Transcript SOMETHINGS NEVER CHANGE: THE BASICS OF GOOD (ON …

Research on the relationship
between academic
development and student
learning: Challenging realities
?
Neil Haigh, (AUT University)
2007
FORCES
Clearly and precisely define role and associated performance
accountabilities + performance evaluated robustly, including through
research
I can’t readily define my role
I can’t provide compelling
evidence that I do work
effectively: that through my
work, student learning is
enhanced.
Some Academic Developers
Status of research-based evidence
Prebble et al (2004) NZ Ministry of Education
The ultimate purpose of academic development practice is the enhancement of
student learning outcomes. Research-based evidence that academic
development can contribute to the achievement of that purpose is limited in
both quantity and quality.
the synthesis highlights the paucity of New Zealand research in this area,
with only three New Zealand based studies exploring the link between
academic staff development and the outcomes for teachers or students and no
studies that address Maori or Pasifika contexts
Trowler and Bamber (2005)
There is little research which clearly links effective student learning with
improvements stemming from lecturer training. What studies there have been
are either inconclusive, making no claims to generalizability or reliability
….or are small scale ….and make no attempt to link apparently positive
outcomes for course participants to the learning outcomes of their students
• National project, academic developers in all NZ Universities.
• Academic development support for teachers and its
impact on learning of students in first year courses.
• Academic Developers and teachers collaboratively develop
teaching and learning enhancement initiatives (TLEIs).
• Questions:
How can academic developers and teachers work together to
enhance students’ learning experiences and achievement? (ways of
engaging in academic development)
What impact do teaching and learning enhancement initiatives
(TLEIs) developed by academic developers and teachers have on
students’ learning experiences and achievement in large first year
classes?
How can the impact of academic developers on student learning be
determined?
Other influences
Academic Developers
Development Activities
Teacher’s Thoughts
and Actions
Teaching and
Learning
Enhancement
Initiatives (TLEIs)
Other influences
Student
Learning
Impacts
Why?
Guskey 1997
• Confusion/inconsistency over effectiveness criteria
• Limited use of student learning as key impact criterion – mainly teacher
impacts.
• Misguided focus on ‘main effects’ – inadequate account of subtle
variations in complex array of factors associated with any AD initiative.
• Relative neglect of qualitative data and indicators.
Trowler and Bamba 2005
AD agenda mainly focused on individual teachers. Limited concurrent
attention on organizational environments which can limit teacher ‘elbow
room’.
Why?
Realities of teaching – learning contexts (Haigh and Katterns, 1984)
Factors that may help or hinder teacher
and student learning:
• invariably numerous
• interact in very complex ways
• often unknown, unpredictable
• often uncontrollable
• have probabilistic relationships with
• learning.
Can raise or lower the odds, but no certainties – no recipes.
But – literature provides guidelines
For academic developers:
• Deepen pedagogical content knowledge vs content knowledge
and generic teaching practices.
• Continuous, coherent, extended engagement vs one-off,
disconnected encounters.
• Iterative cycles of development activity.
• Encounters/activities woven into daily life of teacher.
• Align closely with teacher’s immediate goals, interests, needs.
But – literature provides guidelines
Academic developers ctd.
• Research evidence informs AD and teachers directed to research.
• Teacher inquiries into questions/issues encouraged and supported.
ADs model such inquiry.
• Data about student responses gathered, responded to – underway.
• Take account of/align changes with other initiatives within
department, faculty, institution.
But – literature provides guidelines
And, for researchers
• Action research strategy - appropriate given interacting purposes of
change in practice and research on practice; complexities,
ambiguity and changeable nature of the situation; participation of
practitioners as co-researchers.
• In-depth case study approach - to recognize the realities of
everyday academic development, teaching, learning.
• Multiple case studies - may allow generalizability/situation
specificity to be assessed.
• Comprehensive, rich data from multiple sources – to enable
potential influences on teacher and student behaviour to
be teased out and effects traced.
• Maximize and triangulate data - as data will vary in validity and
reliability. Some weak in isolation.
But – literature provides guidelines
Researchers ctd.
• On-going extended data gathering - to acknowledge timeframes for
change (encounter, try-out, evaluate, practise, fine tune, embed).
• Timing for data gathering and analysis - must take into account
relevance to on-going teacher and academic development
decision-making, as well as research agenda
• Teachers’ first-hand observations and accounts – use when
defensible as well as significant data
• Student learning data - needs to take into account the purposes of
specific TLEIs as well as general learning goals
• Feasibility and appropriateness of data gathering given need to
maintain authenticity of teaching and academic development – are
important design considerations.
AUT University Case Study
• Introduction to Hospitality Management:
a large, part one core paper
• Concerns about overall learning results
(54% successful completion)
• A new teacher assigned to the paper (Chris)
• Two academic developers from Centre for Educational and
Professional Development CEPD) working with Chris (Amanda
and Brendan).
• One member of CEPD overseeing research dimension of project,
limited contribution to academic development.
• We are all are co-researchers as well as practitioners.
Academic Developer Influence??
Table Two: Grade Distribution
Table One: Number Enrolled and Percentage Passed
120
100%
100
80%
Number / Percentage
80
A+
A
A-
60%
60
Enrolled
B+
Pass %
B
BC+
40
C
40%
CD
20
20%
0
2004
2005
2006A
2006B
2007A
0%
New teacher
TLEIs implemented
2004
2005
2006A
2006B
2007A
New teacher
TLEIs implemented
The Data and Data Sources
The Data - Features
 Influences
• external, internal; macro, meso, micro
• vary in stability, extent and timing of impact
• interactions - complex, cumulative, concurrent
• some dissonance likely – response may be compromise
 Inner mental life
Insights into
• influences aware of
• factors determining how influential particular influences are
• thoughts influenced (e.g. meanings, explanations)
• response to dissonance when experienced
• decisions/plans made (incl. TLEIs)
 Actions, Interactions (AD, T, S; AD – T, T – S)
• actual actions – what, attributes
 Material Artefacts
• available, created
 Outcomes
• changed AD/T/S thoughts, plans, actions
• teacher learning, student learning, academic developer learning
Data Analysis: Language TLEIs
About:
• learning and teaching of
discipline/subject and
industry vocabulary
• meeting needs of EAL
students
Language-Related TLEIs - Analysis
Continuing Challenges
• Acknowledging longstanding influences and time between potential
and actual influence - requires a life history approach.
• Can differentiate the beating wings, but weighting their influence/impact
difficult, if not impossible.
• TLEIs can have interacting purposes and impacts (scaffolding, and
language support). Not discrete.
• Impact of some TLEIs (revised learning outcomes) not reflected in
specific achievement gains.
• Accepting incompleteness of data
(avoid overloading, maintain authenticity)
• Accuracy of delayed interpretations
• Handling the mass of data