core 2: teaching and learning · web view2020. 10. 28. · vanessa todd cmalt portfolio: frst...

CMALT Portfolio: First submission

Contextual statement Core 1: Operational issues Core 2: Teaching and Learning Core 3: The Wider Context Core area 4: Communicating & working with others Specialist option: Learner support Future Plans

Vanessa Todd CMALT Portfolio: Frst submission

Contextual statement

HereMacquarie University is located in Sydney, Australia. With over 45 000 students (Macquarie University, 2017), it draws not only from the surrounding suburbs but also internationally; in 2017 26% of the student population overall, and 44% of postgraduate students were on international visas (Australian University Rankings, 2018). Twenty-seven percent of students study part-time; as a proportion of domestic students, this is approximately 37% (Macquarie University, 2017).

Photo copyright Vanessa Todd, design inspired by Marion LuttenbergerNow I’m a Learning Adviser in the Learning Skills Unit at Macquarie University Library. I work directly with students to help them develop academic, writing and (increasingly) digital skills. I also advise/collaborate with academic and professional staff to design, develop and deliver learning opportunities within courses, programs and events (such as Orientation). My position description mentions skills in:

textual analysis and language feedback

pedagogy and curriculum (including assessment)

project management (scoping, structuring, completing according to an agreed plan)

developing/ maintaining productive working relationships with faculties, departments, and professional staff

working within university frameworks and policies (such as the L+T strategic framework).

2


However, increasingly my teaching, resource development, communication and collaboration is taking place online. This had required that I expand my technical skillset, but more importantly think in different ways about learning design.

ThenAt my first job teaching ELICOS (English Language Intensive Courses for Overseas Students) in the late 80’s, technology meant video- and audio-cassettes, used in class and managed by the teacher. In my second position, the Intensive English Centre had a language lab with banks of stand-alone computers with video/audio games saved on floppy disks. Activities in the language lab were generally drill based, imposed on the learner and completed individually. There were frequently problems getting the computers to run the software for lessons, so booking lab time seemed pointless. In 2007, I returned to English for Academic Purposes and higher education after working as an examiner and text writer for the IELTS English language proficiency test (ref). A shift had taken place. My new employer, Macquarie University, had recently launched an online Learning Management System (LMS), at that time hosted by Blackboard. Wi-fi was available on campus (encouraging the use of BYOD) and users could access Library and LMS systems remotely.

However, although new technologies were in place, pedagogy lagged behind. Within the Masters courses I was studying, digital resources consisted of pdfs of scanned readings and worksheets, or of long slabs of text on screen. Images (if any) tended to be decorative and videos were recorded.

At the English Language Centre where I taught English for Academic Purposes, the use of learning technology was slightly more adventurous: the LMS released in 2010 housed classroom resources (such as listening texts, video clips and links to websites), a variety of optional homework activities (ranging from drill-based activities to discussion forums) and links for submitting assignments via similarity software Turnitin.

Searching across the internet for digital resources to recommend to my students, I noticed that some resources were more effective than others, learning what made for effective elearning in a very hands-on way. By then end of my time at the ELC, I was

recommending speech-to-text apps as a tool to improve pronunciation,

reviewing the language software in the Independent Learning Centre to recommend resources to students and staff.

creating and uploading resources to the LMS for students to access independently (although many of these I’d see now as too text-heavy).

When I commenced my current role in 2014, I seized opportunities to experiment with elearning, using:

(Moodle) quizzes to encourage active learning and learning by doing

polling tools (Socrative, Poll Everywhere) to make large-group sessions more engaging and more interactive

3


workshops to introduce students to various digital tools for study

elearning solutions to requests by academics and other teams (animations, Turnitin activities, static and interactive guides) to create sustainable, at-scale support

just-in-time content housed within the LMS, following UX design principles

social media tools to reach the university community in new ways.

My pedagogical approach and choice of tools has varied according to the needs of each brief. During this time my activities have widened: from creating and experimenting by myself, to working on team projects and leading projects.

I’ve also been a learner in the digital space: taking MOOCs and cMOOCs, participating in webinars and Twitterchats. Experiencing e-learning has allowed me to reflect on what does and doesn’t work. I’ve also passed on my knowledge through in-house training, reviewing projects, writing product reviews for journals and presenting at conferences.

Next Preparing my CMALT portfolio has made me realise how little of my work is visible. For several years now I’ve worked across roles and teams within a single institution; as a result, I’ve haven’t prioritised curating evidence of my activities and skills. This portfolio has thus become the start of a long-term project to document my work.

Gaining CMALT accreditation will also help me to gain recognition for my evolving skillset. My role as a Learning Adviser is morphing; whereas previously I mostly supported students face-to-face, increasingly my teaching, learning and working takes place digitally. I’d like demonstrate the extent of my skills, and to show my commitment to continuous learning.

And on a personal note, a portfolio will be useful for reflecting on projects and achievements, strategising ways to improve, and addressing—or at least questioning—gaps in my abilities. And hopefully, provide encouragement (inspiration?) for times when I don’t feel particularly productive.

4


References Australian University Rankings (2018). International Student University Enrolment Numbers. Retrieved Oct 18 2018, http://www.universityrankings.com.au/international-student-numbers.html

Macquarie University (2017). Macquarie University Annual report 2017 (Volume 1). Retrieved from https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/governance/annual-reports

5


Core 1: Operational issues

Background: Deployment of technology at Macquarie University

While Macquarie University offers several degrees (and individual units) online via Open Universities Australia (Macquarie University, 2018b), the majority of courses run in blended mode, with a combination of face-to-face and online activities. The first Macquarie-badged fully online degree will be released in 2019 via Coursera (MGSM, 2018).

The digital experience on campus is similar to that of other Australian universities as reported in the Jisc Digital Tracker 2017 Survey (Beetham, Bailey, & Salisbury, 2017):

Wi-fi across campus, allowing for BYOD (Bring Your Own Device)

A LMS-hosted space for each unit (a unit = a course for credit) housing course information, resources (lecture ppts, course notes, assignment submission then as needed, quizzes, discussion fora) and links to electronic assignment submission.

Completion of most units assumes access to and familiarity with university digital systems, and uptake of electronic facilities demonstrates a degree of comfort with technology; in 2017, there were almost 500 000 logins to iLearn (Learning innovation Hub, 2018). Through Library systems, there were approximately 4.5 million full-text journal downloads and 3.4 million e-book/ video uses, compared to approximately 100 000 print loans (Macquarie University, 2018a).

The University Learning Technologies Policy (Macquarie University, 2014) allocates responsibility for managing and supporting learning technologies to different groups across the University. The Learning Innovation Hub (LIH) and Information Technology group (IT) are responsible for maintaining key systems (such as the LMS, staff wiki, the digital repository Kaltura, Office365 for staff and Gmail for students) and for supporting staff and students in their use. Any other non-sanctioned technologies used are the responsibility of Faculties, and departments are responsible for the management and quality assurance of learning technologies used on their programs and courses. Importantly, “(s)tudents are not to be disadvantaged in using technologies through lack of knowledge of, or access to the technologies” (Macquarie University, 2014).

Many students bring their own device (although there are PC labs available on campus and the Library offers 24 hour loans on laptops and iPads; Macquarie University, n.d.) and significantly, many students at the university access the LMS and other e-learning via mobile devices (Cahir, 2015). At the same time, some students I see at the Library InfoDesk have older devices that load more slowly. This is a powerful reminder that design of digital resources should take into account potential limitations of students’ devices and digital skills. Movements such as 2G Tuesdays (Marra, 2015) and ‘design for a cracked screen’ (Sipley, 2017) are important reminders to ensure that all students have equal access.

My understanding and use of learning technologies

6


I have developed extended my skills with technologies through MOOCs, self-paced coding classes and online training modules at Macquarie. Although pedagogy should be the primary focus of any e-learning resource, logistics such as ease of use, cost, accessibility for those with special needs, flexibility are also important considerations (Schwanbeck, 2015). Below are some of the operational issues I’ve encountered using the university LMS (iLearn) and classroom polling systems. Case Study 1: University Learning Management System iLearn

Because the LMS iLearn is a central space for almost every unit (housing content, activities, grades and communications), much of my e-learning resource development takes place on (or is eventually housed in) this space.

I first started using iLearn in 2014, only being able to upload PDFs or to type text. After completing several MQ online training modules, I experimented developing different types of activities (quizzes, lessons, books), progressed to designing and linking resource types into groups, and can now incorporate or troubleshoot elements (tables, accordions and hover tiles) by adding, inspecting and tweaking html code. I also now regularly access user logs to report on student activity and as evidence for developing new resources, and when leading projects include standards such as including alt-text for images, naming and filing related objects.

Constraints and benefits of the LMSZanjani, Edwards, Nykvist & Geva (2017) identify higher levels of data continuity, reliability and privacy as some of the benefits of LMS’s. For optimal user engagement, LMS should also have a user-friendly structure, and learning designs should use fewer rather than more tools. However, while students desire personalized, customisable, intuitive online learning spaces, integrated with other systems across the institution (Dahlstrom, Brooks & Bichsel, 2014) unfortunately Learning Management Systems can sometimes be “a spaghetti of HTML files” (Dillenbourg, Schneider & Synteta, 2002, p.4), designed more for management and administration than for learning (Castadena & Selwyn, 2018).

The challenges our team have experienced with our LMS system echo these information architecture issues. We have found it problematic because it is:

Gated (requiring log-in); the extra steps of logging in to the LMS and navigating through to our resources may discourage some students from using the resources.

Siloed: Several teams across the campus have created quality support resources, but the resources are ‘siloed’ in separate modules. If there are no hyperlinks between resources, this means additional clicks to navigate out of one resource and into another, again potentially discouraging some users.

Not searchable: to locate resources, users need to have direct links, or to have a general idea in which module or in which subtopic to search.

Firewalled in some countries; this is an issue for students required to complete university discipline modules (managed by our team) after semester has finished but who are out of the country.

Designed for teaching courses with a start and finish, assessments and grades, and teacher-student/ student-student interaction. In contrast, several of our modules have no start and finish dates, and house self-

7


access, as-needed resources. Every session more students are enrolled to the units, with the result that content and especially data logs load slowly. As a result, we now need to un-enrol graduating students regularly from the module as well.

Several of these issues could be mitigated if support/ reference resources were moved to the university website or an intranet. However, for reasons such as governance, evidence of completion and ownership, the resources sit within the LMS.

To compensate for some of the constraints mentioned, I carefully plan the information architecture of content (layout of pages, navigation between pages) and do user testing on organisation prior to release. Some strategies that I use are

uncluttered landing pages so users can rapidly assess content

organising information within content pages using the ‘F’ principle from eye tracking studies (Pernice, 2017)

use of buttons and links to direct users to related content.

Beyond the institution-supported LMS, I have experimented with a wide variety of Web 2.0 tools. Bower, Hedberg and Kuswara (2009) characterise such tools as allowing collaboration, creation of micro-content, creating of interactive designs and being open source or freely available, encouraging “student-centered and interactive approaches” (Bower, Hedberg & Kuswara, 2009, p1).

Case study 2: Increasing interactivity within a large class through polling systems.

When teaching large classes (for example at Orientation) it is difficult to give all students the opportunity to engage actively with ideas and skills, or to discuss their opinions. Moreover, commencing students, or visitors at open days can be shy and thus reluctant to speak. I’ve therefore used polling systems for:

activating prior knowledge on a topic (so that the session can address misconceptions and gaps in knowledge)

asking for personal opinion/ feelings (“What will the biggest challenge at university be?”)

requesting feedback/evaluation at the end of session

providing a humorous element so that students will relax and feel more comfortable contributing to discussion.

Because members of our team only use this technology once or twice a semester, we have stuck to ‘freemium versions’. However, I have tried different products, depending on

the question-types they offer (multiple choice, free response)

# of participants that can be hosted in a single classroom at one time

the ease of log-in (creating an account/ giving a name/ the length of the classroom name).

8


Benefits and constraints of polling systemsClassroom response systems may encourage engagement (by minimising the distraction offered by devices) and foster group dynamics (Bowskill, 2018). However, wi-fi access in lecture theatres can be problematic (Compton & Allen, 2018) and there can also be issues of allowing third-party providers access to student data (Kappers & Cutler, 2015). Bullying and trolling are not strictly speaking technical issues but the tool design (anonymous posting to a public forum) unfortunately opens up this possibility (Compton & Allen, 2018). Some of the constraints with online polling tools are:

Log-ins. Some polling tools require students to enter a log-in or to enter a classroom name. This can delay the activity.

Most polling tools will only host up to 40 participants on the free version. This means that sometimes not every student is able to post an answer as the virtual classroom becomes full.

Similarly, on the free version, most polls will only allow one classroom to be open at a time. This means that if our team are running simultaneous sessions, each team member needs to create a separate account.

Wi-fi: there are several issues here. Firstly, time can be lost from a session while visitors and new students locate and log in to the public wi-fi. Student helpers and I have had to circulate to help individual students log in. Secondly, wi-fi strength varies across the university so that in some spaces it is not possible to run the polls at all.

Because of access issues with wi-fi and log in, I now carefully consider whether polling activities warrant the potential delays and loss of time.

There are however, still reasons to use polling technologies. Firstly, even if not every student can post an answer, they can see (and enjoy) any answers posted, and enjoy doing so. Answers posted often create a g very positive and focused atmosphere where students feel comfortable to contribute to discussions. Secondly, I use polling to encourage discussion and enjoyment rather than for high-stakes assessment, so no student is disadvantaged if they cannot use the technology. Thus, this use of polling tools aligns with the university policy that use of a technology should not disadvantage any student.

Supporting the deployment of learning technologies

As my own technical skills have developed, I have been keen to share strategies with students through workshops and online resources. However, presenting these topics in workshops has sometimes been problematic, as attendees may come with widely differing skillsets and needs. I therefore tend to contextualise the information within larger topics, slowing down or speeding up discussion/ activities as needed.

After leading design and development of the iLearn module StudyWISE Intensive (discussed in Specialist option), I led training sessions for faculty support staff. In these sessions I explained the rationale for the module and the features it offered both students and support staff (who might need to collect data on student engagement). Since this time I have also fielded questions from faculty support staff

9


about some of the tools used in the module (peer-to-peer sharing). With colleagues, I facilitated an InfoClinic for Library staff called “Yes, no and Wow!” Using H5P and Canva.” Core area 1: Reflection

After preparing this section, I now think of my operational skills as expanding circles of mastery. To begin with, I was attracted to tools that looked ‘fun’ or cool, and experimented with several different products offering similar functionalities, gradually settling on one or two which offered the most benefits. I’ve learned through trial and error about their operational issues (frequently related to how accessible and easy to use they are for students). As I’ve become aware of wider issues, such as learning analytics, universal design and data protection, I’ve used these as criteria for the use or non-use of tools.

At times I’ve been able to adapt and modify the tools (through plug-ins and additional code). When they have been more widely adopted within our team, I’ve created or added to heuristics and protocols (which situation to use tools in, processes associated, such as saving versions, logical file structure). And as I have shared my work with others, I have both asked for and received help on related ‘stuck points’.

Preparing this section took a considerable amount of time, as I had to research operational policies at Macquarie and question my own practice and understandings. I’m now conscious of key criteria I can use to evaluate educational technologies in a more methodical manner. At this stage I am not responsible for the purchase of technology but should I be involved in the future, I will be able to contribute more usefully to decision-making.

10


References Beetham, H., Bailey, J. and Salisbury, F. (2017). Jisc Student Digital Experience

Tracker – Outcomes and insights from the UK and Australia. Slides from Digital Literacies ANZ webinar Tuesday 17th October, 2017. Retrieved 26 Oct 2018 http://www.dlanz.com.au/

Bowskill, N. (2018). A ‘Social Identity Approach’ as a Theory for the Design of Learning with Educational Technology: The Case of Clickers. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Networked Learning. Edited by M. Bajić, N.B. Dohn, M. de Laat, P. Jandrić & T. Ryberg.

Cahir, J. (2015). 9 things students say about using iLearn. Teche blog. Retrieved 13 Nov http://teche.ltc.mq.edu.au/9-things-students-say-using-ilearn/.

Castañeda, L. and Selwyn, N. (2018). More than tools? Making sense of the ongoing digitisations of higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 15(22). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0109-y

Crompton, M. & Allen, J. (2018). Student response systems: a rationale for their use and comparison of some cloud-based tools. Compass: Journal of learning and Teaching, 11(1). https://journals.gre.ac.uk/index.php/compass/issue/view/67

Dahlstrom, E., Brooks, D.C. & Bichsel, J. (2014). The Current Ecosystem of Learning Management Systems in Higher Education: Student, Faculty, and IT Perspectives. Research report. Louisville, CO: ECAR. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar.

Dillenbourg, P., Schneider, D. & Synteta, P. (2002). Virtual Learning Environments. In A. Dimitracopoulou. 3rd Hellenic Conference Information Communication Technologies in Education, Rhodes, Greece: Kastaniotis Editions, pp.3-18.

Kappers, W. M., & Cutler, S. L. (2015). Poll Everywhere! Even in the Classroom: An Investigation into the Impact of Using PollEverwhere in a Large-Lecture Classroom. Computers in Education Journal, 6(20). Retrieved from https://commons.erau.edu/publication/333

Learning Innovation Hub. (2018). Learning Innovation Hub 2017 Activity Wrap Up. Teche blog. Retrieved 12 Nov 2018 http://teche.mq.edu.au/2018/03/learning-innovation-hub-2017-activity-wrap-up/

Macquarie University. (2014). Learning Technologies Policy. Retrieved 12 November 2018, https://staff.mq.edu.au/work/strategy-planning-and-governance/university-policies-and-procedures/policies/learning-technologies

Macquarie University (2018a). Library Fact Sheet 2018. Retrieved 12 Nov 2018 https://www.mq.edu.au/about/campus-services-and-facilities/library/about-us

Macquarie University (2018b). OUA degrees, diplomas and certificates. 2019 Handbook. Retrieved 13 Nov 2018 http://handbook.mq.edu.au/2019/DegreesDiplomas/OUADegrees

Macquarie University (n.d.). Library Computer facilities. Retrieved 13 Nov 2018 https://www.mq.edu.au/about/campus-services-and-facilities/library/facilities/computer-facilities

Macquarie University Graduate School of Management (MGSM). (2018). An online global MBA to transform your capabilities for the future. Retrieved 13 Nov 2018 https://globalmba.mq.edu.au/

11


Marra, C. (2015). Building for emerging markets: The story behind 2G Tuesdays. F Code October 27, 2015. Retrieved 20 November 2018, https://code.fb.com/networking-traffic/building-for-emerging-markets-the-story-behind-2g-tuesdays/

Pernice, K. (2017). F-Shaped Pattern of Reading on the Web: Misunderstood, But Still Relevant (Even on Mobile). Neilsen Norman Group. Retrieved January 24 2019 https://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content/

Pugatch, J., Grenen, E., Surla, S., Schwarz, M., & Cole-Lewis, H. (2018). Information Architecture of Web-Based Interventions to Improve Health Outcomes: Systematic Review. Journal of medical Internet research, 20(3), e97. doi:10.2196/jmir.7867

Schwanbeck, G. (2015) Greg Schwanbeck’s factors to consider when selecting educational technologies. Unit 2: Selecting educational technology. MITx 11.133x Implementation and evaluation of educational technology (MOOC). Retrieved https://www.edx.org/

Sipley S (2017). Scaling mobile technology for community college students: five tips for entrepreneurs. EdSurge, August 5, 2017. Retrieved 16 Nov 2018 https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-08-05-scaling-mobile-technology-for-community-college-students-5-tips-for-entrepreneurs

Zanjani, N., Edwards, S. L., Nykvist, S., & Geva, S. (2017). The important elements of LMS design that affect user engagement with e-learning tools within LMSs in the higher education sector. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 19-31. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2938

12


Core 2: Teaching and Learning

MQ context

Strategic direction for learning and teaching projects at Macquarie University is informed by the Learning for the future: Learning and teaching strategic framework 2015-2020 white paper (Macquarie University, 2015). The framework identifies three key aspects of learning and teaching:

Connected experiences (creating a flexible and blended learning experience with appropriate and innovative digital resources)

Connected curriculum (integrating employability skills as well as transferable skills, internationalisation, intercultural and Indigenous perspectives, and sustainability)

Connected people (encouraging sharing of resources, inviting industry and community partners as well as students to input on course design)

Specific pedagogical approaches mentioned in the framework include active and collaborative learning, enquiry-based learning, discipline-specific and trans-disciplinary learning. Overall, the learning experience should be student-centric. In terms of technology for learning, the framework proposes that “[learning] experiences … blend digital and physical spaces to integrate learning both online and offline, and on and off campus” (Macquarie University, 2015, p.12). Suggested activities might draw on “digital possibilities, such as flipped classroom, simulations, games” (Macquarie University, 2015, p.21) as well as custom-built campus teaching spaces (Macquarie University, n.d.) designed to support digital collaboration within face-to-face classes.

At Macquarie University there is an Educational Technology Research community of practice (led by Matt Bower) and the WISEguys community of practice (convened by my manager, Tessa Green). My role as a Learning Adviser, also draws on a the fields of transition pedagogy and academic literacy. Both fields generally conceive of academic success as a process of acculturation into a community of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Lea & Street, 1998). DiPerna (2006) points to ‘academic enablers’ or habits of mind as critical for learning success while Zimmerman (2000) goes further to consider factors that contribute to self-regulated learning; forethought, performance and self-reflection. Lizzo (2006) situates academic competencies within a wider landscape that includes a sense of connectedness and a sense of purpose. As the most common way to assess learning in higher education is through written texts (essays, reports, exams), a key pedagogical strategy in academic literacy is to present and analyse model texts in different genres and disciplines (Hyland, 2007). Originating in face-to-face teaching, this approach to teaching and learning has also been employed in e-learning (Skinner, Mort, Calvo, Drury & Garcia Molina 2012; Wingate & Dreiss 2009).

My understanding of teaching, learning and assessment processes using technology and evidence thereof

Professional development

13


I began investigating online learning resources in about 2009, mostly to recommend to international students in the pathway courses I taught. This got me thinking about what did and didn’t work for online learning: some resources were too text-heavy, which is challenging for learners struggling with academic reading; some had few activities, making the learner passive; some gave a lock-step presentation of content starting with basics, when learners might be looking for specific information to solve a specific need.

Recommending resources for students evolved into reviews evaluating language teaching resources for the English Australia Journal, including reviews of a guide to blended learning for language teaching, a textbook with online resources, an app and a cloud-based writing course. I’ve also completed several MOOCs (including MITx11.132x Design and development of digital technology and MITx11.127x Design and development of games for learning) about teaching and learning online, which included both academic readings and also application of theory to practical problems. I’ve learned that technology can support learning and teaching in many different ways: flexibility of time and place, instant feedback and/or hints, multiple pathways depending on learner’s needs and preferences (multimodality and adaptive learning), interaction with others and creation of digital objects (Gordon, 2014). Coupled with my background in face to face education, these have given me heuristics to guide my TEL pedagogy:

While the affordances of specific technologies are important, pedagogical considerations must come first, NOT technology.

There is no single pedagogical approach or activity type which will suit all learning needs. Any design for learning should be fit for purpose: tools, structures and approaches will be different depending on the topic, the learners, their needs and the learning outcomes.

Learning with technology cannot be considered in isolation, as it often relates to face-to-face / classroom learning (the ecology of learning).

Below are two e-learning projects I’ve been involved with, where I created resources that fitted into a larger suite of learning. However, because of the different goals of each project, and the learners involved, I took a different approach to the design of each.

Case study 1: ENVS117 (2017) In 2017 I was asked to develop resources on paraphrasing, plagiarism and the similarity software Turnitin for a first-year Environmental Science unit The unit convenor explained that 100-level students:

had patchy control of formal referencing conventions required for assignments

frequently found accurate and relevant paraphrasing—a key skill for incorporating evidence into academic arguments —difficult

14

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9gteqtyy582001d/MITx11.127xCertificate.pdf?dl=0%EF%BB%BF

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9gteqtyy582001d/MITx11.127xCertificate.pdf?dl=0%EF%BB%BF

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hyys1gvv38xpd64/MITx%20DDEdTech%20certificate.pdf?dl=0%EF%BB%BF

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hyys1gvv38xpd64/MITx%20DDEdTech%20certificate.pdf?dl=0%EF%BB%BF

https://researchers.mq.edu.au/en/publications/8c9aee4c-6887-4cd3-b62b-c5fd60c91a1d%EF%BB%BF

https://researchers.mq.edu.au/en/publications/0b0922a6-10e1-4201-95d9-ee4fb6ee681b

https://researchers.mq.edu.au/en/publications/9a9fd28b-5624-44e3-afb0-3eaf2aaa7c5c

https://researchers.mq.edu.au/en/publications/9a9fd28b-5624-44e3-afb0-3eaf2aaa7c5c

https://researchers.mq.edu.au/en/publications/4130bd16-b484-47f2-a0d7-2fb42c63f039%EF%BB%BF

https://researchers.mq.edu.au/en/publications/4130bd16-b484-47f2-a0d7-2fb42c63f039%EF%BB%BF


submitted their assignments through Turnitin (a commonly used similarity tool at the university) but were not always able to interpret the similarity scores it produces.

Based on this information about the target learners, I proposed a sequenced suite of resources, including multi-modal resources (video, visuals, and text) student-centric presentation of content (focusing on the errors and challenges students experience, organising content using common questions as headings) and active learning opportunities to develop skills and try out the similarity tools. The convenor gave plentiful feedback on the initial design and on the pages and objects in progress.

The resources were grouped in the unit iLearn module with library Information literacy activities and the unit convenor allocated tutorial time to complete them. The tutorial ran 4 times in Week 1 of session and the module was very positively received by the convenor and the tutor. Despite extensive testing beforehand, there were several minor technical glitches (Turnitin not always providing immediate feedback on the students’ submissions), which led to suggestions for minor changes for the following semester.

Analysing the students’ paraphrasing submissions showed that most students had explored the tool. Exploration ranged from simply copying the original text and submitting it to Turnitin to verify what would happen, through to genuine attempts to paraphrase (although the quality of the paraphrases varied). For future deliveries I recommended including peer review (Dochy, Segers & Sluijsmans, 1999) as well as submission to Turnitin, so that students could learn from reading each other’s submissions as well as writing their own. Further improvements for the future might include repeating the paraphrasing activity later in the semester, using spaced repetition (Karpicke & Bauernschmidt, 2011) to emphasise the importance of the skill and to encourage ongoing development.

Although I worked hard to minimise the amount of text and to use white space within the pages, looking at the content now I would like to further streamline the pages (for example, by using accordions to reduce the length of the pages or organising content into Moodle books).

Case study 2: WriteWISE (2016) WriteWISE is a peer mentoring writing program managed by our team, the Learning Skills Unit (Green, 2018) . Originally funded by an Macquarie University Innovation and Scholarship Program grant, and now funded by faculties, it draws on the writing expertise of second- and third- year students to mentor 100-level students through one-to-one writing consultations.

To establish the program in 2016, the LSU recruited nine current students with good writing skills as peer writing mentors. The cohort was small, and the participants were high-achieving students familiar with the expectations of undergraduate education. However, to ensure quality delivery of support to other students (ability to analyse a text for strengths and weaknesses, strategies for giving feedback, empathy with others), we developed training resources. For the first round of training, this was set up as two half days of face-to-face training, completion of

15


online modules then observation and supervision (an ecology of learning). I was tasked with developing a module on managing online consultations.

Because the cohort were successful students and (presumably) motivated to complete the activities, I used a problem-based approach whereby learning outcomes and key strategies were highlighted through analysis and evaluation of sample texts and feedback. The design had a strong socio-constructive aspect, as students could see each other’s discussion posts, and comment on them.

The module thus began with a reflection on their own experiences of online learning, then moved through a series of scenario-based activities, which stimulated learning by reflecting on problems and examples. Some activities were matching activities, while others required open-ended answers. Once students had submitted their answers, they could see and comment on the answers of others.

The first delivery of the unit ran at the start of Session 2, 2016 (August) and all students completed the activities in a thoughtful way and I responded to the discussion posts individually. Participants then had the opportunity to apply their learning through observations at the InfoDesk and supervised consultations. While some of the mentors lacked confidence when first giving consultations, by the end of the session all but one were successfully advising other students on their writing.

Core area 2: Reflection Looking again at the design of the resources and the students responses to activities, the learning design seems quite effective . As a minor point, however, the layout of the matching activities is rather ‘clunky’; if revising the module I’d investigate other ways of structuring this activity.

The online resources stimulated thinking and encouraged sharing, and provided a basis on which the mentors could draw as they started offering consultations. However, unfortunately, I did not build in opportunities for evaluation or feedback, and would definitely include these next time.

16


ReferencesAljohani, O. (2016). A review of the contemporary international literature on student

retention in higher education. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies 4(1) doi: 10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.4n.1p.40

Bowles, T.V. & Brindle, K.A. (2017). Identifying facilitating factors and barriers to improving student retention rates in tertiary teaching courses: a systematic review, Higher Education Research & Development, 36(5), 903-919. DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2016.1264927

DiPerna, J. C. (2006). Academic Enablers and Student Achievement: Implications for Assessment and Intervention Services in the Schools. Psychology in the Schools 43(1), 7 – 17. doi: 10.1002/ pits.20125.

Dochy, F., Segers M. & Sluijsmans D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350, doi: 10.1080/03075079912331379935

Gordon, N. (2014). Flexible Pedagogies: technology-enhanced learning. York: Higher Education Academy. Retrieved 26 Jan 2019 https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/flexible-pedagogies-technology-enhanced-learning

Green, T. (2018). 1000 students can’t be wrong! Teche blog. Retrieved 26 Jan 2019 https://teche.mq.edu.au/2018/09/1000-students-cant-be-wrong/

Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing 16(3), 148-164. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.005

Jones, J., Bonanno, H., & Scouller, K. (2001). Staff and student roles in central and faculty-based learning support: Changing partnerships. Paper presented at the B. James, A. Percy, J. Skillen and N. Trivett, Proceedings of the 2001 LAS Conference, Changing Identities: Language and Academic Skills Advisers, Wollongong: University of Wollongong.

Karpicke, J. D., & Bauernschmidt, A. (2011). Spaced retrieval: Abso- lute spacing enhances learning regardless of relative spacing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1250–1257.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lea, M., & Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157-172.

Lizzio, A. (2006). Designing an orientation and transition strategy for commencing students: A conceptual summary of research and practice. Griffith University: First Year Experience Project, 2006. Retrieved October 17 2016 http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/51875/Alfs-5-Senors-PaperFYE-Project,-2006.pdf

Macquarie University (2015). Learning for the future: Learning and teaching strategic framework 2015-2020. Retrieved Dec 7 2018 https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/governance/executive/deputy-vice-chancellor-academic/learning-and-teaching-white-paper

Macquarie University (n.d.). Connected Experiences. Retrieved Jan 25, 2019 from https://staff.mq.edu.au/teach/learning-and-teaching-strategic-framework/connected-experiences

Murray T., Arroyo I. (2002) Toward Measuring and Maintaining the Zone of Proximal Development in Adaptive Instructional Systems, 749-758. In: Cerri S.A.,

17

https://staff.mq.edu.au/teach/learning-and-teaching-strategic-framework/connected-experiences

https://staff.mq.edu.au/teach/learning-and-teaching-strategic-framework/connected-experiences

https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/governance/executive/deputy-vice-chancellor-academic/learning-and-teaching-white-paper

https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/governance/executive/deputy-vice-chancellor-academic/learning-and-teaching-white-paper

http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/51875/Alfs-5-Senors-PaperFYE-Project,-2006.pdf


https://teche.mq.edu.au/2018/09/1000-students-cant-be-wrong/&nbsp

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/flexible-pedagogies-technology-enhanced-learning

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/flexible-pedagogies-technology-enhanced-learning

http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.4n.1p.40


Gouardères G., Paraguaçu F. (eds) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2363. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

Roscoe, RD, Wilson, J, Johnson, AC and Mayra, CR (2017). Presentation, expectations, and experience: Sources of student perceptions of automated writing evaluation. Computers in Human Behavior 70, 207-221 doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.076

Skinner, I., Mort, P., Calvo, R., Drury, H., Garcia Molina, M. (2012). Some do, some don’t: student use of online writing resources. 23rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education, Melbourne, Australia: Swinburne University of Technology. Retrieved 25 Jan 2019 from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Rafael_Calvo/publication/235613950_An_Online_Writing_Centre_for_Engineering_students/links/0c96051bc72b8189d1000000.pdf

Wingate, U., & Dreiss, C. (2009). Developing students’ academic literacy: an online approach. Journal of Academic Language & Learning, 3(1), A14-A25. Retrieved 25 Jan 2019 from http://journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/viewArticle/65

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In Handbook of selfregulation. (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/B978- 012109890-2/50031-7

18

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/07475632/70/supp/C

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/07475632

http://journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/viewArticle/65

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Rafael_Calvo/publication/235613950_An_Online_Writing_Centre_for_Engineering_students/links/0c96051bc72b8189d1000000.pdf




Core 3: The Wider Context

The regulatory body for Higher Education in Australia is The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), which is supported by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011. The Act is designed to “regulate higher education using a standards-based quality framework and principles” (Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, 2017a). The framework and standards are set out in the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards 2015) (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015). These outline the standards that higher education providers—and their students—are required to meet. Two areas mentioned within the Framework that impact heavily on my work are academic integrity and accessibility. Academic integrity

The Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2015 Guidance Note follows Monash University to define academic integrity as “the moral code of academia. It involves using, generating and communicating information in an ethical, honest and responsible manner” (TEQSA, 2017 b, emphasis added). This also links to the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), which “grants exclusive rights to the author of creative material…so that only they can determine how their material is copied and used by others” (Macquarie University, n.d.).In practice, a key challenge for students of “using, generating and communicating information” (TEQSA, 2017 b) is correct attribution (through citation, paraphrasing and referencing) and avoiding plagiarism.

For many students, problems arise when integrating sources into their own work (writing, assignments) through the use of referencing conventions. Beetham, McGill, and LittleJohn (2009) point out that academic conventions and the notion of copyright are at odds with the contemporary online culture of mixing and repurposing in which sharing of ideas and information occurs “without boundaries, across ephemeral and regulated networks” (Beetham, McGill, & LittleJohn 2009, p.14 ). Similarly, students from other cultures may mistakenly assume that intellectual property and the conventions of referencing in Australia mirror those of their previous study context (Joyce, 2008). Unfortunately, “the complexities of academic culture and academic writing are often implicit and taken for granted” (East, 2006, p.16) and thus poorly explained.

Two requirements identified by the Higher Education Standards Framework Domain 5 (Institutional Quality Assurance) in which the Learning Skills Unit is involved are:

“to have policies that promote and uphold academic and research integrity and policies and procedures which address allegations of misconduct…

to provide students and staff with guidance and training on what constitutes academic or research misconduct and the development of good practices in maintaining academic and research integrity” (TEQSA, 2017 b, emphasis added).

1. Guidance and training At Macquarie University, a key responsibility of the Learning Skills Unit is educating students about aspects of Academic Integrity (such as referencing, paraphrasing and

19


avoiding plagiarism) through workshops, individual assistance (face-to-face and via e-consults) and online resources . All commencing coursework students are enrolled into our Academic Integrity Module (housed in the LMS) with pilots run in Session 2, 2018 whereby completion of the module was mandatory to access certain first-year subjects (Green, 2018).

As mentioned in Core Area 2 (Teaching and Learning) of this portfolio, I’ve also created online resources (on paraphrasing and using and interpreting similarity software, Turnitin) to meet the needs of specific courses, which are thus more discipline-specific (reflecting discipline-specific topics and preferred styles of presenting evidence). In this way, students are exposed to the concepts of academic integrity within the context of their discipline, are can explore the tools and develop their skills.

In addition to explicit teaching about academic integrity, I attempt to model best practice by ensuring text, ideas and images that appear in my workshop slides, or other work, contain accurate referencing to the standard of referencing required of students within their coursework.

2. Procedures which address allegations of misconduct Unfortunately, some students deliberately choose to plagiarise or to purchase assignments (contract cheating). Reasons may include struggling to manage their study load, the linguistic and intellectual demands of their studies and more fundamentally the high cost of education, particularly for international full-fee paying students (Bretag et al., 2018). Following recommendations of the Higher Education Standards Framework (TEQSA, 2017 b, Section 5.2), Macquarie University Academic Integrity Policy takes an educative rather than a punitive approach; “providing resources and support to students to develop their knowledge and skills” (Macquarie University, 2018, Schedule 1.2.2).

Thus, to address ongoing instances of serious plagiarism and the widely-publicised discovery of contract cheating at Australian universities (including Macquarie; Macquarie University, 2015a), in 2015 the University Discipline Committee requested the Learning Skills Unit design and develop an online module for students found guilty of contract cheating and serious breaches of plagiarism (Macquarie University, 2015b, point 6.3).

I was involved in the design of this module, which took into consideration the target cohort of students (mainly low-achieving international students from English as a Second Language backgrounds), with a goal of encouraging behaviour change. Features of the design included:

Support for participants with poor language skills Carefully worded task instructions and activities for optimal

comprehension

Extracts from academic and media texts, rather than full texts. In later versions, a mini-lecture with slides (housed as a short video) and cartoons/ posters about academic integrity were also used.

Tasks requiring short written responses (several paragraphs) rather than complex formal texts

20


Task rubrics to clarify expectations

An educative rather than a punitive approach Readings outlining the effects of academic and workplace integrity (and

conversely, academic and workplace dishonesty)

Automatically graded quizzes (with feedback) to encourage active engagement with the readings/ texts

Design to encourage behaviour change; written responses requiring students Reflect on their own behaviour

Explain the effect of academic and workplace dishonesty on a range of stakeholders

Plan future courses of action to avoid (academic and workplace dishonesty)

Grading using achieved/not achieved

The design team won a Vice-Chancellor’s commendation (https://www.dropbox.com/s/ybgl8rnnh52rwmp/AWE%20letter_VT.pdf?dl=0) for services to the university.

Core area 3: Reflection I was involved in the maintenance of the module, grading of responses and development of new content for about one year after the first release, however, the module is still in use and moderated by the Learning Skills Unit.

By offering a variety of approaches to education about academic integrity (generic and discipline-specific; face to face and online) the Learning Skills unit ensures that as many students as possible at Macquarie University develop an awareness of and strategies for upholding academic integrity. Online resources are a particularly helpful way for students to learn specific information and skills at times when they need them. For the MOOC MITx11.127x Design and development of games for learning (https://www.dropbox.com/s/9gteqtyy582001d/MITx11.127xCertificate.pdf?dl=0), I scoped a game about plagiarism (http://prezi.com/kstnwj5d6666/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy), which I would be keen to develop. At the same time, copyright and academic integrity continue to evolve as new media and methods of enquiry appear (Jisc, 2016, p.10). Thus, it is probably time for me to review the latest legal developments, particularly in relation to digital intellectual property, through talking to Library copyright experts and through accessing Jisc guides.

Accessibility

While many students at Macquarie University are able to use digital resources without difficulty, there are some students who need further assistance. Several sections of The Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2015 (Commonwealth of Australia 2015) emphasise the importance of supporting these students through “equivalent opportunities” (TEQSA, 2017c, Section 2.2 ,) and providing learning resources that are “accessible when needed (including for individuals with special needs).” (TEQSA, 2017d, Section 3.3).

21


In addition to the TEQSA framework, the Macquarie University Student Disability Support policy draws on relevant anti-discrimination legislation, undertaking to “provide current and future students with a disability the opportunity to realise their potential for physical, social, emotional and intellectual development through full participation in the University” (Macquarie University, 2015c).

One aspect of this opportunity is the implementation of universal design principles. These allow for “maximum access to content, tasks, activities, events and environments… to be usable by as many people as possible at little or no extra cost without need for adaptation or specialised design. A universal design to curricula is student centred, inclusive and enables students with disability to fully participate and demonstrate equivalence in learning outcomes.” (Macquarie University, 2015c, Section 5)

For several years I have ensured that for any online resources I create, all images and hyperlinks include alt-text and videos are close-captioned (by building these into checklists in the project management cycle). Following the practice of colleague, I have also begun providing text descriptions of infographics, and offering Word alternatives at the top of pages in the LMS.

However, recently we had an email from Campus Wellbeing on behalf of a student still finding our resources hard to use. A colleague from the Library Conversion Services who specialises in accessibility reviewed our resources and recommended some areas for improvement:

Include a site map in one of our modules in the LMS, as not all child pages are listed on landing page and the module is therefore not easily navigable by users with visual impairment.

Ensure tables are designed to be read across rows (so that they can be ‘read’ by a screen reader)

Remove images from table cells

Provide alternatives to fillable pdfs (used to step students through process such as planning or structuring an essay), which are not accessible.

Reflection The requirements of both TEQSA and MQ policies make accessibility a high priority area for action in my personal practice and the practice of our team. The MQ Library Conversion Services specialist has agreed to assist us to make our resources more accessible and has also agreed to run a workshop teaching Learning Advisers and interested librarians key standards and formats needed when developing resources. We can then create checklists of requirements and build those principles into our workflows.

While the feedback was related to resources housed in the LMS (in particular images, tables and pdfs), obviously this issue is key for other digital objects such as interactive lessons (made in Adobe Captivate, H5P and so on). Now that I am more aware of the importance (and challenges of) accessibility, I will use this as a

22


selection criteria when scoping new projects and selecting tools/ and presentation and activity formats.

References

Beetham, H, McGill, L, and Littlejohn, A (2009). Thriving in the 21st century: Learning Literacies for the Digital Age (LLiDA project): Executive Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations. UK Joint Information Systems Committees (JISC). Retrieved 10 Jan 2019 at https://elearning.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2009/06/11/thriving-in-the-21st-century-learning-literacies-for-the-digital-age/

Bretag, T., Harper, R., Burton, M., Ellis, C., Newton, P., Saddiqui, S., Rozenberg, P & van Haeringen, K. (2018). Contract cheating: A survey of Australian university students, Studies in Higher Education, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1462788

Commonwealth of Australia. (2015). Higher education standards framework (Threshold Standards) 2015. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2015L01639

Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (Austl.).East, J. (2006). The problem of plagiarism in academic culture. International Journal

for Educational Integrity 2(2), 16-28. Green, T (2018). The New Academic Integrity Module: Shining The Spotlight On

Principles And Practice. Teche blog. Retrieved 15 Jan 2019 https://teche.mq.edu.au/2018/07/the-new-academic-integrity-module-shining-the-spotlight-on-principles-and-practice/

Jisc, (2016). Scaling up online learning. Retrieved 15 Jan 2019 https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/scaling-up-online-learning/legal-issues

Joyce, D. (2007). Academic Integrity and Plagiarism: Australasian perspectives. Computer Science Education, 17(3), 187-200, https://doi.org/10.1080/08993400701538062

Macquarie University (2015). Macquarie University disciplinary outcomes regarding MyMaster cheating. Retrieved 15 Jan 2019 https://www.mq.edu.au/newsroom/2015/05/27/macquarie-university-disciplinary-outcomes-regarding-mymaster-cheating/

Macquarie University (2015b). Academic Senate minutes 25 Aug 2015. Retrieved 15 Jan 2019 https://www.mq.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/109881/minutes-academic_senate-25_august_2015.pdf

Macquarie University (2015c). Student disability support policy. Retrieved 15 Jan 2019 https://staff.mq.edu.au/work/strategy-planning-and-governance/university-policies-and-procedures/policies/student-disability-support

Macquarie University (2018). Academic Integrity Policy. Retrieved 28 Jan 2019 https://www.mq.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/109881/minutes-academic_senate-25_august_2015.pdf

Macquarie University, (n.d.). Copyright. Retrieved 10 Jan 2019, https://www.mq.edu.au/about/campus-services-and-facilities/library/copyright

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. (2011). Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act of 2011, Act. No. 73. Retrieved 28 Jan 2019 http://www.teqsa.gov.au/about

23


Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2017a). TEQSA Act. Retrieved 28 Jan 2019 https://www.teqsa.gov.au/teqsa-act

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2017 b). Guidance Note: Academic Integrity (Beta draft 1.1). Retrieved 28 Jan 2019 https://www.teqsa.gov.au/latest-news/publications/guidance-note-academic-integrity

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2017 c). Higher Education Standards Framework Domain 5: Institutional Quality Assurance. Retrieved 28 Jan 2019 https://www.teqsa.gov.au/hesf-domain-5

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2017 d). Higher Education Standards Framework Domain 2: Learning Environment. Retrieved 28 Jan 2019 https://www.teqsa.gov.au/hesf-domain-2

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (2017 e). Higher Education Standards Framework Domain 3: Teaching. Retrieved 28 Jan 2019 https://www.teqsa.gov.au/hesf-domain-3

24


Core area 4: Communicating & working with others

Background: the Macquarie Context The recently released Macquarie Student Success Strategic Framework Green Paper has a strong focus on communication and collaboration across all areas of the student experience, seeking “to connect curriculum, pedagogical practices, campus and digital spaces, services, policies, social engagement and any other student related activities” (Macquarie University, 2018, p.13). Several communities of practice exist, supporting professional and academic collaboration across the university. One to which our team is connected, the Converged Services Working Group (CSWG), holds regular meetups between professional teams to “ensure(…) alignment and coordination across student support services” (Macquarie University, n.d.). The CSWG uses a tiered services delivery model (Student Success framework, 2018, p.10), meaning that all teams are trained to answer students’ general questions, with referral to relevant teams when more specialised support is needed. More specifically in the technology space, the WISEguys community of practice started in 2016 to share information between support groups about digital resources they were creating and to discuss issues of common interest, such as analytics, accessibility or potential duplication of resources.

Whitchurch points out that cross-team collaborations are becoming increasingly common at higher education institutions, and “although hierarchical line relationships continue to exist, these may be less significant in day-to-day working than lateral networks that can be activated at short notice” (Whitchurch, 2015, p.80). These collaborations tend to involve “a sense of partnership and equivalence” (Whitchurch 2015 p.89), especially since the same people may work together on several different projects, taking on slightly different roles and responsibilities in each.

The Learning Skills Unit sits within the Library organisational structure and thus Learning Advisers frequently collaborate with research librarians to create suites of resources. Each Learning Adviser is also attached to one of the faculties, attending meetings and collaborating as requested with academics (discussed in Core 2: ENVS117). In addition, we work with other professional teams within the Converged Services group; including Faculty Support Staff (discussed in the Specialist Option: StudyWISE Intensive) and Campus Wellbeing (discussed in Core 3: accessibility), as well as the University Discipline Committee (discussed in Core 3: academic integrity). For the most part collaborations are a very rewarding experience, with all parties willing to work productively towards outcomes improving the student experience.

In 2016 the University moved to Office365 communication tools for staff. Popular tools in the Office365 suite include Sharepoint to allow for collaboration on documents, email ‘likes’ to acknowledge receipt of messages and calendar invites as a way to manage time/ show availability. These asynchronous tools are helpful when teams are located in different buildings across campus, and may work on different days or at different times. There are a wide variety of other communication tools

25


available; among others are: Skype and Zoom for video conferencing, Yammer and Slack for messaging.

With such a wide choice of communication tools, tool selection depends on the communication purpose. Daft and Lengel’s (1986) Media Richness Theory suggests that communication channels vary in the amount of detail (or richness) they can convey. As a result, in addition to practicality (such as whether communication needs to be synchronous or asynchronous), users select a tool that allows for the appropriate level of detail. Dennis and Valalich’s related theory of Media Synchronicity suggests that “performance will be improved when task needs are matched to a medium’s ability to convey information” (Dennis & Valalich, 1999, p.1).

Communication choices throughout campus projects. Image by Vanessa Todd.This is evidenced in cross-campus project work, where tools use seems to vary according to the phase of the project. Most projects start with a face-to-face meeting, in which relationships are developed and details and tasks are discussed/ negotiated. This is often followed by emails confirming actions and steps and seeking clarification if necessary. During the development phase where tasks are completed individually, file sharing and emails are usually sufficient, unless there is an urgent matter that requires synchronous communication by phone. Final confirmation is usually through emails and sharing files, with delivery and/or follow up discussion occurring face to face.

Professional Development Systems thinking (the connectedness between parts within a system) is a useful framework for cross-institutional teams working together to address complex issues (Whitchurch, 2015) and I started investigating this field through the MOOC Designing the Future (FutureLearn). I am particularly interested in visual communication and have taken a range of MOOCs to extend my skills in this area: Fundamentals of graphic design and Introduction to typography (both from Coursera), Introduction to infographics and data visualisation (Knight

26


Center https://www.dropbox.com/s/41wouj9709yxgvq/IGDV1115_Certificate.pdf?dl=0) as well as Image |Ability: Visualising the unimaginable (Edx). While I use a range of communication genres and styles (reports to emails to presentations to online resources), I am particularly interested in visual communication and have taken several MOOCs to extend my skills in this area: Fundamentals of graphic design and Introduction to typography (both from Coursera), Introduction to infographics and data visualisation (Knight Center for Journalism) and Image|Ability: Visualising the unimaginable (Edx). The following case study details my experimentation with different modes of communication to students, and a cross-collaboration to achieve this.Case study: Communicating with students via social media and campus newsletter Promotion of the Learning Skills Unit’s services and resources is an ongoing challenge, with many students declaring that they have never heard of our services, or wishing that they’d known about them earlier. In the past we advertised our services via postcards and posters (as well as emails and powerpoint slides sent to unit convenors); however, over the past few years we have experimented with messaging via social media and other channels.

In late 2014, the Learning Skills team started using social media, and throughout 2015 and 2016 I managed the Twitter and Facebook accounts (pitched to students, with the hashtag #mqstudywise). In addition to messages promoting our services, messages each week were grouped around a theme relevant to the time in session (e.g. note-taking at the start of session, preparing for exams towards the end). Content included tips and links to resources (images, videos and webpages, including our own). Messages per day were scheduled Mon-Fri, with release managed using the Hootsuite scheduling tool. However, as engagement was low, I stopped posting at the end of 2016. The tool (a social media) was not a good fit for the purpose (broadcast, one-way communication; Bates, n.d., Section 6.4), which students may prefer to receive via email (Towner & Klemz, 2016).At the start of 2017, University Central Marketing commenced an newsletter for students, MYMQ, delivered via email. The editor approached our team for copy. I took the lead as main point of communication and writer as well as team editor of copy. We crafted several short articles (300-500 words), with a focus on pushing out advice to students (with a few links to our resources) rather than simply giving information about our services. To begin with, final copy required a fair amount of discussion with the editor, as we grasped the communication style she required. We again matched topics relevant to specific times in the session, and encouraged our WriteWISE peer writing leaders to produce copy for some articles. Through 2017 and 2018 our articles were consistently among the most read. I also experimented with some different approaches; including interactive H5P activities in articles as well as text and hyperlinks.

As described above, this collaboration drew on different communication modes depending on the phase of the project. Particularly at the start, there were many phone calls back and forth with the editor to resolve issues synchronously. As we became more comfortable working together, there was less need for feedback and negotiation during the design and creation phases of the project.

27

https://www.dropbox.com/s/41wouj9709yxgvq/IGDV1115_Certificate.pdf?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/41wouj9709yxgvq/IGDV1115_Certificate.pdf?dl=0


In S2 2018, Central Marketing decided to discontinue the email newsletter and focus on social media (Facebook and Twitter) reach. While we continued to produce content last session for this new format, engagement was far, far lower and we have decided to discontinue longer-form articles for the foreseeable future, using campus social media more for promotion of services rather than pushing out content.

Reflection Writing content for the newsletter was a very successful collaboration which unfortunately finished (in its current form) due to changing priorities for other teams. It shows that even successful partnerships may end and the importance of staying flexible and ready to adapt if need be.

Since social media by definition involves interaction, the Learning Skills Unit needs once again to reconsider their use of Twitter and Facebook (and other social media). It might be interesting to take a different approach, for example crowdsourcing study and writing advice (Dunlon, Brown & Costell, 2016) or fostering in students a sense of belonging to the institution (Kift, 2009; Lizzio, 2006).

Many MQ documents (strategies, frameworks) mention collaboration with students, and we did involve the WriteWISE students in the process. However, in the future, I’d like to work even more with students to develop new communication strategies and content.

ReferencesBates, A.W. (n.d.). Teaching in a Digital Age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Vancouver, BC: Tony Bates Associates. Retrieved 15 Dec 2018 https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/Daft, R.L. & Lengel, R.H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science. 32 (5): 554–571. doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554. Dennis, A.R. & Valacich, J.S. (1999). Rethinking Media Richness: Towards a Theory of Media Synchronicity. Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences – 1999 doi: 10.1.1.108.7118. Donlon, E., Brown, M. & Costello, E. (2016). Power of the Crowd: The Promise and Potential of Crowdsourcing for Education. In S. Barker, S. Dawson, A. Pardo, & C. Colvin (Eds.), Show Me The Learning. Proceedings ASCILITE 2016 Adelaide (pp. 206-211).FutureLearn (2015). The crowdsourced guide to learning. Retrieved 20 Jan 2019, https://www.futurelearn.com/learning-guide Kift, S. (2009). Articulating a transition pedagogy to scaffold and to enhance the first year student learning experience in Australian higher education. Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Retrieved Nov 2018 https://altf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Kift_S_Senior_Fellowship_Final-Report_Sep_09.pdf Lizzio, A. (2006). Designing an orientation and transition strategy for commencing students: A conceptual summary of research and practice. Griffith University: First Year Experience Project, 2006. Retrieved October 17 2016 from http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/51875/Alfs-5-Senors-PaperFYE-Project,-2006.pdfMacquarie University (2018). Macquarie Student Success Strategic Framework Green Paper. Retrieved Nov 25 2018 https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-

28

https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/governance/executive/deputy-vice-chancellor-academic/student-success-green-paper



https://altf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Kift_S_Senior_Fellowship_Final-Report_Sep_09.pdf&nbsp

https://altf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Kift_S_Senior_Fellowship_Final-Report_Sep_09.pdf&nbsp

https://www.futurelearn.com/learning-guide

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.108.7118

https://doi.org/10.1287%2Fmnsc.32.5.554

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier

https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/


university/governance/executive/deputy-vice-chancellor-academic/student-success-green-paperMacquarie University (n.d.). Student engagement and collaboration. Retrieved 18 Jan 2019, https://staff.mq.edu.au/teach/student-engagement-and-collaboration/student-supportTowner & Klemz (2016). Social Media in Business and Professional Communication Courses: A Survey of Student Preferences. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 79(3), 331–347. DOI: 10.1177/2329490615628017Whitchurch, C. (2015). The rise of Third Space professionals: Paradoxes and dilemmas. In U. Teichler, W.K. Cummings (eds.), Forming, Recruiting and Managing the Academic Profession, The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession. Switzerland : Springer International Publishing. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-16080-1_5

29

https://staff.mq.edu.au/teach/student-engagement-and-collaboration/student-support

https://staff.mq.edu.au/teach/student-engagement-and-collaboration/student-support




Specialist option: Learner support

Background: legislative framework and the Macquarie Context The Guidance notes to TEQSA’s Higher Education Standards Framework 3: Teaching state that universities have a responsibility to provide ” general learning support (Standard 3.3.4) such as support for:

developing study skills

development of English language proficiency

international students who are unfamiliar with living in Australia.”

This help should be accessible to all students, “irrespective of their mode of participation” (TEQSA, 2017). One avenue of support is academic literacy specialists, who assist students through a combination of workshops, individual consultations and online resources, along a continuum ranging from generic (applicable to all students) through to embedded (woven into discipline-specific coursework) (Green, Floyd & Dymock, 2017).

Because academic literacy per se is often seen as a skills set rather than the focus of for-credit courses, two important concepts are relevant. Firstly, Knowles’ notion of andragogy (adult learning) suggests that adult learners tend to seek learning in order to address specific needs and to solve specific problems (p.40); therefore “the appropriate units for organising adult learning are situations, not subjects” (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson 2005, emphasis added). Secondly, addressing issues of academic literacy requires reflection and metacognition, aspects of self-regulated learning (Zimmerman, 2000). Van Sebille et al (2018) explain SRL as a process “where learners observe, compare and regulate their learning behaviours” (van Sebille et al. 2018, p.263). Macquarie University has a high percentage of international students for whom English is a second language, plus a significant number of domestic students from a non-English speaking background (NESB) (Macquarie University, 2017). The Widening Participation Strategic Framework (2018-2023) also affirms opportunities and support for students from equity backgrounds (Macquarie University, 2018). At Macquarie University, a major source of academic literacies support is provided by the Learning Skills Unit. Two large suites of academic literacy resources that I have been involved in developing and managing are StudyWISE and StudyWISE Intensive. Due to their different target audiences and different goals, they are different in structure. Case Study 1: StudyWISE

The Learning Skills Unit’s primary online resources are StudyWISE (which develops academic writing and study skills) and the Academic Integrity Module (mentioned in Core area 3: the Wider Context), both housed within the LMS. All coursework students are auto-enrolled into these units on commencement, meaning that enrolments in the modules sit at around 35000-40000 students. Many tertiary online academic literacies resources in Australia use “fully-guided, direct instruction” (Land, Hannafin & Oliver, 2014, p.5), where “the media controls the flow of the learning experience” (Hai-Jew, 2012, p.534), thus their learning design is sequenced and scaffolded, with explicit learning outcomes and practice

30


activities. In contrast to the approach taken by many other universities, StudyWISE follows a “user-driven” design (Hai-Jew, 2012, p.534); self-paced, organised visually so that the user can move between resources to locate the most relevant; providing cognitive tools to assist working through processes on the learners own problems; and providing feedback loops (opportunities for self-reflection) (Hai-Jew, 20102, p.537).

StudyWISE was released in 2014 and in 2015 a colleague and I investigated learning analytics in StudyWISE, deducing from activity logs and the end-of-session survey what their preferences were for module content (presented at the 2015 AALL conference). We found that students were less interested in videos, sound clouds and many practice activities, and more interested in information such as the structure of different assignment types. The data showed that:

There were plentiful visits to the website

Usage patterns reflected users’ purposes (High traffic at the start of session when students are getting familiar with university practices, then spikes at points in session when assignments are due)

Average viewing time for videos was only about 18s

Quizzes on the landing page had a large number of hits

Most visited pages were Essays, Reports, Example assignments, Time Management

This was supported by Kirschener, Carr, van Merri Sloep’s (2002) conceptualisation of task activities within an ecology of learning, in which some adjunct activities are applied to central (often assessed) coursework activities. Thus, we postulated that students were using our resources to complete tasks within their course, rather than to practice skills in isolation. My colleague and I concluded that the resources did not need to be organised in the same way as content for a course, but more like a website that allows for multiple use cases, to allow users to engage with the resources in different ways, depending on different needs. As a result of these findings, we have continued to add to and remodel StudyWISE. The design frequently draws on web-based principles of presentation:

1. Organising information to cater for different use purposes. Shander’s 4×4 model (Shander, 2014) recommends that content be organised into four types of content, with the most common needs more easily acessible. Shander explains these as: the Water cooler (quick snippets of information), the Café (information in more depth), the Research Lab (for practice) and the Library (for interaction with others in the community).

2. To organise text according to the principles of screen reading, and to edit text for clarity and brevity (Pernice, 2017).

3. To include fillable pdfs as cognitive tools to scaffold student application of processes and skills to the tasks they need to complete for class.

31

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325987818_'Is_there_an_app_for_StudyWISE'_Exploring_student_expectations_and_use_of_online_academic_literacy_tools

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325987818_'Is_there_an_app_for_StudyWISE'_Exploring_student_expectations_and_use_of_online_academic_literacy_tools


4. To create an affective experience through visually appealing images (especially photos taken at the university).

My role has been as content creator (including images and short animations), as critical friend (reviewing the work of team mates), and as co-project leader (scoping tasks, developing a plan of action and timeframes—often underestimated). However, a continual challenge is to get consistency of presentation and design across the team, as well as completing resources in a timely manner.

Case study 2: StudyWISE Intensive (2016-2017) StudyWISE Intensive is a module housed in the LMS iLearn, developed specifically for students at risk.

In 2016 Macquarie University developed a new Academic Progression policy ( Macquarie University, 2016) by encouraging “students ‘at risk’ of unsatisfactory progress …to seek early intervention through academic and personal support services” (Macquarie University, n.d.).

The Learning Skills Unit appeared in the flowchart of support mechanisms actions for students. However, as a small team we do not have the capacity to meet individually with large numbers of (potentially distressed) students, particularly as communications to affected students are released just as orientation and transition activities commence for the next session.

As a Learning Adviser, I have regularly consulted with students who are unfamiliar with academic conventions, who are struggling to pass or who have failed units. I also talk to unit convenors about the issues that their students deal with and often review sample assignments to understand how students approach tasks and what they find difficult. In addition, for this project I contacted Faculty Student Advisers, who regularly counsel students who are struggling, or have failed units. Confirming published literature (Bowles & Brindle 2017, Aljohani 2016), both unit convenors and Faculty Advisers nominated key issues as: time management (especially when juggling a combination of study, work and family), ineffective study habits, understanding assignment questions, structuring their ideas and expressing themselves clearly.

As a solution to the issues faced by students and the challenges of providing support at scale, I proposed a module that at-risk students could complete online as a first level of support. Below are key features of the module and the pedagogy underpinning them:

Andragogy: allowing students to make choices about topics and activities they complete (Ref)

Reflection and self-efficacy: activities asking students to reflect on their previous strategies, to plan for the future. Providing links to services and resources if students want further assistance. (ref)

Scaffolding (Murray & Arroyo, 2002) to support at-risk students : sequencing resources, providing feedback and creating cognitive tools (fillable pdfs) to scaffold skills practice.

32


Habits of mind (DiPerna 2006): not only content but strategies and approaches to learning

Importantly, the module was also designed so that Faculty support staff could manage enrolment and monitor student progress. Students are thus enrolled into a faculty group when they are enrolled into the module. This gives faculty access to see the activity of students from their faculty and to track their progress.

The module was presented at the AALL and the ASCILITE conferences in 2017. I oversaw the design, structure and content of the module, with colleagues in the Learning Skills team assisting with content development. The first version of the module was released in S2 2017, and a revised version was released in Jan 2018, with a more consistent structure for each section of the module (so that each topic included starting and finishing activities, options for feedback and certificates for completion).

In July 2018 two additional features were added:

1. based on feedback from Faculty support staff, the starting quiz (a diagnostic tool based on reflection) was modified so that students could request feedback/ tailored advice based on their answers.

2. the messaging tool Personal Learning Designer was used to send targeted messages at the start of session and just before the middle of the session (when many written assessments fall due), reminding students of support services/resources available at the university. Module activity logs recorded spikes of interaction as a result.

In addition to creating content, I managed the project, my tasks including:

Scoping the pedagogical parameters and articulating them for stakeholders

Designing the structure of the module (activities, sequence) to scaffold struggling students and building in features to support end users (such as placing students in faculty groups for rapid analysis of activity)

Designing the visual approach (including the logo and graphic design choices)

Briefing others to complete planned sections (text, visuals, digital objects and page design) and overseeing their contributions to ensure consistency of tone, presentation and to avoid content overlap

Communicating with external stakeholders (including training end-users in faculties) about features and to encourage uptake

Monitoring user activity through learning analytics, and through evaluation points within the module

Reporting back on learner activity within the module, and using this to inform further improvements

Core 2: Reflection

33

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325987506_StudyWISE_Intensive_Designing_and_embedding_a_module_into_an_institution-wide_strategy

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325987511_More_than_ticking_boxes_Digital_learning_as_a_meaningful_solution_to_policy_and_procedure


Both of these projects were large, involving a team of people to complete, however the design of each project was different to match the needs of each cohort: the first module was designed for students for the most part to dip in and out as a resource to support their coursework study. The second module was designed to help at-risk students to get back on track by scaffolding learning through sequenced resources, at the same time allowing choice of topics and activities.

Each project has taken considerable time to complete as the team could only work on them between other tasks. I learned several important lessons from the experience:

Managing a project with multiple contributors can be challenging: explaining and constantly reminding others of the brief is important, to avoid project creep or resources that do not fit the learning design or overall tone.

Giving feedback early on before contributors have contributed too much time and effort is vital, as scrapping or doing major revisions is very disheartening.

Taking time to talk (several times) to external stakeholders helps determine the success of such a project. In fact, the connections created through this project have been enjoyable and have led to other collaborations.

Many documents at the university talk about the value of student co-creation. While we did seek some feedback from students for each project, this came at later stages. In the future, I would like to work more on projects that involve students from the beginning as major contributors to the conceptual designs.

ReferencesAljohani O (2016). A review of the contemporary international literature on student

retention in higher education. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies 4(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.4n.1p.40

Bowles TV & Brindle KA (2017) Identifying facilitating factors and barriers to improving student retention rates in tertiary teaching courses: a systematic review, Higher Education Research & Development, 36:5, 903-919, DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2016.1264927

DiPerna, J. C. 2006. “Academic Enablers and Student Achievement: Implications for Assessment and Intervention Services in the Schools.” Psychology in the Schools, 43(1): 7 – 17. doi:10.1002/ pits.20125.

Green, T., Dymock, J., & Floyd, C. (2017). Academic literacy support: teaching along the continuum. In L. N. Wood, & Y. A. Breyer (Eds.), Success in higher education: transitions to, within and from university (pp. 269-286). Singapore: Springer, Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2791-8_16

Hai-Jew, S. (2012). Scaffolding discovery Learning Spaces. Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (editor N.S. Seel). https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-1-4419-1428-6_653

Kirschener, P.,, Carr C., van Merri ,J. & Sloep, P. (2002). How expert designers design. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 15(4), 86-104 .

34

https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-1-4419-1428-6_653

https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-1-4419-1428-6_653

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2791-8_16

http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.4n.1p.40


Knowles, M.S., Holton, E.F,. & Swanson, R.A , (2005). The adult learner: a definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (6th Edn.). Burlington, USA: Elseiver.

Land, S.M., Hannafin, M. J., & Oliver, K. (2012). Student-centered learning environments (pp. 3-26). In D. Jonassen and S. Land (Eds.) Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments (2nd Ed). London, UK: Routledge.

Macquarie University (2016). Academic Progression Policy. Retrieved from https://staff.mq.edu.au/work/strategy-planning-and-governance/university-policies-and-procedures/policies/academic-progression

Macquarie University (2017). Macquarie University Annual report 2017 (Volume 1). Retrieved from https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/governance/annual-reports

Macquarie University (2018). Widening participation strategic framework (2018-2023). Retrieved from https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/offices-and-units/wideningparticipation/WIP4217_Strategic-Framework-Interactive-PDF_201806.pdf

Macquarie University, (n.d.). Why has Macquarie implemented a new Academic Progression Policy and Procedure? Retrieved from https://ask.mq.edu.au/account/pub/display/kb/?record=1f73ac1b-40b4-5ca2-c2a7-58362ab51e93).

Murray, T. & Arroyo I. (2002). Toward Measuring and Maintaining the Zone of Proximal Development in Adaptive Instructional Systems. Submission to the 2002 International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

Pernice, K. (2017). F-Shaped Pattern of Reading on the Web: Misunderstood, But Still Relevant (Even on Mobile). Neilsen Norman Group. Retrieved January 24 2019 https://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content/

Shander, B. 2014. The 4×4 model for winning knowledge content. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@billshander/4×4-model-for-knowledge-content-575cc7f24601

TEQSA (2017). Guidance Note: Staffing, Learning Resources and Educational Support (Version 1.3). Retrieved 12 Jan 2019, https://www.teqsa.gov.au/latest-news/publications/guidance-note-staffing-learning-resources-and-educational-support

Van Sebille, Y., Joksimovic, S., Kovanovic, V., Mirriahi, N., Stansborough, R & Dawson, S. (2018). Extending video interactions to support self-regulated learning in an online course. In M. Campbell, J. Willems, C. Adachi, D. Blake, I. Doherty, S. Krishnan, S. Macfarlane, L. Ngo, M. O’Donnell, S. Palmer, L. Riddell, I. Story, H. Suri & J. Tai (Eds.), Open Oceans: Learning without borders. Proceedings ASCILITE 2018 Geelong (pp. 262-272).

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In Handbook of self regulation. (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978- 012109890-2/50031-7

35

https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-

https://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content/

https://ask.mq.edu.au/account/pub/display/kb/?record=1f73ac1b-40b4-5ca2-c2a7-58362ab51e93

https://ask.mq.edu.au/account/pub/display/kb/?record=1f73ac1b-40b4-5ca2-c2a7-58362ab51e93

https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/offices-and-units/wideningparticipation/WIP4217_Strategic-Framework-Interactive-PDF_201806.pdf



https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/governance/annual-reports

https://www.mq.edu.au/about/about-the-university/governance/annual-reports


Future Plans

Two weeks before the submission of this portfolio, I started a new role as Digital Literacies Design Lead at Macquarie University Library. As a result, this section takes into account development goals for this new position, as well as skills and projects I’ve identified through preparing this portfolio.

The to-do list is organised according to the type of activity needed; some activities are reasonably straight-forward (such as taking a MOOC about Excel), while others are unstructured and contingent on collaboration or institutional interest.

Action items 1 Master tools (productivity, analysis and creation)

Extend data management skills: Complete one or more Coursera Excel courses https://www.coursera.org/specializations/excel (offered free to staff at MQ).

Improve skills with Adobe Captivate. Continue to improve project management skills (investigate

MOOCs), eg Introduction to project management https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-project-management-adelaidex-project101x-1

Chip away at coding skills to better understand issues with resource creation, eg Codecademy.

Extend data analysis skills: complete a statistics course, eg Coursera https://www.coursera.org/learn/basic-statistics/home/welcome

2. Develop skills and relationships Develop a list of steps to improve accessibility of our resources in

consultation with Library experts. Offer training to others and build accessibility steps into my and team workflows.

Support development of digital literacy resources and training of staff:

Develop and support a strategic approach to selecting digital projects (pedagogy and tools).

Identify key digital skills for students and develop resources Develop and support a strategic approach to staff digital skills learning .

Consider ways to extend sustainability of resources: sharing (eg OER), repurposing, tagging.

Join a mentoring program (ASCILITE or CAUL); in the first instance as a mentee.

Connect with CoP by attending meetups (f2f or virtual); learn and/or contribute

At MQ (facilitate WISEguys meetings, attend Educational Technology Research Cluster)

Through ASCILITE SIGs (TELedvisors, SOTEL).

36

https://www.coursera.org/learn/basic-statistics/home/welcome

https://www.coursera.org/learn/basic-statistics/home/welcome

https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-project-management-adelaidex-project101x-1

https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-project-management-adelaidex-project101x-1

https://www.coursera.org/specializations/excel


Connect with CoP by attending meetups (f2f or virtual); learn and/or contribute

At MQ (facilitate WISEguys meetings, attend Educational Technology Research Cluster)

Through ASCILITE SIGs (TELedvisors, SOTEL)

Through conference posters, workshops or journal articles.3. Lead or contribute to large / innovative projects, moving in new directions

Design and run a project involving students as partners (consider PACE students from MMCS or Education) in Semester 2 (starting in August 2019).

Scope and contribute to a small blue sky project (unstructured/ experimental/ crowd sourced/ emerging technology): a serious game for learning/ an unconference/ design to foster emergent learning community (might involve staff or online CoP rather than students).

Scope need for mobile-specific academic-literacy learning resources.

37

core 2: teaching and learning · web view2020. 10. 28. · vanessa todd cmalt portfolio: frst...

Documents