We found 112 results that contain "masking matters"

This post provides an overview of intersectionality as part of the Inclusive Pedagogy playlist.
Intersectionality acknowledges that folks’ identities are multi-faceted and interconnected, influencing their experiences and interactions. Intersectionality is a framework to consider the ways that groups and individuals have unique combinations of privilege and discrimination. Within this, society has interlocking and overlapping systems of oppression. These systems create our institutions, which include education, banking, criminal justice and law, state welfare, media, housing, etc. (Kendall). Then, each of these systems not only interlock and overlap, but they create obstacles, harm, and oppression for anyone who does not have societally privileged identities (white, straight, cisgender, abled-bodied and able-minded, high socioeconomic status, thin body size, etc.). All identities (e.g., race, nationality, language use, gender, sexuality, religion, class, immigration status, trauma survivorship, etc.) are contextually specific to a place and time. These identities cannot be separated at that individual level. For instance, Crenshaw discusses how intersectionality helps to “account for multiple grounds of identity when considering how the social world is constructed” (1245). In other words, each identity interplays with one another to where they can’t be disentangled, such as a Black woman’s experiences may be an interplay of racism and sexism called misogynoir.
In considering these identity and institutional dimensions, there are many visual iterations of identities (Cabiness-Atkinson). The Northcentral University Diversity Wheel illustrates the various components of identity that are personal to self, such as gender, age, race, etc., to those that are developed by social influences and life as well as how that is affected by positionalities within institutions. 
As educators, we must consider our own intersectional identities and how those interact with the systems of oppression and its institutions. To model this inclusive and intersectional pedagogy, it is recommended to (revised and adapted from Case 9): 

Reflect and unpack on your own identities and biases and how that may “alter lived experiences of prejudice and discrimination, privilege and opportunities, and perspectives from particular social locations.” One way is to attend MSU’s Implicit Bias Certification course. Another avenue to reflect and unpack would be to engage with the University of Illinois' compilation of activities to raise awareness of biases.
Continue to unlearn and learn and continually strive to learn more about identities, privilege, and inclusive pedagogy. Some initial and/or continuing resources include Boston University’s Self-Guided Diversity and Inclusion Learning Toolkits.
Foster learner reflection and agency for their own un/learning. Some strategies for this are included later in this series’ Classroom Activities article.
Incorporate diverse social identities typically neglected in course curriculum, interdisciplinary ways of thinking, multiple pathways for learners, and an asset-based approach for thinking about learners.

In addition to the above, the next articles will continue to offer ways to become more inclusive and intersectional in education. 
Continue to read more about inclusive pedagogy in the next article, “Unpacking Problematic Language” or return to the Inclusive Pedagogy playlist.

Welcome to the Webinar Hosting module, where we'll dive into the world of online presentations! Here, you'll pick up tips and tricks on how to keep your audience hooked and your sessions interactive. Whether you're a pro or just starting out, this module will give you the tools to rock your webinars and keep your viewers coming back for more. Let's get ready to make some online magic happen!
What You'll Learn:

Captivating Your Audience: First impressions matter! Learn how to grab your audience's attention from the get-go with compelling introductions and engaging visuals. We'll explore techniques for crafting catchy titles, designing eye-catching slides, and using storytelling to hook your viewers.
Interactive Sessions: Keep your audience engaged and involved throughout your webinar with interactive elements. Discover how to incorporate polls, Q&A sessions, and live chats to foster participation and create a dynamic learning environment. We'll also cover techniques for managing audience questions and feedback effectively.
Managing Technical Challenges: Let's face it – technical issues can happen to the best of us. Learn how to troubleshoot common problems like audio or video glitches, screen sharing issues, and internet connectivity issues with grace and ease. We'll also discuss backup plans and contingency measures to ensure smooth sailing during your webinar.
Building Confidence: Hosting a webinar can be nerve-wracking, especially if you're new to the game. We'll share tips and techniques to boost your confidence and banish those pre-webinar jitters. From practicing your presentation to mastering your delivery, you'll learn how to exude confidence and command the virtual stage.
Post-Webinar Engagement: The conversation doesn't end when the webinar does! Discover strategies for keeping the momentum going after your session wraps up. We'll explore follow-up emails, surveys, and social media engagement to foster continued interaction and build a community around your content.

Why It Matters:
In today's digital age, webinars have become a powerful tool for education, marketing, and communication. Whether you're hosting a training session, promoting a product, or sharing your expertise with the world, effective webinar hosting skills are essential for success. By mastering the art of engaging online presentations, you'll not only captivate your audience but also establish yourself as a trusted authority in your field.
IDEAInterview or record a guest speaker from afar. Global Health and the International programs often have Zoom / Teams recordings of people in other places. The records are OK at best because of the environment that the host is in. If this were available the quality of these opportunities would be better. This was edited with Camtasia, but the output would have been better if the host was in the HushPod.
Ready to Get Started?
Whether you're looking to enhance your professional skills, expand your audience reach, or simply connect with others in a virtual setting, the Webinar Hosting module in our HushPod Recording Studio has something for everyone. So grab your favorite mug of coffee, cozy up to your computer, and let's dive into the exciting world of webinar hosting together. Get ready to inspire, educate, and engage – one webinar at a time!
 
--> Module 3: Screen Recording

Instructional Guidance Is Key to Promoting Active Learning in Online and Blended Courses Written by: Jay Loftus Ed.D. (MSU / CTLI) & Michele Jacobsen, Ph.D. (Werklund School of Education - University of Calgary)
Abstract - Active learning strategies tend to originate from one of two dominant philosophical perspectives. The first position is active learning as an instructional philosophy, whereby inquiry-based and discovery learning are primary modalities for acquiring new information. The second perspective considers active learning a strategy to supplement the use of more structured forms of instruction, such as direct instruction. From the latter perspective, active learning is employed to reinforce conceptual learning following the presentation of factual or foundational knowledge. This review focuses on the second perspective and uses of active learning as a strategy. We highlight the need and often overlooked requirement for including instructional guidance to ensure active learning, which can be effective and efficient for learning and learners.
Keywords - Active learning, instructional guidance, design strategy, cognitive load, efficiency, online and blended courses
 
Introduction
Learner engagement in online courses has been a central theme in educational research for several years (Martin, Sun and Westing, 2020). As we consider the academic experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, which began in 2020 and started to subside in 2022, it is essential to reflect on the importance of course quality (Cavanaugh, Jacquemin and Junker, 2023) and learner experience in online courses (Gherghel, Yasuda and Kita, 2023). Rebounding from our collected experience, learner engagement continues to be an important element of course design and delivery. This fact was highlighted in 2021, when the United States Department of Education (DOE) set forth new standards for institutions offering online courses. To be eligible for Title IV funding, new standards require non-correspondence courses to ensure regular and substantive interactions (RSI) between instructors and students (Downs, 2021). This requirement necessitates the need to find ways to engage students allowing instructors the ability to maximize their interactions. One possible solution is to use active learning techniques that have been shown to increase student engagement and learning outcomes (Ashiabi & O’ Neal, 2008; Cavanaugh et al., 2023).
Active learning is an important instructional strategy and pedagogical philosophy used to design quality learning experiences and foster engaging and interactive learning environments. However, this is not a novel perspective. Many years ago in their seminal work, Chickering and Gamson (1987) discussed the issue of interaction between instructors and students, suggesting that this was an essential practice for quality undergraduate education. The newfound focus on active learning strategies has become more pronounced following an examination of instructional practices from 2020 to 2022. For example, Tan, Chng, Chonardo, Ng  and Fung (2020) examined how chemistry instructors incorporated active learning into their instruction to achieve equivalent learning experiences in pre-pandemic classrooms. Similarly, Misra and Mazelfi (2021) described the need to incorporate group work or active learning activities into remote courses to: ‘increase students’ learning motivation, enforce mutual respect for friends’ opinions, foster excitement’ (p. 228). Rincon-Flores & Santos-Guevara (2021) found that gamification as a form of active learning, ‘helped to motivate students to participate actively and improved their academic performance, in a setting where the mode of instruction was remote, synchronous, and online’ (p.43). Further, the implementation of active learning, particularly gamification, was found to be helpful for promoting a more humanizing learning experience (Rincon-Flores & Santos-Guevara, 2021).
This review examines the use of active learning and presents instructional guidance as an often-overlooked element that must be included to make active learning useful and effective. The omission of explicit and direct instructional guidance when using active learning can be inefficient, resulting in an extraneous cognitive burden on learners (Lange, Gorbunova, Shcheglova and Costley, 2022). We hope to outline our justification through a review of active learning and offer strategies to ensure that the implementation of active learning is effective.
Active Learning as an Instructional Philosophy
Active learning is inherently a ‘student-centered’ instructional paradigm that is derived from a constructivist epistemological perspective (Krahenbuhl, 2016; Schunk, 2012). Constructivism theorizes that individuals construct their understanding through interactions and engagements, whereby the refinement of skills and knowledge results over time (Cobb & Bowers, 1999). Through inquiry, students produce experiences and make connections that lead to logical and conceptual growth (Bada & Olusegun, 2015). Engaging learners in activities, tasks, and planned experiences is an overarching premise of active learning as an instructional philosophy. As an overarching instructional philosophy, the role of instructional guidance can be minimized. As Hammer (1997) pointed out many years ago, the role of the instructor in these environments is to provide content and materials, and students are left make ‘discoveries’ through inquiry.
Inquiry-based learning (IBL) is an instructional practice that falls under the general category of ‘active learning’. The tenets of IBL adhere to a constructivist learning philosophy (de Jong et al., 2023) and can be characterized by the following six elements (Duncan & Chinn, 2021). Students will:

Generate knowledge through investigation of a novel issue or problem.
Work ‘actively’ to discover new findings.
Use of evidence to derive conclusions.
Take responsibility for their own learning through ‘epistemological agency’ (Chinn & Iordanou, 2023) and share their learning with a community of learners.
Use problem-solving and reasoning for complex tasks.
Collaborate, share ideas, and derive solutions with peers.

Historically, inquiry-based learning as a form of active learning was adopted as an overall instructional paradigm in disciplines such as medicine and was closely aligned with problem-based learning (PBL) (Barrows, 1996). Proponents of PBL advocate its use because of its emphasis on the development of skills such as communication, collaboration, and critical thinking (Dring, 2019). Critics of these constructivist approaches to instruction highlight the absence of a structure and any form of instructional guidance (Zhang & Cobern, 2021). Instead, they advocate a more explicit form of instruction such as direct instruction (Zhang, Kirschner, Corben and Sweller, 2022).
The view that a hybrid of IBL coupled with direct instruction is the optimal approach to implementing active learning has been highlighted in the recent academic literature (de Jong et al., 2023). The authors suggest that the selection of direct instruction or active learning strategies, such as IBL, should be guided by the desired outcomes of instruction. If the goal of instruction is the acquisition of more foundational or factual information, direct instruction is the preferred strategy. Conversely, IBL strategies are more appropriate ‘for the promotion of deep understanding and transferrable conceptual understanding of topics that are open-ended or susceptible to misconceptions’ (de Jong et al., 2023 p. 7).
The recommendation to use both direct instruction and approaches like IBL has reframed active learning as an instructional strategy rather than an overarching pedagogical philosophy. Active learning should be viewed as a technique or strategy coupled with direct instructional approaches (de Jong et al., 2023).
Active Learning as an Instructional Strategy
Approaching active learning as an instructional strategy rather than an overarching instructional philosophy helps clarify and address the varying perspectives found in the literature. Zhang et al. (2022) suggested that there is a push to emphasize exploration-based pedagogy. This includes instructional approaches deemed to be predicated on inquiry, discovery, or problem-based approaches. This emphasis has resulted in changes to curricular policies that mandate the incorporation of these instructional philosophies. Zhang et al. (2022) discussed how active learning approaches can be incorporated into science education policy to emphasize ‘inquiry’ approaches, despite adequate evidence for effectiveness.  Zhang et al. (2022) stated that the ‘disjoint between policy documents and research evidence is exacerbated by the tendency to ignore categories of research that do not provide the favored research outcomes that support teaching science through inquiry and investigations’ (p. 1162). Instead, Zhang et al. (2022) advocate for direct instruction as the primary mode of instruction in science education with active learning or ‘inquiry’ learning incorporated as a strategy, arguing that conceptual or foundational understanding ‘should not be ‘traded off’ by prioritizing other learning outcomes’ (p. 1172).
In response to Zhang et al. ’s (2022) critique, de Jong et al. (2023) argued that research evidence supports the use of inquiry-based instruction for the acquisition of conceptual understanding in science education. They asserted that both inquiry-based (or active learning approaches) and direct instruction serve specific learning needs. Direct instruction may be superior for foundational or factual learning, while inquiry-based or active learning may be better for conceptual understanding and reinforcement. The conclusion of de Jong et al. ’s (2023) argument suggests the use of a hybrid of direct instruction and active learning techniques, such as inquiry-based designs, depending on the stated learning objectives of the course or the desired outcomes.
This hybrid approach to instructional practice can help ensure that intended learning outcomes are matched with effective instructional strategies. Furthermore, a hybrid approach can help maintain efficiency in learning rather than leaving the acquisition of stated learning outcomes to discovery or happenstance (Slocum & Rolf, 2021).  This notion was supported by Nerantzi's (2020) suggestion that ‘students learn best when they are active and immersed in the learning process, when their curiosity is stimulated, when they can ask questions and debate in and outside the classroom, when they are supported in this process and feel part of a learning community’ (p. 187). Emphasis on learner engagement may support the belief that active learning strategies combined with direct instruction may provide an optimal environment for learning. Active learning strategies can be used to reinforce the direct or explicit presentation of concepts and principles (Lapitan Jr, Tiangco, Sumalinog, Sabarillo and  Diaz, 2021).
Recently, Zhang (2022) examined the importance of integrating direct instruction with hands-on investigation as an instructional model in high school physics classes. Zhang (2022) determined that ‘students benefit more when they develop a thorough theoretical foundation about science ideas before hands-on investigations’ (p. 111). This supports the earlier research in post-secondary STEM disciplines as reported by Freeman, Eddy, McDonough and Wenderoth (2014), where the authors suggested that active learning strategies help to improve student performance. The authors further predicted that active learning interventions would show more significant learning gains when combined with ‘required exercises that are completed outside of formal class sessions’ (p. 8413).
Active Learning Strategies
Active learning is characterized by activities, tasks, and learner interactions. Several characteristics of active learning have been identified, including interaction, peer learning, and instructor presence (Nerantzi, 2020). Technology affords students learning opportunities to connect pre-, during-, and post-formal learning sessions (Zou & Xie, 2019; Nerantzi, 2020). The interactions or techniques that instructors use help determine the types of interactions and outcomes that will result. Instructors may be ‘present’ or active in the process but may not provide adequate instructional guidance for techniques to be efficient or effective (Cooper, Schinske and Tanner, 2021; Kalyuga, Chandler and Sweller. 2001). To highlight this gap, we first consider the widely used technique of think-pair-share, an active learning strategy first introduced by Lyman (1981). This active learning strategy was introduced to provide all students equitable opportunities to think and discuss ideas with their peers. The steps involved in this technique were recently summarized (Cooper et al., 2021): i) provide a prompt or question to students, (ii) give students a chance to think about the question or prompt independently, (iii) have students share their initial answers/responses with a neighbor in a pair or a small group, and (iv) invite a few groups a chance to share their responses with the whole class.
Instructional guidance outlines the structure and actions associated with a task. This includes identifying the goals and subgoals, and suggesting strategies or algorithms to complete the task (Kalyuga et al., 2001). Employing the strategy of think-pair-sharing requires more instructional guidance than instructors may consider. The title of the strategy foreshadows what students will ‘do’ to complete the activity. However, instructional guidance is essential to help students focus on the outcome, rather than merely enacting the process of the activity. Furthermore, instructional guidance or instructions given to students when employing think-pair-sharing can help make this activity more equitable. Cooper et al. (2021) point out that equity is an important consideration when employing think-pair-share. Often, think-pair-share activities are not equitable during the pair or share portion of the exercise, and can be dominated by more vocal or boisterous students. Instructional guidance can help ensure that the activity is more equitable by providing more explicit instructions on expectations for sharing. For example, the instructions for a think-pair-share activity may include those that require each student to compose and then share ideas on a digital whiteboard or on a slide within a larger shared slide deck. The opportunity for equitable learning must be built into the instructions given to students. Otherwise, the learning experience could be meaningless or lack the contribution of students who are timid or find comfort in a passive role during group learning.
Further considerations for instructional guidance are necessary since we now use various forms of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) to promote active learning strategies. Web conferencing tools, such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Google Meet, were used frequently during the height of required remote or hybrid teaching (Ahshan, 2021). Activities that separated students into smaller work groups via breakout rooms or unique discussion threads often included instructions on what students were to accomplish in these smaller collaborative groups. However, the communication of expectations or explicit guidance to help direct students in these groups were often not explicit or were not accessible once the students had been arranged into their isolated workspaces. These active learning exercises would have benefited from clear guidance and instructions on how to ‘call for help’ once separated from the larger group meetings. For example, Li, Xu, He, He, Pribesh, Watson and Major, (2021) described an activity for pair programming that uses zoom breakout rooms. In their description, the authors outlined the steps learners were expected to follow to successfully complete the active learning activity, as well as the mechanisms students used to ask for assistance once isolated from the larger Zoom session that contained the entire class. The description by Li et al. (2021) provided an effective approach to instructional guidance for active learning using Zoom.  Often, instructions are verbalized or difficult to refer to once individuals are removed from the general or common room. The lack of explicit instructional guidance in these activities can result in inefficiency (Kalyuga et al., 2001) and often inequity (Cooper et al., 2021).
The final active learning approach considered here was a case study analysis of asynchronous discussion forums. To extend engagement with course content, students were assigned a case study to discuss in a group discussion forum. The group is invited to apply course concepts and respond to questions as they analyze the case and prepare recommendations and a solution (Hartwell et al., 2021). Findings indicate that case study analysis in discussion forums as an active learning strategy “encouraged collaborative learning and contributed to improvement in cognitive learning” (Seethamraju, 2014, p. 9). While this active learning strategy can engage students with course materials to apply these concepts in new situations, it can also result in a high-volume-low-yield set of responses and posts without sufficient instructional guidance and clear expectations for engagement and deliverables. Hartwell, Anderson, Hanlon, and Brown (2021) offer guidance on the effective use of online discussion forums for case study analysis, such as clear expectations for student work in teams (e.g., a team contract), ongoing teamwork support through regular check-ins and assessment criteria, clear timelines and tasks for individual analysis, combined group discussion and cross-case comparison, review of posted solutions, and requirements for clear connections between case analysis and course concepts.
Active Learning & Cognitive Load Theory
In a recent review of current policy and educational standards within STEM disciplines, Zhang et al. (2022) argued that structured instructional approaches such as direct instruction align more closely with cognitive-based learning theories. These theories are better at predicting learning gains and identifying how learning occurs. Cognitive load theory is one such theory based on three main assumptions. First, humans have the capacity to obtain novel information through problem-solving or from other people. Obtaining information from other individuals is more efficient than generating solutions themselves. Second, acquired information is confronted by an individual’s limited capacity to first store information in working memory and then transfer it to unlimited long-term memory for later use. Problem-solving imposes a heavy burden on limited working memory. Thus, learners often rely on the information obtained from others. Finally, information stored in long-term memory can be transferred back to working memory to deal with familiar situations (Sweller, 2020). The recall of information from long-term memory to working memory is not bound by the limits of the initial acquisition of information in working memory (Zhang et al., 2022).
Zhang et al. (2022) state that ‘there never is a justification for engaging in inquiry-based learning or any other pedagogically identical approaches when students need to acquire complex, novel information’ (p. 1170). This is clearly a one-sided argument that focuses on the acquisition of information rather than the application of acquired information. This also presents an obvious issue related to the efficiency of acquiring novel information. However, Zhang et al. (2022) did not argue against the use of active learning or inquiry learning strategies to help reinforce concepts, or the use of the same to support direct instruction.
The combination of active learning strategies with direct instruction can be modified using assumptions of cognitive load, which highlights the need to include instructional guidance with active learning strategies. The inclusion of clear and precise instructions or instructional guidance is critical for effective active learning strategies (Murphy, 2023). As de Jong et al. (2023) suggest, ‘guidance is (initially) needed to make inquiry learning successful' (p.9). We cannot assume that instructional guidance is implied through the name of the activity or can be determined from the previous learning experiences of students. Assumptions lead to ambiguous learning environments that lack instructional guidance, force learners to infer expectations, and rely on prior and/or potentially limited active learning experiences. In the following section, we offer suggestions for improving the use of active learning strategies in online and blended learning environments by adding instructional guidance.
Suggestions for Improving the Use of Active Learning in Online and Blended Courses
The successful implementation of active learning depends on several factors. One of the most critical barriers to the adoption of active learning is student participation. As Finelli et al. (2018) highlighted, students may be reluctant to participate demonstrating behaviors such as, ‘not participating when asked to engage in an in-class activity, distracting other students, performing the required task with minimal effort, complaining, or giving lower course evaluations’ (p. 81). These behaviors are reminiscent of petulant adolescents, often discouraging instructors from implementing active learning in the future. To overcome this, the authors suggested that providing a clear explanation of the purpose of the active learning exercise would help curb resistance to participation. More recently, de Jong et al. (2023) stated a similar perspective that ‘a key issue in interpreting the impact of inquiry-based instruction is the role of guidance’ (p. 5). The inclusion of clear and explicit steps for completing an active learning exercise is a necessary design strategy. This aspect of instructional guidance is relatively easy to achieve with the arrival of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools used to support instructors. As Crompton and Burke (2024) pointed out in their recent review, ‘ChatGPT can assist teachers in the creation of content, lesson plans, and learning activities’ (p.384). More specifically, Crompton and Burke (2024) suggested that generative AI could be used to provide step-by-step instructions for students. To illustrate this point, we entered the following prompt into the generative AI tool, goblin.tools (https://goblin.tools/) ‘Provide instructions given to students for a carousel activity in a college class.’ The output is shown in Fig. 1. This tool is used to break down tasks into steps, and if needed, it can further break down each step into a more discrete sequence of steps.

Figure 1 . Goblin.tools instructions for carousel active learning exercises.
The omission of explicit steps or direct instructional guidance in an active learning exercise can potentially increase extraneous cognitive load (Klepsch & Seufert, 2020; Sweller, 2020). This pernicious impact on cognitive load is the result of the diversion of one’s limited capacity to reconcile problems (Zhang, 2022). Furthermore, the complexity of active learning within an online or blended course is exacerbated by the inclusion of technologies used for instructional purposes. Instructional guidance should include requisite guidance for tools used in active learning. Again, generative AI tools, such as goblin.tools, may help mitigate the potential burden on cognitive load. For example, the use of webconferencing tools, such as Zoom or Microsoft Teams, has been pervasive in higher education. Anyone who uses these tools can relate to situations in which larger groups are segmented into smaller groups in isolated breakout rooms. Once participant relocation has occurred, there is often confusion regarding the intended purpose or goals of the breakout room. Newer features, such as collaborative whiteboards, exacerbate confusion and the potential for excessive extraneous load. Generative AI instructions (see Figure 2) could be created and offered to mitigate confusion and cognitive load burden.

Figure 2. Zoom collaborative whiteboard instructions produced by goblin.tools
 
Generative AI has the potential to help outline the steps in active learning exercises. This can be used to minimize confusion and serve as a reference for students. However, instruction alone is often insufficient to make active learning effective. As Finelli et al. (2018) suggest, the inclusion of a rationale for implementing active learning is an effective mechanism to encourage student participation. To this end, we suggest the adoption of what  Bereiter (2014) called Principled Practical Knowledge (PPK) which consists of the combination of ‘know-how’ with ‘know why’ (Bereiter, 2014). This perspective develops out of learners’ efforts to solve practical problems. It is a combination of knowledge that extends beyond simply addressing the task at hand. There is an investment of effort to provide a rationale or justification to address the ‘know why’ portion of PPK (Bereiter, 2014). Creating conditions for learners to develop ‘know-how’ is critical when incorporating active learning strategies in online and blended courses. Instructional guidance can reduce ambiguity and extraneous load and can also increase efficiency and potentially equity.
What is typically not included in the instructional guidance offered to students is comprehensive knowledge that outlines the requirements for technology that is often employed in active learning strategies. Ahshan (2021) suggests that technology skill competency is essential for the instructors and learners to implement the activities smoothly. Therefore, knowledge should include the tools employed in active learning. Instructors cannot assume that learners have a universal baseline of technological competency and thus need to be aware of this diversity when providing instructional guidance.
An often-overlooked element of instructional guidance connected to PPK is the ‘know-why’ component. Learners are often prescribed learning tasks without a rationale or justification for their utility. The underlying assumption for implementing active learning strategies is the benefits of collaboration, communication, and collective problem-solving are clear to learners (Dring, 2019; Hartikainen et al., 2019). However, these perceived benefits or rationales are often not provided explicitly to learners; instead, they are implied through use.
When implementing active learning techniques or strategies in a blended or online course one needs to consider not only the ‘know-how,’ but also the ‘know-why.’ Table 1 helps to identify the scope of instructional guidance that should be provided to students.
 
Table 1. Recommended Type of Instructional Guidance for Active Learning




 


Know How


Know Why




Activity


Steps


Purpose / Rationale




Technology


Steps


Purpose / Rationale




Outcomes / Products


Completion


Goals




 
The purpose of providing clear and explicit instructional guidance to learners is to ensure efficiency, equity, and value in incorporating active learning strategies into online and blended learning environments. Along with our argument for “know-why” (Bereiter, 2012), we draw upon Murphy (2023) who highlights the importance of “know-how’ by stating, ‘if students do not understand how a particular learning design helps them arrive at a particular outcome, they tend to be less invested in a course’ (n.p.).
Clear instructional guidance does not diminish the authenticity of various active learning strategies such as problem-based or inquiry-based techniques. In contrast, guidance serves to scaffold the activity and clearly outline learner expectations. Design standards organizations, such as Quality Matters, suggest the inclusion of statements that indicate a plan for how instructors will engage with learners, as well as the requirements for learner engagement in active learning. These statements regarding instructor engagement could be extended to include more transparency in the selection of instructional strategies. Murphy (2023) suggested that instructors should ‘pull back the curtain’ and take a few minutes to share the rationale and research that informs their decision to use strategies such as active learning. Opening a dialogue about the design process with students helps to manage expectations and anxieties that students might have in relation to the ‘What?’, ‘Why?’ and ‘How?’ for the active learning exercises.
Implications for Future Research
We contend that a blend of direct instruction and active learning strategies is optimized by instructional guidance, which provides explicit know-how and know-why for students to engage in learning tasks and activities. The present discussion does not intend to evaluate the utility of active learning as an instructional strategy. The efficacy of active learning is a recurring theme in the academic literature, and the justification for efficacy is largely anecdotal or based on self-reporting data from students (Hartikainen, Rintala, Pylväs and Nokelainen, 2019). Regardless, the process of incorporating active learning strategies with direct instruction appears to be beneficial for learning (Ahshan, 2021; Christie & De Graaff, 2017; Mintzes, 2020), and more likely, the learning experience can be harder to quantify. Our argument relates to the necessary inclusion of instructions and guidance that make the goals of active learning more efficient and effective (de Jong et al., 2023). Scardamalia and Bereiter (2006) stated earlier that knowledge about dominates traditional educational practice. It is the stuff of textbooks, curriculum guidelines, subject-matter tests, and typical school “projects” and “research” papers. Knowledge would be the product of active learning. In contrast, knowledge of, ‘suffers massive neglect’ (p. 101).  Knowledge enables learners to do something and allows them to actively participate in an activity. Knowledge comprises both procedural and declarative knowledge.  It is activated when the need for it is encountered in the action. Instructional guidance can help facilitate knowledge of, making the use of active learning techniques more efficient and effective.
Research is needed on the impact of instructional guidance on active learning strategies, especially when considering the incorporation of more sophisticated technologies and authentic problems (Rapanta, Botturi, Goodyear, Guardia and Koole 2021; Varvara, Bernardi, Bianchi, Sinjari and Piattelli, 2021). Recently, Lee (2020) examined the impact of instructor engagement on learning outcomes in an online course and determined that increased instructor engagement correlated with enhanced discussion board posts and student performance. A similar examination of the relationship between the instructional guidance provided and student learning outcomes would be a valuable next step. It could offer more explicit guidance and recommendations for the design and use of active learning strategies in online or blended courses.
Conclusion
Education was disrupted out of necessity for at least two years. This experience forced us to examine our practices in online and blended learning, as our sample size for evaluation grew dramatically. The outcome of our analysis is that effective design and inclusion of student engagement and interactions with instructors are critical for quality learning experiences (Rapanta et al., 2021; Sutarto, Sari and Fathurrochman, 2020; Varvara et al., 2021). Active learning appeals to many students (Christie & De Graaff, 2017) and instructors as it can help achieve many of the desired and required outcomes of our courses and programs. Our review and discussion highlighted the need to provide clear and explicit guidance to help minimize cognitive load and guide students through an invaluable learning experience. Further, instructors and designers who include explicit guidance participate in a metacognitive process, while they outline the purpose and sequence of steps required for the completion of active learning exercises. Creating instructions and providing a rationale for the use of active learning in a course gives instructors and designers an opportunity to reflect on the process and ensure that it aligns with the intended purpose or stated goals of the course. This reflective act makes active learning more intentional in use rather than employing it to ensure that students are present within the learning space.
 
References
Ahshan, R. (2021). A Framework of Implementing Strategies for Active Student Engagement in Remote/Online Teaching and Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090483
Ashiabi, G. S., & O’neal, K. K. (2008). A Framework for Understanding the Association Between Food Insecurity and Children’s Developmental Outcomes. Child Development Perspectives, 2(2), 71–77.
Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66–70.
Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem‐based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996(68), 3–12.
Bereiter, C. (2014). Principled practical knowledge: Not a bridge but a ladder. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 4–17.
Cavanaugh, J., Jacquemin, S. J., & Junker, C. R. (2023). Variation in student perceptions of higher education course quality and difficulty as a result of widespread implementation of online education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 28(4), 1787–1802.
Chinn, C. A., & Iordanou, K. (2023). Theories of Learning. Handbook of Research on Science Education: Volume III.
Christie, M., & De Graaff, E. (2017). The philosophical and pedagogical underpinnings of Active Learning in Engineering Education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(1), 5–16.
Cobb, P., & Bowers, J. (1999). Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 4–15.
Cooper, K. M., Schinske, J. N., & Tanner, K. D. (2021). Reconsidering the share of a think–pair–share: Emerging limitations, alternatives, and opportunities for research. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 20(1), fe1.
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2024). The Educational Affordances and Challenges of ChatGPT: State of the Field. TechTrends, 1–13.
de Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Chinn, C. A., Fischer, F., Gobert, J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Koedinger, K. R., Krajcik, J. S., Kyza, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2023). Let’s talk evidence–The case for combining inquiry-based and direct instruction. Educational Research Review, 100536.
Dring, J. C. (2019). Problem-Based Learning – Experiencing and understanding the prominence during Medical School: Perspective. Annals of Medicine and Surgery, 47, 27–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2019.09.004
Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2021). International handbook of inquiry and learning. Routledge.
Finelli, C. J., Nguyen, K., DeMonbrun, M., Borrego, M., Prince, M., Husman, J., Henderson, C., Shekhar, P., & Waters, C. K. (2018). Reducing student resistance to active learning: Strategies for instructors. Journal of College Science Teaching, 47(5).
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415.
Hammer, D. (1997). Discovery learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 485–529.
Hartikainen, S., Rintala, H., Pylväs, L., & Nokelainen, P. (2019). The Concept of Active Learning and the Measurement of Learning Outcomes: A Review of Research in Engineering Higher Education. Education Sciences, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9040276
Hartwell, A., Anderson, M., Hanlon, P., & Brown, B. (2021). Asynchronous discussion forums: Five learning designs.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2001). Learner experience and efficiency of instructional guidance. Educational Psychology, 21(1), 5–23.
Klepsch, M., & Seufert, T. (2020). Understanding instructional design effects by differentiated measurement of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Instructional Science, 48(1), Article 1.
Krahenbuhl, K. S. (2016). Student-centered Education and Constructivism: Challenges, Concerns, and Clarity for Teachers. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 89(3), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2016.1191311
Lange, C., Gorbunova, A., Shcheglova, I., & Costley, J. (2022). Direct instruction, worked examples and problem solving: The impact of instructional strategies on cognitive load. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–13.
Lapitan Jr, L. D., Tiangco, C. E., Sumalinog, D. A. G., Sabarillo, N. S., & Diaz, J. M. (2021). An effective blended online teaching and learning strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education for Chemical Engineers, 35, 116–131.
Lee, J. W. (2020). The roles of online instructional facilitators and student performance of online class activity. Lee, Jung Wan (2020). The Roles of Online Instructional Facilitators and Student Performance of Online Class Activity. Journal of Asian Finance Economics and Business, 7(8), 723–733.
Li, L., Xu, L. D., He, Y., He, W., Pribesh, S., Watson, S. M., & Major, D. A. (2021). Facilitating online learning via zoom breakout room technology: A case of pair programming involving students with learning disabilities. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 48(1), 12.
Lyman, F. (1981). Strategies for Reading Comprehension Think Pair Share. Unpublished Paper. University of Maryland Paper. Http://Www. Roe13. K12. Il.
Mintzes, J. J. (2020). From constructivism to active learning in college science. Active Learning in College Science: The Case for Evidence-Based Practice, 3–12.
Misra, F., & Mazelfi, I. (2021). Long-distance online learning during pandemic: The role of communication, working in group, and self-directed learning in developing student’s confidence. 225–234.
Murphy, J. T. (2023). Advice | 5 Ways to Ease Students Off the Lecture and Into Active Learning. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/5-ways-to-ease-students-off-the-lecture-and-onto-active-learning
Nerantzi, C. (2020). The use of peer instruction and flipped learning to support flexible blended learning during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Management and Applied Research, 7(2), 184–195.
Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., Guàrdia, L., & Koole, M. (2021). Balancing technology, pedagogy and the new normal: Post-pandemic challenges for higher education. Postdigital Science and Education, 3(3), 715–742.
Rincon-Flores, E. G., & Santos-Guevara, B. N. (2021). Gamification during Covid-19: Promoting active learning and motivation in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7157
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building. The Cambridge.
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories an educational perspective. Pearson Education, Inc.
Seethamraju, R. (2014). Effectiveness of using online discussion forum for case study analysis. Education Research International, 2014.
Slocum, T. A., & Rolf, K. R. (2021). Features of direct instruction: Content analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14(3), 775–784.
Sutarto, S., Sari, D. P., & Fathurrochman, I. (2020). Teacher strategies in online learning to increase students’ interest in learning during COVID-19 pandemic. Jurnal Konseling Dan Pendidikan, 8(3), 129–137.
Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 1–16.
Tan, H. R., Chng, W. H., Chonardo, C., Ng, M. T. T., & Fung, F. M. (2020). How chemists achieve active learning online during the COVID-19 pandemic: Using the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework to support remote teaching. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(9), 2512–2518.
Varvara, G., Bernardi, S., Bianchi, S., Sinjari, B., & Piattelli, M. (2021). Dental Education Challenges during the COVID-19 Pandemic Period in Italy: Undergraduate Student Feedback, Future Perspectives, and the Needs of Teaching Strategies for Professional Development. Healthcare, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9040454
Zhang, L. (2022). Guidance differs between teaching modes: Practical challenges in integrating hands-on investigations with direct instruction. Learning: Research and Practice, 8(2), 96–115.
Zhang, L., & Cobern, W. W. (2021). Confusions on “guidance” in inquiry-based science teaching: A response to Aditomo and Klieme (2020). Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 21, 207–212.
Zhang, L., Kirschner, P. A., Cobern, W. W., & Sweller, J. (2022). There is an evidence crisis in science educational policy. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 1157–1176.
Zou, D., & Xie, H. (2019). Flipping an English writing class with technology-enhanced just-in-time teaching and peer instruction. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1127–1142.
 

This week, we are featuring Dr. Dustin De Felice, Associate Professor and Director of MSU’s English Language Center. Dr. De Felice was recognized via iteach.msu.edu's Thank and Educator Initiative! We encourage MSU community members to nominate high-impact Spartan educators (via our Thank an Educator form) regularly!
Read more about Dustin’s perspectives below. #iteachmsu's questions are bolded below, followed by their responses!

You were recognized via the Thank an Educator Initiative. In one word, what does being an educator mean to you? 
One word = Language. I added my CV and resume into a WordCloud generator (https://www.jasondavies.com/wordcloud/) and both generations put that word in the center. I believe that it reflects my focus in my teaching, learning, and supporting. 



What does this word/quality look like in your practice? Have your ideas on this changed over time? If so, how?
I believe I can best assess student understanding through the use of a variety of classroom tasks and assignments that build from and into each other. I rely very heavily on projects that give students the chance to engage in conversations, observations or interactions with language learning situations and language learners. I also believe in autonomous learning and the benefits students receive from working through material at their own pace. As such, I have been offering my courses in hybrid forms with some interactions in the classroom balanced with other interactions asynchronously. Within my classroom, I shy away from lecturing for more than twenty minutes and within those twenty minute blocks, I incorporate video, audio, or other multimedia files along with practical examples that I will ask the students to complete in small groups. I like to design packets of activities that encourage my students to learn the material while demonstrating their current level of understanding at the same time.
All of this direction comes from my earliest experiences with languages and language teaching. I remember being drawn to the English language from an early age. I was fascinated by dialects and accents, and I was especially taken by comedians, rappers and great orators and their abilities to make the English language entertain, inspire and provoke. However, it didn’t take me too long to realize I wasn’t drawn to the English language per se, but to all languages. I began taking courses in linguistics, education, humanities and sociology to help me better understand the world-at-large. Early in my career, I started teaching English as Second Language in Chicago, and I found the experience exhilarating. There I was midway through my B.A. and I was teaching three hour classes every morning and every night four times a week. I worked in a rundown building with no A/C in the summer and half-working space heaters in the winter. The classes were full of immigrants from all over Latin America and most of my classes had 35-55 students in them. Of course there were no textbooks, no curriculum or even a plan for that matter, but I loved the challenge. I loved every moment of trying to help these motivated adults learn something about English, about the city and about the U.S. I think that the challenge is what keeps me going. I sincerely enjoying working with students on succeeding at whatever tasks they have in front of them, and I especially enjoy doing so when it involves language of all kinds.
Tell me more about your educational “setting.” This can include, but not limited to departmental affiliations, community connections, co-instructors, and students. (AKA, where do you work?)
My educational setting includes the English Language Center as my primary home with multiple affiliations in or with graduate programs, undergraduate courses, service-oriented centers, and student-centered activities. I have a much smaller teaching load than I used to now that I spend most of my time in administration, but I specifically asked to maintain a teaching load because of how much I draw from my teaching. In fact, I don’t know how I would get through each semester without having the opportunity to work alongside students and their learning. 
What is a challenge you experience in your educator role? Any particular “solutions” or “best practices” you’ve found that help you support student success at the university despite/in the face of this?
MSU is a big and sometimes confusing place. I see opportunities in my teaching as a way of making MSU a place where students can succeed. I strive to provide my students with a welcoming environment whereby their learning becomes one of many ways of helping them reach their long-term goals. I try to provide opportunities through my courses and daily interactions to educational experiences that will help shape students’ futures. I also strive to be someone the students are very comfortable approaching with questions and/or advice. This approach includes ensuring I am accessible and open for meetings as needed. Within my courses, I work to conscientiously provide my students with an interesting variety of tasks to help keep them curious, satisfied, and motivated.
What are practices you utilize that help you feel successful as an educator?
I am very interested in student success, so I often utilize a 2-week module schedule, which helps make tasks more manageable and less stressful than a 1-week module format. Many students have told me the additional week gives them enough time to understand readings and complete tasks without rushing, which leads to better quality submissions. I believe student success requires creativity and flexibility, so I design classes that give lots of new ways to integrate ideas into students’ lives. I intentionally design course activities and readings with a focus on practicality. I also strive to be very responsive and available to answer questions/concerns from students. Many students have told me that my timely comments and grading are very helpful to them. In my courses, I seek out extra resources based on student interest and need. That kind of searching often leads to flexibility in applying the course content to best serve the students. Because communication is a key component of the practices that help me feel successful, many students have commented on how they really enjoy the open communication between the students and me.  I hope to let everyone focus on their interests and pull out what will be useful for them in their personal and professional lives. Part of that hope includes taking the time to get to know my students’ interests. Lastly, I always have modules up ahead of time, which really helps students plan their time. 
What topics or ideas about teaching and learning would you like to see discussed on the iteach.msu.edu platform? Why do you think this conversation is needed at MSU? 
It has been a difficult few years with so many national and international events that I would like to hear more about keeping or reinvigorating the joy and passion in our teaching and learning. I often meet with students and faculty 1-to-1, and I have to say there are so many good ideas and perspectives to inspire and share.
What are you looking forward to (or excited to be a part of) next semester?
Now that my role is more administration than teaching, I look forward to learning more about what the faculty around me are doing in their classrooms. Of course, I get the pleasure of supporting their teaching, and I’m constantly amazed at the creativity I see in the faculty around me. I suppose the main reason I so enjoy learning about what the faculty are doing in their courses is because that level of creativity just brings out the best in our students. Watching our students learn, grow, and get closer to any and all their goals is just a rewarding endeavor.  



Don't forget to celebrate individuals you see making a difference in teaching, learning, or student success at MSU with #iteachmsu's Thank an Educator initiative. You might just see them appear in the next feature!

This poster outlines approximately 20 suggestions to help students navigate online courses more successfully. Even with careful planning and development, the normalization of remote learning has not been without challenges for the students enrolled in our courses. Besides worrying about a stable internet connection, students must confront a steep learning curve and considerable frustration when it comes to completing even the most basic coursework each week. Participation in the ASPIRE and SOIREE programs notwithstanding, and despite our carefully worded syllabi, weekly course modules, project packets, assignment prompts, and the like, students nevertheless experience significant confusion and anxiety when faced with the prospect of leaving the physical classroom behind for the brave new world of the virtual. The reduction of course material by instructors to bite-sized chunks and the opportunity for online collaboration with their classmates do not necessarily mean students greet online learning with open arms. Already entrenched attitudes and habits among many young adults do little to help them as they make the shift to online learning. But there are a number of fairly simple ways that instructors can smooth this rocky road over which students must now travel. The tips I share have emerged and been developed further as part of my own ongoing process to minimize confusion, frustration, and improve levels of engagement, while simultaneously imparting more agency to the students enrolled in my IAH courses here at Michigan State University.To access a PDF of the "Pandemic Pedagogy: Online Learning and Suggestions for Minimizing Student Storms in a Teacup" poster, click here.
Description of the Poster 
Pandemic Pedagogy: Online Learning and Suggestions for Minimizing Student Storms in a Teacup 
Stokes Schwartz, Center for Integrative Studies in the Arts and Humanities 
College of Arts and Letters, Michigan State University 
Abstract 
The normalization of remote learning during 2020-2021 has not been without challenges for the students enrolled in our courses.  Besides worrying about stable internet connections, they must also confront a steep learning curve and considerable frustration when it comes to completing even the most basic coursework each week. Even with instructor participation in the ASPIRE and SOIREE programs, carefully worded syllabi, weekly course modules, project packets, assignment prompts, and etc., students nevertheless experience significant confusion and anxiety when faced with the prospect of leaving the physical classroom behind for the virtual. Our reduction of course material to bite-sized chunks and the opportunity for online collaboration with their classmates via Zoom or Teams do not necessarily mean students greet online learning with open arms. Already entrenched attitudes and habits among many young adults do little to help them either in the shift to online learning.  But there are a few fairly simple ways that instructors can smooth the rocky road over which students must travel. The tips and suggestions I share in this poster presentation have emerged as part of my own ongoing process to minimize student confusion, frustration, and improve engagement, while simultaneously impart greater agency and opportunity for success to the young adults populating my asynchronous online IAH courses here at MSU during the 2020-2021 academic year. 
Background 

In mid-March 2020, school pupils, university students, and educators everywhere were thrown into disarray by the mass onset of the Covid-19 virus, related lockdowns, and interruptions to normal student-instructor interactions. 
At Michigan State University, we scrambled throughout the summer to prepare for the 2020-2021AY and reconfigure existing courses for online delivery.  
Yet reasonably well developed and presented online courses alone have not enough for students to succeed.  Even in the face of MSU’s push for empathy and understanding, students have demonstrated that they require additional help making the leap from traditional face-to-face to online learning. 
Instructors are well-placed to assist students in an ongoing way as they make this challenging transition.   
Without much additional work, we can support and encourage our students with weekly reminders that exhibit kind words, cues, prompts, signposts pointing the way forward, and calls to action. 
We can foster improved student engagement, learning, and success despite the challenging, new environment in which we operate. 
We can guide students through their many weekly activities with roadmaps to help them navigate course intricacies more easily 
We can provide students with ample opportunity for new ways of learning, thinking, knowing, and the acquisition of 21st century skills. 
In short, faculty teaching online courses occupy an ideal position to prepare students to operate more efficiently and productively in the real world after graduation since remote work and collaboration online is expected to increase markedly as society speeds further along into the 21st century. 

Develop Supporting Communications 

Beside online syllabi, course modules with seem to be clear directions, etc. students need reminders to keep an asynchronous online general education course in mind, on the rails, and moving forward.   
Routine, consistent supporting communications to students from the instructor help to minimize student confusion. 
Send reminders on the same day each week for the coming week. 
Include headers in all course documents, and email signatures, listing a few ‘how to succeed in this course’ tips. 
Share same supporting communication to weekly modules in LMS.  
Students benefit from supporting communication that guide them through the activities for a given week during the semester. 
When students see supporting communications routinely and predictably, they are more likely to remember and act on it. 

Provide Weekly Guidelines 

Through supporting communication, provide additional prompts, directions, clarifications, and reminders to students.  Let’s call these weekly reminders “guidelines.”. 
Emphasize steps students can take to achieve success in the course.  
Keep guidelines fairly short and to the point to avoid information overload. 
Include the week, your name, course name, and number at top of guidelines as both an advance organizer and to help guidelines standout in students’ email inboxes. 
Provide students with concise ‘roadmaps’ in these guidelines making it easy to plan and carry out their coursework each week. 
Conclude guidelines with a call to action for students to complete course-related activities, much like a TV or online commercial, or an old fashioned print ad. 
Think of weekly guidelines as marketing communications that have a higher purpose than just promotion however.  
Share same guidelines at top of weekly online modules in LMS, so students can access them in more than one place.  

Include Key Course Policy Reminders 

Students will not remember all course policies, and expectations outlined in our syllabi.  Some might conveniently “forget.”   
Provide gentle reminders from week to week.  
Assist students by including important course information as part of the guidelines sent each week.  
Remind students of key course policies, expectations, and their responsibilities as members of the course. 
One possible segue way might be,  “For students who have chosen to remain in this course, the expectation is. . .” 
Remind students that we are in a university setting, they are adults, and to avoid letting themselves fall through the cracks. 
Invite students to seek help or clarification from the instructor if they or their student learning team need it. 

Foster Civil Interaction 

We have asked students to make a huge leap into uncharted waters.  They are frustrated and possibly fearful. 
Many are not used to online learning, self-reflection, thinking on their feet, problem solving, or working cohesively with others.  
Many already exhibit an entitled, customer service mindset. 
Make expectations for civil interaction clear with a concise statement in online syllabi, modules, and weekly guidelines.   
Model civility with polite decorum and kindness to reduce potential problems with disgruntled students. 
Be respectful and civil in your synchronous, asynchronous, or email interaction with students.  Listen without interrupting. 
Avoid terse replies, even to naïve questions! 
Use the student’s name in verbal or email replies. 
Reduce the potential for unpleasant episodes by opening all email replies with “Thank you for your email,” and conclude them with “Best/Kind Regards. . .”   
Be the adult in the room and show patience, patience, patience! 
Here are vital teachable moments that allow us to help shape students for collegial and productive working lives following graduation. 
Civil interaction is challenging given the various pressures and constraints under which all of us, faculty and students, must operate, but it is an important part of facilitating continued student engagement and success in our online courses.  

Remind Students of the Skills They Cultivate 

Besides the specific subject matter of the course, remind students in weekly guidelines that they are also cultivating real world expertise.   
‘21st century skills, ’ a term used by Christopher J. Dede, John Richards  and others in The 60-Year Curriculum: New Models for Lifelong Learning in the Digital Economy (2020), enable a smooth transition into the globalized digital economy after graduation.   
Remind students that they are refining relevant skills in:  
Deeper (critical) thinking  
Collaboration and collegiality  
Personal and agency and proactive engagement.  
Effective planning and organization  
Time management.   
Intellectually openness and mental agility.   
Learning from mistakes.   
Accountability and ownership 
Self-Awareness  
Attention to detail  
Timely and Frequent Communication with Your Team  
Creative problem-solving  
Development of high quality work 
Consistency  
On-time delivery of assignments and projects. 
Self-regulation 
Frequent practice of skills like these during weekly course-related activities better prepares students for long term employability through an anticipated six decades of working life in a rapidly changing world. 

Establish Consistent Guideline Format 
Below is a possible format for the weekly guidelines I propose: 

A recurring header in your weekly that lists easy steps students can take to ensure their own success in course.  
Begin with an advance organizer that identifies right away the week, semester, and dates the guidelines are for. 
Follow with a friendly greeting and focusing statement in a brief paragraph. 
Highlight any due dates in yellow below the greeting below greeting and focusing statement. 
Include two-three concise paragraphs that enumerate and outline individual assignments or team projects for the week. 
Provide brief directions for how (and when) to ask questions or seek clarification. 
Furnish technical assistance contact information for students who experience challenges uploading assignments or team projects. 
Remind students gently about the collaborative course design and expectations for students enrolled in the course. 
Mention to students of the need to keep course policies and expectations in mind as they complete their work. 
Highlight the big picture skills students practice each week besides the specific subject matter of the course, and how those skills are relevant to their lives after graduation. 
Finish with a closing salutation that is a bit less formal and includes good wishes for students’ continued safety and well-being. 

Conclusion 

The approach outlined here has emerged, crystalized, and evolved over two semesters in the interest of ensuring student success in asynchronous online IAH courses. 
While these observations are preliminary at this point, most students in the six courses taught during 2020-2021 have met the challenges facing them, completed their individual and collaborative coursework, and met or exceeded rubric expectations.  
 Anticipated student problems and drama either have not materialized, or have been minimal. 
Early impressions suggest that supporting communications like these are helpful to students when it comes to navigating online courses more easily and completing related tasks. 
Weekly supporting communications, presented as brief guidelines, might also be useful in the context in synchronous online, hybrid, and hy-flex as well as traditional face-to-face courses when it comes to helping students navigate and complete coursework in less confused, more systematic way. 
Future plans include refining the weekly guidelines further and possibly assessing their effectiveness through a small study. 

For years, the Office of Admissions has provided our campus with an academic profile of each incoming class. Admissions is now positioned to provide a similar profile of admitted students' co-curricular activities. The data-informed profile provides opportunities to assess how many such activities were tied to areas such as athletics or find more narrow measures, such as the scale of first-year Lyman Briggs College student involvement within the fine arts. Additionally, our institution can identify involvements in areas such as research activity, with such involvements potentially providing students with a foundation for future involvement in high-impact experiences at the undergraduate level.To access a PDF of the "What is the Activities Profile of our Fall 2021 First-Year Class?" poster, click here.
Description of the Poster 
 
What is the Activities Profile of our Fall 2021 First-Year Class? 
Terence Brown 
Abstract 
For years, the Office of Admissions has provided our campus with an academic profile of each incoming class. Admissions is now positioned to provide a similar profile of admitted students’ cocurricular activities. The data-informed profile provides opportunities to assess how many such activities were tied to areas such as athletics or find more narrow measures, such as the scale of first-year Lyman Briggs College student involvement within the fine arts. Additionally, our institution can identify involvements in areas such as research activity, with such involvements potentially providing students with a foundation for future involvement in high-impact practices at the undergraduate level.  [The abstract is accompanied by word cloud that forms a two-dimensional Spartan helmet from the Common Application’s categories for student co-curriculars.]  
Introduction 
MSU’s adoption of the Common Application, now allows Admissions for to collect descriptive information for applicants’ cocurricular activities. The additional information includes applicant descriptions of their high school cocurriculars, categories assigned to each activity and whether a student wishes to continue participation in the activity during their collegiate years. Currently, approximately 71% of first-year students apply to MSU via the Common Application.    This assessment fundamentally asks two questions: 

What does the profile look in the aggregate and by college? 
Can the profile information support our institution’s efforts in the realm of offering high-impact practices (Kuh et al., 2008; AACU, 2018) to our students? 

Results 
In assessing the 204,672 admitted student activity entries as of April 19, 2021, there were a few general findings. First was that students wished to continue with approximately 66% percent of these activities. Second was that the leading activity categories were athletics, community service and work. The collective of academic activities was ranked fourth, with the category having been in the top three in the two preceding years. The test case of Lyman Briggs majors with fine arts experiences was a significant (378 total) but small 5.5%. A full review of results across colleges is pending, but early findings only showed occasional reordering of the established top four categories.   This data must be viewed with the understanding that many applications are completed by the parents of applicants (Jaschik, 2017). However, the data still provides a good foundation for identifying activities that can serve as a gateway to high-impact practices at MSU. There were lower rankings for high school activities categories covering involvements that would most-readily prepare students for Internships, Diversity/Global Understanding and Research.  [The “results” section includes an Excel chart that lists the total activities reported by category, the Common Application’s activity categories, high impact experience categories and MSU Student Activities categories for student organizations.]  
Methods 
During the three most-recent admissions cycles, an iterative process has been used to collect and organized the cocurricular data from applications submitted via the Common Application platform. The Common Application is one of three platforms available to students, but was used by the majority of applicants in each of the last three admission cycles.   Summary data was compiled and applied to a matrix that incorporates all 30 Common Application categories for activities, five of the 11 high-impact practice categories and 12 of MSU’s Student Activities Office’s applicable student organization categories. Additional keywork searches were conducted, identifying student involvement in popular activities such as DECA and rare research areas such as CRISPR, but the activity profile’s assessment mainly focused on the broader categories.  [This section includes seven small, unconnected circles that are collectively placed in an array that forms a larger circle. Each circle includes text that describes a different step in the process used to gather, compile and share the data used in this poster presentation.]  
Conclusions 
The dominant application categories have largely held steady for three admission cycles. There was a notable change with the emergence of work moving into the top three. Incidentally, the top three categories have slightly varied in previous comparisons between MSU college cohorts. A similar assessment will be made after the closing of our MSU’s deposit deadline.  Future work in this area can be supported through use of the Educational Development Plan which Michigan schools maintain starting in middle school. To determine whether a particular high school activity helps prepare for high-impact involvement, the assessment portion of the EDP (Michigan Department of Education) could be used to identify traits that George Kuh associates with high-impact practices. Were the EDP to identify activities that provide students with sustained involvement, advisor involvement or a relevant coaching philosophy, such data could be inputted into the Slate CRM, and shared with appropriate campus partners prior to admitted student matriculation.  
Citations 

Association of American Colleges & Universities (2018). High-impact educational practices. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/node/4084 
Jaschik, S. (July 26, 2017). Survey: Parents finishing parts of college applications. From Inside Higher Education 
Kuh, G. D., Schneider, C. G., & Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities 
Michigan Department of Education (n.d.). The Educational Development Plan, p. 3. Retrieved from https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/EDP_Fundamentals_ADA2017_570694_7.pdf 

Instructing students during the Covid 19 pandemic has created many new challenges and upended normative pedagogical practices in learning spaces. Teaching in the arts, a traditionally hands-on process, represents a particularly unique set of challenges. Studio art faculty have long been asked to perform with limited resources, particularly those in the domestic arts where practitioners are largely women, people of color, and folks from marginalized populations. In this poster presentation, I will discuss how historically, in times of war, and now a pandemic, domestic work or matriculture, is revisited by societies at large. One needs only to look at the proliferation of bread making advice across social platforms; an intense return to cooking, and the sharing of recipes for meals that are comforting; renewed interest in growing plants and gardening to recognize the need to prioritize domestic activities as high priorities during this time. It is noteworthy to acknowledge that these same domestic activities function as productive distractions from trauma, and offer meditative practices, while providing individuals and their families with activities and outcomes that commonly bring about feelings of comfort, and security. Accordingly, I will discuss how these domestic skills can be applied to experimental learning and how students can draw on these practices with rigor for more personal resilience, innovation and imagination in their studio arts practice.To access a PDF of the "Matricultural Practices in Studio Art Courses" poster, click here.
Description of the Poster 
Matricultural Practices in Studio Art Courses 
Rebecca E. Schuiling Apparel and Textile Design Art, Art, History and Design Michigan State University 
Introduction 
Studio environment, now that we are online, happens in the home. Students are making studios of their kitchen table, twin bed, and basement floors. Creative projects that would have been executed on industry standard machines and equipment are now being created from discarded items in the family garage, recycle bin, and the junk drawer. While creative spaces, commonly known professionally as studios, have always had direct connections to matricultural underpinnings, at this time, studio practices and matricultural practices commingle.  
Students and professors alike take for granted the matricultural items and spaces around them, because they commonly exist in patriarchal spaces such as drawing studios with rigid standing tables, fluorescent lighting, cell structure classrooms with concrete floors. The pandemic forced them to examine their surroundings with a critical eye to discover new approaches and materials for creative outcomes. This returned everyone to a matricultural ethos, where materials and approaches reflect the Hestian sphere. Materials that were readily available commonly were found in the natural environment and in the home, which lead to a new appreciation for  sustainable media and materials readily available when viewed through a lens of multiplicity. 
In my studio courses; Knitwear, Advanced Knitwear, and Explorations in Apparel and Textile Design, I employ matricultural pedagogical strategies. The following are a few highlights as to the use and success of Matriculture as a pedagogy. 
Matriculture as Pedagogy 
In the introduction to her book, Cassandra Speaks 2020, Elizabeth Lesser notes that the stories a culture tells, become the culture. Stories with terms coded as feminine, “the home, the hearth, the “womanly arts” of empathy and care” are erased in favor of stories of warriors and violence (Lesser 2020:11). In this way, matriculture embraces practices commonly considered domestic arts, crafts, and even women’s work, because it offers sustainable practices and compassionate community based outcomes. 
In ReMembering Matricultures: Historiography of Subjugated Knowledges, Irene Wiens-Friesen Wolfstone imagines a future where curricula and syllabi are developed through the conceptual and theoretical framework of Matricultures. Her working definition of Matriculture is mother-centered societies founded on maternal values of care-taking and meeting needs, which become ethical principles for men and women, mothers and not-mothers. Matricultures are socially egalitarian and governed by consensus (2018: 5)  
During the Coronavirus pandemic, many returned to matricultural spaces, materials, and approaches for creative studios without fully realizing the connection. Given these factors, professors commonly asked students to use what is around them for creative outcomes in their studios, such as garden mud and dough used for ceramics; a pile of pots and pans for still life drawing; and onions and beets used for fabric dyes.  
Matriculture Pedagogical Case Study Examples 
Students were asked to be highly resourceful for space and materials while taking creative studios online. Closets of parents and peers were raided so as to locate appropriate materials that can be upcycled or repurposed. Furry family companions and stuffed animals within the home, are now models for knitted items such as scarves, blankets, mittens and hand warmers. 
Reconnecting with Matricutural Relationships 
A student in my Advanced Knitwear class could not afford new yarn or notions for the class. She reached out to her family, and her grandmother was gifted her a stash of materials including yarns. Her grandmother was thrilled that her granddaughter was learning to knit and that the materials she had collected over the years would finally be utilized for a creative outcome. The student had lots of materials for her projects that would not impinge on her affording other supplies. (Studio majors commonly spend more than $500 per course per semester). 
Reconnecting to Matricultural Spaces 
Due to the fact that many students are working in tiny spaces, as they are sharing their homes with extended family members, or are limited to small apartments or dorm rooms. Space is at a premium in the pandemic, especially for students. Students negotiate with family or roommates for space at the kitchen table or for a bedroom to become a studio for the semester. Storing supplies requires communication and innovative thinking to prevent children or pets from inadvertently ruining paints, markers, fabrics, and other creative materials. In return, the students will offer gifts of their time to make roommates dinner or even some of their creative outcomes. 
Reconnecting to Matricultural Resources 
Students in fashion illustration courses are using tea or coffee to paint their croquis figures. Orange peels and strawberry hulls now build the silhouettes to create texture and line for garment illustrations. Collage items are created as students forage around the house collecting and collating mail, paper goods, and other household items. Everyday household objects take on a new life in still lifes created in the home, frequently with family members critiquing and contributing. 
Analysis 
Wolfstone notes that Foucault’s methodology of historiography exposes how knowledge construction is influenced by colonialism, patriarchy and capitalism. Wolfstone posits that this is a useful framework “for exploring questions such as: How did we get to this place where patriarchy is presented as the only viable social order? How can we remember the subjugated knowledge of matricultures?” ((Wolfstone 2018: 7). In a patriarchal society, crafts are coded as feminine and amateur. They do not carry hegemonic institutional accreditations. Furthermore, crafting is often discounted as medium as it is typically associated with clothing and, therefore, considered superficial or surface. The Covid-19 Pandemic has forced a societal reckoning with this prioritization. The anxiety, fear, and unknown of living through a contagion, coupled with societal and economic unrest and institutionalized disparities; has led us back to the familiar; to home; to matriculture. To the domestic work that sustains life. 
By employing Matriculture as a pedagogical method in my creative studios, students are encouraged through their studio practice and design processes to simultaneously reconnect to family, reconnect to resources, and reconnecting to spaces in their own lives and creative practices. Thus, moving away from a traditional patriarchal lens of institutionalized learning to an authentic, sustainable, and community based matricultural practice. 
Summary 
In times of crisis, the domestic or matriculture is revisited. In my studio pedagogy, I employed matricultural practices, materials, and approaches because many students were isolated in home environments, where they were also engaged with domestic activities that were applicable to experiential learning and creative outcomes. Students reconnected with family, the home, and resources found in the home. Students draw on these practices with rigor for more personal resilience, innovation, and imagination in their studio practice and creative outcomes. 
Bibliography 
Foucault, M. (1984). Nietzsche, genealogy, history. In P. Rabinow (Ed.) The Foucault reader (pp. 76-100). New York: Pantheon Books. 
Kimmerer, R. W. (2015). Braiding sweetgrass. Milkweed Editions. 
Lesser, E. (2020). Cassandra Speaks. Harper Wave. 
Wolfstone I.W.F (2018).  ReMembering Matricultures: Historiography of Subjugated Knowledges. Accessed April 19, 2021: https://www.academia.edu/37336416/ReMembering_Matricultures_Historiography_of_Subjugated_Knowledges 
In her book, Robin Wall Kimmerer notes that “cosmologies are a source of identity and orientation to the world. They tell us who we are. We are inevitably shaped by them no matter how distant they may be from our consciousness…..On one side of the world were people whose relationship with the living world was shaped by Skywoman, who created a garden for the well-being of all. On the other side was another woman with a garden and a tree. But for tasting its fruit, she was banished. And then they met- the offspring of Skywoman and the children of Eve- and the land bears the scars of that meeting, the echoes of their stories” (Kimmerer 2015: 6-7).  
Wolfstone continues, “Matricultures do not presume the subordination of men, and thus are not the reverse of patriarchy. Matricultures assume a reciprocal relationality between land and culture” 
My research is an exploration of the material culture of dress and appearances, specifically knitted dress. I draw from disciplines including but not limited to Dress, Cultural Studies, Sociology, and Visual Culture in order to build qualitative methodological frameworks, studies, and analyses that allow for better understanding of the rituals of craft. My research and scholarship reveal how crafting practices and rituals of handcraft are vehicles of empowerment.  

This week, we are featuring Norman Scheel, a Research Associate in MSU’s Department of Radiology Cognitive Imaging Research Center. Norman was recognized via iteach.msu.edu's Thank and Educator Initiative! We encourage MSU community members to nominate high-impact Spartan educators (via our Thank an Educator form) regularly!
Read more about Norman’s perspectives below. #iteachmsu's questions are bolded below, followed by their responses!

You were recognized via the Thank an Educator Initiative. In one word, what does being an educator mean to you? Share with me what this word/quality looks like in your practice? (Have your ideas on this changed over time? If so, how?) 
The word would be “rewarding”. For me, teaching and learning is a two-way street and no matter in which direction you are driving, it is always an investment in the future and there is always traffic in both ways. Above all, I want to set up my students for success. As a teacher, I see myself as a conductor to help my students achieve their personal goals and as a role model who possibly has a substantial influence on the future of my students. So, seeing my students excel is highly rewarding, but I am also learning so much from my students, every day, which is also immensely rewarding.
Tell me more about your educational “setting.” This can include, but not limited to departmental affiliations, community connections, co-instructors, and students. (AKA, where do you work?)
I am now in the final stages of my postdoc in the Radiology Department of Michigan State University and am currently applying for Assistant Professor positions. Together with Prof. David Zhu I supervise and mentor the graduate students in our lab as well as students that rotate through it. I also mentor and advise students remotely for their bachelor’s and master's theses at my home University of Lübeck, Germany where I did my Ph.D. in Computer Science and Computational Neuroscience. In my research, I work interdisciplinary with many different universities, e. g. Vanderbilt University, University of Texas, John Hopkins University, or the Max Planck Institute Tübingen, Germany, on a variety of research questions. With my collaborators at these institutions, there are always students working on joint projects where it is natural to mutually teach skills important for the project’s success but also in the personal interest of the students.
What is a challenge you experience in your educator role? Any particular “solutions” or “best practices” you’ve found that help you support student success at the university despite/in the face of this?
My German Diploma in Informatics taught me the importance of multidimensional learning, or as Aristotle said, “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts”. Over the last few years, I saw a trend that students are taught highly specific topics, without relating these to a “grand scheme”. Integrating information from multiple perspectives gives cross-references to other related topics and courses. This integration facilitates the ability to abstract learned information and helps to apply it in a more holistic way of connecting “the bigger picture”. For clarity, the content in my lectures is presented in a way that is illustrative rather than abstract, so that students are able to grasp the content and put it into relation to what they have learned before. I always try to highlight cross-references as much as possible, so that students see past the boundaries of final exams.
What are practices you utilize that help you feel successful as an educator?
The most important I think is to find a way to effectively communicate. As my teaching is typically in a small group or individual setting, I am able to tailor my teaching directly to the needs of my students. This helps tremendously in finding ways to communicate expectations between my students and me. 
What topics or ideas about teaching and learning would you like to see discussed on the iteach.msu.edu platform? Why do you think this conversation is needed at MSU? 
It would be amazing to have a central place on the platform, where educators could advertise potential master’s or bachelor’s theses, or rotation projects, or vice versa, students could advertise that they are on the look-out for these projects, with a few skills that they have, to see if there might be a fit. In my time here at MSU, it has been very difficult to find mid-level academic hands, especially interdisciplinary ones. The lack of or at least problematic communication between different parts of the University makes local collaboration very difficult.
What are you looking forward to (or excited to be a part of) next semester?
I am excited for a few of my students to get the chance to present at scientific conferences. It is always such a rewarding experience and always such a big push for motivation and new ideas.


Don't forget to celebrate individuals you see making a difference in teaching, learning, or student success at MSU with #iteachmsu's Thank an Educator initiative. You might just see them appear in the next feature!