A Designer’s Log Case Studies in Instructional Design- P42 pdf

A D ES IG NE R' S LOG
192
but it’s up to the student to adapt. If after  years of university studies,
they are [still] not ready to work autonomously, they might not be in the
right place. Whatever method [sic] is used, there will be dead wood. If the
model works for the majority of students, so be it. is model does not
promote facilitating the student in his work. It requires the student’s full
involvement. Our students are often criticised [by my colleagues] in that
they have diculty functioning on their own, in conducting research, in
nding answers. Any model that requires students to work, that forces
them to reect, is good. e student must learn to operate autonomously.
Our students are already graduates. e courses are therefore graduate
level. ey already have at least  years of university.”
On working in teams: “In the beginning, I wasn’t very keen on their
working in teams. Some work harder than others. I am still not convinced
of the merits of this approach from an assessment point of view. On the
other hand, I like the fact that they discuss subject matter as a group.
It’s good to see them discussing in groups. So long as there are no marks
involved, ne. ose who are lazy or unprepared for discussions will be
left aside. I believe in formative assessment for teams and in summative
assessment for individuals.”
On teamwork in their profession: “Yes, they must work hand-in-hand
with their colleagues. Part of their work is done as a team, but in the end,
they also have to bear individual responsibility for their work. In terms
of planning, yes, it’s done in teams. ey are marked on their level of
planning ability. Teamwork prepares them for learning how to plan well.
Organizing/planning team assignments should be part of their training.”
On the design process: “It was a new experience for me to work with an
instructional designer. Enriching and interesting. e fact that you can
sit with someone specialized in design… you asked me questions that
no one had ever asked me before. No one had ever asked me these types

of questions. Why do that? Why emphasize this aspect? … I would do it
without asking myself why… So I’ve improved some things and I enjoy
that.”
193
CAS E STU DY 9
On a major problem encountered: “It was the change in clientele [sic].
at changed everything. Developing material for a certain clientele,
putting time into it, then changing everything… it was like working
backwards. We should have designed the course for our regular students,
and then adapt the material as needed for other students. Creating a
customized course takes too much time. We may have to build  or 
versions of the course without a guarantee that the clientele will be there.
Some courses do not change, such as a history course, but in my area
of study, the course must be adapted to specic needs… such as using
relevant case studies for students.”
On workload: “It was hard going to design this course. We would meet
for an hour and a half to three hours every week. at’s practically a full
course load. e horizontal course plan helped and ended up producing
a better course. I often refer back to it,… but associating an objective to
content and activities is demanding. It is long and sometimes frustrating
to realize that we have activities for which there are no objectives. […]
Preparing this course is like giving a course. I reserved half a day every
week for this work.”
On problems with reading material: “e students have hundreds of
pages to read, between , and , pages per term. On campus, they
get their texts from the ‘reserve’ [in the library] and then photocopy
them. With an online course, everything would have to be put online
and that’s the problem. Re-entering and reformatting data is a huge
job but if we don’t do it, there is a copyright issue linked to format. e
texts themselves exist and are public domain. Also, some texts are only

available from publishers but the new ones are available online. is
makes it easier. But student attitudes also need to change… most of the
students want hard copies.”
On future course designing: “As for the course itself, I would have
designed it as a regular course like I oer on campus.”
On working at a distance: “Screen-sharing is denitely a plus. I really like
working directly on the text like that.”
A D ES IG NE R' S LOG
194
On teaching online with the synchronous platform: “I really liked the
direct contact with the students. [e synchronous platform] is far better
than videoconferencing but I do like being able to see to whom I am
speaking. I fear that online learning is becoming too mechanical. With a
[web] camera on the computer, it would really enhance the visual aspect.”
On accessibility to online courses and the interest in oering them: “For
students in remote areas or far away, yes, I would accept to do this [teach
online]. If there are no other solutions and if the bursary system isn’t
abolished, yes, to increase access, I would oer my courses online. [But]
we have to make sure that all of the tools and documents are available
online, especially since the on-campus students have access to their
professors and a full library. But if there are no other means, if the quality
is there, and if they have access to the necessary means for their learning,
yes, online learning would be OK.”
On the professor’s role: “e professor provides the framework for
training and must complete it with resources. e professor assists with
the method, but the students must complete it by conducting their own
research. No professor can say that he/she covers all the material. at
is why we have libraries, computer labs, etc. If a student is led to believe
that contact with the professor in class is enough, then s-he’s being led
astray.”

On the future of faculty: “I hope that this virtual world doesn’t replace
the professor. Some students need the contact but I believe we can
adopt a hybrid approach whereby the student comes to class and also
uses distance education tools. I wouldn’t want the process to become
dehumanized, where the professor goes to his oce and spends the day
typing on his computer.”
On technology and face to face teaching: “An approach is needed that
responds to two types of students. In terms of my on-campus students, I
wouldn’t want them to stop coming to class… I wouldn’t want to lose this
contact that we have together. But for a student in, say, Nunavut, it would
be absurd to make him come here to learn. Some aspects (in my eld
of study) have already integrated ICT. ere is no reason to prevent the
195
CAS E STU DY 9
virtual from replacing the face-to-face, but I would be very disappointed
as a professor to never see a student again, or have a student ever see
me. In the classroom, with  or  students in front of me, I can tell
if the one way in the back of the class has understood me or not. I can
immediately tell this by his reaction. He may not want to ask questions for
all sorts of reasons. rough eye-to-eye contact, students who may have
a question but may not want to ask it are visible. Eye-to-eye contact is so
important that I take the time to look at their faces, to make sure they
have understood me. With online teaching, how can we manage that? I
would not want face-to-face contact to disappear. It would be better to
nd a happy medium, between face-to-face and online learning.”