Abstract:

Academics are used to standing in front of a class to deliver their materials and interact with their students. There is often great resistance towards changing to course delivery via the e-mode because they feel that their roles in educating students, the interaction with students, and the ability to clarify doubts will all be reduced. In addition, many academics do not possess enough depth in technological skills to be able to produce an e-course that is interesting and interactive. Hence, while the university may require faculty to develop and run e-courses, there is often a great hurdle to overcome in terms of resistance and mindset change.

This paper shares how the development of an e-course can be transformed from being a painful experience, to one where the faculty member actually enjoys it, and takes pride in the end result. The key are collaborative teamwork and communication. In the course development effort, there were two key parties, the respective experts in their areas. They are the faculty member and the instructional design team. The faculty member has the responsibility of creating the course content. The instructional designer provides advice on the design of the learning materials, making use of the affordances of technology. Both faculty and instructional designer agreed that the materials should be interactive and user-friendly, incorporating multimedia to enhance learning.

The initial phase is the most important phase of the course development process. However, it is not the work itself, but the communication process that is needed to ensure that collaborative teamwork can take place. Initially, the faculty member viewed the instructional designer with suspicion and antagonism, expecting the instructional designer to impose a set of rules and regulations on what is to be done. While the process was not without its procedures, the instructional designer took pains to listen to the faculty member. The faculty member could express her concerns, frustrations and fears regarding the path ahead. The instructional designer was patient and willing to compromise to accommodate those concerns, and fears. In turn, the faculty member was then willing to cooperate with the instructional designer. In addition, the instructional designer went out of her way to produce a sample of how the work can be done, and was available at any time for consultation. This led to mutual trust and the willingness to cooperate, thus clearing the obstacles in the way.

Both parties learnt along the way to compromise, to adjust, to make changes as new knowledge about design and student learning was acquired. However, the process was much easier because of the trust that had earlier been built up through open and honest communication. The end result was one where both parties were satisfied with the course that had been created, and the reluctant faculty member is now a champion of e-course development, using this collaborative teamwork approach.

Keywords:

collaboration, communication, teamwork, psychosocial, case study.