There will be times as an instructor that you may be asked to deliver instructional material to a group of learners that contains a great deal of informa

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

pp. 1–18

Articles

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses: Teacher-Based Best Practices

William J. Kops, University of Manitoba

Abstract This study provides insight into how highly rated instructors approached teaching compressed summer session courses, and offers a set of best practices that others might use when teaching in similar settings. Top-rated instruc- tors indicated differences in the way they taught compressed-format summer session courses, with respect to course planning, classroom instruction, student assessment, and interaction with students. The study is of value to continuing educa- tors, as universities are increasingly chal- lenged to think about flexible delivery models, including teaching and learning in compressed formats.

Résumé Cette étude permet de comprendre l’approche de chargés de cours très bien cotés envers l’enseignement des cours comprimés des sessions d’été, et offre un ensemble de pratiques exemplaires que d’autres pourraient choisir d’employer dans des conditions similaires. En effet, ces chargés de cours de haut calibre ont indiqué enseigner différemment les cours en format comprimé des sessions d’été en ce qui concerne la planification des cours, l’enseignement en classe, l’évaluation des étudiants et l’interaction avec ceux- ci. Tandis que les universités doivent de plus en plus relever le défi de la flexibilité des modèles de transmission du savoir, incluant l’enseignement et l’apprentissage en format comprimé, cette étude vaut son pesant d’or pour les éducateurs aux adultes.

Articles 2

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

Introduction The topic of teaching in compressed formats has long been of interest to those involved in summer sessions, because of the need to ensure the quality of courses taught in this way. The literature on teaching compressed-format courses is not extensive, but most of what has been reported supports the notion that the quality of the teaching/learning experience is comparable to when the same subject matter is taught in a longer format, particularly when the instructional quality is high. This study provides insight into how highly rated instructors approached teaching compressed summer session courses, and how their approaches differed from those used in full-length sessions. Based on these insights, a set of best practices was developed for teaching compressed-format courses. The study is of value to continuing educators, as universities are increasingly challenged to think about flexible delivery models, including teaching and learning in compressed- format courses. Taking a critical look at compressed courses taught in summer session is important not only to those who offer compressed-format courses in the summer term— often continuing education units—but also to universities more broadly.

Related Literature The literature on teaching in compressed formats is not extensive. However, a number of researchers have commented on the effectiveness of teaching in compressed formats, based on reviews of the literature or on direct interactions during teaching in compressed-format courses, including instructors’ assessments of their own experiences.

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses: Does It Work?

In a review of the literature related to the use of intensive courses in higher education, Daniel (2000) included a section on teaching practices and concluded that intensive courses stimulated discussion and fostered creative teaching. Specifically, she noted that successful intensive courses are well planned, employ organized and structured activities, utilize a multitude of teaching strategies, and focus on learning outcomes and careful student assessment. Lee and Mroczka (2002) determined from their review of the literature that time per se may be relatively unimportant if instructors deal effectively with the learning environment. In particular, they proposed instructors set clear learning outcomes, recognize individual learning differences, create positive classroom environ- ments, consider using short but frequent assignments, and provide regular feedback and support to students. Building on her earlier research findings and those of others, Scott (2003) concluded that intensive courses have benefits, including more focused learning, more collegial classroom relationships, more in-depth discussions, and stronger academic performance when certain instructional and classroom attributes are present.

Articles 3

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

Some of the key attributes are instructor enthusiasm, active classroom interaction, good course organization, and relaxed learning environments. Gaubatz (2003), as part of a review of current research that examined course scheduling formats and student learning, determined time-intensive courses (including courses taught in summer session) compared favourably in terms of student performance to semester-length courses, regardless of discipline. Overall, she indicated that intensive courses were “found to foster academic achievement, stimulate group discussion, improve student– faculty interaction, and promote active learning and creative teaching techniques” (p. 3). Martin and Culver (2007), in a comprehensive review of the literature on teaching/ learning in compressed courses, concluded compressed courses are not inferior to courses taught in a full-length format—and, depending on the context, may be superior.

More directly, Wilson (2007) talked about instructional design for summer sessions in terms of four perspectives: a vision of the student, course-content selection, evidence-based assessment, and organization and delivery of content. In particular, she pointed to the importance of prioritized learning that distinguishes between “must knows” (prerequisite knowledge and foundational ideas), “need to knows” (less critical at the moment but must knows later), and “nice to knows” (can be put off without jeopardizing baseline knowledge). Wilson recommended that when instructors teach compressed courses in summer session, instructional strategies and methods should focus on “must knows” and “need to knows.” Similarly, Swenson (2003) focused on learning outcomes as a measure of learning quality in accelerated (intensive) courses. In his view, thinking in terms of managing learning versus transmitting information opens up possibilities for planning courses differently, regardless of the format. This learning outcome focus potentially creates opportunities to plan more effectively to teach in compressed formats, because rather than simply trying to fit the semester- length content into a more compressed format, instructors can focus on what needs to be learned and plan accordingly. In a study that included interviews with faculty, Shoemaker (2009) reported instructors were enthusiastic about teaching in summer session. In particular, they liked the smaller class size, the more casual atmosphere, and the increased interaction with students. While challenges resulted from the faster pace and physical demands of teaching in a compressed format, these instructors agreed that the quality of teaching in summer session was comparable to, if not better than, when teaching in the full-length term.

Anastasi (2007) looked at academic performance and course evaluations in iden- tical courses taught in summer session and in the full-length term. Her results deter- mined that overall academic performance was similar and course/instructor evaluations were comparable, regardless of the teaching format. Lutes and Davies (2013), in a study at a single US-based university, looked at two points of comparison between courses taught over a full semester versus in a compressed format: grades students earned in comparable courses, and student reported workload. They found that grades earned were not significantly different, while the difference in reported workload was small

Articles 4

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

when comparing formats/sessions (i.e. full-length to compressed) but significant when comparing subject and/or instructor, regardless of format. In an exploratory study of the efficacy of course length and student success in community college developmental education courses, Sheldon and Durdella (2010) discovered that there was a benefit to offering community college developmental education courses in a compressed format, and the benefit extended to all categories of students in terms of both retention of course material and progress through the developmental curriculum. A survey of over 100 faculty members at a large US-based university determined that faculty had different perceptions about teaching a compressed course and made adjustments to the way they taught courses in this format (Eagle, 2012).

Teaching Compressed Courses: Instructor Experiences

In several articles published in Summer Academe (Arrey, 2009; Crowe, Hyun, & Kretovics, 2005; Digregorio, 1996–97; Peca, 1996–97), instructors analyzed their own experiences when teaching courses in compressed formats. All concluded that the experiences were positive but that they needed to adjust their teaching approaches and methods.

Peca presented an account of adapting a 16-week, semester-length graduate course to a four-weekend format. She did a number of things to fit the intensive format, including (i) requiring pre-reading of the text, (ii) testing more frequently, (iii) rescheduling tests to better utilize available study time, and (iv) extending the due date of a research paper. Peca concluded that she got to know her students better, and student meetings—normally scheduled in the semester—happened spontaneously in the intensive format.

Digregorio, in an article that discussed the non-classroom interactions between students and faculty, raised an interesting consideration about teaching in summer session. She indicated that in the literature, student development and performance was linked to the quality of student–faculty interaction. She suggested summer session may be the best time to foster this type of interaction in order to benefit students not only in summer session, but throughout the year. Her claim was that summer session, with typically smaller classes, a more relaxed setting, and closer classroom relationships, is an ideal time for faculty to begin to create opportunities for (and reduce the barriers to) interaction with their students.

Crowe, Hyun, and Kretovics discussed their experiences as new faculty members preparing to teach courses in summer session; specifically, they examined teaching methodology, student assignments and assessment, and academic rigour. They deter- mined instructors need to consider changes to teaching methods and student assess- ment, but elements that define academic rigour (course content, learning goals) should remain unchanged. Further, they suggested that careful consideration be given to the

Articles 5

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

time required for students to complete assignments and reading requirements and to assimilate content. In particular, they emphasized the need to modify assignments in compressed courses and to consult with experienced colleagues about teaching in summer sessions. All three faculty members had positive experiences teaching in summer session, noting in particular that it was easier to establish rapport with students and to teach in a more focused way because there was little interference from extracurricular demands, such as committee meetings.

Arrey (2009), in a study based on his own experience teaching a course in an intensive format in summer session versus in a semester-length format, concluded that the intensive format was more beneficial because students focused on a single course in summer session versus multiple courses in the fall or winter semester, and students performed better (i.e., achieved higher grades).

Overall, this literature supports the notion that the quality of the teaching/ learning in compressed-format summer session courses is comparable to when courses are taught in a longer format, and points to a number of advantages of teaching in a compressed format. Further, it identifies how instructors adjust their teaching strategies and approaches in summer session to take advantage of the compressed format.

Best Practices and Benchmarking: Guides to Improved Performance

Benchmarking is a process designed to improve organizational performance by iden- tifying outstanding (best) practices used by others and adopting them in one’s own practice (Mancuso 2001). The benchmarking process begins by identifying critical areas of practice, then determining best practices in each of these areas. In other words, the process involves identifying best practices of individuals or institutions and examining how they do what they do. In the literature, best practices are defined as practices that have been shown to have good results, have been selected using a systematic process, and have been judged as exemplary (Mancuso, 2001). Once identified, best practices can be adopted to improve performance. The intent of this study is to use benchmarking to identify practices of top-rated teachers who teach compressed summer session courses, examine how they do what they do, and outline a set of best practices that others might adopt to improve teaching performance. Specifically, the intent is to develop a set of teacher-based best practices for teaching in compressed summer session courses.

Methodology A qualitative methodology was used to gain an understanding of how top-rated instructors teach compressed-format courses. This approach is considered the best way to get close to the phenomena being studied. Among other features, Lincoln and Guba (1985) identified (i) using the researcher as the primary data gathering tool and (ii)

Articles 6

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

developing theory inductively from the data as being key to qualitative inquiry; both features are important in this study.

Trustworthiness of the findings was considered by using techniques outlined by Lincoln and Guba (1985), including prolonged engagement, peer debriefing, and member checks. Prolonged engagement means spending sufficient time to get to know the organization. At each university, data were gathered (via interviews) over a two- to three-month period; plus, the researcher had longer contact (greater familiarity) with both universities. Peer debriefing reviewed the process and outcomes of the analysis by having the researcher meet with an informed colleague to help authenticate the interpre- tation of findings. Finally, informal member checks were used, whereby interpretations gathered in one interview were checked with respondents in subsequent interviews.

Sample The study was conducted in two phases. In phase 1, a pool of instructors (in the rank of professor or lecturer) was selected from a large public university in California. In phase 2, a pool of similar instructors was selected from a large public Canadian univer- sity. Individuals selected had taught undergraduate courses in two or more summer sessions (within the prior five years), and had taught at least once in a fall, winter, or spring full-length session in the same five-year period. Additionally, instructors were highly rated as summer session teachers, based on university-administered teaching evaluations—i.e., they scored in the top 20% on teaching evaluations. Finally, the initial sample was reviewed to ensure instructors from a range of departments were included to gain a sense of teaching strategies across a variety of academic disciplines.

Instructors selected were contacted via an email outlining the purpose of the study and inviting them to participate in an interview. Individual consent to partici- pate in the study was based on their agreement to be interviewed. In total, 27 instruc- tors at one university (response rate 30%) and 20 instructors at the other (response rate 33%) agreed to be interviewed. All interested instructors were contacted by a follow-up e-mail or telephone call to set up an interview.

Data Collection and Analysis A semi-structured interview schedule was developed to collect data from instructors about the strategies and approaches they used when teaching compressed summer session courses. This type of interview benefits from a structure that provides consistency of data collection with the spontaneity of a more informal, conversational approach. The preset questions guided the interview within the conversation about teaching. The inter- view questions were pre-tested with several comparable instructors, and adjustments were made based on the feedback received.

Each instructor was interviewed once, for approximately 60–90 minutes, about teaching in summer session (compressed-format) courses, including course preparation,

Articles 7

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

course delivery, learning environment and students, student assessment (assignments, examinations), and course quality. Instructors were also asked to identify how teaching in summer session differed from teaching in full-length semesters, and to comment on issues and concerns related to teaching in compressed formats. All interviews were recorded and later transcribed. Anonymity and confidentiality were protected, as findings are reported in aggregate form to ensure individuals or their institutions would not be identi- fied. All data were securely stored, then destroyed at the conclusion of the study.

The interview results were analyzed using accepted practices for analyzing quali- tative data (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The interview data were analyzed on two dimen- sions: “horizontal” and “vertical.” Horizontal analysis viewed the data by question across all respondents, while vertical analysis looked at the data holistically by respon- dent. Patterns, themes, and categories were developed using the findings displayed in checklist matrices.

Findings The findings have been organized into categories that parallel the interview topics: preparing to teach; teaching in the classroom; interaction with students; and class- room environment. Selected examples from instructor interviews are used to illustrate the findings.

Preparing to Teach Instructors were asked a series of questions about how they prepare to teach in summer session, specifically related to course design, academic quality, student assessment, and achievement of learning outcomes.

For the most part, instructors indicated they used the same course syllabus in summer session as in the fall, winter, or spring terms but restructured and adjusted the course content to better fit the compressed format. With the intent of making the course fit a compressed time frame, instructors at both universities talked about ensuring they covered the basics while removing superfluous content and trimming the frills—e.g., by offering fewer illustrations/examples or reducing the number of assigned readings. An instructor in education illustrated how she reconsidered the course syllabus when preparing to teach in a compressed format:

I look at the syllabus and determine what can be compressed, what lectures can be merged, what can be dropped. I reformulate my lectures—combine them in new ways—adjust and break lecture topics, which in turn determine where assign- ments will fall. Overall, I need to play with the pieces a little bit—it’s re-chunking. (Instructor 22, Education)

The basis for restructuring depended on a range of factors, including (i) type and mix of students in the course, (ii) the instructor’s experience in teaching both

Articles 8

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

semester-length and compressed formats, (iii) curricular baselines set by the department (typically for core courses), (iv) requirements for subject majors, (v) outlines available in condensed versions of textbooks, and (vi) requirements set out for professional practice. A chemistry instructor described that he refocused the course content on what non- majors in biochemistry required:

In summer session, I structure the course around what non-biochemistry majors need to know. I spend more time on introducing and explaining the back- ground—provide foundations and skip some of the advanced topics. I present the big picture versus details on difficult topics. (Instructor 1, Chemistry)

At both universities, instructors indicated using a longer time horizon when preparing to teach compressed courses. Rather than planning a course on a day-to- day or week-to-week basis, they laid out a detailed plan for the entire term prior to the start of the course. As well, they were quite vocal in stating that they needed to prepare themselves for the intensity of the summer term both mentally and logistically by “clearing the decks” to focus only on teaching. A music instructor succinctly spoke about her planning timeline: “I do a larger overview where I plan what to cover the entire course versus planning for a class or two ahead. I think in terms of larger spans of classes” (Instructor 17, Music). A communications instructor talked about avoiding multitasking in summer session:

[I]n the regular terms I am multitasking like crazy, whereas during the summer I just know it’s going to be an intensive time. I don’t travel at all. As well, I make my writing commitments separate from the three-week [teaching] period. I’ll teach two classes and I’ll do nothing but prepare, teach, and grade . . . Four to six hours of teaching is a long day. Then I spend the weekend grading. (Instructor 16, Communications)

Instructors were conscious of adjusting assignments and reading requirements to fit the compressed format of summer session. In particular, they expressed concerns about students’ ability to complete assignments properly and in a timely fashion and instructors’ ability to provide immediate feedback. This was one approach taken by a political studies instructor to compensate for the time pressure: “I set lengthier readings over weekends versus between classes during the week, [and on occasion] substitute reading a book with viewing the DVD (movie) version” (Instructor 4, Political Studies). Some instructors cautioned against setting certain types of assignments in compressed summer session courses, in particular long essays and papers, group assignments, and research papers involving primary research. Others indicated they started assignments earlier in the course, did more quizzing of reading assignments, and defined assign- ment requirements more carefully. Even though instructors appreciated the summer term contained the same amount of class time, their concern was that the time needed between classes to do these types of assignments was more limited. A communications instructor talked about an approach she used to deal with this challenge:

Articles 9

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

The paper assignment is the biggest challenge. There is a question of whether they can do the research for the paper in the compressed time, so I scale back the research paper in summer session, so students do the research but do not fully integrate the information into a research paper. (Instructor 13, Communications)

Teaching in the Classroom Instructors were asked about teaching strategies and approaches, variability of instruc- tional methods, use of technology, influence of continuity of class meetings, and the impact of an increased focus on teaching.

Most instructors talked about their teaching in summer session as being basi- cally the same as teaching in other sessions but with some differences. For example, some instructors employed greater interactivity and more in-class group discussion in summer session. Others required students to do more preparatory classwork and pre- class reading. A number of instructors were more selective in assigning readings, elimi- nated role-play activities and/or field trips, relied less on oral reporting in class, and used learning management systems less as a teaching tool.

On the question of depth versus breadth of coverage of content, “the jury is out.” Some instructors indicated they did not cover the course in the same breadth in summer session but were able to probe more deeply into select concepts. Others suggested they covered the course in less depth because the intensity and pace required them to spend less time on any one topic in order to cover the breadth of required topics. A law instructor made clear decisions about what to teach:

I need to make choices—to include baseline elements. The decision [is whether] to cut a topic versus providing less depth on some topics. Because of tighter time- frame, there is a need to be more selective—don’t cut out topics entirely but rather minimize topics that I don’t feel are as essential. (Instructor 6, Law & Society)

Differences in teaching approaches in the summer term resulted from both compression of the class schedule and continuity of classes. Compression reduces elapsed time of courses, including the available time between classes. At the same time, a compressed schedule increases the length of classes, which allows more time per session. Many instructors felt they were able to get more done in summer term courses because of the intensity and rigour created by the compressed schedule, in which classes meet daily or multiple times per week. This presented an immersion opportu- nity: students were in daily contact with the course material, with the result that the content was always in mind. As a consequence, there was less need for instructors to spend time reviewing and repeating content, and immediate follow-up could take place on problems and concerns, which allowed students to be more engaged with the material/content of a course. A communications instructor articulated the advantage of teaching in compressed formats:

Articles 10

Teaching Compressed-Format Courses

Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education / Vol. 40, No. 1, spring 2014 Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanente universitaire / vol. 40, no 1 printemps 2014 http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjuce-rcepu

[I] spend more time in summer session doing warm up—asking what’s going on and getting to know students better. Longer sessions allow me to take more time—more time to clarify things. Students seem more engaged. I use time during breaks to interact with students. (Instructor 16, Communications)

Student Interaction Instructors characterized students who attended their courses in summer session as mature (more life and work experience), motivated (to get ahead and finish their degrees), and varied (a greater proportion of visiting and international students). While instructors characterized students as generally motivated, they recognized a clearer distinction in the academic performance of students who attend summer session from those who attend other sessions. The academically strong students were those looking to get ahead (to meet degree requirements early), versus those who were attempting to improve poor performance or repeat failed courses. This reality of summer session teaching was noted by an instructor:

You tend to get students who work harder and you see better performance . . . [Y]ou [also] get a crowd of students who tend to be there because they failed the cours

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.