DRAFT Online Equivalencies
Online:F2F Equivalencies
Example: Class Discussion – Typically, face-to-face discussion allows for 25-35% participation, but with online discussion participation is required and can be easily measures. Online usually requires all students to provide substantive comments, read the comments of classmates and offer informed responses. Comments are usually graded on not only quantity, but quality. For this reason, one segment of face-to-face discussion would translate into three times the time online.
Face-to-Face Activity / Online Activity / RatioF2F:Online / HRM 340 HR Planning
Minutes per module / Assessment Comments
Class Lecture / Read lecture notes (written) / 1:1 / 15
View streaming video of lecture / 1:1 / 0 / Timed delivery
View PowerPoint / 1:1 / 10 / Timed delivery
Listen to Podcasts/Streaming audio / 1:1 / 0 / Timed delivery
View Flash demonstrations / 1:1 / 0 / Timed delivery
Classroom viewing of film, multimedia clips, dramatic productions essential to a class session / View streaming film, clips, etc. / 1:1 / 0 / Timed delivery
Class Discussion1 / Discussion Board [asynchronous] / 1:3 / 30:90 / In online discussion, comments are evaluated by quality and quantity. May require thoughtful answers to assigned questions or critical review, evaluation and response to peer posts.
Chat [synchronous] / 1:1 / 0
Whiteboard [synchronous] / 1:1 / 0
Group Projects / Collaboration pages [synchronous] / 1:1 / 0 / Measured by final project evaluations
Group discussion boards [asynchronous] / 1:3 / 0
Group email [asynchronous] / 1:3 / 0
Assessment / Quizzes (Timed) / 1:1 / 15 (2 out of 15 modules) / Time allowed.
Tests (Timed) / 1:1 / 0 / Time allowed.
Feedback / Audio feedback / 1:1 / 0
Peer-reviewed feedback / 1:3 / 10:30 (1 out of 15 modules)
In class revision sessions / 1:3 / 20:60 (2 out of 15 modules)
Student Communication2 / Troubleshooting emails & info / 1:2 / 10:20
Class FAQ’s / 1:2 / 10:20
Assignment clarification / 1:2 / 10:20
Student presentations / Streaming video / 1:1 / 0
Narrated PowerPoint / 1:1 / 20 (1 out of 15 modules)
Web page presentation w/ discussion / 1:3 / 0
Group presentations / Streaming video / 1:1 / 0
Narrated PowerPoint / 1:1 / 0
Web page presentation w/ discussion / 1:3 / 0
Report Out / 1:3 / 0
Interactive activities (e.g. web quests) / Interactive activities (written) / 1:1 / 20 (1 out of 15 modules)
Interactive activities (Flash) / 1:1 / 0
Portfolios / Peer review / 1:3 / 0
In-Class Review (e.g. test prep) / Discussion Board [asynchronous] for Assigned Questions / 1:3 / 0
Chat [synchronous] / 1:1 / 0
Whiteboard [synchronous] / 1:1 / 0
Total for Module / 175 2.92 hours per module
Total– does not occur in every module / 2203.67 hours
total
Modules X 15 / Total for course / 2845 47.42 hours
Notes
1. Discussion 3:1
Research (Maurino 2006, Draves) suggests that only 25-35% of students regularly participate in F2F discussions while 100% of the students are required to participate in online discussions and their comments are evaluated for quality. Since three times as many students will be participating and since all comments are evaluated the numbers suggest a 3:1 ratio.
Maurino, P. (Winter 2006). Participation and interaction: F2F vs. online. Academic Exchange Quarterly10.4,257-263.
2. Mail 2:1
In their article “Teaching Time: Distance Education Versus Classroom Instruction” from The American Journal of Distance Education, Bender, Wood & Vredevoogd find that “the distance course resulted in more than twice as many email messages per student” which was comparable to other studies done by DiBiase 2000 & Lehman 1996 (p. 110).
Bender, D.M., Wood, B.J., & Vredevoogd, J.D. (2004). Teaching time: Distance education versus classroom instruction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 103-114.