Online Discipleship and Relationships: Being Relational Online

Today on the education blog let’s explore a topic that is crucial in the online learning and teaching discussion: how do we recreate a personal touch in the digital environment? Researchers that study distance education define an online teaching and learning persona as your, “social presence.” You may be saying to yourself… “But Ric, I don’t do online teaching.“ Ah, but remember what we said on the blog last week. We are all doing online teaching just by using a learning management system such as Populi.

As we know, discipleship is key to any biblical student – teacher relationship. Can natural and frustration-free discipleship take place online? Can mediated communication such as Populi really take the place of face-to-face classroom interaction? Perhaps not perfectly, no, but social interaction online does have strengths that the face-to-face classroom lacks. For example, it is easy in an online discussion to require a main post and follow-up comments from each student and to track whether or not each student is participating. In the physical classroom, it is much more difficult to track this individually.

It gets better. Lowenthal and Dunlap (2009) looked at whether or not storytelling can enhance online learning. They concluded that digital storytelling such as explaining a photo, narrating a video, giving a PowerPoint presentation, or disclosing personal information and relating it to what is being learned helped students retain more information, feel more involved in their learning, and humanize the teacher. Bottom line: we can be relational online.

What does it really mean to be relational in an online context? Bentley (2011) defines social presence as “an individual’s ability to demonstrate his or her state of being in a virtual space”. This would include the level of connectivity and communication taking place on a personal level between a teacher and his or her students. It would also include the individual’s “level of availability” for interpersonal interactions.

Bentley says, “social presence may represent the degree to which experiences seem unmediated.” Oddly enough, an experience that seems unmediated will almost always occur when teachers and students are comfortable and familiar with interactions in the online environment. This kind of natural social interaction takes place best when people forget that they are using a learning management system or a tool to communicate at all.

With that in mind, here are a few questions to get a conversation started today:

How comfortable are you communicating with students online? How comfortable do you think students are communicating with each other (or with anyone else for that matter) online? Is your interaction with students on Populi important to you? Is it important to our students? Do you seek opportunities for online interaction or avoid it? Do you view Populi as a way to serve our students or as a simple grading and correcting tool? Is an online class or course shell that is devoid of all personal information and human interaction ideal? Can we do better?

Thanks for thinking with me. As usual, leave any comments below. You can click the drop-down box and select “anonymous” to make a comment anonymously.

Works cited

Bentley, Kia J. (2011). The centrality of social presence in online teaching and learning 

Lowenthal, Patrick R. And Joanna C. Dunlap. (2009). From pixel on a screen to real person in your students lives: establishing social presence using digital storytelling

Distance Education Best Practices

Source

First of all, I want to congratulate and thank everyone who has been doing online education at EBI for the past three semesters. Moore and Kearsley propose a working definition of distance education as, “teaching and planned learning in which teaching normally occurs in a different place from learning, requiring communication through technologies as well as special institutional organization (2012).” Two years ago, online learning didn’t happen at EBI. Today, we each interact regularly with students asynchronously via Populi, which technically counts as distance education according to Moore and Kearsley’s definition. Crazy!

Still, we have a long way to go in order to catch up with current educational trends. Allen and Seaman (2013) Point out that as of 2012, 62.4% of higher education institutions provided complete online programs to students. They claim that only 13.5% of higher education institutions offered no purely online classes at all... that was five years ago. You may have heard we’re moving in the direction of offering purely online classes ourselves.

Considering that, let’s examine some online learning best practices in this blog post. Moore and Kearsley (2012) propose that distance education is best delivered and designed in the broader framework of a supporting system. In their words, “adopting a systems approach [to distance ed] is the secret of successful practice.”  They identify the main subsystems of a distance education system as: technology, learning, teaching, program/course design, management, policy, and organization. 

They go on to say, “Content, or subject matter, does not make a course. In a course, the content is organized into a carefully designed structure that is intended to make it as easy as possible for the student to learn... Therefore, preparing a distance education course requires not only the content expert but also instructional designers who can organize the content according to what is known about the theory and practice of knowledge management and the theory of learning.” The point here is that online education (just like all education) is best envisioned as a collaborative effort between multiple experts: design experts, technologists, chief education officers (think dean of ed), and content experts to name a few examples.

Everyone agrees that the key to an online class is communication. This communication should not just exist in the form of content delivery (one way communication). Moore and Kearsley say, “it is the communication that goes on between the individual learner and an instructor that transforms common information into personally relevant knowledge (2012)”. They go on to explain that the form this personal communication takes and the extent of the communication will vary based on the subject matter being taught, the educational philosophy of the designers, and even the maturity level of the students. But they make a point to emphasize the imperative nature of this type of communication. Similarly, most instructional designers emphasize the importance of peer interactions via discussion boards, wikis, or blogs, etc.

Finally, a key component of all education including distance education is quality control. In distance education, the key components of quality control are the products that students complete at regular intervals throughout the course. These are generally thought of as “assignments”, though quality control can be insured another ways as well. These assignments should be based on the knowledge content of the course and deserve careful review, evaluation, correction, and comment from the instructor himself. Anecdotally, speaking from my own experience, I have found that online assignments tend to be more challenging and time consuming than assignments in face-to-face courses. There is a very real sense in which online learning requires discipline, time, and commitment.

What has your experience been so far in delivering assignments and some content knowledge online to students at EBI using Populi? What components of the systems approach outlined above do you include in your regular teaching even for face-to-face courses? Which course has been the best online course that you’ve ever taken? What made it so good? What are the essential characteristics and qualities of a good online teacher? Are they the same as those for a good face-to-face teacher?

Feedback is always welcome.

Sources:

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance education: a systems view of online learning. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

I. Elaine Allen, & Jeff Seaman. (2013). Changing course: ten years of tracking online education in the United States. Pearson Education.

Toward a Healthy Teacher-Student Relationship

How does the student-teacher relationship work? What role does the teacher play in students' lives in scripture? Here at EBI? In our culture at large? What does authority of the Bible School teacher look like as compared with the authority of a pastor or elder in a church? Let's explore these topics together over the next few weeks on the education blog.

As people, we have a tendency to worship things and individuals rather than God. Jeremiah 1:16 "I will pronounce My judgments on them concerning all their wickedness, whereby they have forsaken Me and have offered sacrifices to other gods, and worshiped the works of their own hands.

If only all idolatry were easy to spot! 1 John 2:16: reminds us that, “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.” Unfortunately, subtle lies related to the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life can creep into the student-teacher relationship. 

The student-teacher relationship is a contractual one with certain assumed cultural and biblical obligations. There is a certain way to conceptualize the contractual obligations between teachers and students that frames education as a give and take relationship. The teacher gives and the student takes or receives. While this model is not entirely without merit, I personally believe that it tends toward those problems in 1 John 2:16. Accreditation with TRACS is going to push us toward a contractual obligation with students centered around the students' achievement of measurable, predetermined learning objectives. 

At its core, of course, the student–teacher relationship is built on trust. Trust requires transparency. Transparency is achieved when students understand where and how the information being presented to them came about and when the obligations of teachers and students are clear. Just like teachers, students must weigh and evaluate available evidence and come to personal conclusions. Transparency means that teachers admit when they do not know the answer to a question or objection. It also means that teachers admit when their knowledge is incomplete, their evidence is circumstantial or when their opinions are open to interpretation.

Empowerment (the concept that every course should enable students to achieve and demonstrate core competencies related to the discipline, course, or lesson) enhances learning and transparency. On a practical level, this means that we shouldn't be saying as teachers, "students are paying to hear what I have to say about a topic." This sort of mentality about the teacher-student relationship fosters an unhealthy dependency on the teacher rather than the healthy interdependence and independence modeled in scriptural teaching relationships such as the relationship between Paul and Timothy or Jesus and his disciples.

In general, biblically speaking, we want to embrace those teaching practices and standards that reduce the fleshly problems discussed in 1 John 2:16. As humans, we need guard rails and protections against the idolatry that so easily creeps into our lives.

I think the best way to do this is to simply esteem others as higher than ourselves and practice the kind of incarnational ministry that Jesus himself modeled for us. What about you? Do you see the need for guard rails or standards in your teaching relationship that prevents idol worship? How do the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life intersect with teaching? How do you achieve a healthy balance between challenging students with the word of God on the one hand and participating in what God is already doing in their hearts, minds, and lives? What steps or efforts are you making to create transparency and trust in your student relationships? Is it obvious where you got the information from your notes or do you at times pass off other people's information as your own? Are you generally more focused on student learning or on your own teaching? 

Thanks for any and all comments/participation. 

The K-12 Conversation

Image Credit

How do we know when someone is ready for EBI? Is a high school diploma and a letter from a pastor enough or is there more involved? 1 Corinthians 3:2 says, "I had to feed you with milk, not with solid food, because you weren't ready for anything stronger. And you still aren't ready" (NLT). The Corinthians were "not ready" for engagement in spiritual truth because they were, "still controlled by [their] sinful nature," or living in the flesh (verse 3). 

Jesus also talks about the idea of being ready to engage in truth. John 16:12, ""There is so much more I want to tell you, but you can't bear it now." In addition to the information Jesus presented, he was very concerned that his disciples build life skills that would prepare them for life after his death, burial and resurrection. He often chastised the disciples for their lack of faith (Mark 4:40, Matt 8:26, Luke 8:25). He taught them how to travel (Luke 8). He taught them about humility and service by washing their feet (Matt 26). 

We know that people don't have to be perfect in order to understand truth (John 1:8-10) so our task as educators and trainers is to balance the idea of being ready with the urgent need to change hearts and minds with the truth of the Word. A simple phrase used by Christian educators might be helpful here: Our task is to meet students where they're at. 

Here at EBI, how do we know when someone is ready to engage in the very verbal, literacy-heavy learning environment that we have created? Basic skills such as writing, reading, listening, and critical thinking are not universal, as we know. When someone engages in a learning environment that they are not ready for, many things can go wrong. In fact, as we can see from the above Bible verses it is better for the teacher to go back and re-teach basic concepts and skills rather than moving into information that the learner cannot handle. 

The good news is that we are not the only people having this conversation. Professors at two and four year colleges around United States have noticed a considerable increase in the number of students who need remedial college courses that re-teach high school content knowledge. According to Henry and Stahl (2017), "In two-year colleges, nearly 75% of incoming students need remediation in more than one academic area (most commonly Mathematics and English) and enroll in at least two remedial courses to prepare for college-level coursework."

What does this trend mean for us? As has been noted, students are coming to us less prepared in general for college and less accustomed to lecture-style teaching. Because we attract a good number of private and homeschool students from a wide variety of backgrounds, we can't be confident about the type of education that students received prior to arriving here. If we think about the K-12 experience in terms of a pipeline, a lot can go wrong with the fittings, the joints, and the pipe itself on the way to our EBI bucket under the faucet. 

On the admissions front, we make every effort to select students who are ready for college. Not only is engaging in college prematurely bad for the learner, it can be detrimental for the learning of all other students at the school. My suggestion is that we step up these efforts by collecting High School grades, ACT and SAT scores and other relevant data from the K-12 experience that could help us make a more informed decision. 

On the remediation front, most of us agree that we need more than just one course that teaches basic writing skills to a small group of "struggling" students. A general education writing course is an urgent need for students who have been out of school for a long time and for the 75% of students entering 2-year schools who need remediation anyways. 

Writing skills alone are not enough, of course. There are many other ways in which students struggle. For example some lack basic social skills, financial management skills, listening skills, creativity, a thriving spiritual walk with God, time management skills, training in logic, critical thinking, etc. 

In the broader culture, education is being re-imagined and re-envisioned it in the 21st century as K-16 education. This means that basic skills development such as reading, writing, arithmetic, and scientific inquiry skills are designed to be continued through a bachelors degree. There's a reason most people are unable to get even a basic job without a bachelors degree in our society.

What about us here? Do you feel as though our students are prepared for the rigors of EBI in the same way that they were 10 years ago? 20 years ago? What steps do you take in your classes to ensure that basic skills in literacy, critical thinking, and social interaction are adequate before you move on to core content? Are you primarily focused on delivering information or building life skills? Which skills are most crucial for success at EBI? 

Any thoughts are, as usual, very much appreciated. 

Works Cited: 

Henry, L. A., & Stahl, N. A. (2017). Dismantling the Developmental Education Pipeline: Potent Pedagogies and Promising Practices That Address the College Readiness Gap. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(6), 611-616. doi:10.1002/jaal.640

Are teaching standards necessary?

James 3:1-2 “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.”

When someone teaches kindergarten math they are teaching extremely basic topics that they have completely mastered themselves. Virtually everyone is a kindergarten math subject matter expert. Do they let just anyone teach kindergarten? Why does the state standards initiative known as the "common core" still lay out standards for kindergarten math? Some of the standards include:

Grade K Overview

Counting and Cardinality

• Know number names and the count sequence.
• Count to tell the number of objects.
• Compare numbers.

Operations and Algebraic Thinking

• Understand addition as putting together and adding to, and understand subtraction as taking apart and taking from.

Number and Operations in Base Ten

• Work with numbers 11-19 to gain foundations for place value.

Measurement and Data

• Describe and compare measurable attributes.
• Classify objects and count the number of objects in each category

Geometry

• Identify and describe shapes.
• Analyze, compare, create, and compose shapes.

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/K/introduction/ 


Just because we know something extremely well does not mean that we are good at teaching it. Similarly, as James 3:1-2 says, not everyone is cut out to be a teacher. How do we know if we are doing a good job? Is it just a matter of whether or not students subjectively like our courses? Is there a nonnegotiable core of each class that must be learned by each student in order for the course goals to have been met? Are there any teaching standards that are universal for all teachers of the Bible (or any other subject for that matter)?

I will admit freely that our culture is assessment obsessed. Our culture scientifically and empirically tries to gauge every measurable aspect of the education task. I will also admit that here at the Bible school we are engaged in a primarily spiritual endeavor. What, then, is the role of objective, measurable standards as laid out in the TRACS accreditation manual? For example:

D 11.4 Curriculum (regardless of mode of delivery) has as its central focus the education of students.

a. Course and program objectives are written in reference to measurable learning outcomes.
b. Course outcomes are assessed through student achievement and competency. 

D 11.5 Curriculum has a logical and appropriate scope and sequence.

a. Curriculum conforms to national norms.
c. Curriculum progressively leads to student competency and learning. 

D 11.6 Clearly defined student learning outcomes are established at the course, program and institutional level and reflected in all aspects of academic and support services.

D 11.7 Programs offered by the institution impart a common core of knowledge, which enhances students educationally and/or vocationally, are consistent with national norms, and are appropriate for educational level.

How are we going to meet these standards? What do these standards even mean? How do you use standards in your teaching and how do they contribute to to the goal of imparting, "a common core of knowledge, which enhances students educationally and/or vocationally, are consistent with national norms, and are appropriate for the educational level?"

Any thoughts are appreciated.