Reliability should be Benoit’s priority.

In Benoit’s specific situation, a driving factor in his colleagues’ decisions to gravitate toward Moodle is the speed, or, rather, the lack thereof, of support from the IT department for Blackboard Learn. While this is definitely a factor worth considering, I am more alarmed by the implied belief that Moodle is the superior choice because there is less paperwork and less red tape. As the perceived lack of technical support for Blackboard Learn seems to be a significant factor in Benoit’s choice of platform, I believe the question Benoit must ask is: Which platform is most reliable? This is an important question to ask because, regardless of how easy it is to create the course, or how easy it is to use, none of that will matter if the course becomes inaccessible due to technological difficulties. Bates (2014), in his discussion of reliability, states, “Technical support can be a huge cost, not just in paying technical staff to deal with service calls, but also in lost time of students and teachers” (8.3.4 Reliability section, para. 1). The case study explicitly states that there is no real technical support for Moodle and support for Blackboard Learn is slow at his institution. Therefore, it would be wise to consider which platform will ultimately be more reliable in order to decrease possible lost time due to inadequate technical support.

As Benoit can only dedicate five hours per weeks to developing the online course, he does not have the luxury of time. Boettcher (2004), in her analysis of faculty effort required for an hour of instruction to be converted to online material, states “a recommended planning number today for experienced faculty is 10 hours per hour of instruction” (p.3). Boettcher suggests that, in the case of a three-credit course, that approximately 45 hours of instructional time would need to be converted to an online format (p.2). So, if this suggestion is accurate, it would take 450 hours, or 90 weeks at 5 hours per week for Benoit to develop his online course at this rate. Similarly, Wu (2014) reveals that when factoring in all elements of designing an online course, “Verizon Communications reports that it needs at least 40 hours[…]to develop 1 hour of an e-learning course” (p.597). This translates into 1800 hours of development for Benoit’s course if we apply Boettcher’s estimate of instructional hours in a three-credit course. This number is obviously unreasonable as the course is due to go online the next term—so how can I come up with a more appropriate estimate?

First, I need to discount all hours used in platform and interface development as this is largely covered by Moodle and Blackboard Learn’s existing design. Therefore, Verizon Communications’ time estimate is not useful as it does not categorize where the time is spent. Boettcher’s estimate can still apply, but her information is twelve years old, so we need to account for increased usability of LMS and a potential increase in the skill set of users. Finally, we know that Benoit has developed content previous to being asked to develop a fully-online course, so he will save time there. Taking these adjustments into consideration, my estimates of time needed are as follows:

  • Two weeks to become acquainted with the chosen LMS and its functions.

Rationale:
Regardless of which LMS Benoit chooses, he will have to learn how to use it. Bates (2014) suggests a useful criterion to use when estimating time needed for students to learn how to use a new software is 20 minutes. As Benoit has to do more than navigate the course, I estimate it will take approximately 5 hours of learning and 5 hours of practice to become confident in his skill set. This may be reduced if he chooses Blackboard due to his previous experience with WebCT Vista).

  • Six weeks for content development, broken down as follows: two weeks to review existing material from the face-to-face course and determine its suitability for the online course and four weeks to adapt and upload content material.

Rationale:
The content from his face-to-face course may not be entirely suitable for the online course. It would be wise of Benoit to take into account Mayer’s 12 principles of multimedia design as outlined in the Teaching and media selection components of the SECTIONS model (Bates, 2014), then adapt the content for an online-learning environment.

  • Four weeks to construct interaction and assessment components for the course.

Rationale:
While Benoit does have experience uploading content, he will have to design online assessments and opportunities for interaction, something he does not currently have experience with. I presume that this will be time-consuming.

  • Two weeks to conduct a trial run of the course as both student and instructor (perhaps using faculty members as testers?).

Rationale:
When considering Bates’ (2014) SECTIONS model, I think Ease of Use is an incredibly important area to consider when choosing technology. Therefore, I suggest that Benoit carefully tests the usability and reliability of this course before launching it. I suggest two weeks so he can potentially recruit colleagues to test the course, rather than relying solely on himself in order to provide an outside perspective.

  • One-two weeks for revisions.

Rationale:
Benoit should reserve ample time to correct any issues discovered in the testing phase.

Total number of weeks: 15-16

References:

Bates, T. (2014). Teaching in a digital age. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/

Boettcher, J., (2004, June 29). Online Course Development: What Does It Cost? Retrieved from https://campustechnology.com/Articles/2004/06/Online-Course-Development-What-Does-It- Cost.aspx?aid=39863&Page=1

Wu, H. (2014) A framework of combining case-based reasoning with a work breakdown structure for estimating the cost of online course production projects. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 595-605. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Leave a Reply