The Master Course Design Process Explained Using General College Botany as a Case Study

Main Article Content

Margaret Gaddis


This paper describes the master course design process at the largest institution of higher education in Colorado, USA. The master course design process demonstrated principles of backwards design and employed a team-based approach to course development. The course map was the primary vehicle for communicating the design of the course during development and later for accountability. This case study presented the redesign of General College Botany. The General College Botany curriculum employed authentic assessment and provided an andragogical learning environment. The central authentic assessment in the course was a term-long research project. Other assignments included wiki-building discussions, traditional quizzes, and at-home labs. The accounting of this process and the assignments described for an online science course provide a template for other institutions to follow when considering the implementation of master courses in higher education settings. As botanical curricula continue to be cut from degree programs and the need for remote learning becomes imminent in the modern world, the scaling of educational resources is facilitated by master course design. Master course design promotes accountability and standardization while also affording a well-researched, constructive, and blended learning environment.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Gaddis, M. (2022). The Master Course Design Process Explained Using General College Botany as a Case Study. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 22(3).
Case Studies
Author Biography

Margaret Gaddis, University of Colorado - Colorado Springs

Biology and Environmental Studies Lecturer
University of Colorado - Colorado Springs, USA


About CCCS. Retrieved from

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2016). Online report card: Tracking online education in the United States. [Annual report].

Bangert, A. (2008). The influence of social presence and teaching presence on the quality of online critical inquiry. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 20(1), 34-61.

Chao, I. T., Saj, T., & Hamilton, D. (2010). Using collaborative course development to achieve online course quality standards. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(3), 106-126.

Colorado Common Course Numbering System. (2016). Retrieved September 29, 2020, from

Colorado Community Colleges Online (CCCO) Strategic Plan. (2013/2014). Retrieved from


Colorado Community College System Fact Sheet. (2016). Retrieved from

Cullen, R., Harris, M., & Hill, R.R. (2012). The learner-centered curriculum: Design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass & Sons, Inc.

Cydis, S., Galantino, M.L., Hood, C., Padden, M., & Richard, M. (2015). Integrating and assessing essential learning outcomes: fostering faculty development and student engagement. ¬15(3), 33-52.

Davis, A. A. (2018). An evaluation of an online master course design model at a North Carolina community college Publication No. 10831562. [Doctoral dissertation, Wingate University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

Drea, S. (2011). The end of the botany degree in the UK. Bioscience education, 17(1), 1-7.

Franetovic, M., & Bush, R. (2013). Master course shell practice: Redesign of institutional online course look and feel, alignment of core course content and delivery, and quality improvement.

Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Garrison, D.R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T.S. (2010). Exploring causal relationship among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 31-36.

Goldberg, N. A., & Ingram, K. W. (2011). Improving student engagement in a lower-division botany course. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(2), 76-90. EJ932147

Hershey, D. R. (1996). A historical perspective on problems in botany teaching. The American Biology Teacher, 58(6), 340-347.

Herrington, J., Reeves, T.C., & Oliver, R. (2014). Authentic learning environments. In J. M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, Elen, J., & Bishop, M.J. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 401-412). New York: Routledge.

Jacoby, J.M. (2017). The impact of an aesthetic online course design template on the learner user experience. [Doctoral dissertation, Massey University].

Knowles, M.S., Holton, E.F., & Swanson, R.A. (2011). The adult learner (7th ed.). Burlington,

MA: Elsevier.

Lord, T., Shelly, C., & Zimmerman, R. (2007). Putting inquiry teaching to the test: Enhancing learning in college botany. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(7), 62-65.

Marshall, J. 2016. Digitization of the IPFW herbarium and use in field botany and dendrology courses. CELT Summer Instructional Development Grant Final Report.

Martinez, M.E. (2010). Learning and cognition: The design of the mind. Upper Saddle River,

NJ: Pearson Education.

Merrill, M.D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50 (3), 43–59.

Nichols, G. E. (1919). The general biology course and the teaching of elementary botany and zoology in American colleges and universities. Science, 50(1301), 509-517.

Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2013). Lessons from the virtual classroom: The realities of online teaching (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Puzziferro, M., & Shelton, K. (2014). A model for developing high-quality online courses: Integrating a systems approach with learning theory. Journal of Asynchronous Learning

Networks, 12(3-4), 119-136. Retrieved from

Quality Matters Higher Education Program. (2016). Retrieved from

Quizlet. (2016). Retrieved from

Rennie, F., & Morrison, T. (2008). E-learning and social networking handbook: Resources for higher education. New York: Routledge,

Sachar, C. 2020. Revising with metacognition to promote writing achievement: A case study. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 20(3), 49-63.

Silva, J. R. S. D., Guimarães, F., & Sano, P. T. (2016). Teaching of Botany in higher education: representations and discussions of undergraduate students.

Swan, K., Matthews, D., Bogle, L., Boles, E., & Day, S. (2012). Linking online course design and implementation to learning outcomes: A design experiment. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 81-88.

Uno, G. E. (2009). Botanical literacy: How and what students should learn about plants. American Journal of Botany, 96(10), 1753-1759.

Villarroel, V., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D., Herrera-Seda, C. (2018). Authentic Assessment: Creating a blueprint for course design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 43(5), 840-854.

Wandersee, J. H., & Schussler, E. E. (1999). Preventing plant blindness. The American Biology Teacher, 61(2), 82-86.

Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation. 2(2).

Wiggins, G. (1998). Ensuring authentic performance. Chapter 2 in Educative Assessment: Designing Assessments to Inform and Improve Student Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 21-42.

Wiggins, G.P., & Mctighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Zangori, L., & Koontz, J. A. (2017). Supporting upper-level undergraduate students in building a systems perspective in a botany course. Journal of Biological Education, 51(4), 399-411.

Zhonghua, L. (2005). Using contemporary education strategies to improve teaching and learning in a Botany course at Beijing Forestry University. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 13(1). 29-34.