The New Frontier: A Case Study in Applying Instructional Design for Distance Teacher Education.

Like a scene from a Wild West land grab, would-be pioneers in the wilderness of online learning are surging forward with thoughts awash with optimism, trepidation, and a profound sense of staking a claim in this new educational environment. Even for those who live and breathe this new medium, there have been a myriad of successes, failures, and truly baffling experiences. However, it is becoming clear that the educational landscape has forever changed and whatever direction this online revolution takes, it is clear that it will, in some way, affect the way all of us live and learn.

The area of teacher education is one part of this wilderness that is only beginning to show signs of some settlement. As online environments become populated with "cyber homesteaders"--teacher educators developing and teaching online courses--there is a sense of groping for guidelines, models, or at best, lists of best practices, for the design and delivery of online instruction. Although teacher educators are some of the most innovative and enthusiastic pioneers in the online learning arena, many are rolling off courses from an assembly line of boundless enthusiasm. However, few are familiar with techniques and models for the design and development of instruction. As the new scenario of the online classroom emerges, it will become necessary for teacher educators to become familiar with these principles to enhance their design of computer assisted learning environments and systems.

This article supports Nunan's (1999) call for "new forms of program delivery to be described and analyzed" (p. 52) by focusing on the development of a web-based teacher education methods course for teachers of language minority learners. It examines what challenges and difficulties teacher educators and other course developers face in the design and delivery of distance education and how some of the problems might be overcome through use of an instructional design process. The purpose is to show how the instructional design process can assist in developing a web-based distance teacher education course that suits the needs of participants while addressing the concerns of researchers and teacher educators.

THE NEED FOR DISTANCE EDUCATION AND THE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN PROCESS

The recent and ongoing expansion of online opportunities for teacher education and training are due, in part, to calls for better teacher preparation and professional development opportunities. The National Education Goals for Teacher Education and Professional Development state that for school reform to happen teachers need (a) the opportunity to acquire the knowledge and skills needs to prepare students for the next century and (b) access to professional development programs for continued improvement of skills. Teacher educators must help their students understand how to provide opportunities for all learners and motivate learners to become lifelong learners. Teacher educators must also encourage their students to create new opportunities and solve new problems in their classrooms.

To help meet the National Goals, teacher educators and education courses must provide opportunities for preservice and inservice teachers to reflect on and apply theory to classroom practice and receive feedback from experienced teachers in the field; if well designed, the distance professional development and teacher education courses proliferating on the World Wide Web (WWW or Web) may provide such opportunities for inservice and preservice teachers. The benefits of offering distance courses in which there are a wide variety of learners and where communication is supported by both asynchronous and synchronous technologies include the potential for:

* more time for learners (teachers) to reflect,

* increased individual participation,

* more individualized feedback from the instructor,

* a wider range of opinions and views,

* self-paced/self-directed learning,

* team learning and collaboration, and

* resource-based rather than lecture-based learning.

Falba, Strudler, Bean, Dixon, Markos, McKinney, and Zehm (1999), in a qualitative study of the integration of computer-based technology in teacher education programs, pointed out several obstacles to online teacher education. These included limited access to technology resources, technical problems, and limited time for faculty to experiment and learn the new technology. Other issues also of concern to designers of computer-mediated environments for teacher education include the amount and quality of online interaction, the quality of the education, building in practical experience for the course participants, and the possibility of cheating. Problems may also arise when the technology gets in the way of communicating, old styles of teaching do not mix with new styles of communicating, and expression is limited to the written word. In addition, distance course designers must address how teacher educators can observe students applying concepts and what to do so students do not feel isolated and ensure that fe edback is appropriate (Quintana, 1996, as well as others).

Teacher educators should employ a systemic approach to the development of all courses, but distance courses' lack of extensive face to face interaction, problems with revising web sites and instructional materials "on the fly," and the possibility of technical glitches make it imperative that distance courses be planned even more mindfully. Many researchers have argued for a systemic

approach to instructional design to prevent the designer "from trying to create instruction for a medium prior to a complete analysis of what is to be taught and how. Most research suggests that it is the analysis process, and not the delivery mode, that determines the success of instruction "(Dick & Carey, 1985, p.9). Berge (1999) as well as others, add that in designing web-based courses, each medium and its unique characteristics must be considered carefully as part of the systems approach.

Dick and Carey (1985) described the following components of the systems approach model:

* identifying an instructional goal,

* conducting an instructional analysis,

* identifying entry behaviors and characteristics,

* writing performance objectives,

* developing criterion-referenced test items,

* developing an instructional strategy developing and selecting instruction,

* designing and conducting the formative evaluation,

* revising instruction, and

* conducting summative evaluation.

In the process of developing, offering, and refining distance courses, we have learned a good deal about the need for using an instructional design approach to develop distance teacher education courses. Below we describe the instructional design process for an academic credit bearing course in the Master's program in Language Education at a major Midwestern university, also available for professional development credit. The course developed was L530: Methods of teaching language minority learners, and the core project team included the course instructor, a web designer, and graduate assistants. In discussing the instructional design process for this course, the nine components in Dick and Carey's (1985) model have been condensed into three stages for ease of presentation; these three stages are (a) design, (b) development, and (e) evaluation/revision.

STAGE 1: DESIGN

The first components in the design process are identifying an instructional goal, conducting an instructional analysis, and identifying entry behaviors and characteristics of the learners. Together, these underscore the importance of determining need, the first step in the process used for developing the L530 course.

Determining Need

External data verified the need for opportunities for professional development in the areas of bilingual education and ESL in the state of Indiana. Teachers in Indiana face a problem common to other states throughout the Midwest; this problem is the increase in the number of language minority and limited-English proficient learners enrolled in our schools and the lack of preparation programs available to help mainstream teachers meet their needs. As an example of the growth in the language minority population, for the 1987-88 school year, 11,745 school-age language minority learners were identified throughout Indiana. Ten years later, 24,981 students were identified as language minority--the number of language minority learners doubled within the decade. As of 1998, language minority students were enrolled in 89 of Indiana's 92 counties and in 249 out of 296 school corporations (Indiana State Department of Education, 1999) and they continue to make up an increasingly large percentage of the state's K-12 and adult learners. The large and growing segment of limited-English proficient students in Indiana is currently far underserved--although 16% of the K-12 students identified as language minority are enrolled in Chapter 1 and other special programs, others have been placed in handicapped or special education classes and over half are regularly abandoned to "sink or swim" in regular mainstream classes. By learning techniques such as the appropriate use of visuals, ways to adjust readings to various English language competencies, and communicating in nonverbal ways, teachers can assist these learners in becoming full members of the classroom community. These learners then have the chance to succeed in school and go on to become productive members of Indiana's workforce.

Higher education institutions in states with large language minority populations, such as Texas, New York, Arizona, and California, have excellent teacher education and professional development programs; these courses help teachers to learn about and meet the needs of language minority learners from a single language background (often Spanish) or in special pull-out classes in which all of the learners are from different minority language backgrounds. In Indiana, however, a more common scenario is that a regular classroom teacher will have English language learners from different language groups in a mainstream class. These learners could be speakers of any of the 196 native languages of language minority students in Indiana, and teachers are expected to accommodate their needs with no specific knowledge, training, or support. Urban areas such as Indianapolis are under pressure from the federal government to train qualified teachers to deal with language minority learners.

However, funding for teacher education programs under Title IV is constantly in jeopardy, and resources for bilingual education (BE), English as a Second Language (ESL), and other focused programs are far below the level needed to address the special needs of these learners. In addition, a 1996 Office of Civil Rights review of the Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) cited them for noncompliance in several areas regarding the education of limited English proficient students. IPS and other districts are looking for ways to bring their personnel into compliance with federal law. To do so, they must provide more teachers, and eventually all of their teachers, with the proper training (Simich-Dudgeon & Boals, 1996). Due to a current dearth of BE and ESL programs, trained in-state professionals, and government support for second language programs, already overburdened regular classroom teachers must most often find their own ways to address the needs of their language minority students (LMs).

Many teachers in Indiana and other states, however, are not able to attend classes on the university campuses or free their schedules to attend special workshops. The development of a distance course could help to fill the need for professional development in ESL and BE by overcoming some of the time and space constraints of teachers. However, although the external data seemed to indicate a need, this data did not assist in determining whether classroom teachers perceived the need and, if they did, whether they would be willing to participate in distance professional development in this area. The perception of need by members of the prospective audience also required assessment.

Audience Needs Analysis

With funding from the Indiana Partnership for Statewide Education (IPSE)/Indiana Higher Education Telecommunications System (IHETS) [1], a self-report questionnaire to collect information about teacher professional development needs in the teaching of language minority learners was developed. The survey asked classroom teachers a combination of 13 open-ended and multiple choice questions about their teaching background and education, their schools' language programs for and needs of language minority (LM) learners, their perceptions of trends in the state, and their professional development needs. Administrators distributed the professional development survey in three of the school corporations that are experiencing the most dramatic growth in language minority students in the state: Elkhart, Indianapolis, and Monroe County public school systems. Thirteen ESL teachers and 451 classroom teachers responded to the survey. Sixty-one percent of the respondents were middle or high school teachers, and 41% taught at the early childhood or elementary level. [2] Answers to the multiple choice questions were coded and descriptive statistics were applied, and anecdotal evidence was collected in a database.

Only 28 of the respondents had no language minority learners in their classes. The majority of teachers reported having between one and eight language minority learners. When asked, "[b]ased on recent and current enrollment trends, would you predict a change in the language minority populace of your classes in the next 3-5 years?," 68% predicted an increase; slightly over 12% predicted no change; and only three respondents predicted a decrease. One teacher explained, "I predict a continual increase in ESL students. The past two years have shown a steady increase [at our school]." Another teacher felt that "Caucasians could very well be a minority to the Hispanics in three to five years."

Respondents saw their LM learners as having varied degrees of proficiency in English. Over 4% stated they had beginning English learners in their classroom ("No proficiency whatsoever") and 5% stated they had advanced level English learners (or "little if any awkwardness with English language in academic contexts"). In between these two extremes, 21% of the teachers said that they had novice English learners in their classrooms ("familiar with basic English, require a lot of help"), over 27% stated that they had learners who were somewhat proficient ("can communicate moderately well with peers"), and 22% said that their learners generally occasionally experienced awkwardness with the language in academic contexts.

Sixty-three percent of the respondents stated that their schools had pullout programs for their LMs, by far the most common type of program in the state. More important, 79 of the 463 teachers noted that their schools had no programs for LMs. In spite of the presence of nonproficient LM learners in their classrooms and the prediction that this number would increase, when asked, "[h]ave you ever received any ESL/Bilingual Education teacher training (classes, endorsements, etc.)?" only 11 of the 464 teachers who answered the survey said that they had a degree, certificate, or endorsement in ESL. In addition, 6 of the 464 stated that they had experience teaching language minority students, yet did not have any formal training, and slightly over 5% (24 respondents) said that they had taken a class or workshop. Of the total, 414 teachers had no ESL/bilingual experience or training whatsoever. No correlation was found between teacher time in service and training in ESL. One teacher noted, " I am totally unqualified to teach these students." Clearly, many teachers in Indiana classrooms with non-native English speakers are not equipped to deal with the special needs and problems of these students.

More specifically, the respondents indicated that their LM students' areas of greatest need were in the areas of academic conversation, study and note taking skills, content knowledge, reading, and social conversation. They noted that subject areas they would like to learn more about if offered an online education course to deal more effectively with their LMs were teaching techniques, finding materials and resources, and lesson ideas. Thisf emphasis on the need for practical knowledge was supported by very few respondents responding that they were interested in learning about theories of language and linguistics.

Respondents stated that the factors that would most motivate them to participate in an online teacher education course were direct help for their teaching situations and no time constraints/ deadlines. The vast majority of respondents noted that the type of learning environment that suits them best is one with some structure but where they retain some autonomy. Contrary to the indication that they prefer no time constraints, only nine respondents said that they prefer a loosely structured class with no set deadlines, and five preferred a very structured environment. One hundred thirty-one of the respondents (28%) indicated an interest in receiving information about the online course under development.

Overall, the need for a methods course in the teaching of LM learners in Indiana was clear. Similar situations exist in other states, compounding the need. For participants, the course needed to have a practical focus within a moderately structured environment and to address how to meet the content and skills needs of LMs in the classroom. For teacher educators, the course needed to incorporate real experiences, support the move toward lifelong learning, make connections between participants and other teachers in schools, and connect theory with practice.

Establish Instructional Goals/Objectives

The external and teacher needs analyses confirmed that there was an audience for a distance course in methods of teaching language minority learners. The target audience for the course was established as mainstream and ESL inservice and preservice teachers in the state of Indiana who need to find ways to address the needs of their LMs. The next step in the process was to establish instructional goals and objectives. General goals were developed based on the teachers' stated needs, the goals from the concurrent on-site version of the course, and input from teacher educators. The two general goals of the course were (a) to help teachers discover and create strategies to help their language learners improve reading, writing, speaking, listening and thinking skills in the content areas, and (b) to understand how to facilitate the inclusion of all learners and to use a variety of media appropriately.

Specific objectives included that participants, at the end of the course, be able to:

* discuss intelligently the language learning process and its relation to learning in the content areas (area knowledge);

* assess and evaluate performance and competence (assessment/evaluation);

* access resources, including trade books, computer based information, and human resources and select/create/adapt appropriate materials (materials development),

* develop appropriate instructional activities (lesson development), and

* understand how to integrate language skills into daily instruction (teaching techniques).

Armed with a clear picture of the need for the course and with the course goals and objectives, the project team could now move on to the development stage.

STAGE TWO: DEVELOPMENT

After the need was established and goals determined, the class was developed as a closed-ended, 16 week course with specific (but generous) due dates for activities and open time between deliverables. The course was developed to run concurrently with the onsite version of the course once per year and as a stand-alone course in two other yearly iterations. The next step in the process was to develop instructional strategies and select instruction.

Content Outline

The distance version of L530: Teaching language minority learners needed to offer teachers a range of ideas for assisting language minority populations in mainstream and ESL classrooms. The course was intended to provide teachers with a structured, interactive, technology-based forum in which to learn new ideas, test applications, discuss critical issues related to language and culture, and to work with the support of colleagues throughout the state to better prepare themselves to serve their language minority learners.

Based loosely on the design of the onsite version of the course and the survey results, the course initially featured modules based on critical issues and approaches to teaching language minority learners. General course topics included:

* Language and culture: Drawing on existing strengths

* Language learning environments: Modifying classrooms and tasks

* Computer-assisted language learning: Resources for learning

* Approaches and techniques for including language minority students

* Sheltered Content Instruction: Modifying assignments

* Authentic assessment: Noting and communicating progress

Case studies were developed to assist in the application of concepts and to give students a common basis for discussion. However, after a reconsideration of the audience these cases were abandoned in favor of helping the inservice teachers to apply concepts to their specific teaching contexts.

DEVELOPING MATERIALS AND METHODS

Choosing texts/materials. The choice of course text was made by questioning teacher educators in the areas of ESL/BE, previewing available texts, and evaluating student comments about texts used previously in the onsite course. The decision was to use a practical methods text and a text that specifically and practically addresses the assessment of limited English proficient students.

Developing more specific modules. The general course topics were divided into specific modules based on divisions in the text, the results of the needs analysis, and practical considerations such as time limits. These topics were:

1. getting to know your English Language Learners (ELLs);

2. how is a second language learned?

3. general methods and techniques for teaching ELLs;

4. oral language development;

5. emergent literacy;

6. process writing;

7. reading and literature;

8. learning in the content areas;

9. technology; and

10. authentic assessment.

Developing activities and deliverables. Willis (1995b) noted that distance teachers needed a greater awareness of students' backgrounds. Another need is to form communities to help participants overcome feelings of isolation. To do so, two activities were developed that also encourage participants to think about how language is learned and what ideas and experiences influence their perceptions and actions in the classroom. These two activities, which fit with topics one and two, were establishing electronic conference profiles with photos and writing a reflection paper describing the participant's attitudes toward and experiences with language and language learning.

To support participants in meeting the goals of selecting appropriate materials and accessing resources, a requirement was included that they develop a text set that they could use effectively in their classroom to account for the range of learners and abilities. A lesson planning and teaching assignment was included to meet the goals of developing appropriate instructional activities and understanding how to integrate language skills into daily instruction. Participants were to implement their lesson plans at their school sites and reflect on the outcomes. Participants were also to outline a unit plan incorporating technology. The final project was to develop an action research plan that teachers could use to initiate an inquiry into a classroom issue important to them. To help with these activities, guidance pages, including detailed descriptions of the assignment processes and their evaluation, were created. No lectures or lengthy text presentations were included in the course, but many opportunities to s hare insights, questions, and work products with others were incorporated.

Delivery method and technologies. Jonassen, Davidson, Collins, Campbell, and Haag (1995) note that the "most valuable activity in a classroom of any kind is the opportunity for students to work and interact together" (p.7). They added that the technologies used in distance courses should support learner interaction and other learner-centered activities. Web-based electronic conferencing was thus determined to be a basic and crucial component of this course. To integrate the conferencing and other delivery methods and to create consistency with other distance courses, technology use in this course was patterned after other successful web-based courses developed on the campus. A university-supported communications system (conferencing, upload sites for assignments, posting capabilities, and downloadable document access) was integrated, and e-mail was incorporated for weekly journaling between the instructor and participants.

Creating the site. Once the goals, materials, and methods were determined, the project's instructional designer created the web site. The project team consulted one another on a number of design features such as backgrounds, the arrangement of the content, and types of guidance needed. One of the design goals was to give the course a "comfortable" and "welcoming" look. An introductory page with the course logo was first linked to a page describing how to use the site. The syllabus contained an outline of the course, links to descriptions and suggestion for purchase of the texts, a photo of the instructor and contact information, and brief descriptions of the course activities. Within each activity description was a link to further, detailed descriptions of the activities. Menus at the top and bottom of the syllabus page linked to a detailed schedule, guidance pages, and electronic conference access.

STAGE 3: FORMATIVE EVALUATION AND REVISION

The evaluation step can take many forms; in the case of the L530 course, both pre- and postimplementation evaluations were conducted and both led to changes, as described below.

Review Goals and Objectives: Pre-implementation

A thorough review of the site by colleagues and students before the initial implementation concluded that all of the instructional methods and materials did not effectively accomplish the goals and objectives. First, the course final project needed to be practical and more focused on the teachers' immediate needs. The action research project was made one of several options for the final project. Other choices for participants' included a materials development project, an annotated web site bibliography, a materials adaptation project, and the option for participants to propose a project that would be useful for them. In addition, reading assignments were made with clusters and charts and other pre-and post reading strategies that learners could use with their own students to facilitate their reading.

Second, the evaluators noted that the course instructor would not be able to evaluate participants' teaching/lesson implementations; this is important because good planning does not always lead to appropriate instruction. An expert in teaching practice helped to overcome this barrier by suggesting that participants videotape their instruction and send the tape to the instructor. This suggestion was integrated into the lesson assignment to observe participants applying concepts learned in the course.

Third, it was noted that participants did not have the opportunity to see and discuss good teaching models as Stephens and Leavell recommended (1999). With funds from a grant from the media services department at the university, an extension of the initial course development grant from an external funding source, and assistance from Instructional Computing within the School of Education, plans for a "Best Practices" video were developed. This crucial course component contains video segments of actual practice in classrooms with language minority learners. Segments of this video will eventually be streamed into the course web site; CD-ROMs were being developed. The CDs contained teacher discussion before and after the lesson, lesson segments, student reactions, and expert commentary for each segment. In addition to providing participants the opportunity to see good teaching models, the video segments also add a visual element to the course.

Additionally, it was found that insufficient immediate practical activities were included in the course. Therefore, the technology unit plan assignment was removed from the course and was replaced by a technology-enhanced assignment in which participants used e-mail to solve a mystery with a group of ESL students. Resource file and activity card assignments were also added. In these assignments, participants collected and developed resources that they could use in their classrooms.

Finally, a site review and usability test by a web designer uncovered many navigation and readability problems. These problems were corrected, and a new logo was developed to give the course web site a more teacher-based appeal.

Evaluation and Revision: During and Post-implementation

The course was field-tested off site concurrently with the onsite version. The project team is currently in the process of employing an evaluation strategy to document the effectiveness of instruction in this course. In gathering data that provides information about effective teaching and learning, they are examining, among other data, discussion forum transcripts, student evaluations, reviews of the site by peers, and participants' electronic journal entries. On-going needs analyses of students enrolled in the course also play a role in the continuing development of the course. Because the design process was followed closely in the development of the course, no major revisions have been found necessary. In the future, the iterative instructional design process will strengthen the effectiveness of the course and allow for continual changes to meet the needs of the audience.

CONCLUSION

In the new frontier of web-based distance learning, teacher educators must take care that rushing to the frontier without appropriate support does not thwart their pioneering efforts. The instructional design process is an especially effective tool for aiding educators as they traverse, chart, and settle this new digital wilderness. The course assignments and delivery methods of the online version of L530: Methods of Teaching Language Minority Learners were designed specifically to meet the needs of course participants while at the same time meeting the national teacher education goals. Making use of an instructional design process that is inherently iterative and evaluative in nature allows for a development path that is grounded in the flexibility needed to constantly respond to learners' needs.

Notes

1. Total is greater than 100% due to 25 respondents teaching at more than one level.

2. For the complete survey, contact the first author.

Financial Support. This course development project was funded by the Indiana Partnership for Statewide Education Course Development Grant Program.

References

Berge, Z.L. (1999). Interaction in post-secondary web-based learning. Educational Technology, 39 (1) 5-11.

Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1985). The systematic design of instruction. (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.

Falba, C., Strudler, N., Bean, T., Dixon, J., Markos, P., McKinney, M., & Zehm, S. (1999). Choreographing change one step at a time: Reflections on integrating technology into teacher education courses. Action in Teacher Education, 21(1), 61-75.

Indiana Department of Education (1999). Department of Education - Language minority data for the Indiana Department of Education, 1997-1998. Unpublished report.

Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., & Haag, B. (1995). Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 7-23.

Nunan, D.(1999). A foot in the world of ideas: Graduate study through the Internet. Language Learning and Technology, 3(1), 5 2-74.

Quintana, Y. (1996). Evaluating the value and effectiveness of Internet-based learning. [Online]. Available: http://moevax.edu.tw/inet96/c1/ c1_4.htm .[13 October 2000]

Stephens, L., & Leavell, J. (1999). Producing video-cases that enhance instruction. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7(4), 291-302.

Simich-Dudgeon, C., & Boals, T. (1996). Language and education policy in the state of Indiana: Implications for language minority students. TESOL Quarterly, 30(3), 537-555.

Willis, B. (1995). Instructional development for distance education. Distance Education at a Glance: Guide #3. [Online]. Available: http:// www.uidaho.edu/evo/dist3.html [10 November, 1999].