URBAN FORESTRY ONLINE:
LITERATURE REVIEW
AND CASE STUDY
by
James Douglas Hubbell
A Plan B report submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Forestry
Approved:
__________________ ______________________
Frederick Baker Dale Blahna
Major Professor Committee Member
____________________
Michael Kuhns
Committee Member
UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY
Logan, Utah
2007
ii
Copyright © James Hubbell 2007
All Rights Reserved
iii
ABSTRACT
Urban Forestry Online: Literature Review and Case Study
by
James Hubbell, Master of Science
Utah State University, 2007
Major Professor: Dr. Frederick Baker
Department: Wildland Resources
This paper considers the question: Is teaching urban forestry online feasible and
practical? The short answer is "Yes" but effective teaching online requires knowledge of
the principles of online education. There is no research literature specifically about online
urban forestry education; this literature review is devoted to online education in general.
Online teaching is more than just technology (although the technology is necessary and
must be used effectively); online teaching is a social process that requires the active
presence of an instructor. The principles that guide the development and presentation of
an online class are discussed. The case study describes our experience while preparing
and teaching the online urban forestry class. Students and faculty need to be trained how
to use the online environment before they can learn/teach the class material. Effective
online teaching takes as much time and effort as effective classroom teaching.
(67 pages)
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper would not be possible without the constant support of my dearly
beloved wife, Mary Ann. Her tireless devotion to making my life better, her constant
concern for every aspect of my life and how I might improve, her thoughtful critiques of
drafts of this document, and her insight into urban forestry in general have made this
paper possible.
Dr. Baker's kindness in taking me on as a graduate student, his patience with my
learning speed, and diligent efforts to refine my writing are deeply appreciated.
Others who have made this possible include but are not limited to: Dr. Mike Kuhns, Dr.
Craig Johnson, Dr. Dale Blahna, Ms. Loralie Cox, Mr. Jerry Goodspeed, and all the
students in the urban forestry class who have made comments and endured my efforts to
learn this process.
Finally, I would like to thank my parents, Robert and Marjory Hubbell, who instilled
a love of trees and forests in my early youth, prevented me from an early death as a
logger, and encouraged me in this endeavor, including nagging and bribery as necessary
to actually complete this degree process. My heartfelt thanks to all.
Jim Hubbell
v
CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...................................................................................................4
LIST OF FIGURES.............................................................................................................7
LITERATURE REVIEW....................................................................................................1
Introduction..............................................................................................................1
Urban Forestry.........................................................................................................2
Online Education.....................................................................................................4
Training instructors in online pedagogy..............................................................5
Technology training.............................................................................................6
Student learning and training students to learn....................................................7
Instructional Design.................................................................................................8
Student assessment...............................................................................................9
Faculty support...................................................................................................11
Copyright...........................................................................................................12
Course assessment or evaluation.......................................................................14
Distance education accessibility........................................................................15
Educational infrastructure..................................................................................16
Course management software............................................................................17
Literature Review Conclusions..............................................................................18
URBAN FORESTRY CLASS CASE STUDY.................................................................21
Introduction............................................................................................................21
Course Preparation.................................................................................................22
Instructional Design...............................................................................................24
Principles of effective practice...........................................................................25
Discussion format..............................................................................................27
vi
Course as Implemented..........................................................................................29
Sample discussion..............................................................................................29
Sample assignment.............................................................................................31
Course assessment or evaluation.......................................................................32
Experiences with WebCT..................................................................................33
Online survival skills.........................................................................................34
Student drop rates..............................................................................................35
Adaptations to initial course plans.....................................................................36
Case Study Conclusions.........................................................................................37
CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................39
LITERATURE CITED......................................................................................................43
APPENDIX.......................................................................................................................50
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Pruning a picture: Activity for the Arborist Practices unit............32
2 Pruning tools.................................................................................52
3 Line clearance pruning..................................................................53
4 Severe line clearance.....................................................................53
5 Topping examples.........................................................................54
6 Unbelievable tree topping example..............................................55
7 Pruning at the branch bark ridge...................................................55
8 Woundwood growth pattern after pruning cuts.............................56
9 Crown reduction cut location........................................................57
10 Pruning a tree activity picture.......................................................58
11 Herbie does herbicide...................................................................59
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This paper attempts to answer the question of whether the internet is a practical tool
for teaching urban forestry. I am unaware of any papers that specifically address teaching
urban forestry online, despite diligent searching. However, the literature of online
education in general is fairly extensive. A search of the Digital Dissertations collection
through the Utah State University (USU) library found 666 dissertations nationwide in
the last 5 years on distance education. There are at least 40 journals publishing articles
about online education (Holmes 2004). Based on volume alone, the literature suggests an
intense interest in teaching online throughout the educational industry.
As our society becomes more urbanized, there is an increasing need for foresters
trained to manage forests and trees in urban settings, with a corresponding increase in the
need for training classes and programs (Miller 1996). However, many otherwise
interested students cannot attend face-to-face classes. The internet shows potential to
overcome these scheduling difficulties, hence my interest in determining if the internet is
an effective teaching tool or just a passing fad.
Online education (internet only, with rapid interaction between student and
teacher) is a subset of the broader field of distance education (TV, mailed materials, and
internet) (Mayadas et al. 2003). However, both this paper and the literature use the terms
synonymously. Also note, the scope of this paper is limited to issues of interest to
individual instructors. I do not address issues of interest to administrators or students.
This paper begins with a short discussion of what urban forestry is and why it is
important to learn. Then, in the literature review, I discuss why instructors are necessary
to make the learning process effective. Next, I investigate the principles that guide the
design of successful classes. I discuss some major considerations in presenting online
classes. I conclude the literature review by summarizing the principles and considerations
that are essential to effective online education.
The case study reports our experience teaching the urban forestry class online and
is closely linked to the literature review because the principles reported in the literature
form the basis of my analysis of the conduct of the class. Briefly, I discuss the
instructional design of the class, how we implemented the seven principles articulated by
Chickering and Gamson (1987) and the content of the class. I conclude the case study and
the paper with a discussion of how well our experience conducting this class agrees with
the literature.
Urban Forestry
Urban forestry is the planning for and management of urban greenspaces (Miller
1996). Urban greenspaces are characterized by their close association with people
(Nowak et al. 2001). People need trees; trees must be managed to meet the needs of
people in urban settings (Talbott 1976; 1978, Ulrich 1978; Schroeder 1986; Hartig et al.
1987; Miller 1996) To meet these management needs, urban foresters develop programs,
ordinances, and policies for managing community trees (Treiman and Gartner 2004).
Community trees include all trees on public property; that is, street trees, city park trees
and trees in other publicly owned settings. Trees on private property are also part of the
urban ecosystem and need to be included in management planning (Elmendorf et al.
2003). An urban forester must understand all of the elements of the urban ecosystem that
trees grow in (Smith 1983; Machlis and Force 1997; Pickett et al. 1997). While publicly
funded urban foresters work primarily with public trees, they may also advise private
homeowners who need help managing private trees. Where insects or diseases cross
ownership boundaries, the urban forester finds ways to work effectively with all
landowners.
Specific skills the urban forester needs include but are not limited to (Baker personal
communication 2006; California Urban Forests Council 2007):
Knowledge of how trees grow in the urban environment
Pests and diseases of urban trees and how to control them
Diagnosing tree health
Urban soils, irrigation and fertilization needs and practices
The urban environment and how it affects trees
Landscape planning
Arborist practices
Program planning and budgeting
Hazard tree analysis and mitigation
Tree appraisal and inventory
Tree ordinances
Selecting appropriate trees for specific sites
Knowledge and use of effective planting practices
Public relations, working with the public, public officials, and agencies
Effective communication with all stakeholders
Online Education
Education is a social process requiring interaction between students and
instructors (Rourke et al. 2001). Sims et al. (2002) argue that online education is more
than simply putting course schedules and readings online. Phipps and Merisotis (1999)
conclude motivation and learning style of the student, skill of the instructor, and design of
the learning tasks are more important than technology in determining teaching
effectiveness. Unless a course takes advantage of the multi-media and interactive
attributes of the internet to engage student learning, it "does not equate to online learning"
(Sims et al. 2002). This reinforces the idea that good online teaching takes advantage of
the unique capabilities of the internet to facilitate rapid interaction amongst learners, and
between learners and faculty, to build knowledge (Twigg 2003).
One might think teaching online could be entirely unattended by the instructor,
but without daily instructor presence, answering questions, responding to discussions and
posing new questions, students may lose interest and either fall behind or drop out
( Gorham 1988; Rourke et al. 2001; Richardson and Swan 2003). Instructors need to
model social processes online by relating stories that occur outside of class, calling
students by name, or using humor as appropriate to maintain student interest in the class
(Gorham 1988; Rourke et al. 2001).
Training instructors in online pedagogy
Teaching effectively at a distance, whether online or using other technologies,
requires faculty to engage students in active learning rather than passive lecture note
taking ( Twigg 2003; Keeton 2004). This frequently requires a major change in faculty
mindset (Beaudoin 1990). Two social issues inhibit faculty when adapting to online
education. One is the different role of the instructor as "guide on the side" rather than
"sage on the stage," facilitating learning rather than "pouring knowledge into empty
vessels" (King 1993). The other social issue is a general unfamiliarity with the technical
environment of online teaching. Facing a computer screen and "talking" via discussion
forums and e-mail instead of seeing actual faces is quite different (Schifter 2000). Online
instructors need training to facilitate learning and to coach students in problem solving
rather than simply providing answers in the more familiar, but less effective, lecture style
of instruction (Twigg 2003). While most universities offer online or face-to-face
workshops to improve faculty proficiency in the software skills needed for online
teaching, fewer universities train faculty to facilitate and guide adult learners (Moore et
al. 2005).
Many resources are available to train instructors in effective online pedagogy. One
of the frequently cited resources is Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as
Lever (Chickering and Ehrmann 1996). Briefly stated, these principles are to encourage
contacts between students and faculty, promote reciprocity and cooperation among
students, encourage active learning techniques, provide prompt feedback, emphasize time
on task, promote high expectations, and respect diverse talents and ways of learning.
Chickering and Ehrmann (1996) provide examples of implementing each of their
principles. For example, the variety of communication tools available with the internet,
E-mail, chat rooms, and asynchronous discussion forums can provide more interaction
between students and faculty than contacts that are limited to class time and office hours.
Another resource for training faculty is is the faculty/professional development
program at the TLT Group webpage (Gilbert 2006), a collection of ideas to help faculty
learn easy-to-use software or techniques for teaching on the web. Low threshold activities
(LTA) are applications or actions that take the student and instructor away from teachercentered
instruction and towards learner-centered instruction (Gilbert 2002). They are
easy to implement using commonly available software and do not require major paradigm
shifts on the part of either instructors or students. Each LTA costs little in time, effort or
support to implement. The cumulative effect however is "positive long-term change" in
the learning environment for both instructors and learners (Gilbert 2006). The LTAs are
presented in a "how-to" format with explicit directions on how to do them. A few
examples are: how to improve students' time on task, how to detect and prevent
plagiarism using the Internet, and how to improve students' ability to properly cite
resources in their papers. A number of additional LTAs describe techniques to help
instructors reduce the effort of grading and lesson development tasks so they can devote
more time to student interaction.
Technology training
While mentors and face-to-face workshops can effectively train faculty, university
sponsored websites may play an important role. Every university website I visited in the
course of researching this paper has some sort of online training to upgrade faculty skills
in course development and presentation. See Guiding Principles for Faculty in Distance
Learning (IHETS 2007), For Adult Educators at the California Distance Learning Project
(California Distance Learning Project 2006) or the Faculty Assistance Center for
Teaching at USU (USU FACT 2006c) for examples. Typical skills taught include how to
use WebCT, how to design a website, and how to detect and prevent online cheating
(USU FACT 2006a).
Student learning and training students to learn
Even though this paper focuses on teaching online, the goal of distance education is
effective student learning (Beaudoin 1990). Students learn when they acquire new
information, assimilate it in the context of their previous knowledge, and refine their
understanding through online discussion with fellow students and instructors (Schank
1995). Learning and communicating with others who have common interests forms a
"community of learners" that is motivated to understand the topic of interest, look for
solutions to common problems and find success in such understanding (Schank 1995;
Ragan 2000; Lobel et al. 2002). Students learn better by doing than by listening to
someone talking about doing (Schank 1995; Twigg 2003). Thus teaching online can be
effective if the course engages students in active learning, students receive prompt
feedback on homework and tests, the course encourages student-to-student interaction,
and the course emphasizes time on task (Chickering and Gamson 1987). This is true
regardless of the technology used in the class. As Williams (2003) points out, careful
attention to the design of the class is necessary to meet these requirements.
Students are more likely to succeed when they are actively engaged in learning
the material (Hartman 1995; Halstead and Martin 2001). Peltz (2003) and Hiltz (1997)
suggest allowing students to select topics to read and discuss, letting them identify key
concepts and develop exam questions to test mastery of the concept or skill and then
answer each other's questions. Presumably more instructor guidance would be needed in
the first part of the course, and less guidance would be needed as students become
familiar with the field. Shang et al. (2001) suggest letting the students read, discuss, then
do what they have learned, and then discuss again after some reflection. This process
implements the principles of experiential learning theory, where students undertake
concrete experiences, reflect on them, assimilate the new knowledge into their previous
fund of knowledge, and then test the new knowledge with new experiences (Kolb et al.
1999). This process also takes advantage of the power of interaction with fellow students
and instructors to more fully develop understanding and mastery of the subject (Lobel et
al. 2002).
Instructional Design
Faculty should know who their (potential) students are, use course learning
objectives to form the organizational framework of a course, design activities and
assignments to allow students to work around other commitments, and use active leaning
techniques to promote student engagement in the material (IHETS 2007). Faculty must
consider several additional issues when developing online courses. These issues include
student learning assessment, student support services, faculty support, course
accreditation, course evaluation, technical support for faculty and students, copyright and
ownership accessibility, development cost, time, and educational infrastructure
( Chisholm et al. 2000; Twigg 2003; Williams 2003;IHETS 2007; Thatcher 2007). Each
of these will be covered is some detail here.
Student assessment
Ideally, student assessment measures progress compared to learning objectives and
how much the student has progressed from their previous knowledge or skill level. In the
online environment, students are evaluated (graded) using tests, discussion postings,
and/or written assignments. Regardless of the method, students should receive rapid and
constructive feedback (IHETS 2007).
Tests can be the traditional kind, taken once at set times during the class, or they
can be low-stakes quizzes (Twigg 2003). Low-stakes quizzes can be administered before,
during and after topic sections. Quizzes administered before beginning the topic establish
what the student knows at that point. Quizzes taken during the topic reinforce student
understanding and show the student where their knowledge is weak and needs extra
work. Grades are recorded for quizzes taken after the topic (Twigg 2003).
Using repeated quizzes as a teaching tool is facilitated in the online environment
because it does not take away from lecture time as would be the case in a face-to-face
class. Instructors can set up course management software to automate quiz
administration, thus allowing students to repeatedly test themselves without requiring the
instructor to spend extra time distributing, grading, and returning low-stakes quizzes.
Along with tests and written assignments, discussion postings can be effective
grading and learning tools. Discussion postings are more effective as learning tools if
they include social, cognitive and teaching presence (Peltz 2003). Social presence in
discussion postings is demonstrated by introducing personal comments into the
discussion. Presenting personal experience, posting pictures to illustrate a point of
interest, or mentioning events in your personal life as appropriate to let the rest of the
class know there is a real person at the other end of the computer screen. Cognitive
presence is demonstrated by introducing facts, ideas and theories into the discussion. This
is more valuable when they come from outside the class readings and the student ties
them into the topic under discussion. Teaching presence is demonstrated by such actions
as steering the discussion in useful directions, making sure students understand the topic,
detecting and dispelling misconceptions, bringing in additional information as needed, or
helping resolve those vexing technical problems that always creep in. Only discussion
postings that contain indications of social, cognitive, or teaching presence should receive
points toward grades (Peltz 2003).
Student progress can be graded by observing student interactions with each other
and with faculty (Benigno and Trentin 2000). However, interaction alone is insufficient
for student evaluation (Picciano 2002). Some students "lurk" in the online discussions
much as some students in face-to-face classes sit quietly in class discussions (Peltz 2004).
Both of these quiet types of students study for tests and can do well on individual written
assignments. Thus student grading should include more than an analysis of their
discussion participation (Picciano 2002).
Faculty support
Faculty members and institutions must recognize that teaching online classes
requires at least as much time as teaching face-to-face classes, possibly reducing the time
available for research and publication that has been the primary route to tenure and
promotion (Keeton 2004). Preparation time is the same or greater and the daily time
commitment while the class is being conducted is also just as great. The class material
must be researched, written and made available to students before the class begins.
During the actual time students take the class, the instructor's time is primarily occupied
with student interaction and grading (Schifter 2000; Lee and Dziuban 2002). Phipps and
Merisotis (2000) note the first online class experience for the instructor should be limited
to 15-25 students. As the instructor gains online teaching experience, more students can
be added without undue strain. Administrators can help hesitant instructors by
introducing them to successful online teachers who can act as mentors and by making
workshops available that teach the required skills of graphic design, web development,
programming and instructional design (Schifter 2000).
The California Distance Learning Project provides links to about 15 websites that
provide professional development help for faculty involved in distance education. These
websites help in areas such as technical skills needed, student and class assessment,
examples of good class design, research in online teaching and learning, and related skills
and knowledge useful to the online instructor (California Distance Learning Project
2006). The Distance Learning Project also has a tutorial for teachers of adults based on
lessons learned from the California adult basic education distance learning experience
since 1995. Topics covered in this tutorial include an introduction to distance learning, a
history of distance leaning, course design considerations, planning and administration of
distance learning courses, evaluation of distance learning courses and a special section
discussing online distance learning classes (California Distance Learning Project 2007).
The USU Faculty Assistance Center for Teaching (FACT) center website provides
tips on subjects including website design templates, handouts for students on preventing
plagiarism and cheating, information about copyright laws, and how to write a learner
centered syllabus (USU 2006a). They also have a section of the website that provides
some best practices where instructors can find help on using discussions as a more
effective learning tool, how to begin the class so students are interested from the start of
the semester, how to use PowerPoint effectively and how to use the library more
effectively in learning assignments (USU 2006a).
Copyright
Copyright issues must be considered in developing any course including online
courses (Crews 2003). Congress enacted the "Technology, Education and Copyright
Harmonization Act," commonly known as the TEACH Act, on October 4, 2002 to
address the needs of distance education while protecting the rights of original authors.
Copyright extends protection to the original author until 70 years after his or her death
(Crews 2003). All creative work is automatically covered by copyright regardless of the
medium used or any registration or lack of it with a copyright office. One of the few
exceptions to the rule that authors retain exclusive rights to their work is the category of
"fair use."
"Fair use" is a term not defined specifically in law but there are some guidelines that
help users and courts judge specific cases. The copyright law of 1976 and the TEACH
Act allow use of copyrighted material for "teaching (including multiple copies for
classroom needs), scholarship or research" (Crews 2003; Anon 2006). Four factors guide
decisions about what constitutes fair use: the purpose and character of the use, the nature
of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantialness of the portion used in relation to
the total work, and the effect of the use on the potential market of the work (Anon 2006).
Under the guidelines of fair use and the specific provisions of the TEACH Act,
faculty can generally use copyrighted works in courses limited to enrolled students and
for direct educational activities at non-profit educational institutions, accredited by the
appropriate agency. Non-educational uses such as using copyrighted material to advertise
a course or program to the public, even by a non-profit school, are not permitted by the
TEACH Act (Crews 2003). Use of copyrighted material by for-profit educational
institutions is not covered by the TEACH act; these institutions must seek permission for
any use of copyrighted material. The source of all copyrighted work used needs to be
cited sufficiently in the class material so anyone using the work can refer back to the
original source or author of all work used (Crews 2003). Generally for online courses,
linking to a web page from your class site is permissible because the copyright owner
retains control of the original material, while copying another person's work into your
web page removes such control and is not permissible (USU FACT 2006b; Stim 2007).
Copyright clearance can be a barrier to implementation of any course in part because of
the subjective nature of "fair use" and in part because obtaining permission from the
copyright holder can be very time consuming (Baker personal communication 2006;
USU FACT 2006b).
Faculty must know their institutions' policy on course material ownership because,
while faculty generally retain ownership of their class material, with the increasing trend
of institutions developing and marketing online courses, they may require ownership
rights remain with the institution (Williams 2003). In general, faculty at USU retain
ownership of their course materials except where the materials were developed with
substantial use of institutional resources (USU OCW 2006).
Course assessment or evaluation
Cuseo (2001) suggests that without knowing why you are conducting the
assessment, what your assessment purpose is, when, how, where, and by whom the data
should be collected, there is little purpose in doing an assessment. A formative
assessment is done to improve an existing class while a summative assessment is done to
measure the results or impact of the class (Cuseo 2001). The outcomes to be assessed
must be identified. Does the instructor need to know how well the class met student needs
or does the institution need information to justify retention of the class? These issues
should guide development of the data collection and analysis process.
Achtemeier et al. (2003) state that, because the seven principles of Chickering and
Ehermann (1996) are so widely cited in the education research literature, the principles
form a logical basis for assessing distance education course performance and student
learning. Survey instruments should specifically ask students: if they were given timely
feedback on graded assignments, if they were encouraged to express themselves, how
much time they spent on task and if that time was sufficient to succeed in the class, if
their diverse ways of learning were respected, how navigable the class web pages were,
etc. (Achtemeier et al. 2003). Benigno and Trentin (2000) suggest that students be
allowed to evaluate the educational approach adopted in the course, how well the support
materials used advance student understanding, the organizational aspects of course
activities, logistics of the class, technical aspects related to the use of the internet and the
suggested technologies, and the performance of both tutors and area experts in their
various roles as moderators, facilitators, activity leaders, trainers, etc. The specific
questions used to evaluate the course must be developed with the special needs of the
online environment in mind. The survey instrument should be evaluated each year to
ensure that they provide accurate, reliable and useful responses (Achtemeier et al. 2003).
Distance education accessibility
All courses should be accessible to anyone who wants to take them. This mandate
for accessibility comes from Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 that requires
Federal agencies to make their electronic and information technology accessible to
people with disabilities (Thatcher 2007). The law was needed to ensure that everyone,
including those with difficulty using computers, could access government information,
including courses offered by schools receiving federal funds (Thatcher 2007). Core
Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 provides industry standards for
making websites accessible for anyone with Internet access (Chisholm et al. 2000). Since
every element of a course website must be accessible, they suggest using universal design
principles from the beginning of course development.
Universal design principles refer to constructing your course or website from the
beginning to be as accessible as possible for the greatest number of potential users just as
you would construct a building. For instance, people now construct all buildings in the
United States with wider, automatic doors to provide access for people with limited
mobility. Ramps or elevators supplement steps and stairs. Once inside, Braille signs help
those with impaired vision to use an ATM, find the restroom or know what floor they are
on (UFAS 1984). Likewise, web pages are best designed to conform to accessibility
standards. Proper design can make the pages available to people with impaired vision or
poor muscle control. Web browsers are available to read the content of the page aloud for
visually impaired users. These vocalizing browsers function best when the web page is
formatted using cascading style sheets instead of tables or other outdated formatting
techniques. Pages built without understanding how the screen reader interprets the page
can be nearly useless to the blind user (Anon. 2007).
Determining if a web page is accessible is straightforward. Simply go to Bobby
(http://webxact.watchfire.com/) or Webaim (http://www.webaim.org/), enter the URL of
the web page in question, then read the report generated in a few minutes.
Educational infrastructure
Educational institutions should coordinate online educational infrastructure (course
access, hardware and software requirements, library access) throughout the campus
culture. Students must learn how to use an educational system before they can learn the
content delivered by the system, so if instructors use the same web page design for every
course, students need not learn a new format for each new course (Twigg 2003). An
example of consistent course design is the classes available through USU
OpenCourseWare (http://ocw.usu.edu/Index/ECIndex_view). Using the same software
and same basic layout for all classes allows student to become familiar with the learning
environment and saves time and money for the instructor.
Using automated course management systems to handle assessment also reduces
time and cost. WebCT, and other course management programs, while not cheap, can
generate tests from a pool of questions developed by the instructor, administer them,
grade and record results automatically for True/False, Multiple Choice and Short Answer
tests (Twigg 2003).
An essential part of the educational infrastructure for online students is access to
libraries. Libraries need to be available to distance education students just as they are for
on-campus students (IHETS 2006). All the universities I have examined online have their
library catalogs and some of their collections available in this format. Typically, only
some journals are accessible in full-text. Reference materials do not circulate but
reference librarians are available to help with research needs and can be contacted by email
or phone if the student cannot visit the library in person (USU Libraries 2006).
Course management software
Course management software (CMS) controls access to and administers the course.
Students must register with the educational institution and pay tuition and fees before
being allowed into the class site. CMS provides tools to organize lesson material,
homework submission, and tests; it provides discussion forums, e-mail and chat rooms to
facilitate communication between students and instructors. Page layout, lesson material
access, assignment submission, due dates, and student access to test results are all
controlled by the instructor but administered by the software. With the requirement to log
in to the system to access the class, spam e-mail and viruses are non-existent (Cohen
2002).
Instructional tools for automated exams allow scheduling them for specific times or
after students have completed specific modules of the class. Tests and homework can be
graded automatically if they follow specific formatting using an instructor-defined
answer sheet. Homework submission can be regulated, with the instructor setting
deadlines. Grades are kept private but available to the instructor and the student. The
software also tracks times and pages viewed for each student, allowing the instructor to
monitor class usage.
Literature Review Conclusions
The literature on online eduction primarily consists of reports from educators who
have successfully used the internet to teach. I suspect educators do not report failures
unless those failures lead to later success. While there is extensive research in the field of
online education, Phipps and Merisotis (1999) concluded that much of the research
regarding online education is scientifically flawed. They found many studies lacked
controls to allow investigation of cause and effect, students were not randomly assigned
to controls or tests, and students were not stratified by learning styles. However, these
studies can be valuable because they report on the efforts of a great number of instructors
learning to use the internet to teach; we can learn from their experience what works and
what does not.
Teaching online can be effective if the course takes advantage of the multi-media
and interactive attributes of the internet to engage student learning, and if instructors
model social processes online to maintain student interest in the class. The course must
be designed to encourage contacts between students and faculty, to promote reciprocity
and cooperation among students, to encourage and use active learning techniques, to
provide prompt feedback, to emphasize time on task, to promote high expectations, and
to respect diverse talents and ways of learning. This is no different than other methods of
teaching. Indeed the basic principles of Chickering and Ehrmann (1996) that govern the
development of effective online classes are the same principles that produce good faceto-
face classes.
Effective online teaching is learner-centered, with instructors acting as facilitators of
learning rather than sources of knowledge. The key to effective online teaching is what
the students learn. They are more likely to succeed when they are actively engaged in the
material.
Effective course design must include the technological infrastructure of the course,
student support, course content and learning evaluation. Faculty must learn how to teach
in the online environment as it is not the same as teaching in traditional courses.
Copyright regulations governing online materials must be followed. Online courses must
be evaluated for effectiveness in meeting course and institution objectives as well as
student needs. Online courses need to meet standards for accessibility by all potential
students. Conformance to accepted standards is best built into the course from the very
beginning of the development process.
URBAN FORESTRY CLASS CASE STUDY
Introduction
This case study describes how we designed and implemented the urban forestry
class. I describe the lessons learned as we implemented the principles already described
in the literature review and some adaptations to the principles to meet our circumstances.
Dr. Fred Baker taught an urban forestry class at Utah State University (USU) in the
early 1990s in a traditional face-to-face mode. This class was offered at the Logan
campus but most of the students who attended came from more than 60 miles away.
Changing commitments forced Dr. Baker to stop teaching the class; however the need for
trained urban foresters remained.
As the internet matured as a teaching tool, Dr. Baker seized the opportunity to offer
the urban forestry class online while working around other schedule constraints. The
Utah State Board of Regents provided funding and active class development began in
August 2001. The class, WILD 5650 Urban Forestry, was first offered to students in
Spring semester 2002. It has been offered eight times since then (generally Spring
semester) to a total of 75 students.
About half of our students are non-traditional or mid-career professionals seeking
continuing education. A few are more traditional students at the USU Logan campus who
need three credits of elective credit and can only fit an online class into their schedule.
Most of the rest of the students are at distant locations, working on horticulture degrees.
One student moved out of state for job reasons and needed 3 credits to graduate, and this
fulfilled her needs.
Ten thousand dollars was budgeted to develop the class, the largest percentage of
which was for salaries for the instructional designer and myself as the topic
researcher/writer. Smaller amounts were budgeted for a computer and software
(Dreamweaver and Coldfusion) to write the html pages to present the material in WebCT.
Not all class development costs were directly covered by the budgeted amount. Dr.
Baker's salary, office space for the three of us, some of the computers used, and WebCT
were all supplied either by the university or Dr. Baker.
In the original proposal for the class, my responsibility was to write the web pages
from Dr. Baker's original class notes and post the pages online inside WebCT. By the
time the class development was funded, Dr. Baker understood writing course material
and building web pages were two radically different tasks that required radically different
skill sets. Krystal Kearl, an instructional designer, was hired to build the web pages and
develop exercises to enhance learning. I used the lecture notes provided by Dr. Baker
from his previous edition of the class as the basis of my research on each topic. The USU
FACT Center provided much needed technical help training me in the use of WebCT,
Dreamweaver, and other facets of course management.
While this case study reports our experience using WebCT, USU has changed to
Blackboard as their course management software since this class began and the Urban
Forestry course will begin using it as of Spring semester 2008.
Course Preparation
In preparing the class for delivery, we had to consider not only the content to be
taught but also how we would present it and how we would evaluate students to ensure
learning. The list of topics within the field of urban forestry was pared down to those we
felt appropriate to students beginning a study of the urban forestry profession. We then
selected an instructional design appropriate to each topic to enhance presentation and take
advantage of the interactive nature of the internet. Finally we developed a grading
scheme to assess student learning based on their written work and discussion
participation.
Time, logistical, and expertise constraints limited us to 18 topics in this class. These
topics were:
Urban Environment —how people and development affect tree growth
Public Relations—why and how to involve the public in creating and maintaining
a vibrant urban forestry program
Fertilization —soil tests, chlorosis, timing and methods to correct nutrient
deficiencies in soil
Irrigation —how to provide trees with water when and where they need it
Insect and Disease Management — understand and manage the damage caused by
insects and diseases
Diagnosing Tree Health —how to diagnose tree problems before attempting
remedies
Stress and Abiotic Factors —how lack of nutrients, mechanical and/or pollution
damage, soil compaction and a host of other abiotic factors affect tree health
Urban Wildlife —how to design the urban landscape to provide habitat for
desirable animals
Arborist Practices —modern pruning techniques, safety, tools used and the
appropriate use of herbicides in urban forests
Hazardous Trees —factors that lead to tree failure and the legal obligations of the
urban forester to manage hazards
Litigation —common legal issues urban foresters face, the definitions of
negligence and how to prevent legal problems by establishing a hazard
management program
Tree Ordinances —why cities need tree ordinances and some examples based on
local needs
Tree Inventory —how to collect tree and landscape data needed to support
management decisions
Selecting Trees —how to select trees species that will thrive in specific urban sites
and how to select healthy specimens for planting
Tree Appraisal —how to determine monetary values of trees
Planning —how to develop a long-term plan to guide urban forest management
Financing a UF program —how to develop budgets and funding sources
Programs —how to consider citizen wishes, hazard management, existing
conditions and desired future conditions in developing an urban forestry program
We devote one week to most units, but in a 15-week semester we must cover two
topics in some weeks.
Instructional Design
We used two major principles to guide the instructional design. First we tried to
incorporate the seven principles of effective practice articulated by Chickering and
Gamson (1987) into every facet of the class. Second, we used discussion to reinforce
learning and to provide a basis for grading. Arising from the discussion format, students
start and end the class together; it is not an open entry-open exit class.
Each unit has readings to introduce the student to the topic, activities to deepen
understanding, and a discussion forum. See the appendix for a sample unit. While
participation in the discussion forums is mandatory for every topic, students choose one
of the available activities to do each week. Over the semester, students will do 14 of the
18 available activities. This keeps the work load to a reasonable amount for both students
and instructors.
Principles of effective practice
We implemented the seven principles of Chickering and Gamson (1987) in a variety
of ways, depending on how appropriate each principle is to a particular situation or
course context. Let me explain how we implement each principle.
Frequent contact between students and faculty is facilitated by participation in the
discussion forums by at least one of the instructors and by answering all e-mails
promptly. We outline in the introductory unit of the class that “prompt response” means
an answer within 24 hours so students do not sit waiting for an instant response.
We do not specifically implement reciprocity and cooperation between students.
Using groups is the most common way to do this but our class size has been too small to
form groups. However, we use the discussion forum extensively to share ideas, both
student-to-student and between students and instructor.
Active learning techniques involve the student doing exercises, reflecting on those
activities and writing about them (Bonwell and Eison 1991) Every topic requires the
student to do something, whether it is a soil analysis, a disease control simulation or
developing a budget. The students then discuss their results in the appropriate forum with
moderation and comments from the instructor. For example, the Arborist Practices unit
discussion requires students to find and photograph a poorly pruned tree. They include
the photograph in their initial postings and we talk about what was done and how to
implement proper pruning standards when working on each tree. This discussion
frequently turns into an “ugliest tree” contest as students strive to find particularly
striking examples of poor pruning practice.
Prompt feedback is essential for students who are venturing into new fields but it
can be challenging to implement. One the one hand, we as instructors need to quickly
respond to the students' work with constructive comments to boost student self-esteem
and validate their good work. On the other hand, commenting too quickly in the
discussion forum can put a "cap" on the discussion if the other students perceive "the
expert teacher" has said the final word. This can be difficult if you are using a "guide"
style of teaching because students are conditioned to regard the teacher as the "authority";
too rapid a response from the authority figure tends to stop further discussion (Ganley
2006). Prompt feedback is also essential to keep students motivated. Sometimes I limit
my initial comments to "Good job, what's next?" I hope this sort of short comment is
positive yet allows the other students to feel like they can still contribute to the
conversation. Other times I respond privately in an e-mail to student postings. This
allows prompt feedback without risk of ending the discussion.
The time students spend reflecting on their activities, and then writing about them is
time spent on task and well worth the student's effort (Keeton 2004; Ganley 2006). Elbow
(1994) found students learn the most when they write the most. We induce the students to
engage in reflective writing by making their participation in the discussion forum worth
1/3 of their grade. We provide the discussion exercises to have students write on their
experience. They think they are earning a grade but we know they are learning more than
they imagined.
High expectations are communicated by giving the students real problems to solve
or analyze (Keeton 2004). We use real examples of problems and situations for the
students to work with. For example, in the Urban Wildlife unit, students develop a
landscape plan for a city park to attract desirable wildlife. They frequently design
sophisticated plans using dozens of different plant species with reasons for each plant.
Showing respect for diverse talents and ways of learning of students means using a
variety of teaching methods to complement the variety of student learning styles. Some
students learn better by reading so we offer extensive reading material. Others do best
with the hands-on exercises. Some excel in the discussions, others are better at the written
reports. Success in their preferred method of learning leads to success in other modes.
Discussion format
While we could use tests administered at test centers or proctored by an approved
person in distant locations we chose to grade students using discussion postings for
several reasons. First, due to the relative anonymity of the online environment, instructors
cannot be sure who is actually typing test answers. Discussion postings contain elements
of social presence and provide information about the student as well as their
understanding of the topic. The instructor can form an accurate estimate of student
understanding and be confident it is the student writing answers. Second, writing about
the topic allows the student time to think reflectively about it and clarifies their
understanding. This reflective time on task is key to increased understanding (Meyer
2003). Third, discussions also help bond students into a common community of interest.
They work harder at understanding the topic when they are working together on a
common goal. Successful discussions require all the students to be on the same topic at
the same time, hence the requirement for students to begin and end the class together.
Lastly, discussion also accommodates multiple viewpoints and allows students to share
them in a much less formal and threatening environment.
Grading based on discussions has some drawbacks. It is a subjective process open to
bias for or against the student. It is time-consuming as the instructor must read and reflect
on each posting to determine if the student is showing any progress on learning objectives
before assigning a grade. Perhaps the biggest drawback is that students are unfamiliar
with this process. They know and trust written tests even if they do not like them. We
spend some time in the introduction unit explaining the process with the expectation
students will become comfortable with this method of grading.
Course as Implemented
No educational plan, no matter how well thought out, survives its first contact with
students. Some of our ideas worked well, others had to be modified. This section of the
case study details our experiences in presenting the class. I first describe how the
discussions and activities worked, then some of our experiences with WebCT, and then
discuss changes we made to the course. I finish this section with some conclusions and
recommendations for course improvement.
Sample discussion
This section describes a sample discussion, the questions we asked the students to
start the discussion, our responses, what made a good student posting, what made a weak
student posting, and what we did to improve student responses.
We introduced each topic with a relatively long web page of reading for the student.
Students then discussed the topic, asking questions of each other and us and sharing their
insights of the topic. The general instructions for all discussion topics were:
Participate in the topic unit discussion. The following questions may stimulate
comments or ideas, but please contribute any meaningful ideas whether or not
they are related to the questions below.
These examples of discussion posting came from the Arborist Practices topic. The
discussion questions the students were asked to address was:
What can an urban forester do when local utilities use harmful practices such as
topping trees under utility lines or tunneling utility lines through tree roots? What
practices should you promote to them, what benefits exist for the utility company
by adopting your prescribed practices?
A sample response from a student to this question was:
Education is the key, as always. Utility workers don't get paid to make a tree look
good they get paid to clear the lines. A mandatory class on how to prune would
help the situation. An urban forester could teach the class once a year. They
would have the knowledge, but it would be up to them to use it. They could have
just as much fun cleaning and properly trimming a tree as they could topping a
tree. The flip side to that is educating the homeowner. What trees will actually be
small enough to grow under power lines. How to do that, I really don't know. I
wish I could go home to Idaho and take a picture of my Grandpas trees. He could
work for a utility company! There are topped trees, and branches that are a foot or
more from the crotch. I guess it is not just utility workers who prune badly.
When students make comments such as the one above, which suggests all utility
companies do not follow modern pruning standards (while not all do, the majority follow
good pruning practices), I correct such misinformation.
We need to moderate the discussions if/when students veer off-topic. While the
digression might be interesting to a limited set of the class, it tends to irritate those not
directly involved and thus reduces the quality of the educational experience for the rest of
the class.
Redesigning the discussion instructions to require more cognitive and teaching
presence as described by Peltz (2003) would also improve the quality of student learning
and promote the high expectations Chickering and Ehrmann find useful.
The following is a weak posting:
Mother nature is very good at pruning but really doesn't care much about what is
on the ground when she prunes. (cars and people) I agree that education is the
key. It would be very hard to change the way companies prune the trees but the
more education they have the more likely they will be to see their errors.
This posting is full of opinions and assertions but has no evidence either from the
readings or from sources outside the class to support them.
The following is an example of a good posting.
One of the problems I have noticed with cities is that the right hand doesn't know
what the left hand is doing. For example when I was city forester I had a problem
with the street departments cutting out roots when they fixed the side walks. We
had some large ash trees that were lifting up the side walks in a part of town.
Instead of checking with us they removed the old side walk removed the roots a
foot below and two feet away from the side walk. This left two feet of root system
from the trunk. The new side walk was put in and the job was finished with out us
even knowing about what had happened. Then a month later a utility company
dug on the other side of the tree in the street cutting the roots on that side. We
found out about the problem when we had a wind storm and one of the trees blew
over. We were lucky that no real property damage occurred and that no one was
hurt. We had to remove the others trees for safety reasons. It is hard to get others
to care about trees. The power dept. only cares about power, Water dept. only
about water, and so on. The politics of it all can get real ugly. When you try to
force people to conform they fight it. When you take a passive approach by
education and helping them they will over look it. It really had to be a happy
medium and pick your battles.
This posting mentions principles discussed in the topic readings and relates them to
real-life examples (this is an example from a student who had been a working urban
forester before going into private practice).
At the beginning of the class, we tell the students what will earn points toward a
grade. Currently we award 10 points for any participation at all. A better scheme would
be to award initial participation 3 points, opinions and unsupported assertions worth an
additional 1 point but to earn full credit, evidence needs to be presented to support ideas,
opinions and assertions.
Sample assignment
This section describes a typical assignment from the sample topic in the Appendix to
illustrate how we use assignments to clarify concepts in the class.
Figure 1: Pruning a picture: activity for the
Arborist Practices unit
The activity for the Arborist Practices unit asks students to prune the above picture
(Figure 1). The students need to identify the hazards present in the picture and tell how
they would fix them. One of the strengths of this activity is that there are several "correct"
answers but the students only get rewarded for correctly justifying their answer.
Most students prune some of the branches, especially the low-hanging branches and
some of the crossing ones. They also comment that judging exactly which branches to
prune is difficult to determine from the two dimensional picture. I agree with them and
tell them to do their best. Less frequently, students will move the table and benches to
eliminate the hazard to people. No student yet has opted to move the sidewalk.
Course assessment or evaluation
Even though course evaluation is an important component of developing and
improving a class, we did not conduct any formal evaluation of this course. The online
nature of the class precludes the use of paper surveys and the standard questionnaire used
in face-to-face classes is not well suited to evaluating online classes. USU has recently
begun a formal evaluation process for all online classes so this problem should be
corrected in the future. We have used student comments as an informal evaluation
process. Based on such comments, we reduced the number of assignments students are
required to submit and are revising some of the readings to improve student
understanding. Some comments by students suggest the class has a positive impact on
attitudes and behavior towards urban trees.
Experiences with WebCT
While we use WebCT and and appreciate the many time-saving feature of this class
management software, the software is not completely problem free. I describe the
problems we have encountered and how we work around them.
Navigation in WebCT is not intuitive; students and faculty must be trained in using
the class site. Homework must be submitted exactly as WebCT expects or it will be lost.
The e-mail and discussion tools are easy to use but lack some of the abilities of dedicated
programs such as the ability to easily insert images into documents. For example,
students must attach a graphics file to an e-mail if they want to submit pictures. They
must browse to find the file on their local computer, open it in the WebCT interface and
remember to click an unobtrusive button to actually attach the file. WebCT gives no clue
when it is transferring data to and from the server. Students and instructors need a great
deal of patience waiting for tasks to finish before clicking on something else. Otherwise,
the system will fail to complete the task and frustration builds. Some students send
homework and questions to my regular e-mail account because of their frustration with
the WebCT system.
Online survival skills
Students are generally unfamiliar with our online learning environment so we must
provide some explanations and instruction before they can start learning urban forestry.
We sometimes need to provide help just logging in to the class. Students will contact us
via phone or regular email if they cannot access the class (USU provides instructor
contact information when students register for the class). After students access the class,
the first section outlines initial expectations. We explicitly tell students in the
Introduction exactly what they are expected to do each week of the course.
This course is highly interactive and your participation in weekly discussions,
activities, and assignments, will facilitate cooperative learning. You are expected
to keep up with the group and to study and discuss the assigned weekly topics.
Please begin your coursework early in the week as that will provide for informed
and interesting discussions (and you will get more out of the class).
It may be helpful to outline a typical week. By Tuesday, I expect you will have
read the material for the section, reflected on it, compared what we tell you with
your experiences in life, and post your initial thoughts on the subject. This posting
will typically run for more than one paragraph but not pages and pages. Later in
the week, you will read the postings of all the students and respond by Friday.
The instructors will check in more often and respond as well. Please, feel free to
include questions and your own experiences that relate to the topic.
You will be graded on both the quality and the quantity of your contributions to
the class.
At all times, however, keep in mind that we are here to learn, and learning is most
effective if it is enjoyable. We are all here because of an interest in urban forestry;
our challenge is to learn as much as we can about urban forestry, not just from
this web site and the instructors, but from each other. We hope you will be
comfortable using the discussion forum to exchange ideas and ask questions of
the instructors and each other. If you want to talk about topics not directly related
to the current topic, please use one of the private chat rooms or email others
directly.
We have had problems in the past with extensive off-topic chatting that can be
distracting to the learning process. It is sort of like whispering in class while
others are trying to pay attention.
While these instructions model the teacher as an authority figure, rather than
facilitator or guide, we find such explicit instruction is required at the beginning of the
class to train students for success.
I learned rapidly students needed a backup method of contacting the instructors in
the event of computer or class access problems. The Introduction unit of the urban
forestry course lists office locations, mailing addresses, alternate e-mail addresses, and
phone numbers for the instructors in the class. I include my cell phone for 24-hour access
and tell the students they are welcome to call anytime. I had some concern in the
beginning about potential abuse but in the 5 years of the class, there has been none; 4 or 5
times, such availability has helped students who have lost their login information, had
other computer problems, or just needed to ask questions of a live person. For these
reasons, I plead with students to print the introductory page as the first thing they do in
the class.
Student drop rates
Online survival includes knowing when to drop out. “Going to class” by sitting in
front of a computer screen, never seeing other students or the instructor face-to-face is
difficult. Adapting to the less structured but still demanding time schedule and fitting
college work into the rest of their life's schedule all present challenges not easy to
overcome. Once students start the class and discover exactly what it entails, about one
third drop out. This is in-line with averages reported in the literature (Diaz 2002). I did
not keep accurate records of enrollment so I am unable to report exact numbers of
students who completed the class.
Adaptations to initial course plans
Each of the 18 topics has an assignment associated with it. But requiring a written
assignment or activity for each topic was too much work for the students. We now allow
students the option to choose which of the two assignments to do in each week that has
more than one assignment available.
We intended to have guest experts in specific fields to moderate the discussion in
their field of expertise. This proved to be too much detail work for the inexperienced TA,
and too confusing to students who suddenly had to respond to an unknown person. We
wanted simulations for several units but only have one for the Disease section. We
discovered that, while simulations can be effective teaching tools that allow students to
visualize plant growth concepts, they require extensive programming skills that are
beyond our present resources.
Case Study Conclusions
I have been asked “Is the class worth doing”? I assume this is because we have just a
few students each time and the class takes a significant amount of time to teach and
maintain each day. The answer is “yes, it is worth doing.” We do need more advertising
around the country to attract more students to make it more worthwhile. Most of our
students seem to think the class is worth their time, we have some who don't like the
method of presentation and would prefer to take it face-to-face but are willing to put up
with the Internet version to be able to learn about urban forestry.
Some of the principles of effective practice of Chickering and Gamson (1987)
provide excellent guidance for interaction between student and instructor. Prompt
response to e-mails, daily participation in the discussion forums, providing feedback that
does not stifle discussion, and accepting novel solutions (if they meet lesson objectives)
to class assignments all seem to help students learn and enjoy the class.
Grading based on discussion and activities seems to work well. By the time the class
is completed, the students have produced a sufficient body of work to make grading a
straightforward process. The few students who have taken an incomplete grade never do
as well as students who complete the course in the scheduled time. Their discussion
postings do not show the same level of understanding as students who manage to keep up
in the class. This is true even with students who had been doing well but had some life
crisis that forced them the take time off from the class.
Some of the topic sections need to rewritten to make the assignments easier for the
students to understand what is expected. The appraisal section in particular needs to be
reorganized to make clear to the student the difference between the practice exercise and
the activity to hand in for a grade.
The 18 topics we cover in the class do not have a common thread connecting them.
One week we are teaching soil properties and the next, we are exploring public relations.
The assignments and discussions would be better teaching tools if they revolve around a
unifying theme. We should unite the topics by using them to develop a complete urban
forestry program for a hypothetical community. The hypothetical community could be
one that has no UF program now but does have some enthusiastic citizens (class
students). The students could build a UF program for their community using their own
neighborhoods for examples and lab work.
CONCLUSIONS
Both the literature examined for this paper and our experience suggest the Internet
can be an effective teaching tool. Significant effort is required to develop and present an
online class but the results are worthwhile. Effective classes require dedicated support
from the institution as well as faculty willing to venture into this relatively new field of
pedagogy. It is definitely not a venture for technophobes.
Learning online is a new experience for most of our students. Training them to get
past the hurdles posed by the online environment has been one of my most demanding
tasks and is the primary reason I must be “in the class” every day at the beginning of each
semester. Once students are comfortable with the online environment, my presence can
be reduced but never completely eliminated. This agrees with the literature that
emphasizes the social nature of learning in general and how unfamiliar internet-based
learning is to most adults.
The class was not explicitly designed to implement the seven principles so famously
articulated by Chickering and Gamson. However, Dr. Baker is an experienced instructor
who knew from years of teaching what is needed. Thus the class did implement those
principles in a general way.
Comments made by students have suggested ways to improve the class but a
systematic assessment will both speed modifications and more accurately describe what
we need to do to improve, both the material in the class and ourselves as instructors. In
particular, we don't know if the class presents barriers to education that could be
overcome with a more accessible design.
The literature discusses the support needed from the institution to bring a class to the
students online. While the student sees only the class site, there is substantial
infrastructure behind the scenes, making the class possible. Not only must the institution
provides the class management software (a large undertaking in itself), it must also
provide training for the instructors. USU provides training workshops and classes in both
technical issues and in social issues such as how to facilitate learning rather than lecture.
The literature and our experience suggest that as enrollment increases, grading
discussion could become less practical as a primary student assessment tool. We may
need to develop formal tests administered by the course management software to
efficiently evaluate student learning. However, the learning advantages of the discussion
forums are such that I do not anticipate completely eliminating discussions.
If course enrollment increases much above 20 students per semester, we will need to
split the class into smaller sections and consider limiting enrollment to keep the workload
for the instructor to a reasonable level.
Knowing what I know now, I would improve the class and its learning outcomes by:
· Developing a checklist to guide the development of each topic page for teaching
effectiveness and accessibility. See the checklists already developed at
http://www.webaim.org/standards/508/checklist and
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/full-checklist.html
· Checking each web page for accessibility and correct all problems.
· Developing a student-completed evaluation form for each topic and for the class
as a whole, and make this evaluation form available as an anonymous survey
instrument administered through WebCT.
· Allowing more time to write each topic section. The original time budget allowed
one week for one person to write each section, develop the HTML, find and insert
images and compose each page in Dreamweaver. These tasks actually took a
graduate student assistant, an instructional designer and the instructor two or more
weeks for each section.
· Learning the gentle art of facilitating discussions to guide the learners. It is harder
to guide students through a topic than simply lecture to them because adult
learners tend to explore a topic in ways the instructor may not have planned on
(Peltz 2004; Ganley 2006). The results of student directed learning are worth the
effort as long as the students are working on course goals and objectives.
· Implementing the discussion-grading rubric detailed by Peltz (2003) after a
detailed explanation as part of the Introduction section.
Future Development
Future improvements to this course need to focus on two areas: course evaluation
and student evaluation. We need to evaluate each unit to measure how well the course
material helps students meet unit objectives. Were objectives clearly defined, was the
material organized in a helpful way, what areas were confusing, what areas were clear?
With this data in hand, we will know where to focus our energy on class development.
While the current system of grading students based on discussion posting and writings
seems to be working well, it is open to subjective biases. We need to consider how to
incorporate more objective methods of grading, by a defined rubric for discussion
postings or using written tests.
We also need to monitor student drop rates and learn more about them. Do they drop
because they do not like the online environment? Did the class not meet expectations and
if so, how? Is there a lack of access to necessary hardware or internet connectivity? Did
they not realize just how much time would be required to succeed in the class?
Understanding when they drop out and why will help us find ways to improve student
success.
LITERATURE CITED
Achtemeier, S.D., L.V. Morris, and C.L. Finnegan. 2003. Considerations for developing
evaluations of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(1):1-13.
www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v7n1/v7n1_achtemeier.asp (accessed 6/18/2007).
Anon. 2006. June 2003 edition of Circular 92. Copyright law of the United States of
America and related laws contained in Title 17 of the United States Code.
www.copyright.gov/title17/chapter01.pdf (accessed 2/23/2007).
Anon. 2007. Constructing a POUR Website: Putting People at the Center of the Process.
Article on the WebAIM website. webaim.org/articles/pour/ (accessed 11/4/2007).
Beaudoin, M. 1990. The instructor's changing role in distance education. The American
Journal of Distance Education 4(2): 21-48. www.unioldenburg.
de/zef/cde/found/beau90.pdf (accessed 3/24, 2006).
Benigno, V., and G. Trentin. 2000. The evaluation of online courses. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning 16:259-270.
Bonwell, C.C., and J.A. Eison. 1991. Active learning: Creating excitement in the
classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, D.C.: George
Washington University.
California Distance Learning Project. 2006. Professional development resources for adult
educators. www.cdlponline.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=teacherLinks&categoryID=5.
(accessed 8/1/2007).
California Distance Learning Project. 2007. What is distance learning? A tutorial that
provides an overview of distance learning for adult educators.
www.cdlponline.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=whatis. (accessed 11/4/2007)
California Urban Forests Council. 2007. California Urban Forests Council certified urban
forester study guide. www.caufc.org/studyguide.pdf (accessed 8/2/2007).
Chickering, A., and S.C. Ehrmann. 1996. Implementing the seven principles: Technology
as lever. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin October, pp. 3-6.
www.tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html (accessed 3/14/2006).
Chickering A.W., and Z.F. Gamson. 1987. Seven principles for good practice in
undergraduate education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin March
1987. www.csueastbay.edu/wasc/pdfs/End%20Note.pdf (accessed 10/2/2005).
Chisholm, W., G. Vanderheiden, and I. Jacobs. 2000. Core techniques for web content
accessibility guidelines 1.0. World Wide Web Consortium. Techniques for authoring
accessible content that apply across technologies. www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTEWCAG10-
CORE-TECHS-20001106/ (accessed 12/2/2005).
Cohen, D. 2002. Course management software: Where's the library? Educase Review 37
(3). www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0239.pdf (accessed 6/8/2007)
Crews, K.D. 2003. New copyright law for distance education: The meaning and
importance of the TEACH act. A report for the American Library Association in
furtherance of a project to develop and disseminate information resources related to
copyright and distance education. Copyright Management Center Indiana University
School of Law-Indianapolis. www.copyright.iupui.edu/teach_summary.htm (accessed
7/23/2006).
Cuseo, J.B. 2001. Assessment of the first year experience: Six significant questions, p.
27-34. In R.L. Swing (Ed.). Proving and improving: Strategies for assessing the first
college year. The First Year Monograph Series. Monograph no. 33. Columbia, SC.
University of South Carolina. National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience
and Students in Transition.
Diaz, D. P. 2002. Online drop rates revisited. The Technology Source Archives at the
University of North Carolina. Article was originally published in The Technology Source
technologysource.org/article/online_drop_rates_revisited/. (accessed 8/1/2007).
Elbow, P. 1994. Writing for learning-not just for demonstrating learning. The National
Teaching and Learning Forum. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
www.ntlf.com/html/lib/bib/writing.htm (accessed 4/2/2007).
Elmendorf, W.F., V.J. Cotrone, and J. T. Mullen. 2003. Trends in urban forestry
practices, programs, and sustainability: Contrasting a Pennsylvania, U.S. study. Journal
of Arboriculture 29(4):237-247.
Ganley, B. 2006. Blogging as a dynamic, transformative medium in an American liberal
arts classroom. Paper presented at BlogTalk 2.0 The European Weblog Conference,
Vienna, Austria, July 2004.
mt.middlebury.edu/middblogs/ganley/bgblogging/002796.html (accessed 8/6/2006).
Gilbert, S.W. 2002. The beauty of low threshold applications. Syllabus
Magazine. /www.tltgroup.org/gilbert/Columns/BeautyLTAs2-2-2002.htm (accessed
3/5/2006)
Gilbert, S.W. 2006. TLT Group's faculty/professional development program . The
Teaching, Learning, Technology group. www.tltgroup.org/ProFacDev/home.html
(accessed 3/5/2006).
Gorham, J. 1988. The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and
student learning. Communication Education 37(1):40-53.
Halstead, A., and L.M. Martin. 2001. Learning and thinking styles: A tool for engaging
engineering students with their studies. Progress, the proceedings of the 2001 conference
on improving student success. The University of Hull, U.K.
www.hull.ac.uk/engprogress/Prog1Papers/CoventryHalstead.pdf (accessed 4/20/2006).
Hartig, T., G.W. Evans, L. D. Jamner, and D. S. Davis. 1987. Tracking restoration in
natural and urban field settings. Journal of Environmental Psychology 23: 109-123.
Hartman, V. 1995. Teaching and learning style preferences: Transitions through
technology. Virginia Community Colleges Association Journal 9(2):18–20.
www.vccaedu.org/inquiry/vcca-journal/hart1.htm (accessed 4/20/2006).
Hiltz, S.R. 1997. Impacts of college-level courses via Asynchronous Learning Networks:
Some preliminary results. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 1(2). www.sloanc.
org/publications/jaln/v1n2/pdf/v1n2_hiltz.pdf (accessed 4/12/2006).
Holmes, K. 2004. Full-text education journals online.
www.lesley.edu/faculty/kholmes/libguides/edjournals.html# (accessed 6/20/2007).
Indiana Higher Education Telecommunication System (IHETS). 2007. Guiding principles
for faculty in distance learning. Webpage presenting guiding principles for faculty in
higher education.
www.ihets.org/archive/progserv_arc/education_arc/distance_arc/guiding_principles_arc/i
ndex.html. (accessed 8/1/2007).
Indiana Higher Education Telecommunication System (IHETS). 2006. Student support
principle: The institution provides appropriate support services to distance students that
are equivalent to services provided for its on-campus students.
www.ihets.org/archive/progserv_arc/education_arc/distance_arc/guiding_principles_arc/i
ndex.html#stdsupp (accessed 10/11/2007).
Keeton, M.T. 2004. Best online instructional practices: Report of phase 1 of an ongoing
study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 8(2). www.sloanc.
org/publications/jaln/v8n2/v8n2_keeton.asp. (accessed 10/11/2007
King, A. 1993. From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching 41(1):30.
Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R., & Mainemelis, C. 1999. Experiential learning theory: Previous
research and new directions. In R. Sternberg and L. Zhang (Eds.) Perspectives on
cognitive learning, and thinking styles. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2000. www.learningfromexperience.com/images/uploads/experiential-learningtheory.
pdf (accessed 3/3/2006).
Lee, J. and C. Dziuban. 2002. Using quality assurance strategies for online programs.
Educational Technology Review 10(2):69-78. www.aace.org/pubs/etr/issue3/Lee.pdf
(accessed 7/6/2006).
Lobel, M., M. Neubaurer, and R. Swedburg. 2002. Elements of group interaction in a
real-time synchronous online learning-by-doing classroom without F2F participation.
United States Distance Learning Association Journal 16(4) pp9-31.
www.usdla.org/html/journal/APR02_Issue/article01.html (accessed 9/14/2006).
Machlis, G.E., and J.E. Force. 1997. The human ecosystem part 1: The human ecosystem
as an organizing concept in ecosystem management. Society & Natural Resources 10(4):
347.
Mayadas, F., J. Bourne, and J. Moore. 2003. Coming to terms: ALN. Sloan-C View2 (4).
A publication of the Sloan-C Consortium.
Meyer K. A., 2003. Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and
higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7 (3) www.sloanc.
org/publications/jaln/v7n3/v7n3_meyer.asp (accessed 9/14/2006).
Miller, R.W. 1996. Urban forestry: Planning and managing urban greenspace. 2nd ed.
Prentice-Hall, Upper Daddle River, NJ.
Moore, G.E., J.H. Smith, and G. Straquadine. 2005. Foundations of adult education.
Class that examines theories of of adult education and participation as well as providers
and context of adult education. (ASTE 6240). www.ncsu.edu/cals/agexed/aee523
(accessed 1/4/2005).
Nowak, D.J., M.H. Noble, S.M. Sisinni, and J.F. Dwyer. 2001. People and trees:
Assessing the US urban forest resource. Journal of Forestry 99(3)37-42 (6).
Peltz, B. 2003. Applying research on presence to guide online discussions. Sloan-C
Consortium effective practices webpage publication. www.sloanc.
org/effective/details3.asp?LE_ID=35 (accessed 3/4/2006).
——.
2004. (My) three principles of effective online pedagogy. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Networks 8(3). www.sloan-c.org/publications/JALN/v8n3/v8n3_pelz.asp (accessed
3/4/2006).
Phipps, R. and J. Merisotis. 1999. What's the difference? A review of contemporary
research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Policy report by
the Institute for Higher Education Policy. Washington, D.C. April 1999.
www.ihep.org/organizations.php3?
action=printContentItem&orgid=104&typeID=906&itemID=9249 (accessed 3/4/2006).
——.
2000. Quality on the line: Benchmarks for success in internet-based distance education.
Report prepared for the Institute for Higher Education Policy. Washington, D.C.
www.ihep.com/Pubs/PDF/Quality.pdf (accesses 3/4/2006).
Picciano, A.G. 2002. Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and
performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 6(1).
www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v6n1/v6n1_picciano.asp (accessed 3/4/2007)
Pickett, S.T.A., W.R. Burch Jr., S.E. Dalton, T.W. Foresman, J.M. Grove and R.
Rowntree. 1997. A conceptual framework for the study of human ecosystems in urban
areas. Urban Ecosystems 1(4):185-199.
Ragan, L.C. 2000. Good teaching is good teaching: the relationship between guiding
principles for distance and general education. The Journal of General Education 49(1):
10-22. muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_general_education/v049/49.1ragan.html
(accessed 10/12/2005).
Richardson, J.C., and K. Swan. 2003. Examining social presence in online courses in
relation to students' perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous
Learning Networks 7(1). www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v7n1/v7n1_richardson.asp
(accessed 11/4/2005).
Rourke, L., T. Anderson, D.R. Garrison, and W. Archer. 2001. Assessing social presence
in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education.
cade.athabascau.ca/vol14.2/rourke_et_al.html (accessed 7/6/2006).
Schank, R.C. 1995. What we learn when we learn by doing. Technical Report No. 60.
Northwestern University. Institute for Learning Sciences.
cogprints.org/637/00/LearnbyDoing_Schank.html (accessed 3/5/2006).
Schifter, C.C. 2000. Faculty participation in asynchronous learning networks: A case
study of motivating and inhibiting factors. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks
4(1). www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v4n1/pdf/v4n1_schifter.pdf (accessed 3/5/2006).
Schroeder, H.W. 1986. Psychological value of urban trees: Measurement, meaning and
imagination. Proceedings 3rd National Urban Forest Conference. American Forests.
Washington, D.C. pp. 55-60.
Shang, Y., H. Shi, and S. Chen. 2001. An intelligent distributed environment for active
learning. In the proceedings of the 10th International World Wide Web Conference.
Hong Kong. May 2001. delivery.acm.org/10.1145/390000/384059/a4-shang.pdf?
key1=384059&key2=1599226311&coll=GUIDE&dl=ACM&CFID=61315485&CFTOK
EN=36387647 (accessed 3/5/2006).
Sims, R., G. Dobbs, and T. Hand. 2002. Enhancing quality in online learning:
Scaffolding, planning and design through proactive evaluation. Distance Education 23(2)
135-148.
Smith, D.M. 1983. Urban silviculture in southern New England. Connecticut Woodlands
47(4):7-11.
Stim, R. 2007. Getting permission. Nolo Press, Berkeley, CA.
Talbott, J.A. 1976. Flowering plants as therapeutic/environmental agents in a psychiatric
hospital. HortScience 11(4) 365-366.
Thatcher, J. 2007. Web Accessibility for Section 508. Web based tutorial on compliance
with the requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act and Section 255 of the
Telecommunications Act. www.jimthatcher.com/webcourse1.htm (accessed 11/4/2007).
Treiman, T., and J. Gartner. 2004. Community forestry in Missouri, U.S: Attitudes and
knowledge of local officials. Journal of Arboriculture . 30:205-213.
Twigg. C.A. 2003. Improving learning and reducing costs: Lessons learned from round 1
of the pew grant program in course redesign. Center for Academic Transformation.
www.thencat.org/PCR/Rd1Lessons.pdf (accessed 12/3/2007).
UFAS 1984. Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards. www.access-board.gov/ufas/ufashtml/
ufas.htm. (accessed 6/8/2007)
Ulrich, R.S. 1978. Natural versus urban scenes: Some psycho-physiological effects.
Environment and Behavior 13: 523-556.
USU FACT. 2006a. it.usu.edu/fact/. Webpage with links to technology training,
workshops and resources for faculty (accessed 8/1/2007).
——.
2006b. Webpage of copyright tips and tricks including how to prevent copyright
violations. it.usu.edu/fact/files/uploads/copyright_laws.pdf (accessed 10/12/2007).
——.
2006c. Faculty assistance center for teaching. Website with links to resources for faculty
who are developing or teaching online classes. www.fact.usu.edu/ (accessed 4/4/2006).
USU Libraries. 2006. Webpage with student help pages for all library services.
library.usu.edu/dels/index.phpl (accessed 10/12/2007).
USU OCW 2006. Webpage describing who owns the intellectual property published on
the USU OCW Web site?. Open Course Ware website.
ocw.usu.edu/Help/index_html#19 (accessed 3/4/2006).
Williams, A.D. 2003. Distance education for landscape architecture: An international
survey with implications for a prototype online course application. Thesis, Utah State
University, Logan. 254 pages.
APPENDIX
Sample topic module
Note: this is a printout of what the student sees when they log in to the class.
Arborist Practices
Arborists engage in many practices including fertilization, irrigation, pest management,
pruning, and even herbicide use. This section details two arborist practices that have not
yet been addressed in this course: namely pruning, and herbicide use.
Pruning
Pruning is the purposeful removal of plant parts. The term pruning is preferred to less
precise terms like trimming. The following information describes why, when, and how to
prune branches from urban trees. It describes where to make pruning cuts to avoid stubs
and flush-cuts, and describes why wound dressings should not be used. It refers mainly to
the pruning of branches on ornamental trees; it does not include specific information on
the pruning of fruit trees for fruit production, shearing or other intensive crown shaping
practices, or root pruning.
Why Prune?
Reasons for pruning urban trees generally fit into three closely-related categories: health,
hazard, and form. Rarely should healthy, non-hazardous branches on a tree with good
form (and clear of any utility, traffic, or other problems) be pruned.
Health
Pruning for tree health includes removal of insect or disease infested branches, broken or
dead branches, crowded branches, and branches or portions of trunks with included bark.
The practice of pruning to "open-up" a tree's crown to encourage light penetration or air
movement is generally not needed.
Hazard
Pruning to reduce hazard to people or property includes the removal of dead and
decaying branches; branches that interfere with sight lines or travel along streets,
driveways, or sidewalks; branches that rub against structures; thorny or spiny branches
that might cause injury; and pruning for utility line clearance. Healthy, strong, properly
attached branches that overhang a building do not usually pose an unreasonable safety
risk and do not necessarily need to be removed.
Form
Pruning for tree form or shape involves removal of certain branches and leaving others to
direct growth toward and away from certain areas. Pollarding, crown raising, and topiary
all are examples of pruning for form.
When to Prune
Time of Year
Pruning can be done at any time of year with special care and knowledge, but certain
times are better than others. Pruning is best done in winter or early spring before buds
swell when tree energy reserves are high and the tree is dormant. Though certain trees,
such as birches, maples, and walnuts, may exude sap or "bleed" when pruned at this time
of year, this is not a problem and stops within a few days. During the spring growth
period bark is tender and easily damaged and pruning must be done very carefully. In fall
pruning wounds may be more easily infected with decay microorganisms. Though
summer pruning can be done, considerable dieback may occur at the edges of summer
pruning wounds, possibly due to drying of the living tissues at wound edges. Quickly
wrapping such wounds with white plastic sheeting may reduce this dieback.
Time of Life
At planting time only prune branches that are dead, broken, or that have insect or disease
problems. Otherwise, prune early in a branch or tree's life to avoid pruning large branches
or letting serious problems develop. For maintenance pruning on established trees try to
prune branches before they exceed 2 inches in diameter.
Pruning Severity
Avoid pruning off more than 20 to 25% of a tree's leaf area in any year. Pruning stresses
trees because pruning wound repair requires energy from food while pruning removes
leaves that make food and wood that stores food. Younger and more vigorous trees can
stand heavier pruning than mature or stressed trees. If heavy pruning is unavoidable,
remove branches over two or more years to reduce stress.
Pruning Techniques
Pruning Tools
Sharp, well-maintained tools make cleaner cuts and
are safer than dull tools. Use shear-type hand pruners
for small twigs (sometimes called bypass pruners;
anvil-type pruners cause slightly more injury than
shear-type), loppers for small branches, and pruning
saws for branches up to 3 or 4 inches in diameter.
Good pruning saws have thin curved blades and teeth
that are angled back to cut mainly as you pull rather
Figure 2: Pruning tools than push.
Chainsaws should only be used for large branch removal. Bow saws are not suitable for
pruning because the blade tends to wander and the handle tends to get in the way.
Sterilization of tool blades between cuts (with alcohol or bleach) often is recommended
to avoid spreading disease, but researchers have shown that more extensive sterilization
techniques may be necessary to control the spread of some diseases.
Safety
Urban foresters commonly manage other employees and thus must not only be concerned
for their own safety, but also for the safety of all the people who perform maintenance in
the urban forest. It is essential that managers provide good safety training for employees
on topics such as equipment and handling skills, protective clothing, removing large
branches, cutting down entire trees, and (of vital importance) working around utility
wires. Almost half of the deaths that occur in the tree care industry are caused by
electrocution, which could have been prevented by proper training.
Legally employers are required to provide safety training:
“Employers shall instruct their employees in the proper use of all equipment provided
for them and shall require that safe working practices be observed. A job briefing,
work procedure, and assignment shall be worked out carefully before any tree job is
begun.” - The American National Standard Z-133.1-1988
For both safety and liability reasons, pruning and other potentially dangerous activities
should preferably be conducted by an insured, well-trained professional arborist
(preferably certified by the International Society of Arboriculture) or by a professional
forester.
Pruning near Utility lines
Pruning near utility lines should only be done by certified line clearance professionals
and in coordination with the local utility company. Please read the publication on Utility
arboriculture produced by the USDA Forest Service.
Trees planted below utility lines should at
maturity be lower than the lines and larger
trees should be planted away from the lines.
Pruning techniques such as V-trimming or
side-pruning are more aesthetically pleasing,
better for the tree, and require less
maintenance (in the long run) than topping
trees. It is best to select species for planting
under utility lines that will be less than 25 feet
Figure 3: Line tall at maturity.
clearance pruning
Figure 4: Severe line
clearance
A training and certification program developed by the National Arborist Association
called the Electrical Hazards Awareness Program (EHAP) could be used to promote
safety around utility lines. The training consists of training videos and home-study
booklets, in addition to the satisfactory completion of a rope and saddle aerial rescue and
the completion of a Red Cross (or equivalent) CPR program.
Discussion: Harmful practices
Participate in the arborist practices discussion. The following
questions may stimulate comments or ideas, but please contribute any
meaningful ideas whether or not they are related to the questions
below.
What can an urban forester do when local utilities use harmful
practices such as topping trees under utility lines or tunneling
utility lines through tree roots? What practices should you
promote to them, what benefits exist for the utility company by
adopting your prescribed practices?
Everywhere you look, you can find a topped or mutilated tree.
Take a picture of the worst one you can find and e-mail it. We can
discuss what was done and what could have been done better.
Topping
Trees should never be topped.
Topping or rounding-over is the
removal of branches without regard
to where other branches attach,
usually leaving stubs. Topping is
done to gain clearance from an
obstruction or to reduce a tree's
height or crown spread. Sometimes
cuts are made where a branch is
attached, but the remaining branch
is too small or weak to assume
dominance.
Quick regrowth, combined with decay in the stubs, leads to poor tree health and potential
hazards. Unfortunately, there is no long-term way to keep a tree small and healthy if it is
naturally large, which is why tree characteristics should be matched to location
characteristics prior to planting. In addition, topping looks terrible. The following are
excerpts from an article that was published on May 4, 1989 in a local newspaper with the
title "(City) project leaves trees branchless." Only excerpts are provided so as not to
Figure 5: Topping examples
ridicule the city or people involved, who have hopefully learned better techniques since
then.
An Unbelievable Topping Example
"Despite a massive tree-topping project that stripped
mature shade trees along North State Street of almost all of
their branches and limbs, many residents living along the
highway seem pleased with the project."
"But experts say the green ash trees will be permanently
weakened and damaged by the pruning project."
"Public Works Director (name removed) said the trees are
20-25 years old and were 'totally out of control' before the
topping project. The trees were creating a traffic hazard
along North State, he said, and never had been trimmed."
"But (name removed) of the (some state) Highway
Department, said the trees were carefully pruned in 1971."
The public works director also said, "In two or three years
they will look as pretty as they did before. This is really
not a big deal for the City."
A homeowner on the street said, "There certainly won't be any shade from the trees this
summer. If I had been in charge of the project, they wouldn't have been cut back nearly as
much as they were."
An Alternative to Topping: Directional Pruning
Directional pruning is the removal of branches
with natural target cuts to guide growth away
from certain locations. It is commonly used to
keep branches out of utility lines without
topping, but it is useful in many other
circumstances. Just start at the tip of the branch
to be removed and follow it back to where it
meets another healthy branch that can remain on
the tree and that is large enough to assume
dominance (at least 1/3 the diameter of the
branch to be removed). Remove unwanted
branches with natural target cuts as described
below.
Where to Cut: Natural Target Pruning
Figure 6: Unbelievable tree
topping example
Figure 7: Pruning at the branch bark
ridge
Good pruning involves removing as much of the branch as possible without leaving a
stub or flush cutting. Good pruning cuts are called natural target cuts by arborists, who
use two targets on the tree to show them where to make the cut. These targets are the
branch bark ridge (BBR) and the branch collar. The BBR is an area of excess bark that
accumulates where two branches meet. It extends down the branch or trunk on either
side of the branch crotch. The branch collar is (typically) a swollen, wrinkled area at the
branch base where branch and trunk (or branch and branch) tissues come together.
A natural target cut leaves the BBR and branch collar on the tree without leaving a stub.
Such a cut passes just outside the BBR on top and usually slants out and down, leaving
a bump but no stub (from A to B on figure 1). Sometimes the swollen branch collar
extends all the way around the branch base and the resulting cut is more vertical.
Though the "targets" usually are easy to see on most broad-leaved trees, some trees like
sycamore constantly lose bark and don't accumulate a BBR. Conifers also may not
accumulate a typical BBR. In both cases, just cut outside any swollen or wrinkled
branch collar.
Wound Closure
Natural target cuts start to seal over
quickly and woundwood, sometimes
called callus, forms at the wound edges
(callus forms first and becomes
woundwood as it matures and becomes
woody). Woundwood usually forms in a
continuous ring around a natural target
cut, eventually sealing over the wound as
it grows together. Gaps in the
woundwood at the top and/or bottom
indicate flush-cuts, cuts that were made
too close to the stem (see figure 8).
Though such wounds may eventually
seal, they have a greater chance for dieback, decay, and crack formation than natural
target cuts. The term "seal," rather than "heal," is used to describe tree wound closure,
since the wound still exists inside the tree even after it no longer shows on the outside.
Pruning Dead Branches
Shortly after a branch dies a swollen ring of woundwood starts to form around its base. A
branch protection zone also forms in the wood at the branch base. This zone contains
chemicals that help the tree resist microbial attack. Cut off dead branches just outside the
live woundwood without leaving a stub (see broad-leaved diagram above). Promptly
remove large dead branches since they pose significant hazards.
Figure 8: Woundwood growth pattern after
pruning cuts
Pruning Large Branches and Narrow Angles
Remove large branches with a three step cut: an undercut one-third of the way up through
the branch one or two feet out from the trunk (to prevent bark stripping), a top cut
directly into or slightly outside of the undercut to remove most of the branch weight, and
a final natural target cut that removes the stub. Final cuts can be made from the bottom up
to the crotch (B to A in figure 9) if the branch angle is tight and tools won't fit in the
crotch.
Pruning Leaders or Co-dominant Stems
Pruning to remove a leader or main stem
sometimes is called crown reduction. A leader
can be pruned off where another branch is
attached if the remaining branch is healthy and
vigorous and at least 1/3 the diameter of the
leader to be removed (so a 6" leader could be
removed at a 2" branch). Also, no more than
about one-quarter of the foliage should be
removed from the branch that is being
shortened. The final pruning cut should be on
the other side of the BBR sloping out and down
with the bottom of the cut straight across from the bottom of the BBR. As before, the
BBR remains on the tree and no stub is formed. CO-dominant stems (stems nearly equal
in size) are pruned similarly.
Included Bark
Sometimes the bark where two branches meet turns in instead of out, forming a seam of
included bark inside the tree instead of a BBR. Areas of included bark often die and
become decayed. These areas are naturally weaker than branch attachments with normal
BBRs. Included bark is especially common on certain species or cultivators, like
Bradford pear and littleleaf European linden, but can be found on any tree. It also is more
common where branches attach to one another at a very narrow angle, but can occur with
wide attachment angles.
Avoid purchasing trees with included bark. Don't prune off all branches with included
bark (on some trees nothing would be left), but watch for signs of dieback or cracks
extending down from the crotch below the bark seam. Remove a branch that has included
bark by cutting from the open crotch down and out (or cut up to the crotch). This actually
leaves a small stub on or in the tree, but cutting farther down may cause serious trunk
wounds.
Figure 9: Crown reduction cut location
Wound Care
Pruning wounds and other tree wounds should be left open to the air, with no covering or
dressing (see exception below). Though various paints, shellacs, and tar-like materials
are available for treating wounds, none have been shown to slow or prevent decay or
promote wound healing or sealing. In fact, research has shown that such dressings can
actually promote decay by keeping the wound protected and moist — perfect conditions
for the growth of decay microorganisms.
An exception is the use of white polyethylene sheeting to wrap wounds made in summer
when conditions are hot and dry, or when pruning elms and oaks (wound dressing or
paint will discourage the insects that carry the Dutch elm disease and oak wilt fungi).
Wrapping wounds with such sheeting (preferably within minutes of pruning) results in
less dieback and better healing than with unwrapped wounds. Wrapping can be held on
the tree with tape and can be removed in two or three weeks.
In the past it was common practice to shape or scribe wounds to promote healing;
however, scribing simply makes wounds larger and is not needed. Wounds from natural
target pruning usually heal well on their own. Always remove any loose bark or pieces of
wood that stick out from a wound.
Texas A&M Extension provides extensive information on the website Follow Proper
Pruning Techniques at http://aggie-horticulture.tamu.edu/extension/pruning/pruning.html
Activity: Pruning a Picture
Complete one of the following activities.
· Examine the pruning activity picture (figure 10). Identify which branches to
prune and tell us your reasons why. Indicate where to make each pruning
cut. Either modify the picture to illustrate the pruning, or use a text
description of the picture to explain what you would do.
·
Figure 10: Pruning a tree activity picture
· Take a picture of a poorly pruned tree and a properly pruned tree (either
during the pruning or after the fact). Explain how the first tree was
improperly pruned and what pruning should have taken place and explain
the correct process that was followed in pruning the second tree.
E-mail or snail mail the assignment to the TA. (note if you use regular mail please e-mail
the TA that it is coming that way).
Herbicide Use
Herbicides are used in the urban forest to control undesired vegetation on both a small
and a large scale. The decision to use herbicides in the urban forest should be made only
after several factors are considered including safety, environmental impact, and public
opinion.
While herbicides can reduce competition from herbaceous weeds so that newly planted
trees are given a boost in survival or early growth, when carelessly applied, they damage
non-target trees and vegetation. Common lawn herbicides, which are sometimes
combined with a fertilizer to form a "weed and feed" product, can be damaging and even
deadly to trees. Trees are especially susceptible after heavy rains, or when the tree is
stressed from other conditions such as recent transplanting or insect infestations. Spray
drift from herbicides applied near trees is another common source of unintended damage
from herbicides.
Leaf curl and distortion are the most common symptoms of herbicide injury. Higher
concentrations of herbicide (for instance if applied directly under the tree canopy) can
cause serious defoliation or even tree death.
Recovery from minor herbicide damage can be promoted through watering and
fertilization, but for the most part it will just take time for injured trees to recover.
How a herbicide affects a plant at the tissue or cellular level is available from the Purdue
University Herbicide Mode-of-Action summary at
http://www.btny.purdue.edu/weedscience/moa/index.html.
Figure 11: Herbie does herbicide
Discussion: Herbicide Resistance
Participate in the arborist practices discussion. The following
questions may stimulate comments or ideas, but please contribute any
meaningful ideas whether or not they are related to the questions
below.
Could plant resistance to herbicides actually be used in a good
way?
Check out this article to see some innovative research into
herbicide resistance.
How could herbicide resistance be useful for urban foresters?
References and Resources
How to Prune trees guide by the US Department of Agriculture.
Adapted from the brochure Homeowner's Guide for Beautiful, Safe, and Healthy Trees
from the USDA-Forest Service Northeastern Forest Experiment Station.
www.fs.fed.us/ne/newtown_square/publications/brochures/pdfs/for_homeowners/guide_
homeowners.pdf (accessed 8/3/2007)
Tree Care a journal produced by the National Arborist Association ( now the Tree Care
Industry Association), has semi-technical articles written for the working tree care
person. 128.241.193.252/Public/pubs_tci_magazine.htm. (accessed 8/3/2007).
Ryan, H. D. P. III. 1991. Safety in the urban forest. Women in Natural Resources 12(3):
29-32.
For an extensive bibliography of hazard tree management,literature, see
www.fs.fed.us/r10/spf/fhp/hazard/biblio.htm (accessed 8/3/2007).
