Engaging tutors in using e-repositories for learning and teaching

Universities which set up online repositories for the management of learning and teaching resources commonly find that uptake is poor. Tutors are often reluctant to upload their materials to e-repositories, even though the same tutors are happy to upload resources to the virtual learning environment (e.g. Blackboard, Moodle, Sakai) and happy to upload their research papers to the university’s research publications repository. The paper reviews this phenomenon and suggests constructive ways in which tutors can be encouraged to engage with an e-repository. The authors have recently completed a major project “Developing Repositories at Worcester” which is part of a group of similar projects in the UK. The paper includes the feedback and the lessons learned from these projects, based on the publications and reports they have produced. They cover ways of embedding repository use into institutional working practice, and give examples of different types of repository designed to meet the needs of those using different kinds of learning and teaching resources. As well as this specific experience, the authors summarise some of the main findings from UK publications, in particular the December 2008 report of Joint Information Systems Committee: Good intentions: improving the evidence base in support of sharing learning materials and Online Innovation in Higher Education, Ron Cooke’s report to a UK government initiative on the future of Higher Education. The issues covered include the development of Web 2.0 style repositories rather than conventionally structured ones, the use of tags rather than metadata, the open resources initiative, the best use for conventional repositories, links to virtual learning environments, and the processes for the management and support of repositories within universities. In summary the paper presents an optimistic, constructive view of how to embed the use of e-repositories into the working practices of university tutors. Equally, the authors are aware of the considerable difficulties in making progress and are realistic about what can be achieved. The paper uses evidence and experience drawn from those working in this field to suggest a strategic vision in which the management of e-learning resources is productive, efficient and meets the needs of both tutors and their students.

A bridge too far? Breaching the research/learning and teaching nexus in a previously research-led university

The relationship between research and learning and teaching represents what has been described as ‘amongst the most intellectually tangled, managerially complex and politically contentious issues in mass higher education’ (Scott, 2005, p 53). Despite this, arguments that in order to achieve high quality scholarly outcomes, university teachers need to adopt an approach to teaching similar to that of research (i.e. founded upon academic rigour and evidence), has long been discussed in the literature (see for example, Elton, 2005 & Healey, 2000). However, the practicalities of promoting an empirical and evidence-based approach to teaching within a research-led institution makes dealing with the research/learning and teaching nexus a somewhat challenging proposition. Drawing upon the findings of a mixed methodological study, this paper critically analyses the pedagogical, organisational and practical issues encountered by academics and support staff working within a newly established Centre for Learning Innovation and Professional Practice. Comprising an eclectic group of staff drawn from across the five Schools in the University, the Centre is dedicated to enhancing student learning through the development of evidence based teaching practice. Based upon the premise that the promotion of research-led teaching will act to bring teaching and research together, and in doing so enhance students learning experiences (Simmons & Elen 2007), the paper critically analyses the challenges encountered by staff responsible for developing and introducing a new learning & teaching focused organisational strategy (by reflecting on the previous 12 months work). In doing so it makes a significant contribution to current academic theory and debate in the areas of pedagogic practice and organisational management. Focusing specifically on the impact of the new policy on various aspects of university life including, pedagogic practice, student support, staff training, and organisational management, the paper critically addresses the cultural and attitudinal challenges of change management (Kotter, 1996) within a ‘grey-brick’ university. It concludes by arguing that the move towards becoming a more learning-focused university has started to develop an awareness of the positive impact the change initiative is having on the student experience and wider institution; whilst also drawing attention to the organisational challenges ahead.

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.

Actas da II International Conference «Learning and Teaching in Higher Education/ Learning Orchestration in Higher Education»

É ponto assente que o desenvolvimento social e económico de um país depende do conhecimento e do nível educativo dos seus cidadãos. Num momento de crise económica profunda em que a sustentabilidade do ensino superior se encontra ameaçada e a sua organização com rumo incerto, importa, mais do que nunca, criar um espaço de reflexão em que a ciência se pronuncie, aproximando e colocando em evidência os contributos que em vários domínios se vão produzindo. Nesta conferência, que se pretende em continuidade com a realizada em 2010, elegemos como tema central a qualidade do ensino e da aprendizagem e, tendo em conta a realidade em que nos inscrevemos, alargamos a discussão aos contextos e aos modelos de organização que os podem consubstanciar. Pode parecer um paradoxo centrar esta conferência na componente mais pedagógica do ensino superior quando toda a pressão de avaliação interna e externa das instituições e dos docentes incide particularmente sobre a produção científica. Mas talvez não. Assumimos que a reflexão de cariz pedagógico continua a não ser uma prática corrente no meio universitário português que, durante gerações, se habituou a um ensino universitário tradicional destinado apenas a uma pequena elite e se alheou dos desafios da massificação de que foi alvo. A ideia de que pedagogia apenas diz respeito à relação do professor com crianças ou jovens até ao ensino secundário permaneceu latente, tornando estéril qualquer discussão que, na perspectiva de alguns, seria desnecessária e até contraproducente no ensino superior. Um novo paradigma terá de ser assumido por um ensino universitário que busca o ideal da excelência, colocando no centro do debate o equilíbrio entre as dimensões pedagógica e investigativa e uma redobrada atenção à sociedade e às mudanças se, verdadeiramente, o que pretendemos é ganhar o desafio da qualidade.

Teaching and assessing critical thinking : the interaction of student approaches to learning and teaching approaches

This study explored the relationship among student approaches to learning and teaching methods on critical thinking in two business units. Key findings included differences in critical thinking scores between student approaches to learning and some evidence of an interaction between student approaches to learning and critical thinking teach method (immersion vs. infusion). Possible explanations for the results are examined and implications for developing critical thinking skills across a degree discussed. What is apparent is that as Universities move towards program-wide level assessment of critical thinking, further work is required in terms of the design of critical thinking teaching interventions and assessment at the unit, school, and degree level. The session will discuss the challenges in developing critical thinking programs in individual units and at the Faculty level.

Reframing evaluation of learning and teaching: An approach to change

Evaluation practices in the Higher Education sector have been criticised for having unclear purpose and principles; ignoring the complexity and changing nature of learning and teaching and the environments in which they occur; relying almost exclusively on student ratings of teachers working in classroom settings; lacking reliability and validity; using data for inappropriate purposes; and focusing on accountability and marketing rather than the improvement of learning and teaching. In response to similar criticism from stakeholders, in 2011 Queensland University of Technology (QUT) began a project which aims to reframe the organisation’s approach to the evaluation of learning and teaching. This paper describes the existing evaluation system; the emergence and early development of the project; and formulation of a conceptual framework identifying key dimensions of evaluation. It then compares the draft framework with other conceptualisations and models of evaluation identified in the literature, to determine its validity and suitability for supporting QUT’s plans for the future. Overall, the paper represents a structured evaluation of the REFRAME project at a particular point in its lifecycle. Given that the project follows an evidence based, practice-led process and applies an ongoing action research cycle, the findings are presented in the belief that QUT’s experience is broadly applicable to other institutions which may be contemplating change in relation to evaluation of learning and teaching.

Learning and teaching reflection : developing capacities for lifelong learning

Reflection is an essential part of being an effective learner and working as a productive teacher. It enables the learner or teacher to deliberate about the factors that lead to successful learning and teaching for them and/or their students, in a particular place and for a specific purpose, so they can make reasoned and effective choices. This chapter introduces important frameworks that cover a century of thinking around reflection in education, and illustrates how preservice teachers can use these ideas across three phases. First, becoming a reflective learner as a university student to enhance learning and assessment outcomes; second, becoming a reflective teacher to improve classroom teaching and learning outcomes; and third, developing the reflective capacities of primary students so they can enhance their skills for lifelong learning.

Collaborative learning and critical thinking in technology-enhanced environments : an instructional design framework

The nature and characteristics of how learners learn today are changing. As technology use in learning and teaching continues to grow, its integration to facilitate deep learning and critical thinking becomes a primary consideration. The implications for learner use, implementation strategies, design of integration frameworks and evaluation of their effectiveness in learning environments cannot be overlooked. This study specifically looked at the impact that technology-enhanced learning environments have on different learners’ critical thinking in relation to eductive ability, technological self-efficacy, and approaches to learning and motivation in collaborative groups. These were explored within an instructional design framework called CoLeCTTE (collaborative learning and critical thinking in technology-enhanced environments) which was proposed, revised and used across three cases. The field of investigation was restricted to three key questions: 1) Do learner skill bases (learning approach and eductive ability) influence critical thinking within the proposed CoLeCTTE framework? If so, how?; 2) Do learning technologies influence the facilitation of deep learning and critical thinking within the proposed CoLeCTTE framework? If so, how?; and 3) How might learning be designed to facilitate the acquisition of deep learning and critical thinking within a technology-enabled collaborative environment? The rationale, assumptions and method of research for using a mixed method and naturalistic case study approach are discussed; and three cases are explored and analysed. The study was conducted at the tertiary level (undergraduate and postgraduate) where participants were engaged in critical technical discourse within their own disciplines. Group behaviour was observed and coded, attributes or skill bases were measured, and participants interviewed to acquire deeper insights into their experiences. A progressive case study approach was used, allowing case investigation to be implemented in a "ladder-like" manner. Cases 1 and 2 used the proposed CoLeCTTE framework with more in-depth analysis conducted for Case 2 resulting in a revision of the CoLeCTTE framework. Case 3 used the revised CoLeCTTE framework and in-depth analysis was conducted. The findings led to the final version of the framework. In Cases 1, 2 and 3, content analysis of group work was conducted to determine critical thinking performance. Thus, the researcher used three small groups where learner skill bases of eductive ability, technological self-efficacy, and approaches to learning and motivation were measured. Cases 2 and 3 participants were interviewed and observations provided more in-depth analysis. The main outcome of this study is analysis of the nature of critical thinking within collaborative groups and technology-enhanced environments positioned in a theoretical instructional design framework called CoLeCTTE. The findings of the study revealed the importance of the Achieving Motive dimension of a student’s learning approach and how direct intervention and strategies can positively influence critical thinking performance. The findings also identified factors that can adversely affect critical thinking performance and include poor learning skills, frustration, stress and poor self-confidence, prioritisations over learning; and inadequate appropriation of group role and tasks. These findings are set out as instructional design guidelines for the judicious integration of learning technologies into learning and teaching practice for higher education that will support deep learning and critical thinking in collaborative groups. These guidelines are presented in two key areas: technology and tools; and activity design, monitoring, control and feedback.

Kaleidoscope : Reframing learning and teaching evaluation through a shared stakeholder lens

Sector wide interest in Reframe: QUT’s Evaluation Framework continues with a number of institutions requesting finer details as QUT embeds the new approach to evaluation across the university in 2013. This interest, both nationally and internationally has warranted QUT’s collegial response to draw upon its experiences from developing Reframe into distilling and offering Kaleidoscope back to the sector. The word Reframe is a relevant reference for QUT’s specific re-evaluation, reframing and adoption of a new approach to evaluation; whereas Kaleidoscope reflects the unique lens through which any other institution will need to view their own cultural specificity and local context through an extensive user-led stakeholder engagement approach when introducing new approaches to learning and teaching evaluation. Kaleidoscope’s objectives are for QUT to develop its research-based stakeholder approach to distil the successful experience exhibited in the Reframe Project into a transferable set of guidelines for use by other tertiary institutions across the sector. These guidelines will assist others to design, develop, and deploy, their own culturally specific widespread organisational change informed by stakeholder engagement and organisational buy-in. It is intended that these guidelines will promote, support and enable other tertiary institutions to embark on their own evaluation projects and maximise impact. Kaleidoscope offers an institutional case study of widespread organisational change underpinned by Reframe’s (i) evidence-based methodology; (ii) research including published environmental scan, literature review (Alderman, et al., 2012), development of a conceptual model (Alderman, et al., in press 2013), project management principles (Alderman & Melanie, 2012) and national conference peer reviews; and (iii) year-long strategic project with national outreach to collaboratively engage the development of a draft set of National Guidelines. Kaleidoscope’s aims are to inform Higher Education evaluation policy development through national stakeholder engagement, the finalisation of proposed National Guidelines. In correlation with the conference paper, the authors will present a Draft Guidelines and Framework ready for external peer review by evaluation practitioners from the Higher Education sector, as part of Kaleidoscope’s dissemination strategy (Hinton & Gannaway, 2011) applying illuminative evaluation theory (Parlett & Hamilton, 1976), through conference workshops and ongoing discussions (Shapiro, et al., 1983; Jacobs, 2000). The initial National Guidelines will be distilled from the Reframe: QUT’s Evaluation Framework’s Policy, Protocols, and incorporated Business Rules. It is intended that the outcomes of Kaleidoscope are owned by and reflect sectoral engagement, including iterative evaluation through multiple avenues of dissemination and collaboration including the Higher Education sector. The dissemination strategy with the inclusion of Illuminative Evaluation methodology provides an inclusive opportunity for other institutions and stakeholders across the Higher Education sector to give voice through the information-gathering component of evaluating the draft Guidelines, providing a comprehensive understanding of the complex realities experienced across the Higher Education sector, and thereby ‘illuminating’ both the shared and unique lenses and contexts. This process will enable any final guidelines developed to have broader applicability, greater acceptance, enhanced sustainability and additional relevance benefiting the Higher Education sector, and the adoption and adaption by any single institution for their local contexts.