Course Design: Finding the Right Fit for your Students
Let’s start this off with two assumptions and a question.
Assumption #1 — At the post-secondary program level, it is common for instructors to encourage (expect even) students to broaden and diversify their learning goals beyond only those specified by the program itself.
Assumption #2 — At the post-secondary level, it is uncommon for instructors to accept diversity in the learning goals of a single course.
Question — How can diversity in learning goals be accepted at the program level and not at the course level when it is the courses that make up the program?
At the course level, instructors may start with a very rigid concept of what is acceptable learning for a course. The concern is that instructors will not be in control of their own courses. But what about promoting student agency within the course? Student voice, choice and ownership are all key components of both a successful course and a successful program.
Student agency was the theme of a presentation made by Dr. Andrew Zinck, Associate Professor in the Department of Music at the University of Prince Edward Island, during the 2022 Teaching Community Conference. This is an event that my colleagues and I put on every May.
Dr. Zinck’s presentation was titled One Size Does NOT Fit All: Addressing Student Agency Through Course Design (watch the recording). I have had the opportunity to work with Dr. Zinck on a few occasions and he is a very creative and imaginative person who is extremely thoughtful in his approach to what quality teaching looks like in the 21st century.
In that 25 minute presentation, Dr. Zinck presented five general models for course design using five different travel-related metaphors. These were not conceptual models but through Dr. Zinck’s impeccable storytelling one could visualise the structural components necessary to use a model. Summarized below are the five models. They progress from least to most flexible for student agency.
Model 1 — Mountain Trail
The students begin at base camp at the bottom of the mountain and journey together up the single pathway, stopping at camps along the way. They eventually arrive at the top where the instructor is waiting for them. The instructor has set out the schedule and as the students follow the path they have assessments along the way. Getting to the top of the mountain allows the instructor to what degree students have achieved the learning targets.
Model 2 — Canal Cruise
The instructor and the students are on a boat together traveling along a canal. Negotiation is used to decide at what spots along the canal they will stop. Some places along the way may not get visited at all while others may involve a longer stay. Eventually, everyone disembarks at the end of the cruise. In this model the instructor offers potential assessment options at key points as well as allotting at least one week of unplanned course time to compensate for the nonlinear nature of the schedule. Also, at various points along the way, the instructor needs to engage in formative assessment with the students.
Model 3 — Ocean Voyage
This one is cruise-like as well. The difference being that when stops are made, some passengers may get off while others remain on the ship. Therefore, due to personal interests and choices, some passengers may end up seeing more and doing more than others. At the end of the voyage, everyone disembarks at the same port. In this model, the instructional schedule may be clearly laid out but students still have the chance to pick what works best for them. The assignment menu does require significant pre-course planning by the instructor.
Model 4 — Planetary Expedition
Students are junior cadets taking part in training to prepare them for space flight. Once trained, each cadet embarks on a solo flight to a predetermined planet. The flight plan for getting there is the responsibility of each individual cadet. With this approach, students get lots of choice but it requires a significant amount of time and effort throughout the course by the instructor.
Model 5 — Galactic Exploration
An extension of the previous model, junior cadets have now become senior cadets and they are being trained for deep space missions. Each cadet chooses their own planet for exploration, plans the flight path and launches when they are ready. The nature of the missions determine the training the senior cadets will require. This model maximises flexibility and choice as well as ownership. It also requires the instructor to sede lots of control in order to be able to respond to the needs of students in realtime.
“In Model 5, teaching also becomes a performance often improvised but guided by experience and skill in one’s art.” — Dr. Andrew Zinck
All of these models are useful. The context in which the teaching and learning is done will determine the model(s) to be used. The extra freedom provided by the latter models in the progression may cause students to be anxious or to flounder and see the course as aimless when compared to what their typical course experience may have been. Beyond teaching the course, students experiencing more agency may also require guidance and support in developing metacognitive and assessment skills.
To close, I will share the questions that Dr. Zinck suggested we all think about when considering adding more agency to our course design.
Imagine the end of the semester.
1. What do you want the students to leave with?
2. What do you need to put in place to support the students’ learning journeys given the destination(s) that you have set?
3. For personalised learning paths and unique destinations, what common foundation do you need to lay for all students to support their individual journeys?
4. What tools will you provide for support beyond the initial foundation so that they will feel confident in tackling their own challenge?
5. What safeguards will you put in place so that students feel the confidence to take risks and chart their own course?
6. What sorts of assistance will you provide if a student experiences trouble?
