Arkin and I continue our course prototype work toward our Arts Education lesson for our Grade 7 class, which ultimately involves having our students create a radio play.

Our course prototype design combines in-class instruction with digital components constructed with Lumi to contribute to an engaging and interactive introductory digital lesson for our students.

We presented our course shell to our class colleagues through Microsoft Word. We included our ADDIE to provide our reviewers with a detailed class description, EAL considerations, and a complete unit outline. We followed the ADDIE with our introductory lesson to Radio Plays (PowerPoint) and detailed modules (Curricular Outcomes, Activity Links, and Schedule) created by both of us. Finally, we concluded our shell by sharing our grading scale for reference. Although our course shell was not presented in a traditional Learning Management System (LMS) yet, we felt the organization and format we provided our reviewers with were sufficient for this first module. As we are both employees of the Regina Catholic School Division, we are working toward a finalized LMS created on Microsoft Teams…stay tuned!

The feedback we received from our colleagues during our Week 7 class and through the feedback comments was overwhelmingly positive and appreciated. Some of the commonalities among the feedback were well-constructed, easy to follow and use, student-centered, and age appropriate.

Because we hosted our course shell through the Microsoft Word document, it was suggested that we should have provided a bit of rationale and our ‘why’ for choosing to do so. It was also noted that although we used Microsoft Word, the document was clear, accessible, and appeared professional and polished. Another suggestion provided was to further our course interactions within the prototype. We acknowledge that we must further detail the SeeSaw and Teams interactions and further distinguish and outline classroom versus online interactions.

Some of the feedback we received regarding our course content is that the modules provide opportunities for differentiation and options for students. However, one of our Lumi modules presented challenges when our reviewers attempted to engage with the interactions based on the timing. The open-ended interactions didn’t allow the reviewer to type into the answer box. Something we will look at getting fixed and improving!

Overall, we are pleased to hear that our module was clear, considerate of the students we teach (as outlined in our ADDIE), and engaging for our learners. We will certainly take the feedback of fine-tuning some of our elements to improve our module.

When thinking about accessibility, we were cognizant of creating a course that met the needs of our diverse learners and created space for them to succeed. We have a lot of EAL students and designed a course that would both provide language learning opportunities and allow them to use their experience (for example, students do not write their own fairy tales but can use well-known ones or stories from their childhoods). While most of our students have access to technology at home, not everyone does; we created a plan to ensure those students do not miss out on opportunities (we utilized a program that can splice together recordings so students can record their own contributions to the project at school OR on their own time, and gives grace to absences or lack of tech at home; students do not need to be together to record, they need to collaborate when they can!).

Last week’s class had us reflecting on how our course could be adapted so students who are not permitted to use technology at school and/or at home could still meaningfully engage in our module. We are confident that we’ve created a course where the tech enhances the learning experience without being the sole learning provider. For instance, students can still create Foley sounds, show that they can identify spaces for Foley and soundscapes, and learn about radio plays without the technology component, and most importantly, they can still collaborate with their teammates while at school.

The combination of reviewing peers’ courses and receiving feedback on my own course has been extremely helpful in pointing out the obvious next steps in my course creation. I’ve never created an online/blended course before, and although Katia’s guidelines for the profile and prototype were very clear, receiving honest feedback at this point in the semester is much appreciated. Before looking at some of the other courses or having mine reviewed, I wasn’t sure how to make my particular course better. Now, I have some ideas! A few initial thoughts on moving forward as a result of being a reviewer and reviewee:

• My course has unanswered questions. How will students know how to navigate the platform Canvas, which is likely new to them? If students are completing the course fully online, how will they know how much to do each day or where we are in the lesson sequence? What rationale do I have for students completing the JAM (Journal About Math) at the end of the topic rather than at another point, such as the beginning? How exactly will the course look when it is implemented, both in person and online, as it is technically blended? For a course that might have students completing it completely online and away from the classroom, these questions all need answers.
• My course could be more concise. The “Lesson Guide” page for my first module is rather lengthy and wordy. I need to think about how to simplify this, perhaps by replacing some words with visuals/other media instead.
• My course could be more engaging. Even though I’ve attempted to create an inquiry-based course, I’m not sure it’s hitting the mark. It still follows a very direct instruction-practice-quiz format, which might be hard to avoid, but I need to think about adding gamification or shuffling things around to increase the engagement factor.

So, back to the drawing board I go. If you have any brilliant ideas, I’m all ears!

This week in class, we explored equity and accessibility in online courses. I hadn’t thought too much about these issues before, but Katia’s lecture and the subsequent small-group discussions helped me think about the accessibility of my own course, both for my particular learner personas and other potential students. Is my course accessible and equitable? Are there ways I can improve accessibility and equity?

Reading through Section 9.2 of Teaching in a Digital Age by Tony Bates, along with class discussions, helped me create a list of changes I could make:

• Ensuring links are on the title of the document/page something is linked to, not just the word “here”, as this is unhelpful and confusing for screen readers
• Including required prior knowledge for this concept, plus clearly stated instructions for my learner personas working exclusively at home, working at a grade 4 level, and who are just now learning English and will need language support
• Clarifying steps for students who experience accessibility issues around wifi/connectivity

Looking at the Technological Equity and Accessibility For Virtual and Hybrid Learning reading that Katia suggested, I was reminded to consider that the students who would be completing this course fully asynchronously may need supports beyond those already provided by the online function. As stated in my ADDIE model, two of my learners are attending this course from home due to mental health challenges. These students may have barriers and challenges beyond being in class that might prevent them from completing coursework on time or in full. As I certainly would not want to exacerbate the stress levels of these students, I want to include something in my course that clearly states that accommodations can be made on an individual basis and that I (the instructor) am happy to meet with students virtually, by phone, or communicate by chat and make a plan to help alleviate unnecessary stress and ultimately help them be successful.

Spending a little time on my Canvas-hosted course, I realized that there is an accessibility checker right in the LMS! Cool! So I was already able to make some changes suggested by Canvas.

I was recently listening to The Office Ladies podcast and the hosts (Jenna and Angela) were talking about how really good things aren’t created the first time. I’m paraphrasing, but they discussed how you have to make a lot of crap before you make something great. I immediately thought of this course I’m creating. As I tinker with it, change it around, add and remove things, and continue to ultimately just mold it into what I hope it to be, I’m confident that in the very least, it will be better than it is right now. And if and when I create an online or blended course in the future, it will be better than this one.

“Feedback is the Breakfast of Champions”

– Ken Blanchard

This quote jumped out at me as I related to and agreed with the message, and thought it was appropriate for projects such as the one we are working on.  As I was inserting the quote into this blog post, I thought that I should find a definition of “Breakfast of Champions” to share to put it into context. This turned out to be a lot harder than I thought! People use this expression in many ways, not surprisingly mostly with sarcasm, and some were unexpected!

I finally found a definition that matched most closely to how I define this phrase, it came from definitions.net which cited ChatGPT:

breakfast of champions

Breakfast of champions is a phrase used to refer to a meal or food that is considered nourishing, substantial, or of high quality. It can also be used metaphorically to describe something that is regarded as the best or most important, particularly in the context of personal success, achievement, or excellence.

This is the context of the phrase in my mind when I related to Ken Blanchard’s quote above.

I also discovered there is a novel published in 1999 called “Breakfast of Champions”. Of course, I then went down the YouTube rabbit hole to find some Wheaties commercials as Wheaties is the origin of the phrase. I discovered Wheaties is 100 years old this year! If you want to learn more about Wheaties, this 5-minute video from Cereal Time TV has many surprisingly cool facts. Enjoy!

Anyhow, moving on….this past week, Katia provided us with two valuable learning opportunities:

• working through two other course shells and modules
• receiving peer feedback on our course shells and module

Being the Reviewer

Working through the other shells, was a great experience for me. It’s so interesting to see how differently and creatively people approach a similar task.

The two modules that I reviewed were developed for 2 very different target audiences. Both of which I learned some new ways of approaching a course. Some things we talked about in class but seeing them in action was insightful. Some ideas I learned are:

• Use minimal architecture and a straightforward approach to organizing the modules.
• Incorporating multiple options for teacher-student and student-student interactions
• Provide pre-testing to identify if the student needs to complete all elements of the module
• Use case-studies! They are an excellent way to teach adult learners.
• Perhaps not everything needs to be graded. Maybe some elements simply need to show progression.

Receiving the Feedback

Feedback is the breakfast of champions. It provides substance and nourishment and, if heeded, it can foster growth and sustainability. Effective feedback must be direct, and specific, and include recommendations for improvement. I feel both of my reviewers provided effective feedback in this way that offered substance for positive changes. What did I take away?

1. Each module is organized into 3 sections: Learning, Activities, and Assignments. Both reviewers found it easy to navigate.
2. A welcome video would be beneficial.
3. One of the links did not work for either reviewer. Went I went back I realized I had forgotten to put the link into the section.
4. Further to 3. Proofreading is important.
5. I wasn’t sure if the interactive activities were appropriate for the adult learner. However, both reviewers responded positively to them, so I can take away that they are age-appropriate.

One of the reviewers provided a list of ideas to incorporate, however, they acknowledged that it was out of the scope of the assignment, and are suggestions for implementation. I appreciated these ideas very much.

I am grateful to Katia for including peer review in her class. As I move forward and develop further modules, it is very useful to have these experiences to create more effective learning materials.

Equity and Accessibility in Online Learning

I found the equity class had some interesting discussions. The discussions were about equity in general, which highlighted that if one was creating an open public-facing course, it would be extremely challenging to meet all needs. Especially with limited resources. It was nice to hear that some resources exist in SK school divisions such as translating documents into braille. However, it was pointed out that there are barriers to using this service effectively.

For my class, the students are required to have at least one year of university prerequisites, as well as fill the job description of a Radiation Therapist. This includes lifting 25 pounds and being able to transfer patients safely, just to name a few. These job requirements remove some of the learning barriers related to equity and accessibility.

For other barriers, I have experienced in the past that students have already identified accommodations that they require in their previous year(s) of schooling. I have also experienced discovering these barriers alongside the student as the term progresses. Working together to figure out what the student needs is part of my job as an instructor and mentor. At the cancer centre where I work, we use what is called the Patient Dignity Question with patients which was put into place by the great Dr. Harvey Max Chochinov. It goes like this – “What do I need to know about you as a person to give you the best care possible?” It is a beautiful question that can be re-framed in different circumstances. For example, as a teacher, you can ask the student, or the parent “What do I need to know about you as a person to help you through this learning journey?” At the Radiation Therapy school, it is a learning journey, not just a one-off class. We are with the students throughout their training, guiding them to be effective, empathetic healthcare providers. Asking this question invites the student in a thoughtful way to be open about learning challenges. I have a small class and have the luxury of tailoring the class content/delivery method from year to year if necessary.

I am looking forward to reading other blog posts.