Social software in Higher Education:the diversity of applications and their contributions to students' learning experiences

Higher education institutions are increasingly using social software tools to support teaching and learning. Despite the fact that social software is often used in a social context, these applications can significantly contribute to the educational experience of a student. However, as the social software domain comprises a considerable diversity of tools, the respective tools can be expected to differ in the way they can contribute to teaching and learning. In this review on the educational use of social software, we systematically analyze and compare the diverse social software tools and identify their contributions to teaching and learning. By integrating established learning theory and the extant literature on the individual social software applications we seek to contribute to a theoretical foundation for social software use and the choice of tools. Case vignettes from several UK higher education institutions are used to illustrate the different applications of social software tools in teaching and learning.

Perceptions of learning and teaching quality in Higher Education:developing a culture of co-creation of value

Perceptions about the quality of learning and teaching in Higher Education has for many years focused upon the application of market based principles. This includes the notion of students as “customers” of the Higher Education Institutions (HEI) service. We argue that the application of the customer analogy is unhelpful however, as students this approach is likely to affect student expectations about the service and their judgements about its quality. The purpose of this paper is to propose a study consisting of a series of interventions to develop a culture of value co-creation at a UK based HEI. By introducing CCV principles, it is hoped to steer students away from seeing themselves as “customers”, and passive recipients of in the learning and teaching process, to one where they take responsibility for their own learning experience, to be explored and acted upon in partnership with their lecturers and other stakeholders.

Multiple criteria decision-making techniques in higher education

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to review the literature which focuses on four major higher education decision problems. These are: resource allocation; performance measurement; budgeting; and scheduling. Design/methodology/approach: Related articles appearing in the international journals from 1996 to 2005 are gathered and analyzed so that the following three questions can be answered: "What kind of decision problems were paid most attention to?"; "Were the multiple criteria decision-making techniques prevalently adopted?"; and "What are the inadequacies of these approaches?" Findings: Based on the inadequacies, some improvements and possible future work are recommended, and a comprehensive resource allocation model is developed taking account of these factors. Finally, a new knowledge-based goal programming technique which integrates some operations of analytic hierarchy process is proposed to tackle the model intelligently. Originality/value: Higher education has faced the problem of budget cuts or constrained budgets for the past 30 years. Managing the process of the higher education system is, therefore, a crucial and urgent task for the decision makers of universities in order to improve their performance or competitiveness. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

New lecturers' beliefs about learning, teaching and assessment in higher education:the role of the PGCLTHE programme

This study was carried out with new lecturers on a two year Post Graduate Certificate in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education programme in a UK university. The aim was to establish their beliefs about how studying on the programme aligned with their teaching and learning philosophy and what, if anything, had changed or constrained those beliefs. Ten lecturers took part in an in-depth semi-structured interview. Content analysis of the transcripts suggested positive reactions to the programme but lecturers’ new insights were sometimes constrained by departments and university bureaucracy, particularly in the area of assessment. The conflicting roles of research and teaching were also a major issue facing these new professionals.

Role of the educator in social software initiatives in Further and Higher Education:a conceptualisation and research agenda

Higher and further education institutions are increasingly using social software tools to support teaching and learning. A growing body of research investigates the diversity of tools and their range of contributions. However, little research has focused on investigating the role of the educator in the context of a social software initiative, even though the educator is critical for the introduction and successful use of social software in a course environment. Hence, we argue that research on social software should place greater emphasis on the educators, as their roles and activities (such as selecting the tools, developing the tasks and facilitating the student interactions on these tools) are instrumental to most aspects of a social software initiative. To this end, we have developed an agenda for future research on the role of the educator. Drawing on role theory, both as the basis for a systematic conceptualization of the educator role and as a guiding framework, we have developed a series of concrete research questions that address core issues associated with the educator roles in a social software context and provide recommendations for further investigations. By developing a research agenda we hope to stimulate research that creates a better understanding of the educator’s situation and develops guidelines to help educators carry out their social software initiatives. Considering the significant role an educator plays in the initiation and conduct of a social software initiative, our research agenda ultimately seeks to contribute to the adoption and efficient use of social software in the educational domain.

Essential features of serious games design in higher education:linking learning attributes to game mechanics

This paper consolidates evidence and material from a range of specialist and disciplinary fields to provide an evidence-based review and synthesis on the design and use of serious games in higher education. Search terms identified 165 papers reporting conceptual and empirical evidence on how learning attributes and game mechanics may be planned, designed and implemented by university teachers interested in using games, which are integrated into lesson plans and orchestrated as part of a learning sequence at any scale. The findings outline the potential of classifying the links between learning attributes and game mechanics as a means to scaffold teachers’ understanding of how to perpetuate learning in optimal ways while enhancing the in-game learning experience. The findings of this paper provide a foundation for describing methods, frames and discourse around experiences of design and use of serious games, linked to methodological limitations and recommendations for further research in this area.

Something to talk about: Content and Language Integrated Learning in Modern Languages in British Higher Education. A case study of German at Aston University

This thesis investigates Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in German undergraduate programmes in the UK. At its core is a study of how one German department integrates the teaching of language and content in its undergraduate programmes and how instructors and students experience this approach. This micro-context is embedded in the wider macro-context of UK Higher Education and subject to outside forces - be they political, economic, socio-cultural - whose effects will manifest in more or less obvious ways. Data was collected via an online survey of Heads of German at British universities to determine the status quo of CLIL in UK Higher Education and to investigate how certain institutional parameters determine the introduction of CLIL in Higher Education. This project employs a mixed-method case study approach and is based on student questionnaires and semi-structured interview with German teaching staff. The study brings to light a number of significant aspects. For example, contrary to popular belief, content provision in the L2 is rather common at British universities, which is currently not reflected in the research. Student data indicates that German students perceive clear advantages in the university’s approach to CLIL. They consider German-taught content classes challenging yet beneficial for their language development. Staff interviews have yielded intriguing information about perceived advantages and disadvantages of CLIL, about its implications for classroom practice, and about instructors’ attitude towards teacher training, which echo findings from similar investigations in European contexts. Finally, the results of the macro-analysis and the case study are compared and contrasted with findings from European research on ICLHE/CLIL to determine differences and similarities with the British context, a set of recommendations is made regarding CLIL practice at the case study institution, and some implications these indings may have for the future of CLIL in British higher education are discussed.

Managing the multiplicities of graduate level education! Are Master’s students’ expectations matched by their experiences?

With rapid increases in student fees reflecting moves towards a QUASI Market model of Higher Education in the UK and across much of the Western World[1], many universities find themselves having to meet progressively higher levels of student expectations[2]. This is particularly the case at undergraduate level, where increases in fees over the past decade have far exceeded inflation. Yet with so much attention on ‘consumer savvy’ undergraduates, the question of whether Master’s level students’ expectations are matched by their experiences is one which remains largely unanswered. Grounded in an empirically grounded approach to learning and teaching developed by the paper authors[3], this paper sets out to being to answer this question. In doing so it makes a distinctive contribution to debates about graduate level engineering education and concludes with a number of recommendations. Discussion: The ‘MSc: Managing Expectations’ Project analyses the expectations and experiences of Graduate level Engineering Management Students over a two year period. Focusingon the ‘student experience’, three main concepts are identified as being particular relevant to enhancing learning [3]: Relationships: Variety: Synergy. Relationships: Based on empirical research, the significance of Relationships within the academic environment is discussed with particular attention being paid to the value of students’ social and academic support networks, including academic tutoring. Variety: Grounded in a statistical analysis of ‘engagement data’ together with survey and interview findings, the concept of variety critically examines students’ perspectives and experiencesof different approaches to learning and teaching. Synergy: Possibly the most important concept discussed within this paper, the need for constructively aligned curriculum is extended to reflect the students’ apriori knowledge and experienceas well as employer and societal demands and expectations. The conclusion brings the different concepts within the discussion together, providing a set of practical recommendations for colleagues working both at graduate and undergraduate level. References 1.Gibbs, P. (2001) "Higher education as a market: a problem or solution?." Studies in Higher Education 26. 1. pp. 85-94. 2.Tricker, T., (2005) Student Expectations-How do we measure up. University of Sheffield. Available from: http://www.persons.org.uk/tricker%20paper.pdf Accessed 9/10/14 3.Clark, R. & Andrews, J. (2014). Relationships, Variety & Synergy [RVS]: The Vital Ingredients for Scholarship in Engineering Education? A Case-Study. European Journal of Engineering Education. 39.6. pp. 585-600.