Using Research to Gain Faculty Buy-In

Concurrent Session 7
Streamed Session

Watch This Session

Session Materials

Brief Abstract

Working with some subject matter experts can sometimes be challenging. As an instructional designer, sometimes it's easy to forget that not everyone understands that instructional design is an entire field of study, supported by significant research. In this session, we will discuss how we have been able to use research-based recommendations to create faculty buy-in.

Sponsored By

Presenters

Sing is currently the Manager of Learning Design and Solutions at the Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness. At the Clearinghouse, he manages a team of learning designers, production specialists, and developers to produce researched-based educational solutions to help improve the lives of United States military members and their families. His areas of expertise include instructional design, educational technology, faculty development, adult learning, student engagement, active learning, MOOCs, and the development of STEM-related courses. Sing has previously presented presenter at various education conferences, including the OLC Accelerate, Learning Solutions, and the Penn State Teaching and Learning with Technology Symposium.
April Millet (Learning Designer, John A. Dutton e-Education Institute, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, PSU) She earned both her master’s degree in instructional systems and her bachelor of science in education from Penn State. As a member of the Dutton Institute staff, she works in close partnership with the college’s academic units to design, develop, and manage online courses and programs that use the latest research in education and technology to develop cutting-edge online educational resources that are unparalleled in their quality. April is most interested in ensuring that technology is integrated into courses in a sound pedagogical manner to ensure that students have the best possible learning experience.

Extended Abstract

Working with some subject matter experts can sometimes be challenging. In most cases, they aren't intentionally trying to be difficult. To them, instructional design is this mysterious set of rules and limitations. As an instructional designer, sometimes it's easy to forget that not everyone understands that instructional design is an entire field of study, supported by significant research. In this session, we will discuss how we have been able to bridge the gap with faculty and talk about the most common research-based design recommendations we use in our everyday work.

In this session, we will remind you that there's a large pool of research that supports the work that we do. Using research data to support our claims not only brings legitimacy to our recommendations but can also appeal to the sometimes more clinical approach that our subject matter experts are familiar with. We will start with some broad research that supports learning design as a whole and its role in the course development process. We will then move into specific topic areas, answering many of the common questions our faculty have asked us.

The format of our presentation will be FAQ style where we will present the question being asked by our faculty, our answers, and the research citations to support it. We plan to allow an opportunity for audience members to contribute their thoughts on the answers we provide and provide their own responses. We plan to allocate 15-20 minutes at the end of our presentation for audience members to have a peer-discussion around other common questions they get from their faculty members and to how they have responded.

The presentation will include, but will not be limited to, answers to common questions such as:

Why should we include instructional design in the development of our courses?

Why should we use the backwards design (or any another) model?

How is online any different from my face-to-face course?

Why are we using such simple language?

How long does it take to develop a lesson/course?

Why should we use images/video in our curriculum?

Why should we use different assessment types when we could just use multiple choice exams?