FA7000-15-R-0002_Att_6.c.2._Survey_Report_Appendix_B.pdf

College of Education UNIVERSITY of FLORIDA

Phase I Survey Report January 12, 2015

Task Order 0045:

Corrosion Sciences Education Distance Learning Curriculum Development

Prepared for:

U.S. Air Force Academy Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension Colorado Springs, CO

FA7000-15-R-0002

Section L, Attachment 6.c.2.

College of Education UNIVERSITY of FLORIDA

Table of Contents

TASK ORDER 0045:

CORROSION SCIENCES EDUCATION DISTANCE LEARNING CURRICULUM

DEVELOPMENT

INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THIS TASK

OVERVIEW OF TASK

SURVEY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

METHODS

DEFINING QUALITY

Mastery Learning Community of Practice Intrinsic Motivation Engagement Course Analysis CSU Chico Rubric for Online Instruction The Online Learning Consortium Quality Matters The University of Florida Standards and Markers of Excellence

COURSE ANALYSIS

COURSE 1: FUNDAMENTALS OF MATERIAL SCIENCE

Instructional Technology Curriculum Approach Instructional Efficiency Student Population Course Reach and Availability

COURSE 2: MATERIAL SCIENCE PRIMER

Instructional Technology Curriculum Approach Instructional Efficiency Student Population Course Reach/availability

COURSE 3: MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF MATERIALS

Instructional Technology Curriculum Approach Instructional Efficiency Student Population Course Reach/availability

RECOMMENDATIONS

DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPACT OF MATERIALS ON SOCIETY COURSE

Public outreach Modules Case Studies

COURSE PRODUCTION PLAN

Role of University of Florida Faculty Role of Materials Research Society Instructional Design

Production Post-Production

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA STANDARDS AND MARKERS OF EXCELLENCE

COURSE OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION

COURSE GOALS AND LEARNING OBJECTIVES

ASSESSMENT AND MEASUREMENT

INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

INTERACTION AND ENGAGEMENT

COURSE TECHNOLOGY

COURSE DESIGN EVALUATION

ACCESSIBILITY

COURSE SYLLABUS: FUNDAMENTALS OF MATERIALS SCIENCE — MIT OPEN

COURSEWARE

COURSE MEETING TIMES

THE DMSE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM

3.012 COURSE INFORMATION

Philosophy of the Course

3.012 INTRODUCTION TO THREE TOPICS FUNDAMENTAL TO MATERIALS SCIENCE

AND ENGINEERING

Explanation of Course Units Prerequisites or Corequisites Textbooks Recitations Evaluation

COURSE OUTLINE: MATERIAL SCIENCE PRIMER — UTM OPENCOURSEWARE

COURSE SYLLABUS: MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF MATERIALS — EDX COURSE 3.032X

OVERVIEW:

GRADING:

SYLLABUS:

ADDITIONAL READING:

COURSE SYLLABUS: THE IMPACT OF MATERIALS ON SOCIETY — UNIVERSITY OF

FLORIDA EMA 1004

CATALOG DESCRIPTION

COURSE OBJECTIVES

COURSE OUTLINE

REFERENCES

Introduction and Purpose of This Task

This document represents the culminating project of the first phase in the development of a Corrosion Sciences Education Distance Learning Curriculum. During this first phase of curriculum development, the University of Florida has conducted a survey of three existing online courses taught at the introductory level to college students in materials science. We have analyzed these courses using the UF Standards and Markers of Excellence for Teaching in Online and Blended Courses (see Appendix A). These include a careful analysis of the following: course overview and introduction; goals and learning objectives; assessment and measurement;

instructional materials; interaction and engagement; technology; accessibility; and design evaluation.

The survey report that follows begins with an overview of the task order and a description of the requirements of the Phase I Survey Report. Section two covers the evaluation methods employed including a discussion of the elements of quality mentioned above. The third section includes a description of the courses surveyed, a group of three online materials science courses.

Section four contains an analysis of these courses using the methods described in section two. In the fifth section we propose to develop a materials science course based on the need for such a course, given the current state of online materials science curriculum derived from the analysis presented in section four.

The course we recommend, entitled the Impact of Materials on Society, is unique in both content and approach and has a proven record as an effective means of recruiting undergraduate university students into the Materials Science major area of study. However, the course, in its current manifestation, is offered only in a traditional classroom format. We propose to develop an online version of this course that includes an advanced approach to instructional technology, innovative methods in curriculum and instruction, and a broad appeal to undergraduate students and advanced high school students. The final section includes our proposed approach for producing this course.

Overview of Task

In May of 2014, the Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension (CAStLE) at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) requested support to develop critical training and education materials in physics, chemistry, material science and math. The primary purpose of this task order is to facilitate an understanding of how to prevent and mitigate corrosion. As such, we proposed to develop a distance learning curriculum that specifically targeted students in their first two years of college and advanced high school students who would seek to earn college credit through programs such as dual enrollment or advanced placement.

The premise the task order rests on the belief that effective corrosion prevention and mitigation across the Department of Defense (DoD) depends as much on culture change as on the successful implementation and application of a broad range of technical processes, policies and procedures.

For pervasive cultural change to truly take place, education and training must allow current and future DoD employees to understand the science behind corrosion.

This task directly supports CAStLE’s mission to actively support CAStLE training and/or education of individuals and organizations not located at USAFA. The delivered products from this task will be of significant contribution to USAFA cadet curriculum, future USAF officers, and be of direct benefit to such cadet courses as the following: engineering mechanics courses in the field of structures and materials; the Capstone Design Project; Independent Study for Mechanical Engineering majors; and courses in the Management and Systems Engineering major.

Survey Report and Recommendations

The Phase I survey report, as specified by the Task Order requires the Sabreliner team to conduct a survey and analysis of existing virtual, online courses. Three courses have been selected to serve as the basis of the report and subsequent recommendations. These recommendations are to meet the objectives of the task and must include use of instructional technology; the curricular approach; and the anticipated number of students which may be reached by this course. In addition, this survey report will specifically detail how curricular elements and presentation methods will be materially different from currently available courses.

The following section details the methods employed in order to perform the analysis and determine the concluding recommendations.

Methods

Defining Quality

In this section, we discuss our methods for evaluating quality in online courses. We start with the core values in instructional design that we have developed at the Office of E-learning, Technology and Creative Services (ETC) at the University of Florida. These values are mastery learning, community of practice, intrinsic motivation, and engagement. We describe these concepts in detail and follow with a discussion of rubrics for evaluating quality in online courses. We focus on three established rubrics developed at the California State University at Chico, the Online Learning Consortium, and Quality Matters respectively. These rubrics serve as industry standards and as the precedent for the rubric that we employ in our course analysis: the UF Standards and Markers of Excellence.

Mastery Learning

Learning theorists such as Bloom and others (Bloom, 1968; Block & Airasian, 1971; Gagné, 1988) have argued that most students can learn to the point of content mastery if provided quality instruction, appropriate time, frequent assessment, and varying degrees of corrective exercise.

While mastery learning has been difficult to implement in settings based on group instruction, the concept has found favor in distance education. New technologies and the popularity of online education have renewed enthusiasm for approaches to learning for mastery.

Instructional units should be reduced to their most elemental form in such a way that each learning outcome connects to corresponding formative and summative assessments, testing whether mastery of the particular unit has been achieved. As a measure of quality online instruction, constant feedback and correction should be given to every learner until a score of at least 90% is obtained for each learning objective.

Community of Practice

Most scholars recognize the work of Lave and Wenger as seminal to the concept of communities of practice (Hodges 1998, Schwen 2003, Montgomery and McDowell 2009). Their 1991 book Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation builds on the ethnography of apprenticeship, where not only knowledge is passed from expert to novice, but attitudes, dispositions, linguistic conventions and ideologies as well. Much of the learning that occurs in this context is without explicit instruction. That is, the learner is situated in the context of the activity to be learned and engages at a level appropriate to the skill she has acquired. Her participation is peripheral, but legitimate, in that some limited level of participation is expected of the neophyte in order to learn.

The dynamic of learning that Lave and Wenger wish to untangle is fully contextual and represents to them the fundamental processes of activity and knowledge as practice.

[L]earning is not merely situated in practice—as if it were some independently reifiable process that just happened to be located somewhere; learning is an integral part of generative social practice in the lived-in world... Legitimate peripheral participation is proposed as a descriptor of engagement in social practice that entails learning as an integral constituent (Lave & Wenger 1991, p.

35).

This description of learning through legitimate peripheral participation can also be understood as enculturation, whereby habits, thoughts, dispositions and opinions are adopted and internalized in a process of individual identity-formation as a member of the group.

Given this dynamic, where context subsumes didacticism and learning is not merely ‘knowing’ but ‘becoming’, it is impossible to imagine instruction (as the explicit transfer of ideas) achieving the same ends. Furthermore, learning does not cease once membership is attained. This speaks to the generative nature of practice as the relationship between actors and their social world.

These concepts are not mutually exclusive, rather through activity they “mutually constitute each other” (Lave and Wenger 1991, p. 33).

The Information and Communications Technology that allows for Communities of Practice to form without the physical co-presence of practitioners can be both liberating and intimidating. If the community is not engaged in technologically mediated practice as the activity that defines it, then the technology itself may create a barrier to learning rather than facilitate it. That is, the members must first learn the technology before they can engage one another in their collective practice.

This barrier does not make it impossible to form a Virtual Communities around practices that do by definition require Information and Communications Technology to function. But the complications therein must be considered, and every attempt should be made to lower the cognitive load of technology adoption. Furthermore, the practitioners should see immediate and practical benefits to participating in an Online Learning Community that make the additional effort worth the time. In summary, an Online Learning Community should be relatively easy to engage in with immediate practical results that improve outcomes—a Virtual Community of Practice that generates new knowledge and adapts to a changing world.

Intrinsic Motivation

Psychologists and educators have been researching motivation since the 1970's, when the field was dominated by the Operant Conditioning theories of B.F. Skinner. Skinner proved that behavior can be modified by systematic reinforcement. He showed conclusively that when rats or pigeons are given food for pulling a lever or pecking at a disk, the animals would pull or peck frequently. These ideas spread to the education of children, and Skinner's techniques began to be used in the classroom.

Experimental psychologists from the University of Rochester, Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, have spent the past four decades repudiating the behaviorist approach. They found that students who were rewarded while engaging in activities they find enjoyable, are less likely to continue doing the task than students who are not rewarded. They explain this in terms of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Intrinsically motivating activities are those we enjoy naturally. Extrinsic motivators are rewards such as payment, points or verbal praise.

According to Deci and Ryan, not only is intrinsic motivation more likely to keep us engaged, but extrinsic rewards can have a negative impact on our engagement in those activities that we are inclined to enjoy. Interestingly, one of their early experiments was conducted using a puzzle game similar to a Rubik's cube. The students who were paid to play the game were more likely than those who were not paid, to move on to another activity.

Deci, Ryan and others who follow what is known as Self-determination Theory, propose that intrinsic motivation is rooted in the innate basic needs for competence, autonomy and relatedness. Our need for competence rests in our desire to control outcomes and experience mastery in a given task. We also seek out activities that make sense to who we are as autonomous individuals, while at the same time looking to others to validate our actions.

Engagement

Gamification, or the use of game-like elements in non-game contexts, walks a fine line between intrinsic and extrinsic motivators. On the one hand, games, in their ideal form, are forms of play that are intrinsically pleasing. They are supposed to be fun. The Nike Fuelband is a bracelet with a built-in accelerometer that tracks physical activity. The wearer can set activity goals and track them online. Nike provides game-like rewards, such as points and badges for achieving goals.

The user may then share these accomplishments with others.

At the risk of stating the obvious, this system would not work if the user is not motivated to exercise in the first place. The Fuelband is supposed to keep motivation up by helping the user to track and maintain exercise goals. Progress towards these goals is reinforced using game elements. Gamified systems should not be designed to shape behavior. They should be based on existing motivating factors. In the case of the Fuelband, the user sets the goal (autonomy), gets rewarded for achieving the goal (competence), and shares their accomplishments with peers (relatedness). Designers of such systems should be wary of heavy-handed approaches that could undermine intrinsic motivation.

Course Analysis

Several other institutions have developed standards for assessing quality in online instruction. In our survey of online courses, we identified three exemplars in this arena. They include the California State University (CSU) at Chico, the Online Learning Consortium, and the professional organization Quality Matters. All three of these approaches influenced our evaluation rubric, the UF Standards and Markers of Excellence.

CSU Chico Rubric for Online Instruction

This public California University has a well developed evaluation rubric for online instruction.

The rubric is divided into the following six domains:

1) learner support and resources

2) organization and design

3) instructional design and delivery

4) assessment and evaluation

5) innovative use of technology

6) the faculty use of student feedback

Each of these domains are further articulated into subdomains, with standards divided into rubrics of baseline, effective and exemplary. For the purposes of this survey, we will focus on the standards that qualify as exemplary.

The domain of learner support and resources is divided into three sub-domains: online learning and campus resources; course-specific resources; and course content resources. Markers of excellence for these categories include a well-articulated description of the aspects of online learning and links to supporting resources; a variety of course-specific resources including the appropriate contact information for the instructor and academic program; and a wide range of resources supporting course content.

The second domain of online organization and design includes the following sub-domains:

organization; comprehensive syllabus; aesthetic design; design consistency and functionality;

and accessibility. Exemplary status in these sub-domains requires that a course be well organized, easy to navigate, aesthetically pleasing, consistent, clear, and in compliance with accessibility guidelines.

The domain of instructional design and delivery requires that online courses are developed with ample interaction, frequent communication, clear course goals, well-defined learning objectives, and a wide variety of learning activities that stimulate critical thinking and problem solving. An exemplary course should have an instructional design that incorporates multiple visual, textual, kinesthetic and/or auditory activities that enhance student learning.

Assessment and evaluation is the fourth domain of the CSU Rubric. It includes criteria for student readiness, alignment with learning objectives, assessment strategies, performance feedback, self-assessment, and peer feedback.

The Online Learning Consortium

The Online Learning Consortium (OLC) is a professional organization whose mission is the advancement of online learning through professional development, instruction, best practice publications as well as guidance to educators, online learning professionals and international organizations. As a part of this mission, the OLC has developed an online course evaluation framework based on five pillars of quality online education.

These pillars are:

1) learning effectiveness

2) scale

3) access

4) faculty satisfaction

5) student satisfaction

To assist in the evaluation of online programs according to the five pillars of quality, the OLC has published a quality scorecard.

Learning effectiveness is a measure of how well instructors and course developers take advantage of the affordances of information and communications technologies to reach learners outside of the confines of the physical classroom. The OLC scorecard measures such practices according to instructional design, course development, course structure, evaluation, assessment, and student engagement. For example, the OLC recommends that courses be designed in order that “students develop the necessary knowledge and skills to meet measurable learning outcomes at the course and program level” (OLC, 2014). Furthermore, courses should be developed in such a way that encourages peer interaction among students as well as between students and instructors.

The second OLC pillar asserts that courses should be designed to scale to capacity enrollment in order to control costs, reduce tuition, and recover the initial investment in course production.

Scale can impact the quality of online courses and programs in terms of institutional support, technology infrastructure, instructional design, teaching practices, and direct support to instructors and students. Examples include: sufficient fiscal resource allocation to support online learning; a robust and centrally supported technology infrastructure; an emphasis on usability and learner-centered instructional design; a manageable instructor presence in online courses;

and sufficient support personnel to respond to student and faculty needs.

This last example relates directly to pillars three and four, dealing with faculty and student satisfaction. Aside from a robust infrastructure and administrative support, faculty should be given the opportunity for professional development through training and publications related to online instruction. Students, on the other hand, must be given frequent and substantive opportunities to interact with their online instructors and peers. Satisfaction may be measured in part by practices of evaluation and assessment. For example, frequent assessment of support services for faculty and students may shed light on the effectiveness of those practices as well as the general satisfaction that these groups may have with respect to such services.

The final pillar of quality asserts the importance of access, i.e. minimizing the barriers to online learning. Obstacles might include technology, bureaucracy, and lack of technical or academic supports. Examples of supporting access include: tutoring services; technical assistance; career counseling; administrative supports such as registration, bursar and student aid; and clear policies and procedures for supporting students with disabilities.

Quality Matters

Quality Matters (QM) is a professional organization devoted to improving the quality of online education and student learning in K-12 education, higher education, educational publishing and continuing and professional education.

The QM mission promotes the following:

1. The development of research-supported, best practice-based quality standards and appropriate evaluation tools and procedures.

2. The recognition of QM as experts in online education quality assurance and evaluation.

3. Fostering institutional acceptance and integration of QM standards and processes into organizational improvement efforts focused on improving the quality of online education.

4. Provisioning faculty development training in the use of QM Rubric(s) and other quality practices to improve the quality of online and blended courses.

5. Provision of quality assurance through the recognition of quality in online education

(Quality Matters, 2014).

The QM Rubric Standards promote standardized approaches to the following areas of online course development: the course overview and introduction; learning objectives; assessment and measurement; instructional materials; assessment and measurement; course activities and learner interaction; course technology; learner support; and accessibility and usability. Some examples of excellence include a clear explanation of course objectives, structure, learning objectives and learning outcomes. Furthermore, assessments, instructional materials, and learning activities should all relate directly to the stated learning objectives of the course.

Course technology should facilitate the learning process and not present barriers to access.

Students should be given easy access to technical support, disability services, and co-learner interaction.

The University of Florida Standards and Markers of Excellence

The University of Florida Standards and Markers of Excellence (UFSME) follow the QM Rubric standards with influences from both CSU Chico and the OLC. In our analysis of existing online and distance courses related to material science, we evaluated the following areas according to the UFSME:

1. Course Overview and Introduction

2. Course Goals and Learning Objectives

3. Assessment and Measurement

4. Instructional Materials

5. Interaction and Engagement

6. Course Technology

7. Course Design Evaluation

8. Accessibility

Each of these domains were measured according to more granular subdomains and scored qualitatively by instructional design professionals. Our evaluators hold master’s degrees in educational technology and/or the equivalent of five years or more of professional experience in instructional design at the post-secondary level. This work requires an intimate knowledge of the UFSME as well as expertise in the other rubrics mentioned above.

Exemplary courses, in our analysis, would contain several important features. First, an introductory quiz would provide students with an opportunity to check their understanding of the syllabus, course requirements, and required tools and technologies. An attentive instructor would monitor the course and welcome students as they start the course. While the course is in progress, a student survey captures usability and access issues and concerns. Furthermore, course materials and aesthetic design should be visually pleasing and consistent throughout course, while promoting clarity and continuity of the course structure.

Exemplary course instruction would include student understanding of how to be a successful online learner. Also, instructors should be responsive to student inquiries with a typical response occurring within 48 hours. Instructors should make their learning objectives clear, posting them in the weekly overviews or sub-sections of the course. These objectives would relate to the overall course goals and should be tied directly to assignments and assessments.

Furthermore, ongoing, multiple assessment strategies should be used to measure content knowledge, attitudes and skills. Assignments or project-based assessments should also encourage students to utilize critical thinking skills.

Courses that the UFSME deem exemplary also include well-documented learning outcomes that are reflected in frequent feedback with regards to a Student’s achievement. In turn, the instructor would use student feedback in an ongoing basis to help plan instruction and assessment of student learning throughout the semester. This requires that students participate in collaboration and evaluation, and engage with course content in a variety of ways. As such, student background and experiences should be valued and used as part of the course. Finally, exemplary courses should employ learning technologies that encourage higher-level thinking and activity. Faculty should have opportunities to develop course content using such technology and build in practice items to teach students course technology. Students, in turn, are able to submit course evaluations of learning technologies that are part of the course.

Course Analysis

Course 1: Fundamentals of Material Science MIT OpenCourseWare: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/materials-science-and-engineering/3-012-fundamentals-of-materials-science-fall-2005/

This course focuses on the fundamentals of structure, energetics, and bonding that underpin materials science. It is the introductory lecture class for sophomore students in Materials Science and Engineering, taken with 3.014 and 3.016 to create a unified introduction to the subject.

Topics include:

Introduction to thermodynamic functions and laws governing equilibrium properties relating macroscopic behavior to atomistic and molecular models of materials The role of electronic bonding in determining the energy, structure, and stability of materials Quantum mechanical descriptions of interacting electrons and atoms Materials phenomena, such as heat capacities, phase transformations, and multiphase equilibria to chemical reactions and magnetism Symmetry properties of molecules and solids Structure of complex, disordered, and amorphous materials Tensors and constraints on physical properties imposed by symmetry Determination of structure through diffraction. Real-world applications include engineered alloys, electronic and magnetic materials, ionic and network solids, polymers, and biomaterials

Instructional Technology

MIT OpenCourseWare (OCW) is served by a Plone-based content management system. The publishing process is described by MIT as a "large-scale digital publishing infrastructure consists of planning tools, a content management system (CMS), and the MIT OCW content distribution infrastructure". Video content for the courses use YouTube as the primary digital video streaming platform for the site, embedding YouTube video back into the OCW site. OCW video and audio files are also provided in full for offline downloads on iTunesU and the Internet Archive. In 2011, OCW introduced an iPhone App called LectureHall in partnership with Irynsoft.

The course content is housed on an open website. There is no instructor interaction. The content is designed for self-guided study at the lower undergraduate level. The course home page includes a syllabus, link to readings, notes, assignments, exams and solutions. The Fundamentals of Materials Science course was last updated in Fall 2005. Some benefits of this system include

FA7000-15-R-0002

Section L, Attachment 6.c.2.

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/materials-science-and-engineering/3-012-fundamentals-of-materials-science-fall-2005/ http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/materials-science-and-engineering/3-012-fundamentals-of-materials-science-fall-2005/ the option to download material to a local drive for study offline. However, there few resources for how to use technology and no clear technical support area on the site.

Curriculum Approach

As a self guided course, students are responsible for their own learning and understanding. The course content is freely available but understanding is not measured in a meaningful way. While the course structure is consistent, there are neither learning objectives stated nor rubrics anywhere within the course. Students are given practice problems, but this course is otherwise fairly dry. Essentially, student does problems and checks solutions

The course format is simple. Students view a prepared lecture slide presentation, work through problems, and view solutions. The instructor discusses material covered and topics discussed.

There are no class projects. Some of the slides are scribbled upon by the instructor and have no integrated media such as video or animations. Students are given the opportunity to think critically while running through problem sets. But there are few "big picture" opportunities for student to apply knowledge in some other capacity. In general the course lacks clarity on what the student will achieve by the end. At best, giving the student the opportunity to understand the concepts presented implies course objectives.

Instructional Efficiency

Without formative evaluations student learning is not measured. Therefore, instructional efficiency cannot be measured. It is unclear how the instructional faculty made use of the online course. It is difficult to discern how the class was managed and how instructor communicated with students. Overall, there appears to be very few opportunities for student to interact with instructor within the online platform. Instruction is driven by summative exams on material studied delivered using electronic texts. The course provides plenty of instructional materials in the form of presentation slides or text, but there are few multimedia assets. It is unclear where the course begins. There is a course description, but no welcoming video or outlining of expectations. The instructor used the syllabus to provide the philosophy of the course. But the introduction is not prominent on the first page where a student would find it when accessing the course.

Student Population

The course is a survey of material science, designed for college sophomores interested in exploring the field as a potential major.

Course Reach and Availability

The course can be accessed by anyone via the course website. All course content can be downloaded for free. MIT OCW averages 1 million visits each month; translations receive 500,000 more. Visitors from all over the world use OCW including South America, Europe, Africa, South Asia, and China. College students use OCW courses to enhance personal knowledge

(46%), complement study in a current course (34%), and to help plan a course of study (16%).

Self-learners who are not enrolled in any degree program, use MIT OCW to explore areas outside their professional field (40%), review basic concepts in a professional field (18%), prepare for future course of study (18%), keep current with developments in a professional field (17%), and to complete a work-related project or task (4%).

Course 2: Material Science Primer

UTM OpenCourseware: http://ocw.utm.my/course/view.php?id=28

This course introduces students to the science of materials, including physics, chemistry and basic engineering, which complement the interdisciplinary area of materials science. Three main elements are emphasized: Structures, Properties and Performances, with an additional aspect of material's applications. Atomic and sub-atomic structures, bonding, crystal structure and defects are described. Properties (electrical, mechanical, optical) and Performance (processes and deformation) are included. The uses of selected materials will also be considered.

At the end of this course students should be able to:

Understand the various structures of materials Identify important properties of materials Categorize material performance Use the materials for certain applications

Instructional Technology

The course is a series of text-based resources available on the course website as downloads. The course design is less than impressive, with multicolored text and poorly created notes. The platform provides no practice items for students, no means of contacting or communication with the instructor, and few alternatives for students with disabilities. Sight impaired students are not given the option to listen to pre-recorded lectures and the text resources use color to communicate concepts that could prove confusing to students who cannot perceive the entire color spectrum. Overall, the use of instructional technology is poor and relies on the student to download and view documents locally.

Curriculum Approach

This course introduces students to the science of materials.

Instructional Efficiency

The course has no assessments and no interactivity. In fact, there is no instructor present at all.

This is a self-guided course in which students must navigate a series of electronic documents without instruction or explanation. The course has no schedule, no deadlines, no quizzes, no student interaction and no learning activities. As such, students receive no feedback. This creates

FA7000-15-R-0002

http://ocw.utm.my/course/view.php?id=28 a situation where the course goals are not measurable and learning objectives meaningless or entirely subjective to the student. This course was last updated in 2011.

Student Population

The Material Science Primer course is a survey of material science aimed at lower level undergraduates.

Course Reach and Availability

The University of Technology Malaysia (UTM) is the largest postgraduate research university in engineering and technology in the Southeast Asian country of Malaysia. UTM is a member of the Open Courseware Consortium. UTM Open Courseware is a collection of high quality digital learning materials based on courses offered at this university. The learning materials, in a complete course format, may include lecture notes, lesson plans, and exercise questions. OCW materials are available to users around the world, at no charge.

Course 3: Mechanical Behavior of Materials

EdX Course 3.032x: https://www.edx.org/course/mechanical-behavior-materials-mitx-3- 032x#.VJHIW8azG38

This course provides an introduction to the mechanical behavior of materials, from both the continuum and atomistic points of view. At the continuum level, students learn how forces and displacements translate into stress and strain distributions within the material. At the atomistic level, students learn the mechanisms that control the mechanical properties of materials. The course also covers:

Linear elasticity (recoverable deformation at small displacements) Viscoelasticity (behavior intermediate to that of an elastic solid and that of a viscous fluid) Plasticity (permanent deformation) Creep in crystalline materials (time dependent behavior) Brittle fracture (rapid crack propagation) Fatigue (failure due to repeated loading of a material)

Examples are drawn from metals, ceramics, glasses, polymers, biomaterials, composites and cellular materials.

Instructional Technology

EdX courses consist of weekly learning sequences. Each learning sequence is composed of short videos interspersed with interactive learning exercises, where students can immediately practice the concepts from the videos. The courses often include tutorial videos that are similar to small on-campus discussion groups, an online textbook, and an online discussion forum where students can post and review questions and comments to each other and teaching assistants.

FA7000-15-R-0002

Section L, Attachment 6.c.2.

https://www.edx.org/course/mechanical-behavior-materials-mitx-3-032x#.VJHIW8azG38 https://www.edx.org/course/mechanical-behavior-materials-mitx-3-032x#.VJHIW8azG38

Where applicable, online laboratories are incorporated into the course. For example, in edX's first MOOC—a circuits and electronics course—students built virtual circuits in an online lab.

In our evaluation of the edX platform we found both strengths and weaknesses in the application of instructional technology to this course. While an introductory interactive quiz illustrates the role of the technology in the course, no technical support for students is readily apparent or accessible. The course provides three main modes of engagement for students: video content, course assessments, and readings. There were no apparent synchronous activities in the course, such as live lectures or collaborative projects. In general, there is no evident way for instructors to communicate directly with students. Overall, the course navigation is obvious and easy to use and the Website appears to be accessible and in compliance with disability regulations. The video is able to be played on multiple devices such as smart phones and tablets and the electronic text is selectable by screen readers that serve as reading aids for the visually impaired.

The course has a professional appearance in design with good quality video. Transcripts of the video lectures also provide an alternative means of consuming content for learners. Students are given an instructional technology quiz in the introduction with technology tutorials contained in the first module.

Curriculum Approach

The course orientation quiz goes over, in detail, the workings of the edX platform, but doesn't include the contents of the syllabus. Course topics are listed on the syllabus, but they are not phrased as course goals. Likewise, weekly overviews are posted, but not specifically described as learning objectives. Furthermore, as learning objectives are not specified, assessments cannot explicitly measure learning outcomes. Otherwise, assessments appear to be consistent, but we could not identify expectations and requirements included as guidelines rubrics. The course is built using new material such as lecture notes and video lectures. Materials such as texts and downloads are not exceedingly long and appear to be used properly within the course. No optional materials are provided.

Students are able to engage with other students via student-created forums, however, discussions expectations are not made clear and there was no evidence of a discussion rubric.

This course shows that the only interaction with instructor was available in the discussion forums.

Instructional Efficiency

This course is designed so that the starting point is clear, and an introductory quiz leads prepares students to navigate course. Syllabus and is readily available through the “Course Info” section linked via a navigational tab. The course schedule is contained within the introductory module of the course with all deadlines listed therein. The course instructors are included with biographical information where the components of the course are described, but no contact information is included.

Opportunities for student collaboration are possible in discussion forums, however, no evidence of participation with evaluation was found. Quizzes are designed to engage higher thinking, but the course does not appear to foster active learning. While the video lectures are divided into sections, overall the sections are quite long. In general, it was unclear how students received feedback on assignments.

Student Population

The typical edX student is a 26-year-old male with a bachelor’s degree. This profile fit 222,847 of the total edX enrollees during the 2012-13 academic year. Ho et al. noted however that at 31% of applicants, “this profile describes fewer than one in three registrants” (Ho et al., 2014). The authors report that female enrollees totaled 213,672 (29%), and 234,463 (33%) had a high school education or less. Baby boomers are interested in MOOCs, with 45,884 (6.3%) of them signing up for edX courses.

Course Reach and Availability

Of the 841,687 people who registered for classes on edX during its first year, 469,702 (56%) saw less than half of the course content. An additional 35,937 (4%) viewed at least half or more of the course material. And 43,196 (5%) people engaged the material enough to earn a completion certification. The remaining 292,852 (35%) registrants never accessed the content (Ho et al., 2014).

Recommendations

In this section, we detail how curricular elements and presentation methods in the course we develop in this task will be unique and materially different from the courses surveyed above. As a baseline, we will ensure that the course we develop will consist of an active instructor presence; meaningful assessments with feedback and instructor support; a monitored learning environment; a mobile friendly format; and is regularly scheduled throughout the year and available. Further unique aspects of our proposed course are outlined below.

They include the following:

A curriculum approach that positions the discipline of materials science squarely at the intersection of culture, history and society Instructional expertise from a variety of disciplines, but focused on materials High quality original digital content A flexible approach to instruction An outreach and dissemination plan that includes the Materials Research Society and

National Science Foundation A target student population that is a rich resource of potential material science and corrosion engineers

This course is called the Impact of Materials on Society (IMOS).

Description of the Impact of Materials on Society Course

The University of Florida (UF) and the Materials Research Society (MRS) have partnered to develop an introductory level course suitable for undergraduate and community college students. Faculty from engineering, liberal arts and sciences, and education at the University of Florida were included in the development of the Impact of Materials on Society (IMOS) course.

This interdisciplinary course teaches students that engineering shapes and is shaped by social and cultural variables, and that a career in engineering is not only about math and science, but also about social problem solving.

This project aims to build creative thinking by giving students enough exposure to the cultural and physical dimensions of materials and materials science to enable them to see current engineering problems in new ways, and to think globally as well as locally. By targeting this class to first-semester students, it enables students to draw lasting, creative connections between their general education requirements and core materials science and engineering curricula throughout their undergraduate careers.

The goals of the team-taught course are as follows:

To enable materials science and engineering students to obtain "the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context."

To change the "difficult" perception of materials science and engineering by exposing students in any major to the role, values, and importance of engineering.

To give students in any major competence in basic materials science and engineering principles.

The course features weekly units about different materials, including lectures by materials science and engineering faculty, case study presentations by humanities faculty, video lessons from materials scientists and researchers, and interdisciplinary discussions and activities to apply knowledge and explore current engineering opportunities and challenges.

Public outreach

After evaluating the Fall 2013 pilot course, the subcommittee and faculty from engineering, liberal arts and sciences, and education at the University of Florida are developing curricular materials intended for undergraduate programs at a range of college and university institutions.

Plans include the development of digital curriculum materials as well.

Working with MRS members, the Impact of Materials on Society Subcommittee produced ten independent modular units, providing a total of 18 separate video lessons that can augment the one semester course. Each lesson illustrates the impact of a specific material on a current or future technology, while discussing potential social effects and perception. Students explore cutting edge science within its social and cultural context.

Modules

Materials for Medicine (Diagnostics & Treatment) Materials for Energy (Storage & Harvest) Materials for Sustainability (Geopolitical) Materials for Improving Environmental Quality Materials for Food Production and Processing Materials for Construction and Architecture Materials for Information Technology Materials in Transportation Materials for Security Materials for Sports or Athletics

Case Studies

Entanglement of Earth: The Age of Clay versus the Age of Rare Earths Glass, Flint Knapping and the Human Application of Force Roman Concrete: Engineering Society through Social Spaces Materials for Coinage and the Creation of Value American Steel: The Rise of the Industrial Entrepreneur Writing Technologies and the Politics and Preservation of Knowledge Earl Tupper, Brownie Wise, and Materials Marketing Semiconductors and Cyborgs: Human-Material Relations in the Networked Society

In addition, the IMOS course could be used to introduce materials science and engineering as a potential career path for community college and undecided/undeclared undergraduate students.

The course has built in flexibility to be adapted to a variety of academic purposes including informal science education community programs.

Currently, the University of Florida faculty and MRS volunteers are participating in a course evaluation and pilot implementation program to develop final versions of the instructional materials and assessments, finalize the video lessons, and develop supporting materials and a training workshop for faculty to facilitate the dissemination of the course to other campuses in the fall of 2015.

Course Production Plan

A primary goal with the IMOS class is to significantly increase the number of students entering material science engineering and corrosion science throughout the U.S. In order to be effective in this regard, we will produce high quality digital instructional content covering materials innovations that inspire the advanced high school and college aged students. UF, MRS and the National Science Foundation have already invested in developing this course for classroom instruction. This Task Order will allow us to create digital assets that would provide the course structure and material for online delivery to students at a distance.

National material scientists collaborate with UF instructors to write scripts, storyboard, and produce content that features innovative materials and their connection to contemporary society and culture. These assets will be incorporated into an open source digital textbook and instructor’s manual is freely and broadly disseminated. Dissemination efforts would include MRS outreach to governmental affairs; the Strange Matter Green Earth museum display (viewed by over 5 million people); and to K-12 STEM education through classroom curricula, distance learning, science fairs, and other uses.

Role of University of Florida Faculty

The UF faculty goal will be to create openly accessible materials for the IMOS class that facilitates and engaging and flexible approach to instruction including classroom, online and blended formats. Each faculty instructor will be responsible for digital textbook chapter to present the humanities case study that accompanies their particular instructional unit. This also includes subject matter and creative consulting in the creation of multimedia materials to accompany the unit. Bruno White Entertainment will be responsible for producing these accompanying media.

The University Press of Florida will bring their expertise in editing and dissemination to support and assemble these materials into a virtual open educational resource under a creative commons license. Finally, UF faculty will create assignments or in-class activities that accompany their unit.

Role of Materials Research Society

The Materials Research Society will provide a co-producer and interface between Bruno White, the faculty at UF and scientists around the country, who collaborated on the original IMOS course content and who can help with developing new digital assets.

The MRS co-producer will:

Review the 10 current videos for the class and help decide if there are any subject changes Work with UF faculty and scientists to develop an outline of the scripts Collaborate with BWE in content production Advise on storyboard development Help identify the lead personality for the course material Assist in monitoring the collection of appropriate permissions, release forms, and branding for the project

Instructional Design

Instructional design (ID) will include:

Course design Course development Improved usability Enhanced user experience Technology solutions Instructional support

Our…