Individual Cultural Questionnaire assignment (grading rubric).
3.	Summative Assessment: Completion of the Course Policy assessment in WebCT.
4.	Summative Assessment: Course Consent (no right or wrong answer it allows me.to use student work as models in same or other classes).
5.	Summative Assessment: Attendance at WebCT tutorial assessment.
6.	Formative Assessment: Survey of WebCT Experience (in-class handout).
7.	Formative Assessment: Survey of WebCT Training Session and Homework Assignments (in-class handout).
8.	Formative Assessment: Discussion board assignment as a group member at mid- point of semester (grading rubric).
9.	Formative Assessment: Self-Evaluate personal online group discussion board article summary post after taking plagiarism test (grading rubric).
10.	Summative Assessment: Plagiarism test which had an external link in WebCT (grading rubric).
11.	Summative Assessment: Printing grading rubrics for all speech assignments.

Survey of WebCT Experience Results
Out of 102 students completing the WebCT Experience Survey, 55 indicated they had WebCT experience and 47 indicated they had no WebCT experience.

To further understand the contextual use of WebCT, question 2 on the survey asked students, “In what capacity did you use WebCT?” 

The Results: Question 2 chart represents the findings.  For example, column 1, row 1 indicates 9 students have taken one Web enhanced class; column 2, row 2, indicates 13 students have taken 2 classes that have been Web enhanced, and column 3, row 3 indicates 12 students have taken 3 or more Web enhanced courses.

	1 Course	2 Courses	3+ Courses
Enhanced	9	13	12
Hybrid	6	2	1
Online	7	1	4

The 3rd question asked the student to self-assess skill level with using WebCT tools. Over 60% of students had no or little (beginner) experience using the calendar, learning module and discussion board features in WebCT. Over 50% had no or little experience (beginner) with assessment, my grades, assignments and uploading or downloading files in WebCT. Only 51% had intermediate to proficient levels with the WebCT Mail feature.

In an effort to build community and locate “experts” within each class, the final question on the survey asked students if he or she would be willing to mentor other students during the WebCT hands-on training session. Thirteen students volunteered and all were asked to assist the professor during the tutorial session.

Survey of WebCT Training (tutorial) Session

The first 3 questions on the survey dealt directly with the training session. Questions 4 and 5 focused on the discussion board homework assignment and the final question asked students to provide any recommendations to the training or homework assignments.

Out of 94 students completing the WebCT Training Session Survey, 93 stated the training session was helpful to “understanding how WebCT will be used in the course”. One student did not find the training session helpful.

The 2nd question asked students to identify the “most helpful” aspects of the session.
Listed below are a few examples of student responses.

“I found the arrow thing [using the green arrow to advance/return] helpful…it was good to actually understand what I was doing.”

“The assignments are organized by the calendar and it is linked to it.”

“I found going through each component helpful.”

“The calendar…it really works and you can see it from different views [month, day, week].”

“Showing me the green thing when new items are added.”

“Discussion board with instructor and other students.”

“Being able to add personal info in the calendar.”

The 3rd question asked students to identify the “least helpful” aspects of the session.
Listed below are examples of student responses.

“Student resources is too much for the first week of class, it might help to review down the road.”

“Posting a message.”

“The discussion board is a little confusing because there are so many conversations going on with it.”

Question 4 asked students to explain how or if the discussion board assignment helped answer lingering questions about WebCT after the hands-on training session.
Listed below are examples of student responses.

“I like how it shows people’s previous questions so I can learn from others.”

“I had some questions that were asked by other students that were already answered.”

“Yes because that way all the students can help each other, sharing knowledge of what they learned.”

Ten students stated they were not able to complete the online assignments on time while 84 students were able to complete the online assignments on time.

Question 6 asked students to make recommendations for improving the WebCT training session and/or homework assignments. Listed below are a few of the recommendations made by students.

“It would be nice if the textbook was online, even if I had to pay.”

“Write down step-by-step instructions of steps you might think you will forget.”

“Enough computers for all.”

“I’d make Atlas and WebCT e-mails the same account.”

“An e-mail sent to me when new things added to the class.”

“They should apply WebCT to other courses if they still haven’t.”

During one session, there were not enough working computers in the lab for all students during the tutorial (approximately 3).

WebCT Homework Assignments
Below are a few examples of student posts appearing on the Discussion board in WebCT.

“Learned how to keep up with the class in every way, assignments, speech dates, calendar, mail, and even to create discussion questions.”

“In the WebCT training I learned how to use the calendar in depth. I've had online classes before, but never really used the calendar. Now I will be more organized!”

“I learned that when you see that little green square with the white little star in the middle it means that something new has been posted and I should probably take a look and see.”

“I learned everything about WebCT because I’ve never even used it.”

“I learned that we can view our detailed daily schedule by clicking the actual date on the calendar.”

The Student Consent and Course policy assessments were completed by students and all students came prepared with the Relational Individual Cultural Questionnaire results the following class.

The Survey of WebCT Experience provided me with the background of the students’ experience as a class prior to conducting the tutorial session. After reviewing the results, I felt the lesson planned for the tutorial was on target, and could easily be adjusted for skill and knowledge level. The survey also provided an opportunity for a student with professed experience to mentor. This allowed me to create a list of mentors for each class and to introduce the mentors at the start of the tutorial session allowing students to seek-help from a particular student. One unexpected response was students who indicated they had no experience but would volunteer to mentor while others with intermediate to proficient levels of experience stated they did not want to volunteer as a class mentor.

I was pleased with the overall response to question 1 on the Survey of WebCT Training that found students affirming the tutorial session helpful. Perhaps two of the most unexpected comments students made with helpfulness of the tutorial was with the calendar and discussion board. A number of students with WebCT experience commented that they had never used the calendar before and this feature of WebCT became the life-line to students in my class. With respect to the discussion board and those with experience, some knew how to post a message but many did not know how to reply to another student on the discussion board.

With respect to the “least helpful” aspects of the WebCT training, a majority of students had positive comments such as, “Nope, everything great.” While a few students placed posting/responding in the discussion board in this category, more students responded favorably to this element of the tutorial. This is often the challenge of teaching as students have different levels of skill and knowledge.

The discussion board assignment was well received by students with 90% of students completing the assignment on time. Of the 10 students not completing the assignment, 9 were enrolled in the two courses with the highest response rate to “No WebCT Experience” (34 with no experience and 18 with experience). All 10 of these students were encouraged to complete the assignment for credit at the next class session (after reviewing the assignment results in class) and all completed the assignment. Based on student feedback, the majority of students viewed the discussion board assignment as an opportunity to learn from each other. This was viewed as a positive outcome and serves to support the positive response to question 1 (tutorial as useful). I also surmised that the online assignments scheduled for later in the semester may be viewed favorably by students. Additionally, while the conversations posted to the discussion board were on task, it also provided students an opportunity to get off task. For example, a conversation about Obama’s speech was intertwined within the task related questions. I viewed this as a positive and unexpected outcome.

The students made interesting and valuable recommendations. For example, one student indicated I needed to ask more questions during the tutorial to let students respond and learn from each other. This comment made me reflect on and become more aware of how I ask questions, not just in the tutorial session, but in my face-to-face classes. It also prompted me to immediately review the video-tape session of the tutorial session to reflect on the teaching strategies employed. It is also important to note, during one session, there were not enough working computers in the lab for all students during the tutorial (approximately 3). One student commented on this deficiency.

Overall I would consider the WebCT Tutorial session a success as indicated by student feedback, completion of tutorial work, and self-reflecting on what I believe has been an improvement to student preparedness throughout the semester. I would recommend other faculty members utilizing WebCT as an enhancement to his/her course develop a similar session to familiarize students with understanding how WebCT will be used in the course, how to navigate within the learning environment, and to promote routine use particularly by using the calendar and discussion board features in WebCT.

The artifacts (17) for the WebCT Tutorial include handouts, assignments, assessments, examples of student work, and results from data collected. The artifacts are outlined below, linked and presented as PDF files.

1. Surveys
1. Survey of WebCT Experience: Handout
2. Survey of WebCT Training Session: Handout
3. WebCT Survey Results: This document provides the cumulative results of each question appearing on the Survey of WebCT Experience and Survey of WebCT Training Session.
2. Training Session Handouts:
1. WebCT Features and Tools
2. WebCT Orientation Tutorial
3. WebCT Training Homework Assignment
4. Copy of Grading Rubric (PPF Speech): Printed during training session to demonstrate the print function in WebCT.
3. WebCT Artifacts:
1. Example of Discussion Post on WebCT: A compiled list of one class discussion board posting following WebCT training.
1. Discussion Grading Rubric
2. Announcement Example: A list of items sent using the announcement feature in WebCT.
3. Assignment
1. Relational Individualistic Culture Survey assignment: The assignment as it appeared under the Assignment tab in WebCT (given as part of the WebCT homework assignment after WebCT training).
2. RICQ Assignment Grading Rubric
4. Assessments
1. Course Policies: A copy of the assessment as it appeared under the assessment tab in WebCT (given as part of the WebCT homework assignment after WebCT training).
2. Student Consent and Release:  A copy of the assessment as it appeared under the Assessment tab in WebCT (given as part of the WebCT homework assignment after WebCT training). 
3. Attendance at WebCT Training Session: As appeared under the assessment tab during WebCT training.
5. Learning Module
1. Week One – Start Here Orientation: As appeared under the learning module tab in WebCT.
6. Calendar Example: An example of items appearing on the calendar during the month of September.
4. Video of Training Session: VHS format, available upon request.

The WebCT tutorial provided me with an opportunity to understand student perceptions of a teaching and learning activity geared toward students understanding, navigating and building routine use with the WebCT learning environment. A formal guided approach with hands-on experience proved to be beneficial to student and instructor. For example, students understood that WebCT was a place to go at the learner’s convenience to obtain course information and to communicate with others. Most students accepted the course enhancement and took responsibility for logging into WebCT to check grades, the calendar, and discussion board messages. I did not build an assessment to quantify routine use but rather measured routine use as preparedness for class discussions, assignments, and communication. I am confident that routine use of WebCT was improved with the tutorial because students arrived to class with proper materials, understood the content to be covered, and referred to WebCT in conversations with me and other students. For example, a student would ask about an upcoming assignment or would ask “how to” questions prior to being required to perform a task (e.g., how to print from WebCT). More often than not, other students would answer the question.

A quantitative approach to understanding WebCT use can be obtained by viewing the tracking report available in WebCT however, it only counts use and does not reveal engagement. For example, the report will state how many messages were read but WebCT is really reporting how many messages were opened. To measure routine use more effectively, various classroom assessment techniques could be utilized. For example, posing a question for the week on the discussion board, incorporating surveys to be taken online, or even having mini quizzes.

Incorporating strategies to get students to log-in to WebCT from the start of the semester may help students build routine use as well. For example, the weekly learning modules not only outlined the material to be covered for the week but also had a prompt question (be prepared to discuss….), reference material  including PowerPoint slides, supplemental reading, etc. One thing I learned is the calendar is referred to most often by students when material is linked and due dates appear.  Students throughout the semester always talked about “the calendar in WebCT.” Because of this and the positive responses on the discussion board assignment feedback, I incorporated a “Read Next Week’s Learning Module” prompt on the calendar for the spring 2009 semester. Students were asked to either post a question on the discussion board prior to the last class meeting of the week or come to class with a question.

By creating the WebCT tutorial, I think students have a better understanding of the relationship of WebCT to course success. Students are able to navigate content and seek help through the use of the communication tools available in WebCT. Finally, the project has provided me with insight into what WebCT tools students’ use most and has allowed me the opportunity to continue to develop and incorporate strategies to promote routine use of WebCT. 

Learning Centered Strategies

1. Employ active learning techniques
2. Use cooperative/collaborative learning strategies

Assessment

1. Employ formative feedback to assess the effectiveness of teaching practices

1. Employ active learning techniques
2. Use cooperative/collaborative learning strategies

The creation of the hands-on tutorial and discussion board assignment were structured as both an active learning technique and a cooperative/collaborative learning strategy. Silberman (1996) states active learning involves “team building, on-the-spot-assessment and immediate learning involvement” (p. xi). During the hands-on tutorial, students had the opportunity to experience all three criteria. Creating an atmosphere of cooperation and interdependence occurred as students worked with student mentors, the person sitting in the next station, and while working alone. Students were able to take the attendance assessment and view the grade in the grade book during the session. I tried to extend interest in the learning by expressing the relevancy to succeeding in the course, and by demonstrating how the tools (e.g., calendar and web links) could be used for personal gain. For example, not only did the student learn to enter personal notes on the calendar but some of the Web links focus on the student getting to know more about him or herself (e.g., external links to personality styles, what would I be good at type tests, and internal links such as Atlas lab, etc.).

The discussion board assignment was used to build cooperation and collaboration among learners. Students were not placed into small groups but rather the class was one group.  This extended the active learning paradigm of team building, and began the cooperative learning process. During the Susan Ledlow presentation on Learning-centered teaching strategies, she spoke of PIES (Positive interdependence, Individual accountability, Equal participation, Simultaneous interaction) as a means for evaluating cooperative learning tasks.

Positive interdependence: students read and responded to 2 other student posts.

Individual accountability: students were responsible to post on time, in WebCT, on the proper discussion board, and to answer the questions posed.

Equal participation: all students were assigned the same task.

Simultaneous interaction: student posts were not synchronistic however, a deadline was established for posting and responding and there was an in-class debriefing of the assignment during the next class session.

The debriefing session reminded students of the importance of routine use, asked students to respond to specific questions (e.g., If I were looking to see what is due for class today, where can I look in WebCT?), and students were encouraged to seek help by posting messages to the discussion board, e-mailing the professor directly, or asking questions at the start of class.

I believe the methodological design of the learning outcome was a good beginning for bringing a group of students together in attempt to build a cohesive team.  Linder and Ledlow (Five Issues) present five topics to consider when teambuilding to ready students in cooperative and active learning. The first is social and task cohesiveness.  The discussion board posting assignment presented students with an opportunity to foster social and task cohesiveness.  Roles and norms were established by the professor with perimeters set on how to write and respond to the discussion board assignment.  The interpersonal communication aspect was established by students responding to other students on the discussion board and then further established by e-mailing the professor.  Since the discussion board assignment asked students to identify what aspect of WebCT he or she was unclear about, posted student statements allowed other students to not only share his/her knowledge but it also presented a way for me as the professor to identify areas that may not have been covered as well during the WebCT training session.  Together, the goals of using WebCT were established or understood. The final aspect of team building is interdependence. The completion of and uploading of the Relational Individualist Collectivist Questionnaire assignment was an individual assignment but it was important that students completed the assignment by the next class meeting as the results of the survey determined group membership for the cooperative and active learning activity on diversity.

Having the WebCT training session the first week of class is beneficial to the student on several levels. First, the student understands how WebCT is used in the course. Second, it introduces or reintroduces students to the learning platform. Thirdly, it provides the opportunity for students to be active in and engage in cooperative learning while building team cohesiveness. One way to improve and reinforce what was learned during the training session would be to add additional follow-up assignments. For example, post a weekly question related to course content on the discussion board, place students in groups (e.g., 5 students) and ask students to respond to the question posed.  Have students post a personal entry on the calendar and have the students print and bring to class. Have students print a document from a learning module (e.g., grading rubric) to demonstrate that the student knows how to navigate different aspects of WebCT.

Using active and cooperative learning strategies at the start of the semester encourages students to take part in the class right away. It begins to set the stage for student skill, knowledge and attitude building which are central to my course curriculum. 

~Reference

Linder, D., & Ledlow, S. (n.a.). Five issues to be considered in teambuilding. Available at: http://clte.asu.edu/active/fiveissues.pdf

1. Employ formative feedback to assess the effectiveness of teaching practices.  

The rationale for developing the formative assessment tools was to assess the effectiveness of my teaching practice for this learning outcome. The surveys (Survey of WebCT Experience and Survey of WebCT Training), discussion board assignment, and online assessments were used to gauge effectiveness.
 
Surveys

The Survey of WebCT Experience provided me with an opportunity to judge skill and knowledge level of the students prior to the tutorial session and to seek student mentors. The survey was distributed the first day of class. This survey is similar to a Background Knowledge Probe (CAT) that helps teachers determine the most effective starting point before formal instruction. This assessment validated my assumption that more students would lack WebCT experience or have minimal experience than have intermediate to proficient levels of experience. The assessment also sanctioned my tutorial teaching plan that approached WebCT from a beginner framework.
 
Regarding the instrument, I would recommend changing question 1 to state, “Have you ever used WebCT at Valencia?” Rather than, “Have you ever used WebCT?” There are different versions of WebCT and/or blackboard. However, it does not eliminate the need to know what tools the student has experience with (question 3) because different tools are used by different teachers. Also for question 2, rather than asking “…in what capacity did you use WebCT” I would add ““…in what capacity did you use WebCT prior to this semester.” The reason for the change is it was unclear if students counted currently enrolled classes using WebCT when responding. If so, then this may have distorted the response.

The Survey of WebCT Tutorial was written to obtain feedback on the tutorial session, the discussion board assignment and student recommendations on the tutorial. It was administered during the next face-to-face class session. I was pleased to learn that all but one student found the tutorial helpful. The discussion board questions focused on what was most and least helpful. This is similar to the Applications Cards (CAT) where students are often asked to apply what was learned to a real-life situation. In my case, the answers served to applying student responses to what tools in WebCT should remain or stressed and what tools could be reviewed with less detail the next time the tutorial was taught. For example, more time spent with students on inputting and printing the calendar and less time on the student resources file located on the home page. Asking students for recommendations, and debriefing discussion posts prompted students to think about WebCT and to reinforce its connection with the course.

To gain additionally insight into routine use of WebCT, one recommendation on the Survey of WebCT Experience would be to take the survey on the first day of class and to take a modified version at the end of the semester. This may lend insight into student skill and knowledge growth (e.g., tools) and to quantify routine use.

Discussion Board Assignment:

This assignment was modeled after the Muddiest Point classroom assessment technique (CAT). To avoid reduction of student self-efficacy, the assignment question asked students to focus not only on what he/she didn’t understand (vs. didn’t know) but more importantly, on what the student did understand.  Not only did this assignment allow me to review the elements of WebCT the student was struggling with (e.g., printing a form) but it also provided me with feedback on what the student viewed as new and cool. For example, inputting own notes in the calendar, moving the page forward in the learning module, and the green asterisk indicating something new added. Having students complete the assignment after the tutorial and prior to the next class meeting, allowed students to think about the tutorial session and to think about his/her response to the question without a lot of time-response pressure. A Discussion Grading Rubric was used to grade the post and to begin getting students use to working with grading rubrics (e.g., reading assignment criteria, point values, written comments on graded form, etc.).

One important aspect of the discussion board assignment was the question itself because the question invited student feedback on the teaching and learning process which is an assessment strategy. Since the assignment called for cooperative learning to take place by responding to other student posts, the grading rubric reinforced the cooperative learning objective that began in the classroom and carried over into the WebCT learning environment.

Using the peer review function in WebCT to have students grade other student posts may be introduced during a follow-up assignment. For example, if using the discussion board for weekly course content questions, the peer review feature may be used as a means for students to assess other student achievements. Another way to utilize the discussion board is by creating a category where students can coordinate dates to meet at the communication lab for recording speeches.  By utilizing the discussion board more frequently students may be more likely to frequent WebCT more often and build routine use. 
 
Online Assessments

Each of the 3 online assessments had one true or false question. The attendance assessment took place during the tutorial session to familiarize students with the tool and how to read an assessment score (e.g., 1 correct/1possible or 100%). This assessment was available only during the length of the class (50 or 75 minutes).Two of the assessments (Acknowledgement of Course Policies and Student Work Consent) were homework assignments and served as feedback on retention of information covered in the tutorial and/or the ability of the student to navigate in WebCT. (The assessments also served as a time and file saving way of handling an administrative task.) If a student did not complete the Acknowledgement of Course Policies by the end of the second week, an e-mail was sent asking for the student to complete the assessment and/or to visit the professor to discuss any course policies. The Student Work Consent form was needed only if a student produced a quality piece of academic work to which other learners would benefit from viewing. There were no punitive points associated with this assessment however students completing the assessment received 1 extra point.
An advantage to having the online assessments is the flexibility of adding assessments to WebCT during the semester. For example, if a test is scheduled but more class time is needed for another learning objective, the test can be taken in WebCT with minimal re-training required. Another way the online assessment can be utilized is with the creation of a survey. For example, creating an assessment based on analyzing the audience (the class) to help with covering the topic in class and for student speech topic selection.

Another way to improve or build upon the online assessment and the discussion board assignment is to create an assignment calling for students to visit the grade book to validate the assessment scores and review the grading rubric score from the discussion board assignment. For example, a survey form could be available for printing in WebCT that asks students to respond to specific questions such as, what time and date did you take the Acknowledgement of Course Policies assessment, what was your grade for the discussion board assignment, etc. This would also reinforce navigation and printing from WebCT.

The formative assessments established for this learning outcome met the initial desired goal. By creating new and modifying the assessment tools and assignments as briefly recommended above, additional insight into teaching, student learning and overall effectiveness of course design may be better understood and responded to.