Computers in Business Course Design

In the summer of 2010, I was asked to teach a 200-level online Microsoft Office applications course titled Computers in Business for the upcoming fall. This course had a prerequisite of an introduction to computer information systems course I was already teaching that covered basic computer concepts as well as beginning level coverage of Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. The computers in business course is required for business and retail management students and is transferable to Portland State University. The course had previously been taught by someone who used a Microsoft Projects workbook. The course was overdue for a redesign and curriculum committee review. I spent a long weekend working through all the projects in the book –taking notes for lesson plans along the way. The workbook was sponsored by Microsoft, so it had additional content that was distracting. That was something I new I needed to eliminate right away. The book was riddled with errors. One of the downsides to printed textbooks about technology is that technology changes constantly, where printed text does not. I immediately contacted several publishers asking for review copies of their books. I was sent about a dozen texts. I spent another long weekend working through selected projects in about eight of the books before settling on an affordable book for the bookstore to order as a required text. One of the principles of universal design for learning (UDL) is to gain student interest by optimizing relevance, value, and authenticity. UDL has three main principles –often indicated by “why,” “what,” and “how.” The “why” refers to multiple means of learner engagement. This provided flexibility in the ways students accessed the content and ensured all students had an equal opportunity to succeed. The book had fairly relevant projects, had only a few errors per project, and most importantly, did not leave students stranded if they were having challenges like some of the automated course tools like Pearson’s MyITlab of Cengage’s MindTap do. The automated tools also add an additional level of technical complexity for students to navigate and they don’t provide many choices for students to engage. Autonomy is important for adult learners. I taught the course for three terms. I was constantly addressing the errors throughout the book and troubleshooting application errors. During that time, I had reached out to many of my colleagues at other community colleges who shared similar frustrations about MS Office course materials. At the time, I started a master’s program in education technology. I was learning so many things I wanted to fold into practice, especially with my most problematic and time-intensive course.

Over the summer of 2011, I redesigned the course. The first thing I did was utilize the principles of universal design and what I was learning in school about assessment to balance the grading scheme. I created multiple means for student engagement, multiple ways to be successful, guidance on course load management and learning habits, and multiple means to access materials. I also eliminated the final exam. It wasn’t necessary –summative assessment often isn’t necessary in many courses. Feedback from our business advisory committee and dozens of retail employers indicated that they wanted more collaboration and project management skills using MS Office. Data from student surveys indicated that learners were spending about 10 hours per week on the course. The course is 4 credits, and the Department of Education suggests 2 – 3 hours per week per credit for course2 with in-person learning. That meant the goal should be 12 – 16 hours per week for this online course with no lecture. I was barely meeting the outcomes/assessment alignment, so I created a group project. I was already wanting to remove two of the projects. Doing so and adding a five-week group project that had students collaboratively use MS Office for project management and document integration fit the bill nicely. I had a sound process for assigning balanced teams. I created a private work area within the LMS, provided ways for team members to hold each other accountable, and I gave guidance on how to use a handful of synchronous meeting platforms. Students created Gantt charts, submitted weekly status reports, synthesized data, integrated applications, and used PowerPoint to record a comprehensive final presentation. The project met nearly all the student learning outcomes and I received very positive reviews from students. Group projects are usually dreaded by students, but this one worked great –even fostered some lasting relationships. I also incorporated a wisdom wall, which is basically an area for students to share insights about the class which were then available to the next class of students. Students tend to listen to the advice of other students. This was a way to leverage the value of self-assessment and reflection.

In 2012, I made some minor changes to meet Quality Matter’s standards. One change was the addition of some Word and Excel basic skills tutorials because we had decided to remove the prerequisite course requirement. I taught the class using the textbook for a few years, making tweaks along the way. The course design was pretty good. One indication of a great online course is one where student questions about expectations, navigation, and technical support are almost non-existent. This is a great indicator of optimized engagement. I had achieved that, but I wasn’t done. I had been teaching the class using MS Office 2013, a change from when I started with Office 2010. Every time Microsoft comes out with a new version of Office they move controls, change data libraries, and do a facelift. That requires a change in instructional materials every few years. I could have simply used the new version of the textbook I had been using. The problem was that some of the projects still did not quite align well with what the employers were saying they wanted. There was also a need for course materials to be more accessible and inclusive. We had transitioned to Canvas, so I invested time searching Canvas Commons and other digital sources like LUMIN courseware for content –with no luck. I could find plenty of good content for other subjects, but not MS Office. Many of my colleagues at other institutions were opting to use automated publishing tools. I wasn’t ready to deal with the constant need for technical support for those tools and student access keys still came with a fee. And again, the content didn’t align with the needs of the employers. After much pondering, I decided to write my own content. I also had requests from adjunct instructors to remove the group project. They felt it required too much instructor engagement. I was reluctant to remove the final project. It was a course element I was very proud of.

Besides creating all the content, I decided to throw out all the workarounds, and other aspects of the course that created barriers. I also wanted to make the course as inclusive as possible. The student learning outcomes also needed to change without being changed officially. I said that correctly. The Western Association of Food Chains, the organization that represented dozens of grocery and verity stores across the U.S. wanted the outcomes for the course to be different than the outcomes that aligned with transfer to Portland State University. Fortunately, I was involved in the discussions about the outcomes and was able to guide consensus on a desirable set of outcomes. The process was similar to that of a DACUM model. I already knew how I wanted to assess learning, so I shared my thoughts as the committee established the outcomes. I literally broke out a Blooms Taxonomy assessment model in one of the meetings. Some members of the committee were adamant about the particular verbs used in the outcomes. My course syllabus officially stated the student learning outcomes for PSU transfer, but then stated, more specifically, the outcomes for the Western Association of Food Chains retail  management certificate (RMC) program. In addition to some of the barriers I had mentioned, there was also an opportunity to help students with their overall college experience. Many of the students had not been to college before and needed help with handling their course load, writing college level papers, and even managing their own personal finances. I wanted to embed some of those skills into the course. I created project-based assignments where students learned how to use Word to create an APA research paper and other professional documents. I created Excel assignments where students learned skills they would need as managers in the business and retail industries. The first learning activity covered basic math and order of operations, because many of the students hadn’t taken a math course since high school. The lead instructor for managerial finance in the RMC program had asked that I not overlap his curriculum, so I had the students create a personal budget with Excel instead of covering business financials. The math and formulas were more logic based than financial. Most textbooks cover specific intermediate Excel skills that utilize standard application tools, but not all of them are relevant to industry. I created activities that merged more relevant intermediate and advanced skills. I even created an activity where learners analyzed a weighted grade report. This was meant to teach Excel skills, but also help students understand how academic grading processes worked. I created PowerPoint learning activities where students pushed their application skills beyond everyday use. I also had them do an activity where they collected and assembled useful information about the college –information that might not be readily available to remote students. Since most organizations often use proprietary databases and enterprise software, I created assignments where students learned skills with MS Access that would translate to other applications. I also created learning activities where students learned to integrate the applications in meaningful ways. I also included more information about vocabulary, syntax, and other application related nomenclature, so students would not be confused if they searched outside reference material. The final activity asked students to reflect on what they learned and share how they would apply the skills. This activity is sometimes overlooked in higher education, but reflection on the learning process is important for meta-cognition and transference. This aligns with the “how” principle of UDL where learners are provided multiple ways to express skills and understanding.

I already had the course framework from the previous version, I just updated the design to meet Quality Matter’s standards while folding in a plethora of applied learning theory. Assessment was the catalyst for the creation of the student learning outcomes. I then created a story board. I filled in the content from there. That is consistent with the Dick and Carey design model. I learned best practices of syllabus creation in college, so I applied that knowledge for the course outline. I used numerous problem-based projects, which is rooted in Merrill’s principles of instruction. These principles also incorporate contextualized learning. I wrote scripts for each project so they could be supported by screencast videos for guided instruction. I shared images of finished examples for context. I used Adobe Creative Suite to create graphics that weren’t created within assignment activities. I didn’t use photos, but inclusivity was considered for the few images I needed. I used inclusive language throughout the course as well as techniques such as chunking, consistent formatting, and attention to reading level. I even had students complete an MS Word lesson about making accessible images and documents. I was careful to consider Mayer’s Multimedia Theory when balancing visual and sound media with text. This aligns with the “what” principle of UDL as it refers to multiple means of representation. All the content, directions, learning guides were available in printable versions for tactile learning alternatives. I provided synchronous and asynchronous student-to-student and student-to-teacher engagement. I designed equitable grading rubrics and provided information on how learners were assessed and graded. I made all the learning activities sharable as open educational resources. I am aware of instructors at two other community colleges who were using some of the projects and videos. Shortly after I left, the college’s Microsoft licensing made Office 360 available to students at no charge. The college often scheduled two or three, and sometimes four, sections of this course each term. That means I was fortunate to have data from hundreds of student surveys to make improvements to content and design. I was very lucky to have tremendous support from employers who provided feedback on learner behavior and performance. That allowed me to apply all four levels of Kirkpatrick’s Model of assessment This is not easily obtained in higher education. The last design update and curriculum review I completed was in 2017. In addition to this course being student-centered, I also designed the course to require minimal preparation and be easier to manage for instructors. I provided solution files and an instructor guide detailing a checklist of items to personalize, update, and modify such as the instructor introduction, hyperlinks, and integrity keys on data files. There were no longer application workarounds to cause issues or require troubleshooting and no date sensitive information was embedded in the course, which made it easier to refresh term after term. I have designed, reviewed, and provided guidance and support for many other projects over the years, but this course is the best all-round representation of my design skills and development processes.

This video summarizes the design process: