Too often, online courses struggle with communication that feels slow and one-sided. Students swap ideas in discussion boards, but collaboration stops there. Integrating Microsoft Teams into Canvas changes that. It brings real-time conversation, file-sharing, and group spaces directly into the LMS–helping students connect more naturally and giving instructors new ways to guide and engage. This integration not only boosts collaboration, it also provides more opportunities for Regular and Substantive Interaction (RSI) between students and instructors—structured, faculty-initiated engagement that is required in online courses under federal guidelines.
Seamless Collaboration Across Projects and Courses
Integrating Teams into Canvas ensures that group work and peer review move beyond static discussion boards into dynamic, asynchronous interactions. Students can download the app on their mobile devices, which allows them to have more consistent and real-time access to the comments and work shared by their peers. Teams allows for:
Dedicated channels for individual projects or study groups
Tagging teammates so each member of a channel knows when they are needed
File sharing by both team members and instructors
This unified workspace helps teams stay organized, accountable, and focused on shared learning outcomes. Teams has both course-level and group-level integrations. This allows instructors flexibility in how they would like to use the app. These different levels allow Teams to be used for the entire course or just for specific group projects (or both). Regardless of the level of integration and use, instructors can see how students are collaborating and completing a task or group assignment. This gives them a space to quickly jump in if students are struggling or off track.
Enhanced Communication and Community Building
Canvas announcements and emails can feel one-sided; within Teams, conversations become two-way forums where ideas flow instantly. Notifications appear directly inside Canvas (and on mobile devices if students/instructors allow), ensuring students never miss critical updates. Meanwhile, professors can host Q&A chats without scheduling hurdles by simply creating a channel in Teams. The fluid interaction nurtures a vibrant learning community, fostering peer support and timely faculty feedback. Additionally, this allows instructors to meet their Regular and Substantive Interaction goals, nurtures a collaborative online community and directly addresses the Ecampus Essentials standard of requiring all three forms (student–student, student–instructor, student–content) of interaction and engagement in a classroom.
Easy Oversight for Seeking Solutions Courses
One of the new CoreEd (Core Education is OSU’s state-of-the-art, 21st-century-focused general education program) categories being implemented this year include the Seeking Solutions courses. These courses require students to work in interdisciplinary groups and “wrestle with complex, multifaceted problems, and evaluate potential solutions from multiple points of view” (from the Seeking Solutions OSU page). This necessitates that students complete group assignments and projects while instructors mentor and monitor these groups individually.
With a fully asynchronous OSU Ecampus course, this can be difficult. One way this can be accomplished is through Teams channels. If each group has its own Teams channel and the instructor requires that they use Teams to communicate and collaborate for their project, then instructors can use this space to share resources, mentor the students, and facilitate hard conversations.
Conclusion
Integrating Microsoft Teams into Canvas reshapes the university experience by uniting collaboration and communication within a single resource. Students benefit from real-time teamwork features and greater access to their instructors, while professors enjoy streamlined group work oversight and the ability to intervene whenever necessary. Adopting this integrated approach not only enhances the quality of instruction but also fosters a more engaged and connected learning community. For more information on how to integrate Teams into your Canvas site, read the Canvas: Create linked Teams from Canvas page.
In part one of this two-part blog series, we focused on setting the stage for a better feedback cycle by preparing students to receive feedback. In part two, we’ll discuss the remaining steps of the cycle- how to deliver feedback effectively and ensure students use it to improve.
In part one, we learned about the benefits of adding a preliminary step to your feedback system by preparing students to receive suggestions and view them as helpful and valuable rather than as criticism. If you haven’t read part one, I recommend doing so before continuing. This first crucial but often overlooked step involves fostering a growth mindset and creating an environment where students understand the value of feedback and learn to view it as a tool for improvement rather than criticism.
Step 2: Write Clear Learning Outcomes
The next step in the cycle is likely more familiar to teachers, as much focus in recent decades has been placed on developing and communicating clear, measurable learning outcomes when designing and delivering courses. Bloom’s Taxonomy is commonly used as a reference when determining learning outcomes and is often a starting point in backwards design strategy. Instructors and course designers must consider how a lesson, module, or course aligns with the learning objectives so that students are well-equipped to meet these outcomes via course content and activities. Sharing these expected outcomes with students, in the form of CLOs and rubrics, can help them to focus on what matters most and be better informed about the importance of each criterion. These outcomes should also inform instructors’ overall course map and lesson planning.
Another important consideration is ensuring that learning outcomes are measurable, which requires rewriting unmeasurable ones that begin with verbs such as understand, learn, appreciate, or grasp. A plethora of resources are available online to assist instructors and course designers who want to improve the measurability of their learning outcomes. These include our own Ecampus-created Bloom’s Taxonomy Revisited and a chart of active and measurable verbs from the OSU Center for Teaching and Learning that fit each taxonomy level.
Step 3: Provide Formative Practice & Assessments
The third step reminds us that student learning is also a cycle, overlapping and informing our feedback cycle. When Ecampus instructional designers build courses, we try to ensure instructors provide active learning opportunities that engage students and teach the content and skills needed to meet our learning objectives. We need to follow that up with ample practice assignments and assessments, such as low-stakes quizzes, discussions, and other activities to allow students to apply what they have learned. This in turn allows instructors to provide formative feedback that should ideally inform our students’ study time and guide them to correct errors or revisit content before being formally or summatively graded. Giving preliminary feedback also gives us time to adjust our teaching based on how students perform and hone in on what toreview before assessments. Providing practice tests or assignments or using exam wrappers, exit cards, or “muddiest point” surveys to collect your students’ feedback can also be an important practice that can help us improve our teaching.
Step 4: Make Feedback Timely and Actionable
Step four is two-fold, as both the timeliness and quality of the feedback we give are important. The best time to give feedback is when the student can still use it to improve future performance. When planning your term schedule, it can be useful to predict when you will need to block off time to provide feedback on crucial assignments and quizzes, as a delay for the instructor equates to a delay for students. Having clear due dates, reminding students of them, and sticking to the timetable by giving feedback promptly are important aspects of giving feedback.
To be effective, feedback must focus on moving learning forward. It should target the identified learning gap and suggest specific steps for the student to improve.. For a suggestion to be actionable, it should describe actions that will help the student do better without overloading them with too much information- choose a few actionable areas to focus on each time. Comments that praise students’ abilities, attitudes, or personalities are not as helpful as ones that give them concrete ways to improve their work.
Step 5: Give Time to Use Feedback and Incentive it
The last step in the cycle, giving students time to use the feedback provided, is often relegated to homework or ignored altogether. Feedback is most useful when students are required to view it and preferably do something with it, and by skipping this important step, the feedback might be ignored or glanced over perfunctorily and promptly forgotten. To close the loop, students must put the feedback to use. This can be the point where your feedback cycle sputters out, so be sure to make time to prioritize this final step. Students may need assistance in applying your feedback. Guiding students through the process, and providing scaffolds and models for using your feedback can be beneficial, especially during the initial attempts.
In my experience, it never hurts to incentivize this step: this can be as simple as adding points to an assignment for reflecting on the feedback given or giving extra credit opportunities around redone work. As a writing teacher, I required rewrites for work that scored below passing and offered to regrade any rewritten essays incorporating my detailed feedback. This proved to be a good solution, and while marking essays was definitely labor intensive, I was rewarded with very positive feedback from my students, often commenting that they learned a lot and improved significantly in my courses.
Considerations
A robust feedback cycle often includes opportunities for students to develop their own feedback skills by performing self-assessments and peer reviews. Self-assessment helps students in several ways, promoting metacognition and helping them learn to identify their own strengths and weaknesses. It also allows students to reflect on their study habits and motivation, manage self-directed learning, and develop transferable skills. Peer review also provides valuable practice honing their evaluative skills, using feedback techniques, and giving and receiving feedback, all skills they will find useful throughout adulthood. Both self-assessment and peer review give students a deeper understanding of the criteria teachers use to evaluate work, which can help them fine-tune their performance.
Giving and receiving feedback effectively is a key skill we all develop as we grow, and it helps us reflect on our performance, guide our future behavior, and fine-tune our practices. Later in life, feedback continues to be vital as we move into work and careers, getting feedback from the people we work for and with. As teachers, the most important aspect of our job is giving feedback that informs students how to improve and meet the learning outcomes to pass our courses. We soon learn, however, that giving feedback can be difficult for several reasons. Despite it being one of our primary job duties as educators, we may have received little training on how to give feedback or what effective feedback looks like. We also realize how time-consuming it can be to provide detailed feedback students need to improve. To make matters worse, we may find that students don’t do much with the feedback we spend so much time providing. Additionally, students may not respond well to feedback- they might become defensive, feel misunderstood, or worse, ignore the feedback altogether. This can set us up for an ineffective feedback process, which can be frustrating for both sides.
I taught ESL to international students from around the world for more than 10 years and have given a fair amount of feedback. Over many cycles, I developed a detailed and systematic approach for providing feedback that looked like this.
Gaps in this cycle can lead to frustration from both sides. Each step in the cycle is essential, so we’ll look at each in greater depth in this blog series. Today, we will focus on starting strong by preparing students to receive feedback, a crucial beginning that sets the stage for a healthy cycle.
Step 1: Prepare Students to Receive Feedback
An effective feedback cycle starts before the feedback is given by laying careful groundwork. The first and often-overlooked step in the cycle is preparing students to receive feedback, which takes planned, ongoing work. Various factors may influence whether students welcome feedback, including their self-confidence going into your course, their own self-concept and mindset as a learner, their working memory and learning capacity, how they view your feedback, and whether they feel they can trust you. Outside factors such as motivation and working memory are often beyond our control,butcreating an atmosphere of trust and safety in the classroom can positively support students. Student confidence and mindset are areas in which teachers can play a crucial supporting role.
Researcher Carol Dweck coined the term “growth mindset” after noticing that some students showed remarkable resilience when faced with hardship or failure. In contrast, others tended to easily become frustrated and angry, and tended to give up on tasks. She developed her theory of growth vs. fixed mindsets to explain and expound on the differences between these two mindsets. The chart below shows some of the features of each extreme, and we can easily see how a fixed mindset can limit students’ resilience and persistence when faced with difficulties.
Mindset directly impacts how students receive feedback. Research has shown that students who believe that their intelligence and abilities can be developed through hard work and dedication are more likely to put in the effort and persist through difficult tasks, while those who see intelligence as a fixed, unchangeable quality are more likely to see feedback as criticism and give up.
Developing a growth mindset can have transformative results for students, especially if they have grown up in a particularly fixed mindset environment. People with a growth mindset are more likely to seek out feedback and use it to improve their performance, while those with a fixed mindset may be more likely to ignore feedback or become defensive when receiving it. Those who receive praise for their effort and hard work, rather than just their innate abilities, are more likely to develop a growth mindset. This is because they come to see themselves as capable of improving through their own efforts, rather than just relying on their natural talents. A growth mindset also helps students learn to deal with failure and reframe it positively. It can be very difficult to receive a critique without tying our performance to our identity. Students must have some level of assurance that they will be safe taking risks and trying, without fear of being punished for failing.
Additionally, our own mindset affects how we view student effort, and we often, purposefully or not, convey those messages to students. Teachers with growth mindsets have a positive and statistically significant association with the development of their students’ growth mindsets. Our own mindset affects the type of feedback we are likely to provide, the amount of time we spend on giving feedback, and the way we view the abilities of our students.
These data suggest that taking the time to learn about and foster a growth mindset in ourselves and our students results in benefits for all. Teachers need to address the value of feedback early on in the learning process and repeatedly throughout the term or year, and couching our messaging to students in positive, growth-oriented language can bolster the feedback process and start students off on the right foot, prepared to improve.
Here are some concrete steps you can take to improve how your students will receive feedback:
Model a growth mindset through language and actions
Include growth-oriented statements in early messaging
Provide resources for students to learn more about growth vs. fixed mindsets
Discuss the value of feedback and incorporate it into lessons
Create an atmosphere of trust and safety that helps students feel comfortable trying new things
Teach that feedback is NOT a judgment of the person, but rather a judgment on the product or process
Ensure the feedback we give focuses on the product or process rather than the individual
Praise effort rather than intelligence
Make it clear that failure is part of learning and that feedback helps improve performance
Provide students with tools and strategies to plan, monitor, and evaluate their learning
Resources for learning more about growth mindset and how it relates to feedback:
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.
“In the Winter Term 2024, the Ecampus Research Unit conducted a survey study of 669 students who had taken online courses at OSU. The 40-item survey was designed to assess students’ knowledge and use of generative AI tools, as well as their perceptions of their use in their courses and careers. A full report of this study is available on the Ecampus Research Unit website. Based on the results of this study, several recommendations were developed to guide decision making about generative AI tools in online courses.”
Dello Stritto, Underhill, & Aguiar (2024).
This recent study highlighted three key recommendations for faculty seeking to integrate generative AI into their courses effectively:
Recommendation 1
Write a course policy about generative AI that is clearly explained.
Recommendation 2
Consider a wide range of student emotions and concerns when integrating generative AI in your online courses.
Recommendation 3
Educate students on generative AI tools.
Applying data to design
To apply these recommendations in practice, we can reorganize them into instructional design categories that foster AI resiliency in course design: Course Learning Outcomes, Learner Profiles, Learning Materials, Activities and Assessments, and Course Policies. These categories offer a comprehensive framework for integrating AI while addressing students’ concerns and enhancing learning experiences.
Course Policies: Establish Clear Guidelines for AI Usage
Reflecting Recommendation 1, developing a clear, transparent policy on AI usage is key. Faculty should articulate when and how students can use AI tools, providing specific examples of ethical use. By defining these expectations early in the course, instructors help students understand the role AI can play in their learning process, promoting academic integrity.
Learner Profiles: Address Emotional and Academic Concerns
In line with Recommendation 2, it is essential to consider students’ diverse reactions to AI—ranging from excitement to anxiety—when designing a course. This is where understanding Learner Profiles becomes critical.
Learning Materials and Activities: Ensure Relevance and Adaptability with AI
Recommendation 3 emphasizes the importance of educating students about generative AI, which can be achieved through thoughtful integration into learning materials, activities, and assessments.
Course Learning Outcomes: Integrate AI with Intentional Learning Design
The integration of generative AI tools into course design necessitates an examination of their impact on student mastery of the Course Learning Outcomes. It is vital to ensure that student use of AI tools supplement and enhance the learning process rather than bypass cognitive engagement.
With these four considerations in mind, we can now introduce a tool to help assess and improve course resilience against generative AI, while providing learners with clear policy decisions and explanations.
Introducing CART: Course AI Resiliency Tracker
In response to the clear need for effective integration of generative AI in educational settings, a new tool has been developed (as part of a wider suite of artificial intelligence tools) to assist faculty in navigating this complex landscape. This tool is designed to support instructors in evaluating how generative AI could respond to their course learning outcomes by highlighting its current capabilities to address and complete these outcomes. It facilitates a detailed understanding of learner profiles to ensure that AI applications are relevant and accessible to all students. Additionally, the tool encourages faculty to reflect on the currency and relevance of their learning materials and to assess how AI might be incorporated into activities and assignments. By examining existing course policies on AI usage and offering actionable steps for course development, this resource aims to demystify generative AI for both educators and students, promoting a thoughtful and strategic approach to its integration or decision to restrict AI.
Getting Started
Upon accessing the landing page, you will be prompted to input your Course ID, after which you may proceed by selecting the “Start” button.
Learning Outcomes
The first step in the tool involves a reflection on your Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs). At this stage, you will have the option to choose from a list of commonly used learning outcome verbs, organized by the general categories of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Note that there is a current selection limit of five CLOs at one time, and faculty with verbs absent from this list are encouraged at this time to select verbs that are most like those in their own CLOs to get feedback that will feel the most transferable.
After selecting the appropriate verbs that align with your outcomes, click on the “Test Resiliency” button. This will display feedback on how generative AI may already be able to meet expectations for common tasks associated with those action verbs.
Your Learners
Following the assessment of CLOs, the next step encourages you to consider your learners. In this section, you are invited to input relevant details about your students, including their backgrounds, career aspirations, prior knowledge, or any other contextual information that could inform your generative AI course policies. We are aware that this question might feel challenging, especially for faculty who teach all kinds of learners as part of a general education course. In this case, consider this as a more general introduction to the wide variety of learner profiles that may take the course, and how generative AI may be used from their perspective.
Your responses here, as with all inputs in the tool, will be temporarily stored and displayed on the Summary Page for your future reference.
Learning Materials
Next, the tool asks you to evaluate the relevance and adaptability of your learning materials. You may choose from the pre-set options provided, or alternatively, you can select “Other” to add customized choices based on your specific course materials.
Activities and Assessments
Next, you will be prompted to reflect on your course activities and assessments. This section includes three key questions. Two of the questions are straightforward yes-or-no inquiries, while the third invites you to select one or more methods that you currently employ to promote academic integrity in your assessments. Including this information alongside activities and assessments bolsters understanding for your learners about expected Gen AI usage, why the choice has been made, and enhances academic integrity across the entire course.
Course Policies
You will then be prompted to consider an important question: does your syllabus currently include a policy on generative AI? This reflection is crucial for ensuring transparency and consistency in how AI is addressed throughout your course design. After choosing one of the answers, you will be able to select from some key elements to include in your AI usage policy.
Next Steps
Finally, the tool concludes by prompting you to consider the next steps in your course development, offering guidance on how to proceed with integrating generative AI effectively. Each choice offers different recommendations as automatic feedback, and you are encouraged to read through them all before moving onto the final summary.
Summary Page
At the conclusion of the tool, you will be directed to a Summary Page that consolidates all your previous inputs, along with the guidance and recommendations provided throughout the process. This comprehensive summary can be printed or saved as a PDF for future reference and review.
The benefits of using the tool
Recommendation 1: A clearly explained course policy
The new tool supports this recommendation by guiding instructors to design course policies that offer clear instructions to learners on what is allowed and disallowed, and most importantly to give rationales behind these policy decisions.
Recommendation 2: Considering learner profiles
The tool helps instructors map these profiles to ensure that generative AI is integrated in ways that are accessible, equitable, and aligned with the emotional and cognitive needs of different students. By anticipating student concerns, instructors can provide thoughtful guidance on how AI will or will not be used in various course activities and assessments.
Recommendation 3: Ensure Relevance and Adaptability with AI
The tool helps instructors evaluate the relevance and adaptability of their current materials by offering pre-set options or the ability to add customized choices. This process ensures that course content remains up-to-date and flexible enough to incorporate generative AI effectively or alternatively, provides avenues to secure assessments against AI generated content.
Course Learning Outcomes: Integrate AI with Intentional Learning Design
The tool supports this by guiding instructors through a reflection on their CLOs, offering a selection of commonly used learning outcome verbs categorized by Bloom’s Taxonomy. It also helps educators recognize the extent to which generative AI can currently accomplish many of these learning outcomes, providing valuable insights into the specific areas where AI might enhance or support course goals. the purpose of this is to ensure that AI integration choices are not just incidental, but strategically aligned with fostering critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving skills within the broader context of your course objectives.
Conclusion
In response to the growing need for effective AI integration, this new tool helps faculty navigate the complexities of incorporating generative AI into course design. By addressing Course Learning Outcomes, Learner Profiles, Learning Materials, Activities and Assessments, and Course Policies, the tool promotes a strategic approach that aims to demystify AI for both educators and students. With thoughtful integration, well-designed generative AI policies can enhance learning experiences, help prepare students for future, teach learners to avoid potential pitfalls, and maintain the academic integrity of online courses.
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.
This past spring marked one year in my role as an instructional designer for Ecampus. Like many of our readers, I started conversing with AI in the early months of 2023, following OpenAI’s rollout of ChatGPT. Or as one colleague noted in recapping news of the past year, “generative AI happened.” Later, I wrote a couple of posts for this blog on AI and media literacy. A few things became clear from this work. Perhaps most significantly, in the words of research professor Ethan Mollick: “You will need to check it all.”
As the range of courses I support began to expand, so did my everyday use of LLM-powered tools. Here are some of my prompts to ChatGPT from last year, edited for clarity:
What is the total listening time of the Phish album Sigma Oasis?
Answer: 66 minutes and 57 seconds
How many lines are in the following list of special education acronyms (ranging from Section 504 – the Rehabilitation Act – to TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury)?
Answer: 27 lines
Where is the ancient city of Carthage today?
Answer: Today, Carthage is an archaeological site and historical attraction in the suburbs of the Tunisian capital, Tunis.
What is the name of the Roman equivalent of the Greek god Zeus?
Answer: Jupiter, king of the gods and the god of the sky and thunder
What’s the difference between colors D73F09 and DC4405?
Answer: In terms of appearance, … 09 will likely have a slightly darker, more orange-red hue compared to … 05, which might appear brighter. (Readers might also know these hues as variations on Beaver Orange.)
And almost every day:
Please create an (APA or MLA) citation of the following …
The answers were often on point but always in need of fact checking or another iteration of the prompt. Early LLMs were infamously prone to hallucinations. Factual errors and tendencies toward bias are still not uncommon.
As you can sense from my early prompts, I was mostly using AI as either a kind of smart calculator or an uber-encyclopedia. But in recent months, my colleagues and I here at Course Development and Training (CDT)—along with other units in the Division of Educational Ventures (DEV)—have been using AI in more creative and collaborative ways. And that’s where I want to focus this post.
The Partnership
First, some context for the work we do at DEV. Online course development is both a journey and a partnership between the instructor or faculty member and any number of support staff, from training to multimedia and beyond. Anchoring this partnership is the instructor’s working relationship with the instructional designer—an expert in online pedagogy and educational technology, but also a creative partner in developing the online or hybrid course.
Fig. 1. Collaboration anchors the story of online course development at OSU (credit: Ecampus).
Ecampus now offers more than 1,800 courses in more than 100 subjects. Every course results from a custom build that must maintain our strong reputation for quality (see fig. 1). This post is focused on that big circle in the middle—collaboration with the instructional designer. That’s where I see incredible potential for support or “augmentation” from generative AI tools.
As Yong Bakos, a senior instructor with the College of Engineering, recently reminded Faculty Forum, modern forms of this technology have been around since the 1940s, starting with the influence of programmable computers on World War II. But now, he added—in challenging faculty using AI to figure out rapid, personalized feedback for learners—”we speak the same language.”
Through continued partnership, how do we make such processes more nimble, more efficient? What does augmentation and collaboration look like when we add tools like Copilot or a custom GPT? Many instructional designers have been wrestling with these questions as of late.
“Human Guided, but AI Assisted”
Here are a few answers from educators Wesley Kinsey and Page Durham at Germanna Community College in Virginia (see fig. 2). Generative AI—also known as GAI—is a powerful tool, says Kinsey. “But the real magic happens when it is paired with a framework that ensures course quality.”
Take this line of inquiry a little farther, and one starts to wonder: How might educators track or evaluate progress toward such use cases?
Funneling Toward Augmentation
As a thought experiment, I offer the following criteria and inventory—a kind of self-assessment of my own “human guided” journey through course development with generative AI (see fig. 3).
Criteria for Augmenting Development with Generative AI
ESTABLISHED – Regular, refined practice in course development — EMERGING – Irregular and/or unrefined practice, could be improved — ENVISION – Under consideration or imagined, not yet practiced
Faculty with experience teaching online may find my suggested criteria familiar; “established, emerging, envision” is adapted from an Ecampus checklist used in course redevelopment.
Fig. 3. Self-assessment of augmenting development with generative AI (CC BY-NC-SA).
Augmentation 1: From Set Up to Intake
Broadly speaking, I’m only starting to use chatbots in kicking off a course development—to capture a bulleted summary of an intake over Zoom, for example. Or with these kinds of level-setting prompts:
Remind me, what is linear regression analysis?
What fields are important to physical hydrology?
Explain to a college professor the migration of a social annotation learning tool from LTI 1.1 to 1.3.
Augmentation 2: Course Content
In my experience, instructors are only now beginning to envision how they might propose a course or develop its learning materials and activities with support from tools like Copilot—which is increasingly adept at helping us with this kind of iterative brainstorming work. The key here will be getting comfortable with practice, engaging in sustained conversations with defined parameters, often in scenarios that build on existing content. In recent practice with building assignments, I’m finding Claude 3 Sonnet helpful—more nuanced in its responses, and because you can upload brief documents at no cost and revisit previous chats.
Fig. 4. From a “more precise” conversation on citation generation. Can you spot Copilot’s errors in applying MLA style?
Augmentation 3: Suggested Revisions
Once course content begins rolling in, I apply more established practices for augmentation. For building citations of learning materials, I’m using Copilot’s “more precise” mode for its more robust abilities to read the open web and draw on various style guides (see fig. 4). With activities, often the germ of an idea for interaction needs enlargement—a statement of purpose or more detailed instructions. Here are a few more examples from working with the School of Psychological Science, with prompts edited for brevity:
What would be the purpose of practicing rebus puzzles in a lower division course on general psychology?
Please analyze the content of the following exam study guide, excerpted in HTML. Then, suggest a two-sentence statement of purpose that should replace the phrase lorem ipsum.
How should college students think about exploring Rorschach tests with inkblots? Please suggest two prompts for reflection (see fig. 5.)
Fig. 5. From an augmented reflection activity in PSY 202H, General Psychology (credit: Juan Hu).
Augmentation 4: Discussion, Planning & Review
As with course planning, I’m not quite there yet with using generative AI to shape module templates and collect preferred settings for the building I do in Canvas. But by next year—armed perhaps with a desktop license for Copilot—I can imagine using AI to offer instructors custom templates or prompts to accelerate the design process. One more note on annotating augmentation—it’s incredibly important to let my faculty partners know—with consistent labeling—when I’m suggesting course content adapted from a conversation with AI. Most often, I’m not the subject matter expert—they are. That rule of thumb from Ethan Mollick still holds true: “You will need to check it all.”
Augmentation 5: Building & Rebuilding—More Efficiently
Finally, I look forward to exploring opportunities for more efficiently writing and revising the code behind everything we do with support from generative AI. Just imagine if the designer or instructor could ask a bot to suggest ways to strengthen module learning outcomes or update a task list, right there in Canvas.
Your Turn
With the above inventory in mind, let’s pause to reflect. To what extent are you comfortable using generative AI as a course developer? In what ways could this technology supplement new partnerships with instructional designers—or other colleagues involved in the discipline you teach? Together, how would you assess “augmentation” at each stage of the course development process?
Looking back on my own year of “human guidance with AI assistance,” I now turn more reflexively to AI for help with frontline design work—even as our team considers, for example, the ethical dimensions of asking chatbots to deliver custom graphics for illustrating weekly modules. In other stages, I’m still finding my footing in leveraging new tools, particularly during set up, refresh, and redesign. As we continue to partner with faculty, I remain open to navigating the evolving intersection of AI and course development.
(And now, for fun: Can you spot the augmentation? How much of that last sentence was crafted with support from a “creative” conversation with Copilot? Find the answer below.)
Resources, etc.
The following resources may be helpful in exploring generative AI tools, becoming more fluent with their applications, and considering their role in your teaching and learning practices.
All the buzz recently has been about Generative AI, and for good reason. These new tools are reshaping the way we learn and work. Within the many conversations about Artificial Intelligence in Higher Ed a common thread has been appearing regarding the other AI–Academic Integrity. Creating and maintaining academic integrity in online courses is a crucial part of quality online education. It ensures that learners are held to ethical standards and encourages a fair, honest, and respectful learning environment. Here are some strategies to promote academic integrity and foster a culture of ethical behavior throughout your online courses, even in the age of generative AI.
Create an Academic Integrity Plan
Having a clear academic integrity plan is essential for any course. Create an instructor-only page within your course that details a clear strategy for maintaining academic integrity. This plan might include a schedule for revising exam question banks to prevent cheating, as well as specific measures to detect and address academic dishonesty (plagiarism or proctoring software). In this guide, make note of other assignments or places in the course where academic integrity is mentioned (in the syllabus and/or particular assignments), so these pages can be easily located and updated as needed. By having a plan, you can ensure a consistent approach across the course.
Exemplify Integrity Throughout the Course
It is important to weave academic integrity into the fabric of your course. Begin by introducing the concept in your Start Here module. Provide an overview of what integrity means in your course, including specific examples of acceptable and unacceptable behavior. This sets the tone for the rest of the course and establishes clear expectations. On this page, you might:
Offer resources and educational materials on academic integrity for learners, such as guides on proper citation and paraphrasing.
Include definitions of academic dishonesty, such as plagiarism, cheating, and falsification.
Provide guidance on how learners might use generative AI within the class, including what is and is not considered acceptable.
Add scenarios or case studies that allow learners to discuss and understand academic integrity issues, specifically related to the use of generative AI.
Connect academic integrity with ethical behavior in the larger field.
Provide a place for learners to reflect on what it means for them to participate in the course in a way that maximizes their learning while maintaining academic integrity.
Throughout the course, continue to reinforce these ideas. Reminders about academic integrity can be integrated into various lessons and modules. By articulating the integrity expectations at the activity and assignment level, you provide learners with a deeper understanding of how these principles apply to their work.
Set Clear Expectations for Assignments
When designing assignments, it is important to be explicit about your expectations for academic integrity. Outline what learners should and should not do when completing the task. For instance, if you do not want them to collaborate on a particular assignment, state that clearly. Provide examples and resources to guide learners on how to properly cite sources or avoid plagiarism. Be specific with your expectations and share why you have specific policies in place. For instance, if you want to discourage the use of generative AI in particular assignments, call out the ways it can and cannot be used. As an example, you might tell learners they can use generative AI to help form an outline or check their grammar in their finished assignment, but not to generate the body text. Share the purpose behind the policy, in this case it might be something about how a writing assignment is their opportunity to synthesize their learning and cement specific course concepts. This kind of transparency shows respect for the tools and the learning process, while also clearly outlining for learners what is acceptable.
Encourage Conversations About Integrity
Creating opportunities for learners to engage in discussions about academic integrity can help solidify these concepts in their minds. You can incorporate forums or discussion boards where learners can share their thoughts and experiences related to integrity. This also gives them a chance to ask questions and seek clarification on any concerns they may have. Encourage open dialogue between instructors and learners regarding academic integrity and any related concerns. These conversations can also extend beyond the classroom, exploring how integrity applies in your field or career paths. By connecting academic integrity to real-world scenarios, you help learners understand its relevance and importance in their professional lives.
Foster a Supportive Learning Environment
A supportive learning environment can help reinforce academic integrity by making learners feel comfortable asking questions and seeking guidance. Offer resources like definitions, guides, or access to mentors who can provide additional support. When learners know they have access to help, they are more likely to adhere to integrity standards. With generative AI in the learning landscape, we will inevitably encounter more “gray areas” in academic integrity. Be honest with your learners about your concerns and your hopes. Being open to conversations can only enhance the learning experience and the integrity in your courses.
We all play a role in cultivating a culture of academic integrity in online courses. By documenting a clear plan, weaving integrity into the course content, setting clear expectations, encouraging conversations, and providing support, you can create an environment where honesty and ethical behavior are valued and upheld. This not only benefits learners during their academic journey but also helps them develop skills and values that will serve them well in their future careers.
I was recently reminded of a conference keynote that I attended a few years ago, and the beginning of an academic term seems like an appropriate time to revisit it on this blog.
In 2019, Dan Heath, a bestselling author and senior fellow at Duke University’s CASE Center, gave a presentation at InstructureCon, a conference for Canvas users, where he talked about how memories are formed. He explained that memories are composed of moments. Moments, according to Heath, are “mostly forgettable and occasionally remarkable.” To illustrate, most of what I’ve done today–dropping my kids off at spring break camp, replying to emails, going to a lunchtime yoga class, and writing this blog post–will largely be forgotten by next month. There is nothing remarkable about today. Unremarkable is often a desirable state because it means that an experience occurred without any hiccups or challenges.
Heath went on to describe what it is that makes great experiences memorable. His answer: Great experiences consist of “peaks,” and peaks consist of at least one of the following elements: elevation, insight, pride, or connection. He argued that we need to create more academic peaks in education. Creating peaks, he contends, will lead to more memorable learning experiences.
So, how do we create these peaks that will lead to memorable experiences? Let’s explore some ideas through the four approaches outlined by Heath.
Elevation. Elevation refers to moments that bring us joy and make us feel good. You might bring this element into your course by directly asking students to share what is bringing them joy, perhaps as an icebreaker. Sharing their experiences might also lead to connection, which is another way (see below) to create peaks that lead to memorable experiences.
Insight. Insight occurs when new knowledge allows us to see something differently. Moments of insight are often sparked by reflection. You might consider making space for reflection in your courses. Creativity is another way to spark new insights. How might students engage with course concepts in new, creative ways? To list off a few ideas, perhaps students can create a meme, record a podcast, engage in a role play, or write a poem.
Pride. People often feel a sense of pride when their accomplishments are celebrated. To spark feelings of accomplishment in your students, I encourage you to go beyond offering positive feedback and consider sharing particularly strong examples of student work with the class (after getting permission–of course!) Showcasing the hard work of students can help students to feel proud of their efforts and may even lead to moments of joyful elevation.
Connection. Connection refers to our ties with other people. Experiencing connection with others can feel deeply rewarding. As I mentioned above, asking students to share their experiences with peers is one way to foster connection. In Ecampus courses, we aim to foster student-student and student-teacher connection, but I encourage you to explore other opportunities for students to make meaningful connections. Perhaps students can get involved with their communities or with colleagues, if they happen to have a job outside of classes. Students could connect with their academic advisors or the writing center to support their work in a course. There are many ways to foster connections that support students in their learning!
It’s easy to focus on delivering content, especially in online courses. This was one of Heath’s overarching points. The key, however, to creating memorable learning experiences is to take a student-centered approach to designing and facilitating your course.
I invite you to start the term off by asking yourself: How can I create more moments of elevation, insight, pride, and connection for my students? It might be easier than you think.
References:
Heath, D. (2019, July 10). Keynote. InstructureCon. Long Beach, CA.
This article has its roots in a discussion I had with an Ecampus intern about going on the job market. This intern is working in an academic technologies role at a higher ed institution already, but also getting the Instructional Design certificate here at OSU. It was my first time thinking about what the growth of instructional design certificate and degree credentials means for all instructional designers. Very few of the instructional designers I’ve met and worked with here or at my previous institutions actually have degrees in instructional design, including myself. The field of instructional design emerged out of a specific institutional and educational need in higher education and corporate education, which makes for an ever-growing, ever-changing, but always innovative membership. How do we, as a field, continue to be inclusive of all instructional designers, regardless of their academic or educational backgrounds?
One potentially positive fact is that academia moves very slowly, so we have some time to strategize. Instructional design is still an emerging speciality within higher education, with each institution classifying that role differently, and providing that role with different levels of support. Some institutions, even today, do not have any instructional designers. Current research indicates that this must change. One of the best sources of data about the field of instructional design in higher education and instructional designers is the Changing Landscape of Online Education (CHLOE) Project. The participants in the CHLOE survey are “the senior online officer at each participating institution.” This survey pool recognizes the variance in organizational structures at different institutions by focusing on the COO’s purview. In the 2019 CHLOE 3 survey, it was reported that the median number of instructional designers employed at 2-year colleges, and public and private 4-year institutions, was four, regardless of enrollment or institution size. In CHLOE 7, one of the conclusions was that “insufficient instructional design staffing may be one of online learning’s most serious long-term vulnerabilities,” with only 10% of Chief Online Officers surveyed describing their ID capacity as sufficient for their current needs, and only 3% believing they would be able to meet anticipated need.
These findings signal that universities should be moving towards a significant fiscal investment in hiring instructional designers. Joshua Kim wrote a few key takeaways from the CHLOE 7 in CHLOE 7: The Present and Future of Instructional Design Capacity. Kim predicts that universities will need to not only hire more instructional designers, but that these roles will need to be hybrid or remote to attract the post-pandemic workforce. In addition to hybrid and remote options, Kim posits that, “Forward-thinking universities may find that they need to start offering star non-faculty educators the same recognition and incentives that have long been necessary to recruit and retain star tenure-line faculty.” But what does this mean for instructional designers? How would an instructional designer even be able to become identified as a “star” within the field or even at a specific institution?
Understanding Branding for Faculty and Non-Faculty Educators
Circling back to my initial inquiry about what instructional designers can do to ensure the field stays inclusive, I believe an individual enterprise will have a collective impact that will benefit the largest number of people: personal branding. In What’s the Point of a Personal Brand? Executive coach Harrison Monarth uses the story of his client, Mike, to illustrate how important it is for employees to think about how personal branding is now a strategy for gaining visibility within organizations, and that visibility is now a key component when employers are thinking about promotion. Monarth observes that “In high-performing organizations, at certain levels, everyone is exceptional. To clearly differentiate your value and what you bring to the table, you need to do more than have a good reputation. You need to have an outstanding personal brand.” Having a brand isn’t the same thing as being a celebrity, although I think many would agree that there are celebrities in every field, even instructional design.
Creating a personal brand is a successful career strategy outside of the corporate world as well, and one of the fields that is encouraging faculty to think about branding is not, as one might think, business but medicine. In 2019, the Academic Medicine blog published Knowing Your Personal Brand: What Academics Can Learn From Marketing 101, the purpose of which was to persuade medical professionals that a brand identity can be empowering. According to the article,
[K]nowing one’s academic brand can (1) help faculty members approach projects and other responsibilities through the lens of building or detracting from that brand, (2) provide a framework for determining how faculty members might best work within their institutions, and (3) help faculty members better understand and advocate their own engagement and advancement.
Although this article specifically speaks to and about academic teaching faculty, Instructional designers at institutions are often placed in the professional faculty role, along with librarians or program directors, and have many of the same professional demands on their job descriptions. As former faculty, I can attest that both of my careers have included independent research, departmental service, and conference or publication responsibilities.
Finding Your Personal Brand
If a brand is defined as opinions that people have about you based on your work, it is important to be self-aware, and intentional about the work that you do. Creating your brand can be a difficult task if, like me, you have a variety of experiences and interests. It requires self-reflection about one’s accomplishments and body of work as a whole, and the need to generalize what are sometimes very disparate activities. In Using Your Personal Mission Statement to INSPIRE and Achieve Success, an article published in Academic Pediatrics, the official journal of the Academic Pediatric Association, the authors describe a framework for building a personal mission statement (INSPIRE):
Identify Your Core Values
Name the Population You Serve
Set Your Vision
Plan How You Will Achieve Your Vision
Identify Activities That Align With Your Mission
Review, Revise, and Refine Your Mission Statement
Enlist Others to Help You Accomplish Your Mission
A slimmed down version of this same framework can be a helpful starting point for creating a brand identity. It enables you to identify your core values, name the population you serve, and identify activities that support those values and populations. But unlike a mission statement, this framework is best completed in reverse; a backwards brand design, if you will. (Sidenote: Instructional designers love to do things backwards). I call this framework SIFT:
Start with your experience and accomplishments
Identify keywords or topics
Frame your work and interests
Tie everything together
I believe that SIFT-ing has the potential to be a reflective process that will lead to a changing self-awareness of different types of instructional designers, for ourselves, and collectively.
Start with your experience and accomplishments
The best place to begin is with your complete resume or CV. It might be tempting to start with the tailored version you used to get your last position, but you don’t want to limit your view to only things that you think are relevant to instructional design. I can trace some elements of my brand back to my undergraduate and graduate degrees. I also include my two years as a contracted captioner for 3play and Rev within the same brand. Finding a brand that encompasses all that you are will only be successful if you use the most complete picture of yourself.
Identify keywords or topics
Your brand is more than just the places that you’ve worked at, the committees you’ve served on, and projects you’ve worked on. To understand your brand, you should begin by identifying a perspective, or positionality, that informs the decisions you’ve made in the past, however unconsciously that might have been, and looks towards the future. Keywords can be a useful next step, but you will want to avoid the potential to find yourself trapped within categories! In a field like medicine, there are already established research interests and specialties. As a field, instructional design hasn’t reached the point of specialization, but we are trending towards accepting that there are too many topics that fall under the broad umbrella of instructional design for everyone to be experts in everything. For example, the Quality Matters Instructional Designers Association has 21 expertise categories that you can select from when joining the association that others can use to find you to connect with you.
A screencapture of the list of categories from the QM IDA website
When I first joined the QM IDA, I didn’t know what boxes to check, or even what some of these categories were. And since they are presented without explanation, the criteria for self-identification are unclear. I can check almost all of these boxes as things I have experience in—with the exception of K12 and the Continuing and Professional Education Rubric, but is experience the same thing as expertise? It might be my imposter syndrome talking, but I am more inclined to identify with interests than areas of expertise. (Sidenote: I still haven’t checked any boxes.)
Frame your work and interests
I hadn’t noticed a pattern to my interests while I was doing them, but by reflecting on my professional journey, I realized that I could trace one interest all the way back to my undergraduate honors thesis, through to my current career as an instructional designer. I’ve always had an interest in communities and the community spaces they inhabit—especially if they are online. Community doesn’t appear on QM’s list of categories, but it is the lens through which I approach many of the categories on that list. Accessibility, Computer-Based Learning, Distance Education, Hybrid instruction/Design, LMS, Multimedia Creation, Problem-Based Learning—all of these categories need to address questions of community by addressing inclusivity, access, equity, and authentic student-student and student-teacher interactions. Community is the keyword I use to frame my research interests and approach to instructional design, in all of its various forms.
Tie everything together
If you go to my LinkedIn profile, you’ll see that I have “Humanities girl in an instructional technology world” as my headline. That’s my brand. You might notice that it does not include “instructional design” or “community.” But at the same time, by labeling myself a humanist, I am evoking the words associated with humanities and humanism–things like communities, kindness, compassion, human potential, and the arts. Technology is often viewed either as the savior of humanity, or its destruction. In reality, of course, it’s both. By framing myself as a humanist working with technology, I am clueing people in that my perspective on technology will incorporate potential negative impacts for people. The playful nature of the headline i.e. using “girl” to rhyme with “world” also reveals my personality. Compare this headline with something like, “I am interested in humane approaches to technology used in education.” It’s true, but it doesn’t tell you about me as a person outside of my interests.
Being “On Brand”
To declare a brand is not to limit your interests, nor should it be criticized as promoting a non-interest in other topics. Another observation from Kim is that instructional designers are likely very busy, and overstretched. In his words, there is “a significant mismatch between institutional demand for instructional design services and the available supply.” To avoid burnout, instructional designers need to be strategic with the projects they commit to. A brand can also help you be selective about which conferences you attend, or committees you serve on. Being “on brand” can be a way of focusing your energy, and also a touchstone of your identity.
Using the SIFT framework, you can reflect on your professional values, and your professional goals. One of my colleagues in the field is an accessibility expert, and gets called in to consult on all things related to accessibility in addition to her daily work as an instructional designer. She recently became a certified Accessibility Professional with the IAAP, and this credential is visible on her LinkedIn profile as an emblem of her brand. Knowing her brand allowed her to appeal to her institution to allow her this opportunity that enriches not only her own skillset, but the prestige of her institution by having an IAPP certified accessibility professional on their staff. In that sense, personal branding can also help institutions build diverse departments that are teams of specialists.
To return to the three benefits of branding for faculty outlined in the Academic Medicine article, knowing my brand helps me decide where to devote my limited bandwidth by pursuing professional activities that are “on brand” for me. I can also use my brand to search for specific opportunities that will build my brand, even if those fall outside the typical skillset of instructional designers. However, moving towards a “branding” mindset also benefits my colleagues, who are equally, individually, uniquely talented, and should be recognized for their specialties and allowed to follow their passions, rather than be constrained to their job duties. As instructional design teams at universities grow, having a team of specialists can also help alleviate burnout by allowing people to play to their strengths. This can ensure that instructional design remains a space where all career pathways are valid and not contingent on specific credentials.
