Online Course Critiques

This researcher decided to assess and critique the design and delivery of free courses offered by Classroom Connect (http://www.classroom.com) and Element K (http://www.elementk.com). Classroom Connect provides professional development and online curriculum resources for teachers as part of Harcourt, Inc. Element K primarily offers business and IT training as a partner with Harvard Business School Publications. This researcher enrolled in the trial courses that both sites offered for free evaluation. The conclusions offered in this paper are reflections of the researcher's progress through the evaluation courses.

First impression of the course

Classroom Connect and Element K have very similar interfaces. Both sites utilize the “paper-white” background that is familiar to most people using the Internet. They also use a variation of blue as the color for bars, title and headings and for main text headings. The blue is uniform throughout the sites as well. The site designers have adhered to good design guidelines and kept the colors limited, the graphics simple and the layout clear.

The Classroom Connect site is obviously more directed toward teachers as it uses softer colors, fonts that reflect children's' interests and graphics that included pictures of children. The layout is fairly traditional, with menu bar to the left and navigation clearly available on the top layer. The technology is also fairly straight forward, with the most advanced coding being for a roll over effect on the menu bar.

Element K is obviously directed to a more “power” centered group. The blue is stronger and the font choice is professional, no-nonsense. There are fewer graphics, the emphasis being on a business approach. The technology used is fairly advanced, with drop down menus as well as the roll over effects. The entire page is viewable on the front page, also a very straight-forward, “let's get to work” attitude. Interestingly, the Element K site provides links to financial partners that the Classroom Connect site does not.

Ultimately, both sites provide a good first impression. It is easy to understand the intent and purpose of the sites and the target audiences is easily brought into the concept of the site.

Course objectives

The Classroom Connect course reviewed was entitled, “Internet in the Classroom: First Steps.” It was setup and introduced in a way that most teachers would be able to easily follow and understand. A syllabus was provided that included objectives and learner outcomes as well as a detailed account of expectations and assessment strategies in the form of a rubric. A final project was explained in the syllabus as well. Anyone taking this course would know exactly what was to be learned, what was expected and how the course would develop.

The Element K course reviewed was entitled, “Coaching by Harvard Business School .” This course offered a very simple approach. The objective was stated clearly but did not offer learner objectives, goals, outcomes, or assessment strategies. There was a very brief course description.

Content

The Classroom Connect course was very traditional, as one may expect from a teacher centered classroom. The content was presented in a very straight-forward manner. Each unit in the course had all the material available and easy to find. There was not a great deal of creativity involved with the content. It was easy to navigate through the course, to the resources, links and so on.

The content of the Element K course was very engaging, once the researcher was able to access it. The content is presented as a series of Macromedia Shock Wave units. There is video, audio and interactive queries throughout each lesson. The Shockwave made it a very interesting and captivating experience.

When looking at either course, it was obvious that a great deal of thought had been put into the design stage and the target audience was well researched. People taking business courses are more likely to be impressed with the “bells and whistles” of the Element K courses. Perhaps, teachers may be intimated by such extras and just want to “get the job done.”

Both courses offered content that seemed very appropriate for an online course. The concepts were fairly basic. To take either course would not require substantial prior knowledge of the subject area. In the beginning, there is some problem solving involved to actually get to either course, but once in, they are easy to follow.

The Element K course was the more engaging and interesting of the two, as it used multimedia with great affect. However, this also makes it a course that one could only truly reap benefit from if one had access to high speed Internet connection.

Assignments

The Classroom Connect assignments were very traditional classroom developed as well. There was some use of discussion and the instructor required students to work in a group. Most of the work seemed to be following other resources on the web, and doing research and writing and problem -solving. The Element K course was fairly self-contained. The course utilizes a mixture of video and audio, but the student can choose text-only format. The video is well done and the lessons are supplemented with exercises that use real-life situations to develop skills. Ironically however, the final assessment is given in the form of multiple choice tests.

Does the course take advantage of a web-based format?

Both courses take advantage of the technologies available with web-based format. The Classroom Connect class relies a great deal on discussion boards and links to other resources on the web. The Element K course uses the technologies available for streaming video and audio.

Is a detailed syllabus included?

Classroom Connect presents a very detailed syllabus, while Element K has a very brief syllabus. Educators are much more concerned about a detailed syllabus. Business people simply want to get onto the work at hand.

Access to instructor

The instructor was presented on the front page of the Classroom Connect course and there was a link provided to keep in touch with her using email. The Element K course used a virtual instructor. There was no instructor presented that a student could contact. This was an obvious difference between the two courses.

Navigation of the web site

Both websites were fairly easy to navigate if the student had an experience with the Internet. The sites were not intuitive however. If one had never used the web before, the navigation could be difficult. It took a number of clicks before one actually got to the course content. The Element K course content, once accessed, was easier to follow. As the student finishes one section, the course directs the student to the next lesson. The Classroom Connect course was more open and the student could surf through the sections with ease, without having to complete each lesson.

Application of content to practice?

Both courses were easily applied to practice. The Classroom Connect course was perhaps easier to apply as it had to do with using the Internet, whereas the Element K course was directed to dealing with managing people in work situations. However, the student who would be interested in either course, would find that the content and the skills developed would be able to be applied to real life situations. The Element K courses actually offered exercises from real situations that the student would be able to apply to the work place immediately.

Student participation

The Classroom Connect course required more active student participation, as well as interaction between and among students. The Element K course did require student participation to complete the course, however, the pace and the completion of the activities relied completely on the individual student motivation.

Conclusion

Essentially, both courses investigated were well done and clearly designed with student profile and needs taken into consideration. Each course took different approaches, but were well suited for the target audiences. It was obvious that thought had gone into what learning styles were going to be best suited for the courses. The Classroom Connect course utilized less technology, but the assessment strategies were better suited to address real learning and individual learning styles. The Element K course utilized a higher level of technology, but relied on the more traditional assessment of multiple choice tests.

The courses were easy to follow and provided appropriate content and structure as well as use of the web based technologies.

It would be interesting to see the potential of a mixture of the best aspects of both course approaches.