1. Redesigning Computer Literacy Arizona State University Tempe,Arizona Toni Farley toni@asu.edu Redesign Alliance Conference March 23, 2009 Orlando, Florida

2. 03/22/09Slide 2 Annual Enrollment Capacities Traditional Model 8 lecture sections (capacity 270) 2160 students Redesign – Per Semester 4 hybrid sections (capacity 300) 2 online sections (capacity 500) 2200 students

3. 03/22/09Slide 3 Motivation for Redesign Update Content and Delivery Traditional course is outdated in content and delivery methods Reduced Costs Traditional course incurs significant per student cost due in part to duplicated resources Instructors Graduate Teaching Assistants (TAs) Graders

4. 03/22/09Slide 4 Redesign Summary Update content and learning objectives Cover modern methods and technologies Promote self-guided learning to prepare students beyond the completion of the course Redesign delivery to support dual objectives Modern learning environment A technology based delivery Decrease in delivery costs Efficient, sustainable delivery structure

5. 03/22/09Slide 5 Updated Content Traditional Course 4 paper-based, multiple choice exams based on computer technology too introductory for today's tech-savvy students 12 assignments in Microsoft Word, Excel, and FileMaker Pro, submitted in hard copy Redesigned Course 9 online quizzes demonstrating understanding of modern computing concepts 7 self-guided learning assignments applying computing concepts and computer-driven problem solving techniques, submitted via various online methods 4 major projects requiring substantial independent inquiry, submitted via various online methods

6. 03/22/09Slide 6 Updated Delivery Traditional Model 2 lectures per week Open lab hours for assistance, staffed by TAs and graders Assignments turned in hard copy during lecture – graded by graders, and returned hard copy during lecture Paper-based, multiple choice exams completed in lecture Redesign Model 1 optional lecture per week, all content on Blackboard Scheduled guidance in lab, staffed by Undergraduate Learning Assistants (ULAs) Discussion board available for assistance daily All assignments, quizzes and projects submitted via the Web

7. 03/22/09Slide 7 Learning Outcomes Traditional Sections Average of 26% of students earned 70% or more Redesigned Sections Average of 65% of students earned 70% or more, on a demonstrably more difficult course

8. 03/22/09Slide 8 Student Satisfaction Surveys show strong improvement in student satisfaction for redesigned model Average course evaluations Traditional Model – 3.6 Redesigned Model – 3.92 When provided an opportunity to give open ended, blind feedback about the course, many students commented positively on the amount of knowledge and skills they acquired, far in excess of what they had expected.

9. 03/22/09Slide 9 Cost Savings Per Semester Traditional Teaching 2 sections – Lecturer 2 sections – Faculty Associates Staff 2 TAs 6 graders 1120 hours Redesign Teaching 1 Course Coordinator (Lecturer) Staff 1 TA 3 ULAs 480 hours Decrease in cost per student from $50 to $28

10. 03/22/09Slide 10 Delivery to Achieve Cost Reduction 75% of grading automated Online quizzes and assignments ~ 40% In-house programs ~ 35% Major individual projects: partial automated grading ULAs paid higher than graders Able to attract more qualified student staff Provide better support to learners – students prefer ULA guidance to TA guidance Ability to work with automated grading tools TA fully utilized to assist instructor

11. 03/22/09Slide 11 Sustainability The entire course is packaged in Blackboard to copy from semester to semester Course manual provided with complete instructions for delivering course All simultaneously offered sections share same Blackboard site and instructor Course design successfully transferred to new instructor, with very positive feedback