Analysis of an Open Course

This blog post looks at an open course available from Yale, Physics 200:Fundamentals of Physics ,1 found at http://oyc.yale.edu/physics/phys-200#overview.  Since I have a science background, completed college physics courses and have previously taught physics at the high school level, I thought this would be a good course to analyze.  I will look at how this course works as a distance course in terms of planning, effectiveness and active learning. 

Does the course appear to be carefully pre-planned and designed for a distance learning environment? How so?

The course appears to be pre-planned, but not necessarily for distance learning environment.  When you first look at the course, it seems to be recorded lectures with weekly problems to solve.   The lectures and problems sets are all found on the course site.   The video quality is good; it is clear to see the instructor and what is being written on the chalkboard. There is opportunity to join in a study group through www.openstudy.com, but it is not incorporated into the course.  This is an optional activity to help with answering questions. You post your quesiton and a helper may answer your question. There are some open questions that have been posted for some time without being resolved completely.  You are at the mercy of the helpers.The sequence of topics and progression of course content is typical for introductory calculus based physics.  Overall, this is not what would be designed as a distance learning course (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2012).  It is a face-to-face course put on the web.

Does the course follow the recommendations for online instruction as listed in your course textbook?

The textbook discusses several recommendations and considerations for online instruction (Simonson et al., 2012).

1. Online instruction must know who the learners are.  The instructor for this course did address which learners would be sitting in the classroom with him, but the online version of the course does not necessarily take this into consideration. 
2. The presentation of learning did not vary.  The lessons were lecture with drawings and equations on the chalkboard.
3. The instructor on the video states that he is presenting the essential content for a physics course and took into account the amount of time available for coverage in a semester long class. 
4. Instructional goals and objectives were not specifically shared with students – the purpose of the video cameras and an overview of the course occurred in the first lecture, but objective and course goals were not provided on the website or in the course materials. 
5. By definition active learning is something other than sitting and listening to a lecture in the classroom (Paulsen & Faust, n.d.).   The video lessons do not provide opportunities for active learning and allow students to recognize what they are struggling with (Classroom, 2009).  The video instruction provides a lot of information, but there is little active discovery in the lesson.
6. The visual materials included video, but do not include other items, except for lecture notes for a few of the lessons.   According to Simonsen et al. (2012)  “Handouts are an essential communication link with students” (p. 167).   This course misses the communication opportunity available through handouts as well as an opportunity to help with transfer of knowledge.

Did the course designer implement course activities that maximize active learning for the students?

Active learning is defined as a classroom activity that allows student engagement in the learning process.  By definition it is something more than just attending and listening to lectures (Prince,  2004).  In this online physics class, there would need to be more activity to the lesson structure to be considered active learning.  Since the information is obtained through lectures on video and the lesson structure does not incorporate other activities within the lesson, active learning is not being implemented in this course.  An interactive online quiz from the lecture or reading material in which students are able to get immediate feedback would be a good step in making the lessons more active. Online discussion could be a possible activity incorporated into the lesson structure.  Since this is an open course, the online discussion would be a challenge to implement easily.

Concluding Thoughts

The course appears to be an experiment in online learning.  I would recommend the use of this course for anyone wanting to see how quickly a college course moves as well as a refresher course in using calculus in the physics classroom.  I would also recommend high school students looking at a science or engineering degree to view the lectures in this course to introduce college level lectures and problem solving expectations.  For this course to be more effective it will be important for designers to incorporate more active learning components with some interactive web based materials.  This could interactive online quizzes and additional problem solving activities.

References

Classroom Activities for Active Learning. (2009, November). For your consideration: Suggestions and reflections on teaching and learning.  Chapel Hill, NC: UNC Center for Faculty Excellence. Retrieved from http://cfe.unc.edu/pdfs/FYC2.pdf

Paulsen, D. R. & Faust, J. L. (n.d.). Active learning for the college classroom.  Retrieved from http://www.calstatela.edu/dept/chem/chem2/Active/

Prince, M. (2004, June).  Does active learning Work? A review of the research.  Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231.  Retrieved from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Prince_AL.pdf

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2012). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.