Last summer I had an experience that changed the way I want teach my online courses.

I decided to update my online descriptive astronomy course first. I had some ideas about what I wanted to do, but I decided to take some MOOCs to come up with more possibilities. I took courses on gamification, designing e-learning, virtual performance assessment, digital storytelling, and astronomy. Based on what I learned in those courses, this is my plan for updating one module in my course (and my final project in two of those MOOCs...).

I chose Hannafin and Peck's instructional design model. I like the simplicity of it and the importance of evaluation and revision at each step. This is a good model to use while developing a smaller instructional system, like a unit within a course.

In my descriptive astronomy course, I traditionally teach the solar system by having students read the appropriate chapters in the text about the terrestrial planets, Jovian planets, and small bodies. Each chapter takes a week, and in addition to a quiz that includes multiple choice and essay questions, students do activities designed to help them distinguish between the different types of bodies.

One of the essay questions on the last quiz is, "Is Pluto more like a terrestrial planet or a Jovian planet?" The correct answer is neither, because it has several moons, a lower density, and is very far from the sun like Jovian planets, but it is small, rocky (and icy), and lacks a ring system like terrestrial planets. But students tend to pick one characteristic (it's small so it must be terrestrial or it has a low density so it must be Jovian), and ignore all the ones that don't fit.

I decided to redsign the unit on the study of the solar system. I chose this topic for a number of reasons:

1. The clear lack of understanding on the part of students concerning how planets are classified, based on the high error rate on the essay question.
2. The abundance of physical and orbital data for objects in our Solar System.
3. The importance of object classification in understanding the formation of the solar system.

How I use inquiry-based learning to design instruction is affected by two things, my target audience and the goals and objectives of the unit

My audience is non-science major community college students taking online courses. This course fulfills a non-lab science general education elective. It is accepted to transfer institutions, and I get a fair number of visiting students (students enrolled in a 4-year college taking one or two classes at the community college) in the summer.

Because these are not science majors, they are not necessarily familar with the scientific method or how to conduct experiments or research, so any activities I design will need specific directions. However, it is important that they develop critical thinking skills. Since this is a general education elective, and not a major requirement, there are no prerequisites nor is it a sequence course; it stands alone.

This is the goal for this unit, from the course syllabus, along with its student learning objectives.

Gain experience in understanding the formation of the solar system, its structure and composition of the planets and their moons

• Provide a capsule summary of our solar system
• Provide a special emphasis on terrestrial planets contrasted to gaseous planets and especially the Earth-Moon System.

Unfortunately, these are simple knowledge level objectives, based on Bloom's Taxonomy. One goal of general education science courses is to improve critical thinking skills, and that requires higher order objectives.

While I can't change the goals and objectives on the syllabus, I can develop new ones for the purpose of course design:

• Gather physical and orbital data about given solar system objects
• Based on the gathered data, develop a classification scheme for solar system objects with 3-6 categories
• Given the physical and orbital data for a new solar system object, classify that object according to the developed scheme
• Write a classification paper justifying the classification of the new objectives.

My design objectives lead to the same outcomes as the syllabus objectives, but they reflect higher order thinking skills and are both observable and measurable.

Evaluation and Revision of the Analysis Phase

To evaluate my objectives, I created a survey that I asked my colleagues (users of our LMS at my college) to complete. While this survey would have been better split into the two phases, I knew at the end of the semester, asking my fellow professors to complete two separate surveys would lower my response rate.

The survey included the following question:

At least 95% of the respondents either agreed or strongly agreed with each of these statements about the design objectives. Based on these results, I am satisfied with my analysis of the audience and objectives for my project.

The next step was to design activities and assessments to support the objectives. Because this is a science class, I chose an inquiry-based learning design for this content. With inquiry-based learning, learners seek the answers to questions by gathering and analyzing data and then drawing conclusions. In this case, learners will gather data about objects in the Solar System, anaylze the data for patterns and trends, and then based on those patterns, form their own classification scheme.

My target audience influenced the way I employed inquiry-based learning in my design. There are generally four methods of inquiry-based learning:

• Confirmation Inquiry
• Structured Inquiry
• Guided Inquiry
• Open Inquiry

I chose a modified guided inquiry method. With guided instruction, learners are given a specific question, and then they develop their own methodology, deciding what data to collect, how to collect it, and how to analyze it, and then form their conclusions. However, since these are non-science majors, and this unit occurs near the beginning of the course, they will need more direction in terms of what data to collect.

I also chose to use collaborative learning. This will allow more advanced learners to support others. Each learner will be given a set of data to collect, and then they will analyze it and form conclusions as a group. They will also complete some peer assessment activities, reviewing the work of their classmates.

With that in mind, I designed the following activities and assessments:

Objective: Gather physical and orbital data about given solar system objects.

Activity: Learners are given tables to complete for named solar system objects, 5-6 objects each. They will be given suggested sites to use to find the required data. Each person in a group will get their own data to find, which they will then share with the group. Using gamification theory, which says to increase motivation, early levels should be easier to complete than later ones, the first objects in their list will be the easiest for which to find information while the last ones will be the hardest.

Supporting Content: Course content to support this activity includes, but is not limited to materials like the following:

Assessment: Using gamification theory again, I decided on a staggered point system. The early, easier data sets will earn more points. This will allow learners to quickly reach a "passing" grade on the assignment, giving them early, positive reinforcement. This will encourge them to continue with the later, more difficult sets.

Objective: Based on the gathered data, develop a classification scheme for the solar system objects with 3-6 categories

Activity: Working in groups, learners first collate their individual data into one data set. They will then look at each property and ascertain natural division points in each property using their group discussion board for asycnchronous dicsussion and Blackboard Collaborate for synchronous discussion (if needed). They will continue this process until they have a classification scheme of 3-6 categories. They will then develop a wiki page describing their classification scheme.

Supporting Content: Course content to support this activity includes, but is not limited to materials like the following:

Dr. Alan Stern's Paper on classifying planets:

A set of directions similar to this:

Videos describing how to classify data (in development)

Assessment: This activity will be assessed using a rubric with the following criteria:

• Individual participation in discussion
• Individual contribution to group wiki
• Completeness of classification scheme
• Accuracy of classification criteria

Objective: Given the physical and orbital data for a new solar system object, classify that object according to the developed scheme

Objective: Write a classification paper justifying the classification of the new object

Activity: The last two objectives will be covered in one activity, because they are closely related. Learners will be given the data for Pluto; however, they are not told it is Pluto. Based on that data and using the classification scheme developed by their group, they will classify the object. They will thanwrite a 5-paragraph essay with an introductory paragraph that includes a thesis statement of how they classified the given object, 3 supporting paragraphs that explain which criteria the learner used for the classification and why, and a conclusion that includes suggestions for further study.

Assessment: This activity will be assessed using a rubric with the following criteria:

• Introduction includes overview of classification scheme and classification of object
• Supporting paragraphs identify the key criteria for classification and why they were chosen
• Supporting paragraphs are organized with most important criteria first.
• Conclusion summarizes the main topics without repeating previous sentences and includes suggestions for additional research to refine classification.

Evaluation and Revision of the Design Phase

The results of the survey regarding the design of learning activities and assessments was not as unanimous as it was for the objectives. The survey included the following question"

Over 90% of respondents indicated that each activity refected the obbjective. At least two-thirds thought the assessments evaluated the activity for the last three objectives, but only 55% agreed with that for the first objective. Slightly fewer (but still over 50%) believed the assessment measured the objective.

The open comments provided more insight into concerns faculty have. One was what would happen if students came up with a classification scheme that differs from the one listed in the syllabus. Other comments indicated the rubrics should be more detailed.

Based on those results, the design of the classification activity will move from guided to stuctured/confirmation, with directions that will lead learners to the traditional terrestrial/Jovian/small bodies classification scheme, with learners encouraged to further subdivide the small bodies on their own (dwarf planets, asteroids, comets. KBOs). The directions will guide learners to determine what planetary or orbital properties support that classification scheme. They will still develop their own classification scheme; they will just be quided to develop the generally accepted scheme. This will still allow them to see why Pluto does not fit into the terrestrial/Jovian dichotomy.

The rubrics will also be developed more fully to reflect these changes. The classification rubric will be split into two parts; one to assess participation in the discussion and one to assess the development and publication of the classification scheme. Input from a professor in the English department will be sought for help developing the directions and rubric for the written paper to make sure both support what that department teacher in English composition classes.

Development is currently ongoing. Our college uses Blackboard Learn as the LMS; all activities will be implemented using Blackboard Learn tools;

• Data gathering will be individual assignments where learners download the data sheet, complete it offline, and then upload it to submit the assignment.
• The classification scheme development will be completed in assigned groups. Learner will have a graded group discussion thread in which to discuss their scheme; the discussion will be graded with a rubric. They will use a group wiki to publish their classification; this will be graded with a separate rubric.
• The written paper will first be assessed with the peer assessment tool in Learn; learners will be given the rubric and specific examples by which they can assess and provide feedback to their fellow learners.
• Learners will submit the final version of the written paper to an individual assignment, uploaded as a file and submitted to the SafeAssign plagiarism tool. Learners will be told they should receive a score below 15% on SafeAssign before submitting their final paper.

Evaluation and Revision of the Development/Implementation Phase

Prior to implementation, other Blackboard Learn faculty will be asked to volunteer as reveiwers; they will complete another survey based on a simplified version of the Blackboard Learn Exemplary Course Program rubric.

Modifications will be made before full implementation for the summer semester. Learners who complete the module will be given extra credit to complete an anonymous survey about their experience, including working in groups.

The original essay question about classifying Pluto will be included on the final exam; answers will be compared to prior semesters to see if their is an increased understaning of why Pluto is no longer considered to be a planet.