You can't just take F2F materials, post them online and then expect them to teach the course for you.  Every aspect of your course must be transformed, not just translated in order for students to be able to properly access the materials, complete the assignments and meet the course learning objectives

Teaching in an online format requires instructors to be more student-centered and to act as facilitators to help students meet course objectives

In most cases, it doesn't matter so much whether a course is delivered synchonously or asynchronously as long as there is guidance to help the student (and instructor) navigate through the course

It is important to evaluate and select technology tools that match the instructors teaching style as well as enhance teaching and learning

In order to evaluate the effectiveness of my course, I need to look at the totality of the course from syllabus matching to student grades and student evaluation to self and peer evaluation

Providing feedback goes deeper than simply assigning a grade and the type of feedback to be given will vary depending on the nature of the assignment being discussed

I like the idea of a dynamic syllabus and the FAQ section of a dynamic syllabus.  It would have saved me time the past few weeks addressing student issues

Consistency is key in planning and administering online courses and content

Although e-learning is a paper-less way of providing and participating in teaching and learning, a system for documentation of student participation, contact, conduct and the like are absolutely vital to the success of an online course.  One thing I resonated with from the discussion of student attrition was the necessity of the instructor to reach out to students who are not participating/completing assignments.  It has been my experience with my own children as they have had e-learning thrust upon them for whatever reason, that many if not most instructors are NOT reaching out unfortunately.

For the past few weeks of remote learning we have had division meetings (Google Meets) of a varying number of participants.  Groups have beeen as small as three and as large as 40.  Synchronous discussions are benficial for sharing information and getting feedback from smaller groups--I would say five or less.  Asynchronous discussions are better for larger groups.  I suggested the later for our division meetings in lieu of a synchronous discussion.  It was chaos when we tried to have a Google Meet with 15-16 people.