Special Edition: Guest Blog by Assistant Professor of Practice (Urban Forestry), Jennifer Killian
When I was asked to create a new course for Oregon State University’s Ecampus program, my first reaction was a mix of sheer excitement… and, well, a little terror. I’ve built workshops, presentations, and even all-day trainings, but assembling ten weeks of graduate-level content from scratch? That felt like wandering through a haunted house to me. Dark, empty, and full of unknowns. Adding to the surrealness, I realized that thirteen years ago, I was a graduate student here, taking several Ecampus courses myself including an early version of the very class I would now be teaching. The idea that I could bring my professional experience back to this institution and shape this course? Thrilling, humbling… and a yes, definitely a little spooky.
The course, FES 454/554: Forestry in the Wildland-Urban Interface, explores the complex challenges of managing forests where communities and wildlands meet. Students dive into forest health, urban forestry, land-use planning, wildfire, and natural resource management through social, ecological, economic, and political lenses. It’s a “slash course,” meaning both undergraduates and graduate students can enroll so I knew the content needed to speak to a broad spectrum of learners. And I had to build it all from the ground up.
Enter the magical world of Ecampus Instructional Design. My Instructional Design partner was way more than support. To me, she was a friendly ghost guiding me through every room of this haunted course house. There were moments when I was convinced I had hit a dead-end, only to have a creative solution appear almost instantly. From turning complex assignments into clear, engaging experiences to keeping me on track and motivated, the team transformed my raw ideas into a cohesive, polished course. I honestly cannot say enough about the skill, creativity, and dedication they bring to the table.
One lesson I carried from my own hiking adventures literally proved invaluable during the course build. Years ago, I was struggling up a 14,000-foot peak in Colorado, staring at the distant summit, more than ready to quit. My hiking buddy simply said, “Don’t look at the summit. Pick a rock a few feet ahead and walk to that. Then take a break, and pick another rock.” That became my metaphor for course development. Instead of being paralyzed by the enormity of a ten-week course, I focused on the next “rock.” Some of my rocks included simply finishing the syllabus, creating the first assignment, securing a guest lecture, or finding a key reading. By breaking the work into manageable pieces, the haunted hallways of that blank course shell became far less intimidating and actually surprisingly rewarding.
Another highlight of building this course was connecting students with the people shaping forestry in the field. Reaching out to industry professionals for guest lectures and insights brought this material to life and grounded it in examples. It also reminded me how much real-world perspectives enrich student learning. Two colleagues from my department contributed individual weeks of material, which helped broaden the course and gave students a chance to see the WUI topic through multiple professional lenses. I was grateful for their contributions too! Seeing the course evolve into a bridge between theory and practice was incredibly rewarding and it reinforced a key principle I’d learned over the years through my various roles. That collaboration amplifies impact. Never has this resonated more with me!
For anyone stepping into a course development role for the first time, my advice is simple; Lean on the resources around you. The Ecampus team offers an incredible array of tools, templates, and guidance. Don’t hesitate to ask questions, tap into expertise, and stick to timelines. Above all, remember the “next rock” approach: the mountain is climbed one step at a time. Celebrate small wins along the way because they add up faster than you think.
Looking back, building this course has been a career highlight. From the panic of staring at a totally blank syllabus to the thrill of seeing assignments, discussions, and modules come alive, I’ve learned that teaching online is truly a team sport. The course may be called Forestry in the Wildland-Urban Interface, but what I really learned was how humans, collaboration, and thoughtful design intersect to create something extraordinary. I hope my story encourages other first-time developers to embrace the process, trust their teams, and find joy in the climb. After all, even a haunted course house is easier to navigate when you have friendly ghosts guiding the way and every “next rock” brings you closer to the summit. And as the crisp autumn air settles in and the leaves turn, I’m reminded that even the spookiest, most intimidating challenges can reveal unexpected magic when you face them step-by-step.
“You won’t always have a calculator in your pocket!”
How we laugh now, with calculators first arriving in our pockets and, eventually, smartphones putting one in our hands at all times.
I have seen a lot of comparisons 123 across the Internet to artificial intelligence (AI) and these mathematics classes of yesteryear. The idea being that AI is but the newest embodiment of this same concern, which ended up being overblown.
But is this an apt comparison to make? After all, we did not replace math lessons and teachers with pocket calculators, nor even with smart phones. The kindergarten student is not simply given a Casio and told to figure it out. The quote we all remember has a deeper meaning, hidden among the exacerbated response to the question so often asked by students: “Why are we learning this?”
The response
It was never about the calculator itself, but about knowing how, when, and why to use it. A calculator speeds up the arithmetic, but the core cognitive process remains the same. The key distinction is between pressing the = button and understanding the result of the = button. A student who can set up the equation, interpret the answer, and explain the steps behind the screen will retain the mathematical insight long after the device is switched off.
The new situation – Enter AI
Scenario
Pressed for time and juggling multiple commitments, a student turns to an AI tool to help finish an essay they might otherwise have written on their own. The result is a polished, well-structured piece that earns them a strong grade. On the surface, it looks like a success, but because the heavy lifting was outsourced, the student misses out on the deeper process of grappling with ideas, making connections, and building understanding.
This kind of situation highlights a broader concern: while AI can provide short-term relief for students under pressure, it also risks creating long-term gaps in learning. The issue is not simply that these tools exist, but that uncritical use of them can still produce passing grades without the student engaging in meaningful reflection gained by prior cohorts. Additionally, when AI-generated content contains inaccuracies or outright hallucinations, a student’s grade can suffer, revealing the importance of reviewing and verifying the material themselves. This rapid, widespread uptake stresses the need to move beyond use alone and toward cultivating the critical habits that ensure AI supports, rather than supplants, genuine learning.
Employing multivariate regression analysis, we find that students using GenAI tools score on average 6.71 (out of 100) points lower than non-users. While GenAI may offer benefits for learning and engagement, the way students actually use it correlates with diminished exam outcomes
Another study (Ju, 2023) found that:
After adjusting for background knowledge and demographic factors, complete reliance on AI for writing tasks led to a 25.1% reduction in accuracy. In contrast, AI-assisted reading resulted in a 12% decline. Ju (2023).
In this same study, Ju (2023) noted that while using AI to summarize texts improved both quality and output of comprehension, those who had a ‘robust background in the reading topic and superior reading/writing skills’ benefited the most.
Ironically, the students who would benefit most from critical reflection on AI use are often the ones using it most heavily, demonstrating the importance of embedding AI literacy into the curriculum. For example: A recent article by Heidi Mitchell from the Wall Street Journal (Mitchell, 2025) cites a study showing that the “less you know about AI, the more you are likely to use it”, and describing AI as seemingly “magical to those with low AI literacy”.
Finally, Kosmyna et al. (2025), testing how LLM usage affects cognitive processes and neural engagement in essay writing, assembled groups of LLM users, search engine users, and those without these tools (dubbed “brain-only” users). The authors recorded weaker performance in students with AI assistance over time, a lower sense of ownership of work with inability to recall work, and even seemingly reduced neural connectivity in LLM users compared to the brain-only group, which scored better in all of the above.
The takeaways from these studies are that unstructured AI use acts as a shortcut that erodes retention. While AI-assistance can be beneficial, outright replacement of thinking with it is harmful. In other words, AI amplifies existing competence but rarely builds it from scratch.
Undetected
Many people believe themselves to be fully capable of detecting AI-usage:
Most of the writing professors I spoke to told me that it’s abundantly clear when their students use AI. Sometimes there’s a smoothness to the language, a flattened syntax; other times, it’s clumsy and mechanical. The arguments are too evenhanded — counterpoints tend to be presented just as rigorously as the paper’s central thesis. Words like multifaceted and context pop up more than they might normally. On occasion, the evidence is more obvious, as when last year a teacher reported reading a paper that opened with “As an AI, I have been programmed …” Usually, though, the evidence is more subtle, which makes nailing an AI plagiarist harder than identifying the deed. (Walsh, 2025).
In the same NY Mag article, however, Walsh (2025) cites another study, showing that it might not be as clear who is using AI and who is not (emphasis added):
[…] while professors may think they are good at detecting AI-generated writing, studies have found they’re actually not. One, published in June 2024, used fake student profiles to slip 100 percent AI-generated work into professors’ grading piles at a U.K. university. The professors failed to flag 97 percent.
The two quotes are not contradictory; they describe different layers of the same phenomenon. Teachers feel they can spot AI because memorable extremes stick in their minds, yet systematic testing proves that intuition alone misses the overwhelming majority of AI‑generated work. This should not be surprising though, as most faculty have never been taught systematic ways to audit AI‑generated text (e.g., checking provenance metadata, probing for factual inconsistencies, or using stylometric analysis). Nor do most people, let alone faculty grading hundreds of papers per week, have the time to audit every student. Without a shared, college-wide rubric of sorts, detection remains an ad‑hoc, intuition‑driven activity. Faulty detection risks causing undue stress to students, and can foster a climate of mistrust by assuming that AI use is constant or inherently dishonest rather than an occasional tool in the learning process. Even with a rubric, instructors must weigh practical caveats: large-enrollment courses cannot sustain intensive auditing, some students may resist AI-required tasks, and disparities in access to tools raise equity concerns. For such approaches to work, they must be lightweight, flexible, and clearly framed as supporting learning rather than policing it.
This nuance is especially important when considering how widespread AI adoption has been. Walsh (2025) observed that “just two months after OpenAI launched ChatGPT, a survey of 1,000 college students found that nearly 90 percent of them had used the chatbot to help with homework assignments.” While this figure might seem to justify the use of AI detectors, it could simply reflect the novelty of the tool at the time rather than widespread intent to circumvent learning. In other words, high usage does not automatically equal cheating, showing the importance of measured, thoughtful approaches to AI in education rather than reactionary ones.
What to do…?
The main issue here is not that AI is magically writing better essays than humans can muster, it is that students are slipping past the very moments where they would normally grapple with concepts, evaluate evidence, and argue a position. Many institutions are now taking a proactive role rather than a reactive one, and I want to offer such a suggestion going forward.
Embracing the situation: The reflective AI honor log
It is a fact that large language models have become ubiquitous. They are embedded in web browsers, word processors, and even mobile keyboards. Trying to ban them outright creates a cat‑and‑mouse game; it also sends the message that the classroom is out of sync with the outside world.
Instead of fighting against a technology that is already embedded in our lives, invite students to declare when they use it and to reflect on what they learned from that interaction.
For this post, I am recommending using an “AI Honor-Log Document”, and deeply embedding it into courses, with the goal of increasing AI literacy.
What is it?
As assignments vary across departments and even within courses, a one-size-fits-all approach is unlikely to be effective. To support thoughtful AI use without creating extra work for students, faculty could select an approach that best aligns with their course design:
Built-in reflection: Students note when and how they used AI, paired with brief reflections integrated into their normal workflow.
Optional, just-in-time logging: Students quickly log AI use and jot a short note only when it feels helpful, requiring minimal time.
Embedded in assignments: Reflection is incorporated directly into the work, so students engage with it as part of the regular writing or research process.
Low-effort annotations: Students add brief notes alongside tasks they are already completing, making reflection simple and natural.
These options aim to cultivate critical thinking around AI without imposing additional burdens or creating the perception of punishment, particularly for students who may not be using AI at all.
AI literacy is a massive topic, so let’s only address a few things here:
Mechanics Awareness: Ability to explain the model architecture, training data, limits, and known biases.
Critical Evaluation: Requiring fact-checking, citation retrieval, and bias spotting.
Orchestration Skills: Understanding how to craft precise prompts, edit outputs, and add original analysis.
Note: you might want to go further and incorporate these into an assignment level learning outcome. Something like: “Identifies at least two potential biases in AI-generated text” could be enough on a rubric to gather interesting student responses.
Log layout example
#
Assignment/Activity
Date
AI Model
Exact Prompt
AI Output
What you changed/Added
Why You Edited
Confidence (1-5)
Link to Final Submission
1
Essay #2 – Digital-privacy law
2025-09-14
GPT-5
“Write a 250-word overview of GDPR’s extraterritorial reach and give two recent cases
[pastes AI text]
Added citation to 2023 policy ruling; re-phrased a vague sentence.
AI omitted the latest case; needed up-to-date reference
4
https://canvas.oregonstate.edu/……
Potential deployment tasks (and things to look out for)
It need not take much time to model this to students or deploy it in your course. That said, there are practical and pedagogical limits depending on course size, discipline, and student attitudes toward AI. The notes below highlight possible issues and ways to adjust.
Introduce the three reasons above (either text form or video, if you have more time and want to make a multimedia item). Caveat: Some students may be skeptical of AI-required work. Solution: Frame this as a reflection skill that can also be done without AI, offering an alternative if needed.
Distribute the template to students: post a Google-Sheet link (or similar) in the LMS. Caveat: Students with limited internet access or comfort with spreadsheets may struggle. Solution: Provide a simple Word/PDF version or allow handwritten reflections as a backup.
Model the process in the first week: Submit a sample log entry like the one above but related to your class and required assignment reflection type. Caveat: In large-enrollment courses, individualized modeling is difficult. Solution: Share one well-designed example for the whole class, or record a short screencast that students can revisit.
Require the link with each AI-assisted assignment (or as and when you believe AI will be used). Caveat: Students may feel burdened by repeated uploads or object to mandatory AI use. Solution: Keep the log lightweight (one or two lines per assignment) and permit opt-outs where students reflect without AI.
Provide periodic feedback: scan the logs, highlight common hallucinations or errors provided by students, give a “spot the error” mini lecture/check-in/office hour. Caveat: In large classes, it’s not realistic to read every log closely. Solution: Sample a subset of entries for themes, then share aggregated insights with the whole class during office hours, or post in weekly announcements or discussion boards designed for this kind of two-way feedback.
(Optional) Student sharing session in a discussion board: allow volunteers or require class to submit sanitized prompts (i.e., any personal data removed) and edits for peer learning. Caveat: Privacy concerns or reluctance to share work may arise. Solution: Keep sharing optional, encourage anonymization, and provide opt-outs to respect comfort levels.
Important considerations when planning AI-tasks
Faculty should be aware of several practical and pedagogical considerations when implementing AI-reflective logs. Large-enrollment courses may make detailed feedback or close monitoring of every log infeasible, requiring sampling or aggregated feedback. Some students may object to AI-required assignments for ethical, accessibility, or personal reasons, so alternatives should be available (i.e. the option to declare that a student did not use AI should be present). Unequal access to AI tools or internet connectivity can create equity concerns, and privacy issues may arise when students share prompts or work publicly. To address these challenges, any approach should remain lightweight, flexible, and clearly framed as a tool to support learning rather than as a policing mechanism.
Conclusion
While some students may feel tempted to rely on AI, passing an assignment in this manner can also pass over the critical thinking, analytical reasoning, and reflective judgment that go beyond content mastery to true intellectual growth. Incorporating a reflective AI-usage log based not on assumption of cheating, but on the ubiquitous availability of this now-common tool, reintroduces one of the evidence-based steps for learning and mastery that has fallen out of favor in the last 2-3 years. By encouraging students to pause, articulate, and evaluate their process, reflection helps them internalize knowledge, spot errors, and build the judgment skills that AI alone cannot provide.
Fu, Y. and Hiniker, A. (2025). Supporting Students’ Reading and Cognition with AI. In Proceedings of Workshop on Tools for Thought (CHI ’25 Workshop on Tools for Thought). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5 pages. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2504.13900v1
Kosmyna, N., Hauptmann, E., Yuan, Y. T., Situ, J., Liao, X-H., Beresnitzky, A. V., Braunstein, I., & Maes, P. (2025). Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872
Fall Term is just around the corner, bringing with it new opportunities, fresh faces, and the chance to make a lasting impact on your students. Whether they’re logging in for the first time or for their final term, setting a welcoming and engaging tone from day one helps create a foundation for everyone’s success, yours included.
Here are a few ways to kick things off and set the stage for a smooth, successful term:
Start with a warm welcome
Post a welcome announcement and introduce yourself to your students.
Use a warm and welcoming tone in your message to help students feel encouraged, supported, and comfortable as they enter the course.
Personalize it with a photo or short video, it goes a long way in making connections.
Open your course early
If possible, open your course before the official start date. This gives students a chance to explore, order materials, and introduce themselves.
Open modules at least two weeks ahead. Many students juggle full-time jobs, families, and other commitments, so maximum flexibility is appreciated.
Keep communication open
Set up a Q&A discussion forum, and check it regularly. This allows you to answer common questions once and ensures everyone sees the response.
Encourage students to post questions in this forum and let students know when and how they can expect replies.
Be responsive to messages and follow up with students if needed.
Model engagement
Join discussion boards and post regularly. Ask guiding questions, offer feedback, or simply cheer students on, show them you’re present and engaged.
Think about how you’d engage in a face-to-face class and bring that energy to your online space too.
Be accessible
Hold regular office hours or offer flexible scheduling options. Creating the time and space for students to connect with you makes a difference.
Grade consistently and give meaningful feedback
Timely, constructive feedback helps students grow. The effort you put in early pays off in improved work later in the term.
Stay organized
Block out time in your calendar each week for class check-ins and grading. A little planning now can prevent overwhelm and burnout later.
Take care of yourself
Don’t forget to breathe. Support your students by also supporting yourself.
Be kind to yourself and set boundaries to attend to personal commitments, too.
Here’s to a strong, successful Fall Term — you’ve got this!
This post was written in collaboration with Mary Ellen Dello Stritto, Director of Ecampus Research Unit.
Quality Matters standards are supported by extensive research on effective learning. Oregon State University’s own Ecampus Essentials build upon these standards, incorporating OSU-specific quality criteria for ongoing course development. But what do students themselves think about the elements that constitute a well-designed online course?
The Study
The Ecampus Research Unit took part in a national research study with Penn State and Boise State universities that sought student insight into what elements of design and course management contribute to quality in an online course. Data was collected from 6 universities across the US including Oregon State in Fall of 2024. Students who chose to participate completed a 73-item online survey that asked about course design elements from the updated version of the Quality Matters Rubric. Students responded to each question with the following scale: 0=Not important, 1=Important, 2=Very Important, 3=Essential. A total of 124 students completed survey, including 15 OSU Ecampus students. The findings reveal a remarkable alignment between research-based best practices and student preferences, validating the approach taken in OSU’s Ecampus Essentials.
See the findings in data visualization form below, followed by a detailed description.
What Students Consider Most Important
Students clearly value practical, research-backed features that make online courses easier to navigate, more accessible, and more supportive of learning. The following items received the most ratings of “Essential” + “Very Important”:
QM Standards and Study Findings
Related Ecampus Essentials
Accessibility and Usability (QM Standards 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 8.6): Every OSU student rated course readability and accessible text as “Very Important” or “Essential” (100%). Nationally, this was also a top priority (96% and 91%, respectively). Accessibility of multimedia—like captions and user-friendly video/audio—was also highly rated (100% OSU, 90% nationally).
Text in the course site is accessible. Images in the course are accessible (e.g., alt text or long description for images). The course design facilitates readability. All video content is accurately captioned.
Clear Navigation and Getting Started (QM Standards 1.1, 8.1): 93% of OSU students and 94% of the national sample rated easy navigation highly, while 89% of OSU students and 96% nationally said clear instructions for how to get started and where to find things were essential.
Course is structured into intuitive sections (weeks, units, etc.) with all materials for each section housed within that section (e.g., one page with that week’s learning materials rather than a long list of files in the module). Course is organized with student-centered navigation, and it is clear to students how to get started in the course.
Meaningful Feedback and Instructor Presence (QM Standards 3.5, 5.3): Students placed high importance on receiving detailed feedback that connects directly to course content (100% OSU, 94% nationally). The ability to ask questions of instructors was also essential (100% OSU, 96% nationally).
Assessments are sequenced in a way to give students an opportunity to build knowledge and learn from instructor feedback. The instructor’s plan for regular interaction with students in substantive ways during the course is clearly articulated. Information about student support specific to the course (e.g., links to the Writing Center in a writing course, information about TA open office hours, etc.) is provided.
Clear Grading Criteria (QM Standards 3.2, 3.3): 93% of OSU students and the full sample found clear, detailed grading rules to be essential.
Specific and descriptive grading information for each assessment is provided (e.g., detailed grading criteria and/or rubrics).
Instructional Materials (QM Standard 4.1): All OSU students and 92% nationally rated high-quality materials that support learning outcomes as very important or essential.
Instructional materials align with the course and weekly outcomes. A variety of instructional materials are used to appeal to many learning preferences (readings, audio, visual, multimedia, etc.). When pre-recorded lectures are utilized, content is brief and integrated into course learning activities, such as with interactive components, discussion questions, or quiz questions. Longer lectures should be shortened to less than 20 min. chunks.
What Students Consider Less Important
The study also revealed areas where students expressed less enthusiasm:
Study Findings
Related Ecampus Essentials
Self-Introductions (QM Standard 1.9): Over half of OSU students (56%) and a third nationally (33%) rated opportunities to introduce themselves as “Not Important”.
No specific EE
Peer Interaction (QM Standard 5.2): Students were lukewarm about peer-to-peer learning activities. Nearly half said that working in small groups is not important (47% OSU, 46% nationally). About a quarter didn’t value sharing ideas in public forums (27% OSU, 24% nationally) or having learning activities that encourage them to interact with other students (27% OSU, 23% nationally).
Three forms of interaction are present, in some form, in the course (student/content, student/instructor, student/student).
Technology Variety and Data Privacy Info (QM Standards 6.3, 6.4): Some students questioned the value of using a variety of tech tools (20% OSU, 23% nationally rated this as “Not Important”) or being given info about protecting personal data (20% OSU, 22% nationally).
Privacy policies for any tools used outside of Canvas are provided.
Student Comments
Here are a few comments from Ecampus students that illustrate their opinions on what makes a quality course:
“Accessible instructional staff who will speak to students in synchronous environments. Staff who will guide students toward the answer rather than either treating it like cheating to ask for help at all or simply giving out the answer.”
“A lack of communication/response from teachers and no sense of community” – was seen as a barrier.
“Mild reliance on e-book/publisher content, out-weighed by individual faculty created content that matches student deliverables. In particular, short video content guiding through the material in short, digestible amounts (not more than 20 minutes at a go).”
“When there aren’t a variety of materials, it makes it hard to successfully understand the materials. For example, I prefer there to be lectures or videos associated with readings so that I understand the material to the professor’s standards. When I only have reading materials, I can sometimes misinterpret the information.”
“Knock it off with the discussion boards, and the ‘reply to 2 other posts’ business. This is not how effective discourse takes place, nor is it how collaborative learning/learning community is built.”
Conclusion and Recommendations
The takeaways? This research shows that students recognize and value the same quality elements emphasized in OSU’s Ecampus Essentials:
Student preferences align with research-based standards – Students consistently value accessibility, clear structure, meaningful feedback, and purposeful content.
Universal design benefits everyone – Students’ strong preference for accessible, well-designed courses supports the universal design principles embedded in the Ecampus Essentials.
However, there is always room for improvement, and these data provide some hints. Many students don’t immediately see value in peer interactions and collaborative activities, even though extensive educational research shows these are among the most effective learning strategies. Collaborative learning is recognized as a High Impact Practice that significantly improves student outcomes and critical thinking. This disconnect suggests we need to design these experiences more thoughtfully to help students recognize their benefits. Here are some suggestions:
Frame introductions purposefully: Instead of generic “tell us about yourself” posts, connect introductions to course content (“Introduce yourself and share an experience related to the topic of this course”).
Design meaningful group work: Create projects that genuinely require collaboration and produce something students couldn’t create alone.
Show the connection: Explicitly explain how peer interactions help students learn and retain information better, and the value of teamwork for their future jobs.
Start small: Begin with low-stakes peer activities before moving to more complex collaborations.
Over the past few years, Higher Education (HE) has been called to action in response to the rise of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools. As Artificial Intelligence (AI) becomes more autonomous and capable, proactive steps are needed to preserve academic and learning integrity. This article will explore tangible strategies educators can apply to their unique program and course contexts. Only slight adjustments may be necessary to support learning processes and capture evidence of learning, as changes will build upon the excellent work that is already occurring.
Initially, the focus in HE was on understanding the potential impact these tools would have on teaching and learning. Awareness of GenAI capabilities, limitations, and risks has been acknowledged with great care. Today, the tools are now being tested, and educators are envisioning how to use them for various purposes (e.g., productivity, creativity). Integration of these tools has begun with the aim of supplementing and enhancing human learning. As we move forward, concerns with regard to academic and learning integrity become increasingly prominent.
Meet Agentic AI
Recently, I had the opportunity to attend the Quality Matters Quality in Action conference, where I attended the session Ensuring Academic Integrity and Quality Course Design in the Age of AI. The presenter Robert Gibson, Director of Instructional Design at WSU Tech, shared about an Artificial Intelligence (AI) innovation now available to the public (and our students)….meet Agentic AI!
Your new Agentic AI assistant no longer requires you to be an expert prompt engineer. These tools are designed to achieve specific and clear goals with minimal human supervision or oversight. Engagement in complex reasoning, decision making, problem solving, learning from new information, and adapting to environments can occur autonomously (Gibson, 2025; Schroeder, 2025; Marr, 2025). These new Agentic AIs can even work together to form what is known as an Orchestrated AI. Think of this as an AI team working collaboratively to accomplish complex tasks. Agentic AI has already demonstrated the capability to create and complete online courses. What does this mean for Higher Education?
Now more than ever, we need to come together to collectively reinforce academic and learning integrity in online and hybrid courses. Preserving the quality of our institutional products and credentials is essential. Equally important are the students who will apply their OSU-acquired knowledge and skills in the real world. The time to be proactive is now.
Where and how should I start?
A good starting point is to evaluate assessments that AI can complete. Running an assignment through a GenAI tool to see if it can complete the task, with relative accuracy, can produce helpful insights. Next, consider modifications to pedagogical approaches and assessment methods. The goal is to design assessments to produce and capture evidence that learning is taking place. This could include assessments that are process-oriented, focus on skill mastery, are personalized, incorporate visual demonstrations (e.g., video), and/or integrate real-time engagement (Gibson, 2025).
What might a reimagined activity look like?
For example, let us say an instructor uses case-based learning in their course, and small groups discuss real-world scenarios on a discussion board. This activity could be reimagined by having students meet virtually and record their discussion. During their real-time interaction, they examine a real-world scenario, identify associated evidence, present examples, and share their lived experiences. This would be similar to how students conduct group presentations currently. This approach could be enhanced by shifting the focus to the learning process, such as arriving at ideas and cultivating perspectives (i.e., learning, growth, development). This would be in lieu of having students find a right or wrong answer (Gibson, 2025). This approach encourages students to engage substantively, co-construct knowledge, and work together to demonstrate learning. After participating in the activity, each student could create an individual video presentation to synthesize their learning. A synthesis video could include discussing their initial perspectives (Where did I start? – prior knowledge activation), how those initial perspectives evolved (What was my cognitive process? – metacognition), what new knowledge is needed (gap analysis), and how my perspectives and knowledge change (learning reflection). This method reinforces academic and learning integrity by validating that students are learning and achieving outcomes (Bertram-Gallant, 2017).
Reflect! Take a moment to reflect on how you know that students are learning in your course(s). What evidence do you have?
While the potential for academic dishonesty cannot be entirely controlled, there should not be an assumption that students will use these tools in their coursework just because they are available. Take a moment to examine the Ecampus Research Unit’s research, “Student Perceptions of Generative AI Tools in Online Courses.” This research study explores online students’ perceptions, understanding, and use of GenAI tools. The study found that most students had not been using GenAI tools in their courses, but rather, they were primarily using GenAI tools within professional contexts. Students noted that they understood that using AI in their careers would be necessary. However, strong concerns were articulated around inaccuracies, biases, lack of reliability, propagation of misinformation, and that the use of the tools is not in alignment with their personal values and ethics. (Dello Stritto, M, Underhill, G. and Aguiar, N., 2024).
How can academic and learning integrity be reinforced?
Educators can foster academic integrity in a way that drives students’ internal motivation, self-determination, and desire to demonstrate their learning because they value the work they are doing. A multifaceted developmental approach that fosters a culture of academic integrity using various strategies in concert with one another is key (Bertram-Gallant, 2025), as no single approach can serve as a definitive solution.
Integrity teaching – Taking on the role of an active guide during course delivery and meeting students where they are developmentally is essential. This may include teaching students how to engage in critical thinking around the use of AI tools, connect the value of academic and learning integrity to their future profession, how to make well-informed decisions, and how to leverage metacognitive strategies when engaging with AI.
Integrity messaging – This approach is one that can be most effective if holistically integrated into a course. The content communicates that integrity, values, and ethics are normative within the course and will be held at the forefront of the learning community. Staged and timed messaging can be most helpful when targeted at different points in a course and as the complexity of academic work increases.
Transformative real time experiential learning – Transformative experiential learning involves designing opportunities that generate new ideas for action, which can be applied to other experiences. These activities may include, but are not limited to, service learning, internships, hands-on collaborative activities (e.g., role play, point-counterpoint discussions), and demonstrations. By focusing on real-time engagement, this approach demonstrates learning and thereby reinforces academic and learning integrity.
Deep learning – Learning opportunities focused on skill mastery and demonstration through staged attempts. This approach may necessitate a pedagogical shift focusing on development and growth (Bertram-Gallant, 2025).
Agentic AI brings exciting opportunities for the world but tangible challenges for HE. By intentionally designing assessments that lead students to demonstrate evidence of their learning and using facilitation strategies that foster a culture of academic integrity, we can harness the potential of AI to supplement learning. What is the end goal? To ensure that educational opportunities are designed to preserve and enhance learners’ critical skills and knowledge needed to thrive in their professional pursuits. Will you accept this challenge?
Trying to decide when and how to incorporate AI into your work? Take a look at the AI Decision Tree!
Need a few quick, practical strategies to get started? These recommendations aim to improve learning for both teachers and students.
Are you ready to evaluate and enhance the resiliency (i.e., flexibility, adaptability) of your course within the context of AI? Check out the new The Course AI Resilience Tracker [CART] interactive tool. This interactive tool can help you reflect on various course elements and will share personalized resources to help you get started.
Review Bloom’s Taxonomy Revisited to explore how to emphasize distinctive human skills and/or integrate AI tools to supplement the learning process.
Explore our AI Assessment Examples Library for assessment ideas designed to incorporate AI tools and strategies in your course and/or create more human-centric assessments.
Bertram Gallant, T. & Rettinger, D. (2025, March 11). The Opposite of Cheating: Teaching for Integrity in the Age of AI. University of Oklahoma Press.
Dello Stritto, M. E., Underhill G. R., & Aguiar, N. R. (2024). Online Students’ Perceptions of Generative AI. Oregon State University Ecampus Research Unit. https://ecampus.oregonstate.edu/research/publications/
Gibson, R. (2025, April 10). Ensuring Academic Integrity and Quality Course Design in the Age of AI [Conference presentation]. Quality Matters Quality in Action 2025. Virtual.
Ashlee M. C. Foster, MSEd, is a seasoned Instructional Designer with the Oregon State University Ecampus Course Development and Training Team. With a profound commitment to supporting faculty and students in online teaching and learning, Ashlee’s mission is to design high-quality and innovative educational opportunities that foster transformational learning, development, and growth. Ashlee’s learning design approaches are grounded in research-based insights, foundational learning theories, and the thoughtful integration of industry-led practices. This ensures that each educational experience is not only effective but also engaging and relevant.
This is a guest post by Winter 2025 Ecampus Instructional Design Intern Terrence Scott.
Creating Online Learning Spaces Where Adult Learners Belong
Today’s college students are increasingly adults returning to education to pursue career shifts, personal growth, or new credentials. Yet, this return often brings discomfort. Adult learners find themselves in a liminal space, caught between who they were and who they are becoming as students. This “in-between” state is a psychological and social threshold where identity and belonging are in flux (Maksimović, 2023; Turner, 1969).
Liminal space is defined as “characterized by the questioning and reexamination of one’s identity, often as a result of transitional moments in an individual’s life such as separation, loss, and conflicts” (Maksimović, 2023). Rather than a moment, adult learners experience the entire educational journey—from enrollment to graduation—as a liminal space. Supporting learners through this journey requires intentional course design that centers on inclusion and belonging.
Online Learning as a Threshold
As Johnson (2022) and Maksimović (2023) describe, adult learners often navigate identity shifts as they move from familiar roles in work or family life into the unfamiliar space of studenthood. For some, prior negative school experiences further intensify feelings of isolation during this transition.
Adult learners in liminal space often struggle with:
Imposter Syndrome: “Am I really capable of doing this?”
Identity Conflict: “Am I a student now, or still just a working professional?”
Social Isolation: “Do I belong here, or am I too different from my classmates?”
Fear of Failure: “What if I don’t succeed and let myself or my family down?”
Without a strong sense of belonging, these feelings can lead to disengagement or dropout. But when courses are designed to recognize this liminal space, learners are more likely to persist and thrive (Mezirow, 1991).
The Role of Belonging in Adult Learning
Belonging is a powerful driver of student success, especially for those from nontraditional backgrounds. It’s not just about showing up—it’s about feeling seen, respected, and included. When learners experience psychological safety and validation, motivation and commitment grow (Strayhorn, 2019).
How Does Belonging Develop?
Representation: Course content should reflect diverse identities and lived experiences.
Identity Validation: Recognize the knowledge adult learners bring with them.
Connection: Encourage interaction through group work, discussion forums, or mentorship.
Flexibility: Design with life responsibilities in mind—multiple paths to participation and success.
These elements help learners cross the threshold from “outsider” to “insider,” evolving from questioning their role in higher education to fully embracing it.
UDL 3.0: Designing for Inclusion and Belonging
Universal Design for Learning offers a framework for inclusive online course design. The latest iteration, UDL 3.0, centers identity, belonging, and engagement more explicitly than ever (CAST, 2024). It urges instructors to create spaces where students feel welcomed and recognized, not just accommodated.
How UDL Supports Adult Learners in Liminal Spaces
Engagement: Make content relevant with real-world examples, reflection exercises, and collaborative activities.
Representation: Use varied media—text, video, podcasts, interactive tools—and include voices that reflect learners’ identities.
Action & Expression: Offer multiple ways to demonstrate understanding with flexible formats, low-stakes practice, and accommodations for life’s demands.
When courses reflect these principles, adult learners gain the confidence to move through uncertainty and emerge with a stronger academic identity.
Conclusion
Liminal spaces—the uncertain, transitional moments in adult learning—can be both challenging and transformative. While some learners struggle with identity shifts, imposter syndrome, or social isolation, institutions that prioritize belonging and inclusive design can help them navigate these transitions successfully.
Higher education can foster a sense of belonging and empowerment for adult learners by integrating UDL 3.0 principles into course design and student support services. Welcoming students, valuing their diverse experiences, and establishing supportive learning environments are essential to addressing students’ unique needs and ensuring their success.
References
CAST (2024). UDL Guidelines 3.0: Universal Design for Learning.
De Abreu, K. (2023, August 7). Extreme coming of age rituals. ExplorersWeb. Link
Johnson, K. (2022). Beginning, Becoming and Belonging: Using Liminal Spaces to Explore How Part-Time Adult Learners Negotiate Emergent Identities. Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning, 24(2).
Maksimović, M. (2023). Insights from Liminality: Navigating the Space of Transition and Learning. Sisyphus–Journal of Education, 11(1).
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass.
Turner, V. (1969). The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. Cornell University Press.
Strayhorn, T. L. (2019). College Students’ Sense of Belonging: A Key to Educational Success for All Students (2nd ed.). Routledge.
One of my favorite design strategies is to make a small adjustment that delivers a big impact. When it comes to creating a welcoming online course, certain small adjustments can do just that and go a long way in warming up the online classroom. But first, let us look at why online courses ought to be welcoming and then what it means to be welcoming in the online space.
Why Welcoming Students Is Important
First, why is it important to design a welcoming course? According to the OSU Ecampus Online Teaching Principles, which are supported by research and endorsed by Quality Matters, it is recommended to “[m]ake facilitation choices that support diverse students and make each student feel welcomed and valued.” Additionally, specific review standard 1.8 from the Quality Matters Higher Education Rubric, 7th Edition, states that “The self-introduction by the instructor is welcoming and is available in the course site.” Furthermore, UDL 3.0 Guidelines were updated recently and include “Design Options for Welcoming Interests & Identities.” While all of those are evidence-based recommendations, I think it is safe to say that many faculty also have plenty of anecdotal evidence for the benefits to students when feeling welcome in a course. If one has been working in the higher education context for several years, it is easy to forget that many students struggle to feel that they belong in this context. Warm communication and greetings is one way to begin connecting with students who are skeptical that their experience matters or that their presence is valued.
What Does It Mean To Be Welcoming?
Next, let’s look at what it means to be welcoming in the online classroom. If we get down to basics and turn to a dictionary definition, we see that Merriam-Webster has defined welcoming as “to greet hospitably and with courtesy and cordiality; to accept with pleasure the occurrence or presence of.” For the online modality then, we can ask ourselves some questions: Where in the course can facilitators greet students? When students inquire about office hours or email with a question, can their presence be warmly accepted? Next let’s look at actions that faculty or other course facilitators, such as graduate teaching assistants, can take to be welcoming.
Creating a Welcoming Online Classroom
The following tips are just a few of the actions that can be taken to create a welcoming online classroom:
Greet each student in the introduction discussion. Replying to each student is one of those actions that is small but has a big impact.
Many online students are older than the traditional college age, so they often have extensive work experience and life experiences to draw upon. Acknowledging this life experience can go a long way in welcoming students.
Rename office hours to something like Coffee Chat, Afternoon Tea, or Q&A Hour. Here is an example to consider: Which description of office hours sounds more welcoming, Example 1 or Example 2? Example 1: “Office Hours are held by appointment. Please email to make an appointment.” Let’s compare that to Example 2: “Please join me for a Coffee Chat this term! Coffee Chats are held three times per term, as an open Zoom room for our class. If you can’t attend any of the scheduled Coffee Chats, please email me and schedule a time to meet. I want to get to know each of you. Furthermore, when I get to know students, I am better positioned to serve as a reference for educational or professional opportunities that come up in our field. I look forward to meeting with you!”
Consider how students are described in the course site. Alternative descriptions besides “students” could be fellow scholars, colleagues, participants, etc.
Consider these two different introduction discussion prompt designs, 1 and 2:
Design 1: “Students: Post an introduction that includes the following: Your major and why you are taking this course. Reply to two other students.”
Design 2 (designed to be more welcoming): “Welcome, fellow engineering scholars! Please introduce yourselves so that we may all begin to get to know each other. In your post, include 1) an educational or professional goal that you have connected to this course, 2) a time management tip that you have found helpful that you are willing to share with others, and 3) a photo or fun fact about yourself. Replies to other participants are optional but encouraged.”
Ecampus Online Teaching Principles, endorsed by Quality Matters, recommend “referring to each student by name with their chosen pronouns.” Sometimes students who use a shortened nickname will say so in their introductory post, but it is also nice to include instructions for students on how to change their display name in the course site. That way, facilitators of the course, including graduate teaching assistants, if applicable, do not have to refer back to the introduction post to remember what students prefer to be called.
Takeaway
Adding a welcoming tone to a course does not mean that the whole course needs to be redesigned. A few small adjustments here and there can make a difference.
MTH 112Z at Oregon State University is designed to prepare students for calculus and related disciplines. This course explores trigonometric functions and their applications as well as the language and measurement of angles, triangles, circles, and vectors. These topics are explored symbolically, numerically, and graphically in real-life applications. MTH 112Z is designated as a Common Course Numbering (CCN) in the state of Oregon, ending with “Z” in the course number. When transferring to an Oregon public college or university, “CCN courses will be accepted as if they were taken at the institution students transfer to (that is, the receiving institution)” (State of Oregon, 2023).
An instructor from the math department and Tianhong Shi from Ecampus collaborated in designing a brand-new version of MTH 112 to meet the new Core Ed requirements for Oregon State University and Z course requirement for the state of Oregon. At the beginning of this project, the design team identified major challenges of this course as follows: 1. Content challenges 2. Low motivation for some students to continue studying math at this level after initial frustration in this course. 3. Low interest in participation in class discussions.
The instructor and Tianhong met regularly to discuss the challenges, brainstorm strategies for solutions, and delineate a plan to implement practical solutions for MTH 112Z. The solutions that were implemented in the course include:
1. Creating a safe and inclusive learning environment that students will feel they belong here. 2. Creating short animated stories of how math operates in people’s real life, each video is about or less than 30 seconds long. The purpose of these animations is to build a bridge between math learning and real life and to motivate students to learn the topics of each unit. 3. Helping students to identify the steps in solving a math problem to scaffold learning and build learning success step by step. 4. Creating “Make Learning Fun” discussion topics: Research (Purinton and Burke, 2019; Tews, et.al., 2014) tells us that when students feel emotionally relaxed and happy, learning is more effective. Therefore, one “Make Learning Fun” discussion forum is created for each unit.
Building an Inclusive and Trusting Learning Community where Students Belong College belonging is defined as “students’ perceived social support on campus, a feeling or sensation of connectedness, the experience of mattering or feeling cared about, accepted, respected, valued by, and important to the group”, according to Strayhorn (2018, p.4). The strategies used to build an inclusive and trusting learning community in MTH 112Z included the following: 1. In Start Here Module, the instructor made a video covering Artificial Intelligence (AI), academic integrity, honesty, and diversity, to explicitly explain the expectations for this course regarding academic integrity and why it is so. 2. Also in Start Here Module, the instructor built a “Name Tents 112Z” discussion board for students to introduce themselves, setting an example by introducing the instructor himself first. 3. There is a Diversity Forum where students can post comments that they would want the instructor to know about themselves to make learning more inclusive.
Making Content Relevant In addressing the challenging content, the instructor identified concepts that would be better explained through a set of short animated videos, recorded the audio narratives, and the media team helped creating the short animations. For example, at the beginning of unit 4 is an animation about finding the length of a tall tree on campus. And here is the transcript of the video: “The Trees on the O S U campus, are wonderful . how tall are the cedar trees by the memorial union? if you measure the angle from the ground to the top of the tree and know the distance you’re standing away from the tree, you can compute it. Make a triangle and set up an equation to get the height. Which function would you use?” And here is the transcript of unit 5 animation video: “You can get swept away in a river. Oregon has many great rivers for boating. When you were kayaking, you need to account for how much the current will push you off course, this can be done with vector. One vector represents the river’s flow with direction and strength, another vector is the direction which you kayak. The results of these two added together is the direction you end up going. If you want to reach a certain point on the other side, where should you aim?” We can see from these two examples that they are relevant to student lives (trees and kayaking) and relevant to the topics of the units. And these animations tell short stories, hoping to motivate students for learning.
Scaffolding Toward Learning Success Scaffolded learning activities provide students a supportive learning environment (Dennen, 2004). In each unit’s content discussion forum and homework assignment, students explore problem solving step by step and discuss with each other to help them build confidence and fluency in problem solving. By such a design, the design team hoped students would get the support they needed and would be able to easily identify where they did wrong and how to improve or correct based on the feedback they receive from the online homework system and from the instructor and Teaching Assistants.
Making Learning Fun Emotional health is important for students’ learning success. Research suggests there is a significant positive relation between fun delivery of content and the forms of engagement (Tews, et al., 2014). Schwartz et al. (2016) also recommend building fun elements in learning for effective teaching and learning. So the design team strived to build elements of fun into the course. The short animations are meant for fun. In addition, each unit has a “Just For Fun” discussion forum to bring students’ attention to learning and promote motivation. Below are examples of these discussions:
Unit 1 Just for Fun: Please read through this survey and describe how you would answer the questions. (The survey was about having students imagine themselves navigating through the forest on foot and trying to find their way to their cabin.)
Unit 2 Just for Fun: What do you think of the animation?
Unit 3: Just for Fun: Please take a picture of something you can model with a sine function as you have been studying in this module. It could be a windmill if you live near a windmill, or an ocean if you live near an ocean. Make sure it is a picture that you have taken and then explain briefly what it is and how you would model its movement.
Unit 4 Just for Fun: Describe a time when you could feel the effect of the wind or water current as you were moving. For example, winters in Oregon are blustery and you can get blown around when you are biking. Or you can describe a way that you would use vectors in your own life.
Unit 5 Just for Fun: This is it! you’re almost done– What was a topic in the course that was interesting to you? or what was a topic that didn’t seem to be useful?
That is what we did to make introductory college math fun, inclusive and learnable. If you have ideas for math or STEM course design, feel free to share with us (Tianhong.shi@oregonstate.edu). The more, the better!
References Dennen, V. P. (2004). Cognitive apprenticeship in educational practice: Research on scaffolding, modeling, mentoring, and coaching as instructional strategies. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (2nd ed.), (p. 815). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hogan, K., and Pressley, M. (1997). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues.Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Huck, C and Zhang, J., Efects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on K-12 Education: A Systemic Literature Review. Educational Research and Development Journal. Summer 2021, Vol. 24.
Purinton, E. and Burke, M. (2019). Student Engagement and Fun: Evidence from the Field. Business Education Innovation Journal, Volume 11 Number 2, P133-P140.
Schwartz, D. L., Tsang, J. M., & Blair, K. P. (2016). The ABCs of how we learn : 26 scientifically proven approaches, how they work, and when to use them (First edition.). W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Strayhorn, T. L. (2018). College students’ sense of belonging. Routledge. https://doi-org.oregonstate.idm.oclc.org/10.4324/9781315297293
Tews, M. J., Jackson, K., Ramsay, C., & Michel, J. W. (2014). Fun in the college classroom: Examining its nature and relationship with student engagement. College Teaching, 63(1), 16-26.
In our hyper-connected world, it’s tempting to think that technology like Google, Generative Artificial Intelligence, and our smartphones have rendered memory obsolete. But is that really true?
There has been a growing backlash against memorization in education, with critics claiming it’s outdated and harmful to creativity and critical thinking. But here’s the kicker: memory actually supports robust, transferable thinking skills. Memory and thinking aren’t enemies – they’re complementary partners in learning.
Despite the “Google it” mentality, memory remains crucial. It’s not just about recalling facts; it’s about building a foundation for critical thinking and creativity. For one thing, it’s impossible in certain situations to stop and look things up (think emergency room doctors or lawyers during a trial). But more than that, our own memorized knowledge in a discipline allows us to consider context and practice skills fluently.
We’re all familiar with Bloom’s taxonomy and its bottom level: “Remembering”. Michelle Miller recommends that, instead of viewing memory as the “lowest” level of thinking, consider it the foundation. Higher-order thinking skills interact with and reinforce memory, creating a two-way street of learning.
The Power of Testing
Contrary to popular belief, quizzes and tests aren’t the enemy. Research shows that retrieval practice actually strengthens long-term retention, supports complex skills, and can even reduce test anxiety. It’s not about memorizing for the test; it’s about reinforcing learning.
In addition, “pre-quizzing” – that is, giving a quiz before introducing the material (ungraded or graded for participation only) – has been shown to help activate prior knowledge, integrate new information into existing schemas, and identify gaps or misconceptions that instructors can address.
Attention Spans: Not What You Think
The idea that “attention spans are shrinking” isn’t backed by solid science. In fact, in attention research there’s no such thing as “attention span”! And that “Students can only pay attention for 10 minutes at a time” idea? It’s based on outdated, poorly designed studies.
What about the idea that technology worsens our attention? There is no strong evidence that technology is affecting our ability to pay attention. While people often report this phenomenon (about themselves or others), a more likely explanation seems to be our decreased tolerance for boredom rather than our actual ability. However, smartphones can indeed be very distracting, and they can also affect memory negatively through the “I can Google it” effect – the expectation that information will be available online anytime can reduce our memory encoding.
Handwriting vs. Typing: It’s Complicated
The debate over handwritten versus typed notes isn’t as clear-cut as you might think. What matters most is your note-taking strategy. The best notes, regardless of medium, involve synthesizing ideas rather than transcribing verbatim.
Enhancing Memory in the Classroom
The good news is that there are many things an educator can do to help students remember essential content. Here are some strategies:
Create meaning and structure: When we process information deeply and evaluate it for meaning we remember it better than when we perform shallow processing. Organizational schemes like narrative structures help information stick, and active learning techniques such as project-based learning ensure a deeper level of engagement with the content.
Connect to prior knowledge: Ask questions to elicit information, draw explicit connections with previous material, and use pre-quizzing to help students see the gaps and stimulate curiosity.
Embrace visualization: We’re visual creatures – use this to engage your audience. Create and ask students to create mind-maps, infographics, or other visual representations.
Engage emotions: Both positive and negative emotions can enhance memory, but aim for a supportive atmosphere, which has been shown to improve learning outcomes. The emotion of surprise is a powerful memory enhancer.
Connect to goals: Show how information is relevant to students’ immediate objectives.
Use the self-reference effect: Relating information to oneself boosts memory. Ask students to bring their own experience or interests into the learning process through personalized assignments.
Implement retrieval practice: Regular quizzing with immediate feedback can significantly boost retention.
Space it out: Distribute practice over time instead of cramming.
Conclusion
In this age of information overload, understanding how memory works is more crucial than ever. By debunking myths and implementing evidence-based strategies, we can help students navigate the digital landscape while building strong, adaptable minds. I’ve only touched on a few points, but this book is chock-full of interesting information that’s useful not just for educators but for everyone!
What myths about memory and technology have you encountered in your teaching? How might you incorporate these insights into your classroom? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
References
Miller, M. D. (2022). Remembering and forgetting in the age of technology: teaching, learning, and the science of memory in a wired world (1st ed.). West Virginia University Press.
I’d like to share a recent experience highlighting the crucial role of collecting and using feedback to enhance our online course materials. As faculty course developers and instructional designers, we understand the importance of well-designed courses. However, even minor errors can diminish the quality of an otherwise outstanding online course.
A lighthouse on the Oregon coast, where student feedback and technological tools act as the guiding light. Image generated with Midjourney.
A Student’s Perspective
Recently, feedback was forwarded to me submitted by an online student enrolled in a course I had helped develop.
He praised the overall design of the courses and the instructors’ responsiveness, but he pointed out some typographic and grammatical errors that caused confusion. He mentioned issues like quiz answers not matching the questions and contradictory examples.
What stood out to me was his statement:
“These courses are well-designed and enjoyable. Their instructors are great. They deserve written material to match.”
Proactive Steps for Quality Improvement
This feedback got me thinking about how we can proactively address such concerns and ensure our course materials meet the high standards our students deserve. Here are a few ideas that might help:
Implement a Feedback Mechanism
Incentivize students to hunt for flaws. Reward sharp eyes for spotting typos and grammar slips. Bonus points could spark enthusiasm, turning proofreading into a game of linguistic detective work. For example:
Weekly Surveys: Add a question to the weekly surveys asking students to report any errors they encounter, specifying the location (e.g., page number, section, or assignment).
“Did you encounter any typographic or grammatical errors in the course materials this week? If so, please describe them here, including the specific location (e.g., page number, section, or assignment).”
Assignment Feedback: Include a text-field option for students to report errors alongside their file uploads in each assignment submission.
Utilize Technology Tools
Consider using technology tools to streamline the review process and help identify typographic, grammatical, or factual errors.
AI tools
The latest advanced AI tools can assist in identifying grammatical errors, suggesting more precise phrasing, and improving overall readability. They can also highlight potential inconsistencies or areas needing clarification, ensuring the materials are more accessible to students. They can also help format documents consistently, create summary points for complex topics, and even generate quiz questions based on the content.
(Oregon State University employees and currently enrolled students have access to the Data Protected version of Copilot. By logging in with their OSU credentials, users can use Copilot with commercial data protection, ensuring their conversations are secure and that Microsoft cannot access any customer data.)
Many powerful AI tools exist. But always verify their information for accuracy. Use them as a helper, not your only guide. AI tools complement human judgment but can’t replace it. Your oversight is essential. It ensures that AI-suggested changes align with the learning goals. It also preserves your voice and expertise.
Tools for content help
Some tools can be used to target different areas of content improvement:
Grammar and Style Checkers:
Grammarly: Checks grammar, spelling, punctuation, and style
Read Aloud: A text-to-speech extension for browsers (Chrome|Firefox )
Collaborative Editing Platforms:
Google Docs: Allows real-time collaboration and suggesting mode
Microsoft Word (with Track Changes): Enables collaborative editing
Request Targeted Assistance
If specific content requires a closer review, ask for help from other SMEs, your instructional designer, colleagues, or even students. Collaboration can provide fresh perspectives and help catch errors that might have been overlooked.
Encourage Open Communication
Foster an environment where students feel comfortable reporting errors and providing feedback. Make it clear that their input is valued and will be used to improve the course.
Embrace Constructive Criticism
It’s natural to feel defensive when receiving critical feedback (I always do!), but view it as an opportunity for potential improvement. By addressing these concerns, you can enhance the quality of your course materials and ultimately improve our students’ learning experience.
