Design Thinking Prototyping an Online Course Monika Seifert 

 Challenge 

 As instructional designer ( ID ) , I was approached to support a professor at the university , where I   work , to advise him on how to put his negotiation course online . This initial challenge , of putting   materials online in a coherent and meaningful way , that was given to me evolved in the process   of information gathering that I underwent with this professor and his Teaching Assistants ( TAs ) .   When he asked for support , he was looking for someone to help him develop video lectures to   replicate his in - class presentations . However , there were several obstacles to putting the course   online . Firstly , the professor received data in individual spreadsheets several times a week from   the students and needed to compiled them at the end of the week . Keeping track of the multiple   weekly activities and assignments contributed to confusion on the part of the students , as well .   Another obstacle was how to replicate the weekly interactions that built a strong student   community in the classroom with an online setting where students would interact in a relatively   isolating environment . 

 As an instructional designer , my focus has always been on creating a learner - focused   environment so the challenge was to take a complicated course structure and simplify it for   students as well as faculty .   Added to that challenge was the need to create an online structure   for a positive student experience to engage with the materials and activities as well as to   automate the students ’ work in such a way that the TAs and professor need only to track it and   review it leaving a clear documentation trail and making grading easier . 

 Selection    ( Terms in bold refer to the Learning Launch Design template as described by Douglas Wood in Week   4 . ) 

 I plan to discuss the Learning Launch Design Tool because I had the opportunity to develop a   prototype , 7 - week course , and test it by offering it to a small group of 14 professionals ( from   diverse backgrounds , all working full - time ) with the same team — faculty , TA , and ID — who   would later implement the full 14 - week version for full - time graduate students . Our key   assumption was that an online negotiation course could be successfully implemented by   developing an active student community , through relevant activities and course structure based   on user - centered design . As to who , we knew that working professionals often look for   training   in negotiation so the course would meet their ongoing needs . The how was implemented   through the existing communications and LMS systems . The costs to implement the learning   launch were minimal as it required staff time that was already allocated to the project and used   tools and processes that are part of the university system . The only real cost to anticipate would   be the program ’s reputation ( not a minor cost ) . We anticipated giving refunds if this were an   issue to maintain good relations . And the timeframe was short and completed a month prior to   the start of fall term , allowing us to make changes , where needed , to the prototype . 

 Application 

 A primary goal of the learning launch was to test the automation of assignments as well as the   structure of the course for ease of communication and engagement . Did the automation work   without being too complicated for the students ? Were the students engaged ? Did it free up time   for the professor and TA ? A secondary goal was to evaluate the efﬁcacy of offering the course in   the online environment . Would the students not only remain engaged but would they achieve   the course outcomes and skill building ? Did the structure of the course in the learning   management system ( LMS ) allow for clear communication and a positive user experience ? 

 Design Thinking Prototyping an Online Course Monika Seifert 

 The course was structured and designed , applying user - experience effective practices . All   assignments were completed using online tools to aggregate responses in a spreadsheet . Pass/ fail quizzes were built into the LMS so that students could determine if they were absorbing the   material . Along with the automated grading system that was created , a survey was given to the   students at the end of the course to gauge their learning experience with questions focused on   their experience with the course structure , content , and assignments . 

 This was a surprisingly effective method for testing the course in the online environment . While   students did pay to take the course , we were using a curriculum that had been developed years   ago and improved upon in the subsequent years , so the quality was high . The professor is   highly regarded in his ﬁeld and enjoyed engaging with the students in web conferences . We   were focused on their engagement in the online environment and the use of new online tools ,   but the students were focused on connecting with each other through the assignments and   absorbing the material . 

 Insight 

 Having been part of teams that had developed non - credit online courses for busy professionals ,   I had warned the professor that he should be prepared for several to drop out of the course   sometime in the ﬁrst three weeks , even though I had recommended activities and materials that   would accommodate the schedule of someone working full - time . The results , however , were   astonishingly successful . Not one student dropped out , and all , but one student , completed all of   the activities required to receive a certiﬁcate of completion . I attribute this to the focus of using   the assignments to build community and having a weekly class meeting with the professor . The   professor and TA were thrilled with the automation of assignments and grading . They   determined to continue to use this model for the full 14 - term course in the classroom . 

 That said , there were drawbacks which required correction to aspects of the course but even so   this new iteration will be a better and more effective course for the students as well as for the   faculty . What has been most effective , however , has been the experience of the faculty member   who has become a supporter of teaching online   through this experiment and now sees an   opportunity to meet the needs of non - traditional graduate students while maintaining the high- quality education expected at the university . One of the students also requested that he offer the   7 - week course to her colleagues , so there are other potential markets for this course and others   that build on it . 

 Approach 

 In ID work , prototyping and testing courses is meant to be part of the process . However , it is   seldom implemented , in my experience , except on a very small scale , in large part due to tight   deadlines for launching a course . For this reason , there has been little innovation in the   structure of online courses . This opportunity for a learning launch was serendipitous and one for   which I had total control as the professor trusted my experience and insights as to what would   work for his students . The work that we did here can help promote differentiated courses that   meet the needs of both faculty and students and create a student - centered experience . I hope   to be able to continue to implement learning launches as the online learning environment grows . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: Monika Seifert, Monika Seifert
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Design Thinking Prototyping an Online Course Monika Seifert 

 Challenge 

 As instructional designer ( ID ) , I was approached to support a professor at the university , where I   work , to advise him on how to put his negotiation course online . This initial challenge , of putting   materials online in a coherent and meaningful way , that was given to me evolved in the process   of information gathering that I underwent with this professor and his Teaching Assistants ( TAs ) .   When he asked for support , he was looking for someone to help him develop video lectures to   replicate his in - class presentations . However , there were several obstacles to putting the course   online . Firstly , the professor received data in individual spreadsheets several times a week from   the students and needed to compiled them at the end of the week . Keeping track of the multiple   weekly activities and assignments contributed to confusion on the part of the students , as well .   Another obstacle was how to replicate the weekly interactions that built a strong student   community in the classroom with an online setting where students would interact in a relatively   isolating environment . 

 As an instructional designer , my focus has always been on creating a learner - focused   environment so the challenge was to take a complicated course structure and simplify it for   students as well as faculty .   Added to that challenge was the need to create an online structure   for a positive student experience to engage with the materials and activities as well as to   automate the students ’ work in such a way that the TAs and professor need only to track it and   review it leaving a clear documentation trail and making grading easier . 

 Selection    ( Terms in bold refer to the Learning Launch Design template as described by Douglas Wood in Week   4 . ) 

 I plan to discuss the Learning Launch Design Tool because I had the opportunity to develop a   prototype , 7 - week course , and test it by offering it to a small group of 14 professionals ( from   diverse backgrounds , all working full - time ) with the same team — faculty , TA , and ID — who   would later implement the full 14 - week version for full - time graduate students . Our key   assumption was that an online negotiation course could be successfully implemented by   developing an active student community , through relevant activities and course structure based   on user - centered design . As to who , we knew that working professionals often look for   training   in negotiation so the course would meet their ongoing needs . The how was implemented   through the existing communications and LMS systems . The costs to implement the learning   launch were minimal as it required staff time that was already allocated to the project and used   tools and processes that are part of the university system . The only real cost to anticipate would   be the program ’s reputation ( not a minor cost ) . We anticipated giving refunds if this were an   issue to maintain good relations . And the timeframe was short and completed a month prior to   the start of fall term , allowing us to make changes , where needed , to the prototype . 

 Application 

 A primary goal of the learning launch was to test the automation of assignments as well as the   structure of the course for ease of communication and engagement . Did the automation work   without being too complicated for the students ? Were the students engaged ? Did it free up time   for the professor and TA ? A secondary goal was to evaluate the efﬁcacy of offering the course in   the online environment . Would the students not only remain engaged but would they achieve   the course outcomes and skill building ? Did the structure of the course in the learning   management system ( LMS ) allow for clear communication and a positive user experience ? 

 Design Thinking Prototyping an Online Course Monika Seifert 

 The course was structured and designed , applying user - experience effective practices . All   assignments were completed using online tools to aggregate responses in a spreadsheet . Pass/ fail quizzes were built into the LMS so that students could determine if they were absorbing the   material . Along with the automated grading system that was created , a survey was given to the   students at the end of the course to gauge their learning experience with questions focused on   their experience with the course structure , content , and assignments . 

 This was a surprisingly effective method for testing the course in the online environment . While   students did pay to take the course , we were using a curriculum that had been developed years   ago and improved upon in the subsequent years , so the quality was high . The professor is   highly regarded in his ﬁeld and enjoyed engaging with the students in web conferences . We   were focused on their engagement in the online environment and the use of new online tools ,   but the students were focused on connecting with each other through the assignments and   absorbing the material . 

 Insight 

 Having been part of teams that had developed non - credit online courses for busy professionals ,   I had warned the professor that he should be prepared for several to drop out of the course   sometime in the ﬁrst three weeks , even though I had recommended activities and materials that   would accommodate the schedule of someone working full - time . The results , however , were   astonishingly successful . Not one student dropped out , and all , but one student , completed all of   the activities required to receive a certiﬁcate of completion . I attribute this to the focus of using   the assignments to build community and having a weekly class meeting with the professor . The   professor and TA were thrilled with the automation of assignments and grading . They   determined to continue to use this model for the full 14 - term course in the classroom . 

 That said , there were drawbacks which required correction to aspects of the course but even so   this new iteration will be a better and more effective course for the students as well as for the   faculty . What has been most effective , however , has been the experience of the faculty member   who has become a supporter of teaching online   through this experiment and now sees an   opportunity to meet the needs of non - traditional graduate students while maintaining the high- quality education expected at the university . One of the students also requested that he offer the   7 - week course to her colleagues , so there are other potential markets for this course and others   that build on it . 

 Approach 

 In ID work , prototyping and testing courses is meant to be part of the process . However , it is   seldom implemented , in my experience , except on a very small scale , in large part due to tight   deadlines for launching a course . For this reason , there has been little innovation in the   structure of online courses . This opportunity for a learning launch was serendipitous and one for   which I had total control as the professor trusted my experience and insights as to what would   work for his students . The work that we did here can help promote differentiated courses that   meet the needs of both faculty and students and create a student - centered experience . I hope   to be able to continue to implement learning launches as the online learning environment grows .
### Output: 