Transcript Document

Using e-technologies to support
learning
CETL/SWAP/ESCALATE
Stranmillis University College
March 1st 2006
Jon Alltree – The Blended Learning Unit
Overview of session
•
•
•
•
The BLU
Blended Learning and e-technology
Examples of Blended Learning
Curriculum design
BLU team
• Prof Peter Bullen - Director
• Jon Alltree – Deputy Director
• Prof Diana Kornbort – Evaluation
coordinator/BLU teacher (0.4 FTE to BLU)
• 11 more BLU teachers (0.4 FTE to BLU)
• Faculty Champions
• Administrator Liz Mellor (0.5 FTE)
• Student consultant Nuz Quadri
BLU’s Goals
•
•
•
•
•
Minimising barriers to using IT
Pedagogic development
Evaluation
Internal communication and dissemination
External communication and dissemination
BLENDED LEARNING
“Educational provision where high
quality e-learning opportunities and
excellent campus-based learning are
combined or blended in coherent,
reflective and innovative ways so that
learning is enhanced and choice is
increased.” (UH CETL bid 2004)
Blended Learning
“the thoughtful integration of
classroom face-to-face learning
experiences with online learning
experiences”
Garrison and Kanuka, 2004 p96
Why Blended Learning?
• Widening participation
– Student numbers
– Non traditional students
– Demands on their time eg
• student as workers
• home demands
• Student expectations and capability with
technology
• Opportunities afforded by technology
Some aspects of F2F
• Humans are sociable beings (can influence
motivation)
• F2F dialogue very ‘rich’ (including NVC),
immediate and flexible
• F2F is particularly suitable to some types of
activity – eg developing complex practical
skills
However…
• Digital technology makes it easy to capture
F2F interactions and make them available
electronically eg
– Podcasts, narrated slideshows, videostreaming
• Blended Learning can enable teachers use
more of their F2F contact for developing
higher order (intellectual) skills
• Timetabled contact is inflexible in respect of
time and place
Some aspects of e-learning
• Flexible in when and where students learn
– Students can learn at their own pace
– Can enhance/provide structure for independent study time
(‘extends’ the classroom)
• Rich potential of multimedia learning materials
– Learning preferences
– Disability issues
– Simulations
• Collaborative opportunities for people who are separated in time
and space
–
–
–
–
Learning preferences (eg reflectors)
Disability issues
Can give some their voice
Encourages written communication
• Opportunities for automation eg
– Feedback
– Customisation of the learning environment
Some of the technologies we use
• MLE/VLE
– Resources
– Communication and collaboration
• Routine applications (eg Office, email)
– Straightforward use
– More sophisticated use
• SMIRK (presentation software)
• WIKIS
• IAWB/Tablet PC’s
Examples of Blended Learning
• PAD 13
• SMIRK and virtual lectures
• W.A.T.S.
Some of the benefits…
• Materials can readily be made available in advance…
and afterwards
– ‘Extending the classroom’
– Reserving F2F time for higher level activities
• Digital record of classroom interactions can facilitate
review or support those unable to attend
• Communication facilities supported group between
teaching sessions
• Electronic assignment submission minimised feedback
turnaround
• Resources and communication facilities located
together ..and available 24/7
SMIRK
• Simple Media-Integrating Resource Creator
• Developed by:
– David Kraithman (BLU/Business School)
– Steve Bennett (BLU/Computer science)
•
•
•
•
Accessibility agenda to the fore
Special prize for ‘Teaching tools’ at 2004 EASA
Steve was THES e-tutor runner-up 2004
Delivery via StudyNet ‘designed in’
Slide order can
be controlled
by clicking on
title or using
access keys
Lecture can be
paused and
resumed by user.
Links are listed
separately for
users with limited
manual control of
mouse
Where available, videos showing signing
for the deaf or other ancillary media appear
in separate region of screen.
Captioning is present
for hearing-impaired
users and to aid those
studying in a foreign
language.
Using SMIRK for virtual lectures
(David Kraithman)
• Microeconomics module
– Compulsory
– 870 students
Lecture
+
seminar
Changed to:
Virtual lecture
+
Participatory workshop
+
Seminar
Outcome in Microeconomics
• Referral rate decreased by 40%
• Students with dyslexia scored an average of
2 grade points higher than their other studies
• The international students found the
combination of text and narration very helpful
for developing their language skills
W.A.T.S.
• Weekly Assessed Tutorial Sheets
– Student unique
– Generated by Excel and Mail Merge
– Delivered via email and StudyNet
• Fluid mechanics and thermodynamics
module
• Developed by Mark Russell (BLU/AADE)
– THES e-tutor of the year 2003
– NTF 2005
WATS league tables
No of students getting queston correct
120
WATS 7
100
80
60
40
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Question number
8
9
10
11
Outcome in Fluid Mechanics
and Thermodynamics
• Mean exam mark increased from 39%
to 47%
• Referral rate reduced by 33%
• High level of student satisfaction
• Year on year refinements and increases
in performance indicators since
inception
Conversational framework
(Laurillard 1993)
• Learning is dialogic and iterative
• Four dimensions
– Discursive
– Adaptive
– Interactive (which includes feedback)
– Reflective
Surface approach
• Intention only to complete task requirements and
student distorts the structure of the task…
–
–
–
–
–
–
Focus on the signs (words, sentences, formulae etc)
Focus on unrelated parts of the task
Memorise information for assessments
Associate facts and concepts unreflectively
Fail to distinguish principles from examples
Treat the task as external imposition
• External emphasis/focus/motivation
(Ramsden 1992 p 46)
Deep approach
• Intention to understand…
– Focus on what is signified (author’s argument or concepts
applicable to solve problem)
– Relate previous knowledge to new knowledge
– Relate knowledge from different courses
– Relate theoretical ideas to everyday experience
– Relate and distinguish evidence from argument
– Organise and structure knowledge into coherent whole
• Internal emphasis/focus/motivation
(Ramsden 1992 p 46)
Surface approaches are encouraged by…
• Assessment methods emphasising recall or the
application of trivial procedural knowledge
• Assessment methods that create anxiety
• Cynical or conflicting messages about rewards
• An excessive amount of material in the curriculum
• Poor or absent feedback on progress
• Lack of independence in studying
• Lack of interest in and background knowledge of the
subject matter
• Previous experiences of educational establishments
that encourage surface approaches
(Ramsden 1992 p81)
Deep approaches are encouraged by…
• Teaching and assessment methods that foster active
and long term engagement with learning tasks
• Stimulating and considerate teaching, especially
teaching which demonstrates the teacher’s personal
commitment to the subject matter and stresses its
meaning and relevance to the students
• Clearly stated academic expectations
• Interest in and background knowledge of the subject
matter
• Previous experience of educational settings that
encourage these approaches
(Ramsden 1992 p81)
Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate
Education
Good teachers:
• Encourage contact between students and staff
• Develop reciprocity and co-operation among
students
• Encourage active learning
• Give prompt feedback
• Emphasise time on task
• Communicate high expectations
• Respect diverse talents and ways of learning
Chickering and Gamson (1987)
BL spectrum
• DEST* classification
– Web supplemented – online participation
optional
– Web dependent – online participation
compulsory
– Fully online
*(Australian) Department of Education, Science and Training
Web supplemented
• Online aspect optional eg
– Links to wider reading
– Revision and review materials (eg practical
skills videoclips, formative quizzes)
– Online discussion site for tutor/peer and
peer/peer support
Web dependent
• The e-learning and F2F components are
both essential
– co-dependent eg
• David’s virtual lectures in microeconomics
• Mark’s use of WATS in Fluids and Thermodynamics
– separately eg
• F2F Lecture and tutorial on topic A and Electronic
Reusable Learning Object** on topic B
**eg http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/morality_play.htm
Fully Online
• e-learning route with no (or minimal?)
F2F component
– One end of the Blended Learning spectrum
– Quality and effectiveness of e-learning
resources and support critical
– Although a minority of people may prefer
such an option, it is typically for people
who cannot attend
– Eg UH Flexi route for PGCE
Questions to ask?
• How can e-learning opportunities….
– enable me to make better use of my F2F
contact time?
– give the students greater flexibility in when
and where they study??
References
Anagnostopoulo K (2002) Designing to Learn and Learning to Design: An overview of instructional design models. Available at:
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=198
Biggs J (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University
Press
Chickering AW and Ehrmann SC Implementing the seven principles: Technology as the lever.
http://www.tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html
Chickering AW and Gamson ZF (1987) New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Applying the Seven Principles for Good
Practice in Undergraduate Education. Jossey-Bass.
See the following for a good overview: http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/7princip.htm
Garrison GR and Kanuka H (2004) Blended Learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet
and Higher Education. 7, 95-105
Laurillard D (1993) Rethinking University Teaching. A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology. Routledge,
London
Ramsden P (1992) Learning to teach in higher education. Routledge, London
Also see this ‘Module Planner’ site at University of Central England – some of the videos on L, T and A are excellent
http://www.ssdd.uce.ac.uk/module/index.php?template=mainpage