Pandemic Pivot: A Faculty Development Program for Enhanced Remote Teaching

Abstract

The novel coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the higher education sector all over the world and has been most disruptive to residential academic institutions that offer mostly, if not wholly, in-person instruction. Of the 1.5 million college faculty members in the United States, about 70% had never taught a virtual course prior to COVID-19. During spring 2020, colleges had to pivot to remote instruction without much notice for faculty to prepare. Some referred to this as “emergency remote teaching” as it did not allow adequate time to thoughtfully plan out a course for a remote format. Over the summer and fall of 2020, many colleges invested in training programs to help faculty design and deliver their courses in a remote format. This article describes an online faculty development program that was created for faculty at a residential liberal arts university that, prior to COVID-19, offered the majority of courses on campus in-person. The objective of the program was to help faculty plan out and design their remote courses in the Blackboard Learning Management System using an instructional design framework known as backward design. This program ended up receiving the 2021 Blackboard Catalyst Award for Training and Professional Development.

1. Introduction

During the spring of 2020, higher education institutions had to pivot to remote instruction due to the COVID-19 pandemic where little advance notice was given to allow faculty to adequately plan and design their course for a remote format. This sudden shift was referred to as “emergency remote teaching” as opposed to online teaching because courses that are designed for online learning require months of planning, often in collaboration with academic technology and instructional design specialists. Like many institutions, the university described in this article was faced with a similar dilemma of having to move all of its courses, the majority of which are offered in person on campus, to a remote format. For the spring 2020 term, the institution extended spring break by one week and live training sessions were held for faculty to learn Zoom and Blackboard basics to finish out the remainder of the spring semester.

A survey of 400 faculty conducted by the Office of Institutional Research found that prior to spring 2020: 69% of faculty respondents had taught exclusively in an in-person classroom environment; 13% had taught a hybrid class (partly in-person and partly online); and 18% had taught at least one class fully online. About 20% of faculty respondents were already using Blackboard at the time they transitioned to the remote environment and 12% were experienced with using Zoom. The report on the survey results indicated that, overall, faculty were resilient and resourceful in adapting quickly to remote teaching and that students were generally flexible and understanding, which some attributed to the fact that relationships had already been built in-person in the classroom before the pandemic hit [1, 2, 3]. This report also noted challenges faculty and students faced including technological challenges such as internet connectivity and equipment problems; pedagogical challenges such as engaging students in a remote class and students being in different time zones as well as Zoom fatigue; and other challenges related to the pandemic itself and the lifestyle changes people had to make that created additional stress.

To address the challenges related to pedagogical support, the authors of this article designed and facilitated a professional development program for faculty to help them plan and design a remote course using Blackboard Learning Management System and an instructional design framework known as backward design. The following describes the structure and content of the remote teaching faculty development program, the results from a conducted survey on faculty participants, lessons learned and reflections by the instructional designers of the program, and future directions for faculty development and support for remote teaching.

2. Enhanced remote teaching training program

During summer 2020 a training program for campus faculty was developed by four instructional designers from the university’s learning design center. The training program consisted of an organization page in Blackboard called Remote Teaching Resource Center (RT101) and a course in Blackboard called RT102: Course Design for Enhanced Remote Teaching 102 (RT102). The organization in Blackboard (RT101) housed tutorial videos and job aids (written manuals with step-by-step instructions) on the technological tools available to faculty to teach their remote courses. Tools available included Blackboard, Zoom, and Panopto (a platform for creating and hosting videos). All faculty (including adjunct faculty) were automatically enrolled in the organization so they could get access to the training resources on using the technology tools. Faculty were encouraged to enroll in the course in Blackboard, RT102: Course Design for Enhanced Remote Teaching, and a stipend of $500 was issued to faculty who completed the course. Over the summer and fall of 2020, 257 faculty completed RT102.

The instructional designers who developed the training program usually work with faculty subject matter experts to create courses for the university’s online programs. However, after the pandemic hit and the campus was closed, campus faculty needed pedagogical and technological support to teach their courses remotely and the university did not have a large staff of instructional designers to work with each individual on-campus faculty member one-on-one to redesign their course for a remote format. Therefore, it was decided that the best way to provide the campus faculty with support at scale, was by introducing them to the basics of online course design via a training course. This course, RT102, had to be developed rather quickly in the span of about five weeks. The course launched in late June 2020, running multiple weekly sections in June, July, August, September, October, November, and January, and was facilitated by the same instructional designers who designed the course. In total, 30 training courses were facilitated in summer and fall of 2020. In addition to the training course, the instructional designers facilitated webinars during the summer of 2020 on strategies to engage students on Zoom that focused on flipped/active learning and retention strategies using Blackboard’s Retention Center tool. Recordings from these webinars were posted in the RT101 organization so all faculty could access them even if they were not able to attend the webinars or the RT102 course. This article focuses mainly on the course, RT102, and the results, lessons learned, and future directions for faculty development for remote teaching.

2.1 Module 1

RT102 consisted of five modules with each module corresponding to a phase in the backward design process. Module One was about crafting clear and measurable learning outcomes using Bloom’s (2001) Taxonomy action verbs (revised) [4]. This module focused on creating module-level learning outcomes that align to course-level and program-level learning outcomes. Faculty were asked to reflect about the big picture takeaways from their courses and how they can create meaningful and compelling learning outcomes that engage students and encapsulate their own goals for their course. Faculty participated in a threaded discussion forum on ways they can get students to engage with learning outcomes.

2.2 Module 2

Module Two was about creating assessments and rubrics that are used to evaluate student evidence of learning outcomes achieved. This module focused on designing authentic assignments that allow students some choice and autonomy to demonstrate their achievement of the learning outcomes [5]. Unlike many conventional forms of assessment such as multiple-choice exams, authentic assessment requires students to “do” the subject and mimics real-world problems or situations that people face in the field [6]. Examples of authentic assignments include projects, experiments, demonstrations, presentations, and other assignments that result in an artifact that students submit. This artifact provides evidence of the learning outcomes achieved and students can choose to showcase their work in a portfolio for potential employers to view. In this module, faculty also took an online proctored exam so they could experience what it’s like from a learner perspective. Because many faculty turned to online proctored exams in spring 2020, this allowed faculty to gain some insight on the student experience to inform their own course design choices. Faculty discussed their personal experience taking the exam and presented their assessment ideas in a blog activity.

2.3 Module 3

Module Three was about creating peer learning activities that prepare students to succeed on assignments, engage meaningfully with their peers, and gain constructive feedback. This module focused on pedagogical aspects of social learning theory such as social presence in online interactions and the importance of developing community [7]. This module also included practical resources on asynchronous technological tools to facilitate peer learning in Blackboard such as discussion boards, blogs, wikis, and group tools. Faculty shared their ideas for encouraging students to engage with each other in a collaborative wiki activity.

2.4 Module 4

Module Four was about curating and creating instructional materials such as readings, videos, and web resources that align to the learning outcomes, assessment, and learning activities. This module highlighted the use of open educational resources (OER), which have been known to improve student retention and engagement, as an alternative to traditional textbooks [8]. This module also focused on pedagogical aspects of multimedia learning [9] with practical resources to support faculty’s creation of instructional videos. Faculty shared their ideas for their own instructional materials in a group threaded discussion activity.

2.5 Module 5

The final module (Module Five) was a faculty showcase where faculty present their plan for how they intend to apply the backward design framework to their remote course. Faculty could choose to present their plan as a recorded video presentation, written paper, or slide deck, following the principles of universal design for learning [10] and authentic assessment. Faculty would then upload their showcase to a discussion forum to share with peers and comment on each other’s work. With permission, faculty showcases were also posted in RT101 Blackboard Organization and organized by school, department, and program so that other faculty could view their colleagues’ showcases from past cohorts and get inspiration or ideas for their own showcase. In Module Five, faculty also filled out a self-evaluation rubric to rate themselves on their plan for learning outcomes, assessments, peer learning activities, and instructional materials and reflect on their learning and takeaways from the course. Faculty submitted their self-evaluation rubric as an assignment so only the course facilitator would be able to view it.

Each module followed a consistent format which included:

• An introduction to the topic.

• Module learning outcomes.

• Recorded video presentations on the topic.

• Foundational resources consisting of curated readings on the pedagogical aspects of the topic.

• Practical resources consisting of curated readings and videos on the application aspects of the topic.

• Hands-on course design prep activities.

• Tutorial demo videos and job aid documents with written instructions and corresponding screenshots on how to use tools in Blackboard based on the module topic.

• An asynchronous peer learning activity (discussion, blog, wiki or group) for faculty to discuss their course ideas with colleagues

3. Results

The following describes the results from a survey given to faculty after they completed the RT102 course. There were 125 faculty who filled out the survey. Here is a summary of the survey results on the overall satisfaction rate from the RT102 course.

3.1 Post-course survey

See (Table 1)

	Number of faculty	%
Very Satisfied	42	34%
Satisfied	64	54%
Neutral	10	8%
Unsatisfied	7	6%
Very Unsatisfied	2	2%
Total	125	100%

Table 1.

Overall satisfaction rate from RT102.

3.2 Follow up survey

Faculty were asked in a follow-up the survey if they were able to apply what they learned in the training to design their own remote course. There were 77 faculty who filled out the survey.

	Number of faculty	%
Strongly Agree	33	43%
Agree	29	38%
Neutral	12	15%
Disagree	3	4%
Strongly Disagree	0	0%
Total	77	100%

Faculty comment highlights are included in Appendix 1. The faculty development program was the recipient of the 2021 Blackboard Catalyst Award for Training and Professional Development which recognizes individuals and/or institutions “who use Blackboard programs to support and enhance professional development within or outside their organization” [11].

4. Lessons learned

Survey results from faculty participants in RT102 indicate that, overall, this faculty development course was successful in terms of faculty satisfaction with the course and faculty being able to apply what they learned. It was helpful for faculty to take an online course (RT102) from a learner perspective since many of the faculty participants had never taken an online course before and were now expected to teach their courses remotely when COVID-19 hit. Getting first-hand experience from a learner perspective can inform faculty’s course design as well as pedagogical and technological choices for their own remote course [12]. This was especially true for faculty who gained first-hand experience taking an online proctored exam. After taking the exam, many faculty shared in their blog post that they found the experience stressful and invasive and would opt instead for alternative forms of assessment, like authentic assignments. Other faculty indicated that they would continue to use proctored exams but that they would be better able to prepare their students for what to expect. Many faculty stated that they felt taking an online course with colleagues from their department or discipline was a beneficial experience.

Some of the challenges faculty cited was the time commitment required to complete the course and the difficulty with being able to transfer certain courses or disciplines to a remote format such as hands-on science labs. Along these lines, some faculty did not think that the backward design framework worked well for their subject matter and that the framework presented in RT102 was too structured and did not allow enough flexibility. This is a valid critique of backward design as not all learning is linear and not all learning can be planned out in advance. Some faculty who are used to being able to improvise and teach material on the fly as they do in-person may find the framework of backward design limiting and cumbersome. Additionally, some faculty from STEM disciplines and in fine arts such as sculpting did not feel that backward design was a framework that worked well for their discipline. Perhaps a competency-based framework would work better for some STEM disciplines.

Some faculty were expecting the RT102 course to focus only on technology and were surprised by the focus on the methodology of design. One faculty commented: “Frankly, I was surprised that the course spent so much time and scholarly work surrounding learning outcomes; I thought it was simply training regarding tech. VERY GLAD about the emphasis on learning outcomes, as we all aim to be as on-target with these with the remote and hybrid versions of our classes as possible.” Another faculty member stated that the workshop changed her perception. “I had no idea what backward design was. The information on each module was not only helpful, it really changed how I can teach and learn from the online environment.” Because many faculty do not receive formal training in course design or pedagogy in their doctoral program, it is helpful for them to receive professional development in areas that can help them improve their teaching.

While some faculty stated that they plan on incorporating what they learned from RT102 into their in-person or hybrid classes, others viewed the backward design approach as being associated only with the online modality. Some faculty may view remote teaching along with backward design as a temporary shift and that “it’s easier to cover more material in a face-to-face class.” Others shifted their perspective on how to teach, regardless of modality, stating that RT102 helped in “reminding us to focus on the student experience, and what they should learn, and working backward from there to design the course.”

It should also be noted that the instructional designers who created RT102 have a background in creating fully online asynchronous courses. The campus faculty came from a background of teaching mostly in-person courses and were under the impression that they were not expected to immediately pivot to teaching “online” courses when COVID-19 hit. Rather they were expected to teach remotely, using a combination of Zoom and Blackboard.

Online course design typically requires months of planning and usually involves instructional designers, academic technology specialists, librarians, and faculty subject matter experts. It was not feasible to transition all campus courses to online courses given the limitations of staff resources and time required to complete such an undertaking. Hence, the rationale for creating a faculty development course to help faculty transition to teaching their courses remotely. However, going forward, it would be prudent to explore alternative frameworks to backward design that are more agile and adaptable for remote teaching as opposed to frameworks used predominantly in online learning.

Additionally, it is worth considering ways to restructure faculty development programs to be less time intensive and using perhaps micro-learning modules or mini courses in order to accommodate busy faculty with heavy workloads. This was the rationale for extending the RT102 course duration from one week to two weeks. Additionally, compensating faculty for their time to engage in professional development is a worthwhile investment in course quality as the university did in this case. When possible, allotting sufficient time for faculty to engage in professional development by reducing workload expectations can also pay dividends toward teaching excellence and faculty job satisfaction [13]. Having faculty participate in courses that mimic the student experience can also allow the opportunity for faculty to develop learner empathy which can result in their ability to design learner-centered courses, an approach considered effective in education [14]. This becomes increasingly important as new models of teaching and learning, including online and hybrid modalities, become more mainstream in the near and distant future as well as in the case of emergencies when universities will need to, once again, pivot to the remote teaching format.

5. Future directions

Although no one knows what the future holds, some are predicting that higher education will continue to rely more heavily on digital technology [15]. Others are forecasting that this trend toward digitization in higher education will only expedite post-COVID as evidenced by the explosion of new technology tools coupled with people becoming more acclimated to working and learning remotely [16]. For students who grew up using screens and are comfortable with online interactions, the shift to online courses may not pose as big a learning curve compared to educators who have historically relied less on technology. As institutions of higher education position themselves for a new period of technological disruption, consideration must be given to faculty development to prepare instructors for the future of teaching. The work of teaching will continue to evolve with the advances made in technological innovation, impacting pedagogies faculty use. Likewise, pedagogies will also influence technology as new tools are developed based on learning science and expertise in education.

Attitudes toward technologies and pedagogies also impact their widespread use and adoption. Even though online education has grown substantially in recent decades, prior to COVID-19, most college faculty had never taught an online course and likely had no desire to do so. A previous study found that most faculty, administrators, and students perceived online education to be inferior as compared to face-to-face delivery in six different categories: retention of course content, critical thinking, rigor, discussion depth, engagement, and quality [17]. But during the pandemic, many did not have a choice. It was remote teaching or nothing if a campus was closed.

Attitudes are also continuing to shift toward more student-centered educational experiences [18]. If universities are going to live up to the ideals of increasing access to liberal education and improving student outcomes, then planning the design of education using frameworks such as backward design will continue regardless of if the education experience is offered in person or online. Universities may also find themselves needing to be more versatile as they adapt and evolve toward the future.

While the pivot to remote teaching was not perfect, education was able to continue during an emergency thanks to online technology. One certainty about the post-pandemic future is that disruptive emergencies such as natural disasters and events will continue to impact education delivery. And once again universities will find themselves needing to pivot to a virtual format. Regardless of whether the approach toward remote teaching is proactive or reactive, the investment in faculty development programs aimed to support faculty in their technological and pedagogical advancement will be a necessary priority for universities in the future.

6. Conclusion

This chapter described a faculty development program that was designed to help campus faculty transition to teaching their courses remotely during COVID. Overall, this program was successful according to faculty satisfaction surveys and the Catalyst Award that was given to the team in the category of professional development and training. As the world moves forward, technology continues to advance and evolve, providing numerous opportunities to innovate in the education space. There is no longer a disconnect between online and on-site as modalities are fluid. Institutions that invest in faculty development will be more prepared to pivot to online in the next emergency. They will also be better positioned to reimagine how education can be transformed for student-centered learning and success in the years to come.

Additional information

Parts of this book chapter were initially published as a preprint article in the institutional repository, Digital USD, in January 2021. The preprint article is entitled Pandemic Pivot: A Faculty Development Program for Enhanced Remote Teaching. The preprint article has not been peer-reviewed.

Faculty Comment Highlights from Surveys.

Survey Question: What was most useful from the workshop?

Changing my perception. I had no idea what backwards design was. The information on each module was no only helpful, it really changed how i can see teach and learn from the online environment.

I thought the daily emails with tasks and reminders were super useful to keep me engaged and on top of the work needed. The resources shared are fantastic and the showcase was helpful to get insight from others

Frankly I was surprised that the course spent so much time with scholarly work surrounding learning outcomes; I thought it was simply training regarding tech. VERY GLAD about the emphasis on learning outcomes, as we all aim to be as on-target with these with the remote and hybrid versions of our classes as possible. WELL DONE

I found talking to my colleagues on the discussion boards extremely helpful. The prompts forced me to put in writing some of my ideas which helped greatly as I plan the course.

I will now teach my modules differently (even when we are in-person), with clear modular LOs and better formative assessments. I also will be able to better engage the students in peer-to-peer learning.

I appreciated that the workshop made me produce tangible assignments, LOs, etc.

Getting to practice the Blackboard tools as if I were a student in my own class--blog, discussion board, Wiki.

The values and strategies it taught and the metacognitive component by which the course emulated all the values and strategies it taught.

the sense of camaraderie amongst the instructor and the participants~ ~ a great model for what we want to achieve in our classes~

Seeing examples of how to structure the class in Modules in Blackboard, including the types of content and materials that can be bundled together into a learning module. It emphasized how important it is to organize the class in a clear and easy to follow structure so that students can keep track of everything - especially when they will need to navigate so much content for all of their classes.

The integration of the tools into the course itself was most valuable. For example, using a blog, discussion board, wiki, all provided us with the experience of using the tools we might incorporate into our classes. The faculty showcase at the end was another example of us doing something we could adapt for use in our own classes.

Exposure to different tools and resources that will help with remote teaching. Taking it with colleagues in my department, so we could share our thoughts and ideas about our courses.

It helped me focus my thinking on some discrete areas of my courses, such as peer involvement and building community. It linked to some good materials on online teaching. And reminding us to focus on the student experience, and what they should learn, and working backward from there to design the course, was useful.

Exposure to literature that supported different pedagogies. Ability to practice what we learned.

The course was great. I liked in particular how it illustrated what it taught so that I have not only a conceptual understanding but also a physical model to remember, emulate, and experiment with. [Course facilitator] did a remarkable job designing the course, encouraging participation, inviting authenticity and creativity, and serving as a model instructor of online pedagogy.

I still believe that there may be more interactions in a face to face class, and that it’s easier to cover more material in a face to face class. My responses have become more positive about online learning since learning about different approaches and techniques in RT102.

Faculty comment highlights from follow up survey (after faculty taught their fall 2020 remote course).

I received positive feedback from my students in course evaluations specifically regarding the LSM organization and remote delivery of my courses. They noticed that I had worked to redesign the course for the remote format this semester and that things ran smoothly.

The RT102 class definitely prepared me for the fall semester; aside from rubrics (instead I give detailed instructions and a checklist), I applied really everything I learned from the class.

I had a very positive experience this semester, and received lots of positive feedback from students. I used Blackboard for the first time and integrated learning goals from the first day, which helped me structure the course all the way through the final exam. I also used the online discussion board, but found that feature to be less useful. I’m going to continue to experiment with incorporating online discussion into remote learning classes.

The RT102 course was super helpful, especially on the practical components of running a course online. After reading my student reviews I am confident that students learned a lot, even with the online environment.

Thank you! It has changed my mind completely about how effective remote teaching can be— excellent course!

The collaboration and support were incredible. People with experience shared tips and tools. This fostered the kind of online environment instructors would want to replicate in their own courses.