Tips for successful asynchronous teaching: creating engaging content, part one

Two scary words: online asynchronous.

Why? First, teaching asynchronously is a lot of work – more so than teaching in person or online synchronously. Second, if not done well, the teacher-student connection is impaired, making the experience feel ineffective. Third, many college students lack the academic maturity and mental discipline to learn asynchronously (but they’re in the course to learn that, too).

In my institution, the rule about asynchronous modality is clear: the instructor may not require meeting with students individually or in groups, virtually or in person. This allows flexibility for students taking the course in another state or country. So, field excursions or hands-on work in an IRL lab are out. Many educators perceive that as a big impediment to learning, especially in STEM fields. 

• Asynchronous pedagogy to improve student engagement
• Strategies to motivate students in asynchronous learning
• Spotlight guide: Back to the basics of pedagogy

That is also why many do not like teaching asynchronously, and some feel its remote nature prevents building community among the students. So, many educators harbour a tacit bias: asynchronous teaching is subpar to teaching in person.

I discovered that is all myth – except that asynchronous teaching is, in fact, a lot of work.

Changing how ‘teaching well’ is measured

After four years of teaching asynchronously, I realised it can be impactful, enjoyable and worthwhile for the students. In fact, asynchronous teaching offers many positives over traditional, in-person teaching. To understand this, I had to change my mindset about what “teaching well” means. A direct application of what I do in person to an asynchronous format did not work. So, I had to rethink teaching using these questions: 

• How can I teach content and skills asynchronously without compromising the learning requirements depicted in the syllabus? 
• How can I make asynchronous modality engaging for the students? 
• What advantages does asynchronous teaching have over the traditional, in-person format?
• How can I build relationships with students asynchronously and not be seen as some form of glorified AI? 
• With AI and the internet at students’ fingertips, how can I make sure that assessment is fair? 

Strategies for building asynchronous courses that students will stick with

Asynchronous teaching requires reconsideration of usual teaching elements – course structure, teaching materials, practical skills, communication modes, office hours, assessment and academic integrity. Here, in part one of this series, I offer tips for creating course content that makes asynchronous teaching engaging and impactful, based on my experience. Part two will include advice for managing the logistics of asynchronous teaching so students don’t give up.

1. Consistent course structure and deadlines are key to success 

For good asynchronous instruction, coursework must be extremely structured and consistent – so reliable as to almost be automatic in the eyes of the students. A well-devised, detailed syllabus is simply not enough. Students can become disengaged quickly, and many believe asynchronous courses are deadline-free. 

So, it is imperative to assign weekly work for students that follows the syllabus as closely as possible. Students need to be informed every week, like clockwork, about the topics and requirements for that week. And weekly deadlines must be upheld. For example, I notify students of all weekly work first thing Monday morning, and all work is due by 11.59pm the following Sunday night. I assign at least one assignment and one crossword puzzle per week related to the topic at hand. That’s my preferred structure, but other structures work, too; the key is to maintain a consistent structure throughout the whole term. I realised that if I falter on the consistency or change course structure midway through the term, students quickly become confused and drift away. 

Assignments encourage students to think outside the box and find (or calculate) their own answers. This is new to some students, and in asynchronous format, this forces most students to be more resourceful. 

Students sometimes complain about too much weekly work. However, they are complaining because they are engaged with the course – and that’s a good thing. The alternative, not so much work, results in students losing interest and lamenting “never knowing what is happening in the course” despite my best efforts to post lecture videos perfectly in tandem with the course plan in the syllabus.

2. Lecture videos matter, a lot

I invest a lot of time in making weekly lecture videos; I almost “produce” them in a professional sense, from lighting to script. Instead of being the voice behind PowerPoint slides, I found that being the professor in action makes the lectures as engaging as they would be in person. Zoom recordings work best for me because the viewers can see me while I share slides as needed. I take students to interactive websites in my videos and demonstrate concepts rather than simply posting an animation, and I can embed questions into the lecture videos that students can answer through emailing me – often for extra credit. The latter allows me to make sure students are attentively watching the lecture video and not just using it as background noise while doing something else (just to get the learning management software to mark them as “watched the video to completion”). 

Lastly, interactive software related to the topic of the lecture can be a very engaging component to include in lecture videos, and it is difficult to use interactive software so well while teaching in person.

3. Hands-on learning is possible asynchronously, too

Students can be asked to buy lab kits or to borrow samples for hands-on lab activities. Students who are close to campus can pick up and return loaned materials; those further away can use the mail. Similarly, students can be asked to create a safe workspace at home to perform lab experiments for which the instructor will provide guidance. Lab topics can be diverse, such as exploring concepts like density or thermal expansion of water through materials available in most households. 

While hands-on engagement is important, it isn’t always necessary to engage students’ minds. For example, it is much easier to engage students with high-impact learning experiences focused on computational climate models through online teaching than it is through in-person interaction. And even in asynchronous format, labs can be designed to develop quantitative skills and to solve real-world problems through calculation, assessment and analysis. 

As for field trips, especially in earth science and biology courses, nothing can substitute for the real thing, but virtual field trips in various formats can be customised into lecture videos. This way students can be “taken” to intriguing, educational places that may be prohibitively expensive, distant or dangerous to visit in person, such as volcanoes, deep forests, museums and archeological sites.

The key is to develop curiosity and high-impact, hypothesis-based learning. While physically being somewhere has no substitute, real-world problem-solving can also be cultivated through thoughtfully designed lab exercises where ideas build progressively through the outcome of each step in the exercise.

What are positives that asynchronous teaching offers but the in-person format lacks?

The simplest positive, as mentioned above, is virtual field trips, where students can be taken anywhere beyond the limitations of traditional field trips. And it is easier to have guest lecturers in asynchronous format. I’ve asked professional colleagues (academic, industrial and from the local community alike) to make guest lecture videos for my students about their specific field of expertise. 

Lecture videos in asynchronous format can be more impactful than lectures in person because the latter are transient experiences for students; many have to be reminded to take notes during lectures. Lecture videos can be paused while students look up facts or terminology, and they can be watched multiple times. Also, students can send private queries to the professor, such as: “I am confused at 12 minutes into the video.” In contrast, during in-person lectures, students are often reluctant to interrupt or publicly ask what they fear may be perceived as a “stupid question” so they let the moment pass.

Figen Mekik is guest faculty for climate science and professor of geology in the department of physics at Grand Valley State University, Michigan.

If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.