Communicating course content can sometimes be difficult for on-campus instructors, and communicating the same content via online instruction can be overwhelming! My charge was to design and teach a course for master’s level students to be offered online and on-campus during the same semester. Several issues were involved. This was a prerequisite course for education majors that required specific competencies be met to prepare them for the next level of coursework. Distance students could choose to take subsequent courses on campus. Additionally, student-centered instruction with field experiences was an integral component of the course.

My goal was to maintain appropriate expectations for students taking either section of the course. After teaching these courses for several semesters, I have found that varied learning opportunities are possible in either environment. Innovations in technology complement teaching and learning in both settings, and online instructional programs augment on-campus as well as online courses. For example, video streaming, presentation software, written text with audio for lectures, and discussion board assignments enhance learning in both sections of my course.

Those who have taught via distance education know that online courses require different organization than do courses on campus and often require more instructor time. However, similar content and thoroughness are needed to ensure quality of practice and uniformity in both settings. There are three areas I find to be most important when planning to teach a course both online and on campus: the syllabus, communication, and assignments.

The syllabus

The syllabus should describe each of the courses explicitly, as it is an instrument that guides success in teaching and learning. Separate syllabi are necessary for online and on-campus sections, even though the course is the same. Assignments and activities for online students may differ slightly for those taking the course on campus, but course expectations (goals and learner outcomes) are the same and should be clearly stated for each course.

Other similarities include the scope and breadth of the courses, an outline of topics to be covered, the point value for assignments, and grade percentages. This is particularly important for prerequisite courses. Differences between the online and on-campus sections include attendance requirements, student contact hours, how student-to-instructor and student-to-student communication will be addressed and documented, and level of technology expertise. It is most important to note on the syllabus that both courses cover the same material.

Communication

Effective communication can certainly be achieved in an online environment, and interaction of students with me and among each other is an important part of my teaching. Timely submission of assignments, posted messages, group meeting records, synchronous chat rooms, and email are ways I document online participation. In both classes, I ask students to post biographical information on their personal Web pages, and real-time email dialogue and ongoing discussion board threads allow students to communicate with me or with their classmates on a regular and timely basis. Telephone communication is readily available as well. End-of-semester questionnaires help me plan future courses. Students offer positive and negative comments as well as recommendations for course improvement. One distance-learning student related, “Through this course, I gained a greater understanding of how I can integrate literacy into my teaching—I never thought I’d say I enjoyed taking an online course!”

Assignments

Modifying classroom activities and assignments typically practiced in my traditional university classroom for online introduction has caused me to take a fresh look at my instructional planning. I have found that many of the literacy strategies introduced on campus are easily modified for online introduction. Activities are coordinated with textbook explanations and/or outside readings, and online students successfully understand and practice the strategies, as evidenced by submission of quality work.

For example, a prediction guide is a pre-learning literacy strategy given to students before the lesson begins. Students respond to true/false statements (or yes/no questions) designed to reflect information that is important for them to know. Their answers indicate their level of prior knowledge about the topic, and they are introduced to what they will be learning about. I introduce this strategy with a short lecture and examples in the on-campus class and post the lecture and examples for the online class. The assignment is quite similar for both sections. Students are to design a prediction guide in a particular subject area and use the strategy in a field experience/pre-K–12 classroom. For both sections, the prediction guide is turned in with a reflection about the classroom experience via the course drop box. Field experiences are documented by cooperating teachers. Student success with this assignment spans both course sections.

Adapting traditional courses for online delivery can revitalize one’s teaching methodology. Teaching two sections of the same course (one online and one on campus) has been quite a challenge. I have learned that the integrity of the course content does not have to be compromised for either setting. I am glad to have a new perspective as I plan instruction for both online and on-campus students.

Julie H. Lester is an associate professor in the Department of Teaching & Learning at Southeastern Louisiana University.

For similar articles about online instruction, check out Online Classroom. Each issue features tips and insights from successful online course developers and instructors on topics such as course design, facilitation, assessment, interaction, student support and use of emerging technologies. Click here for more information and to subscribe.