Using e-technologies to support learning

CETL/SWAP/ESCALATEStranmillis University College

March 1st 2006

Jon Alltree – The Blended Learning Unit

Overview of session

• The BLU• Blended Learning and e-technology • Examples of Blended Learning• Curriculum design

BLU team• Prof Peter Bullen - Director• Jon Alltree – Deputy Director• Prof Diana Kornbort – Evaluation

coordinator/BLU teacher (0.4 FTE to BLU)• 11 more BLU teachers (0.4 FTE to BLU)• Faculty Champions• Administrator Liz Mellor (0.5 FTE)• Student consultant Nuz Quadri

BLU’s Goals• Minimising barriers to using IT• Pedagogic development • Evaluation • Internal communication and dissemination• External communication and dissemination

BLENDED LEARNING

“Educational provision where high quality e-learning opportunities and excellent campus-based learning are combined or blended in coherent, reflective and innovative ways so that learning is enhanced and choice is increased.” (UH CETL bid 2004)

Blended Learning

“the thoughtful integration of classroom face-to-face learning experiences with online learning experiences”

Garrison and Kanuka, 2004 p96

Why Blended Learning? • Widening participation

– Student numbers – Non traditional students – Demands on their time eg

• student as workers • home demands

• Student expectations and capability with technology

• Opportunities afforded by technology

Some aspects of F2F• Humans are sociable beings (can influence

motivation)• F2F dialogue very ‘rich’ (including NVC),

immediate and flexible• F2F is particularly suitable to some types of

activity – eg developing complex practical skills

However…

• Digital technology makes it easy to capture F2F interactions and make them available electronically eg– Podcasts, narrated slideshows, videostreaming

• Blended Learning can enable teachers use more of their F2F contact for developing higher order (intellectual) skills

• Timetabled contact is inflexible in respect of time and place

Some aspects of e-learning• Flexible in when and where students learn

– Students can learn at their own pace– Can enhance/provide structure for independent study time

(‘extends’ the classroom) • Rich potential of multimedia learning materials

– Learning preferences – Disability issues– Simulations

• Collaborative opportunities for people who are separated in time and space– Learning preferences (eg reflectors)– Disability issues– Can give some their voice– Encourages written communication

• Opportunities for automation eg– Feedback– Customisation of the learning environment

Some of the technologies we use• MLE/VLE

– Resources– Communication and collaboration

• Routine applications (eg Office, email)– Straightforward use– More sophisticated use

• SMIRK (presentation software)• WIKIS• IAWB/Tablet PC’s

Examples of Blended Learning

• PAD 13• SMIRK and virtual lectures• W.A.T.S.

Some of the benefits…• Materials can readily be made available in advance…

and afterwards – ‘Extending the classroom’– Reserving F2F time for higher level activities

• Digital record of classroom interactions can facilitate review or support those unable to attend

• Communication facilities supported group between teaching sessions

• Electronic assignment submission minimised feedback turnaround

• Resources and communication facilities located together ..and available 24/7

SMIRK

• Simple Media-Integrating Resource Creator • Developed by:

– David Kraithman (BLU/Business School) – Steve Bennett (BLU/Computer science)

• Accessibility agenda to the fore• Special prize for ‘Teaching tools’ at 2004 EASA • Steve was THES e-tutor runner-up 2004• Delivery via StudyNet ‘designed in’

Slide order can be controlled by clicking on title or using access keys

Links are listed separately for users with limited manual control of mouse

Where available, videos showing signing for the deaf or other ancillary media appear in separate region of screen.

Lecture can be paused and resumed by user.

Captioning is present for hearing-impaired users and to aid those studying in a foreign language.

Using SMIRK for virtual lectures (David Kraithman)

• Microeconomics module– Compulsory– 870 students

Changed to:Lecture

+ seminar

Virtual lecture+

Participatory workshop+

Seminar

Outcome in Microeconomics

• Referral rate decreased by 40%

• Students with dyslexia scored an average of 2 grade points higher than their other studies

• The international students found the combination of text and narration very helpful for developing their language skills

W.A.T.S.

• Weekly Assessed Tutorial Sheets – Student unique– Generated by Excel and Mail Merge– Delivered via email and StudyNet

• Fluid mechanics and thermodynamics module• Developed by Mark Russell (BLU/AADE)

– THES e-tutor of the year 2003– NTF 2005

WATS league tables

WATS 7

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Question number

No

of s

tude

nts

getti

ng q

uest

on c

orre

ct

Outcome in Fluid Mechanics and Thermodynamics

• Mean exam mark increased from 39% to 47%

• Referral rate reduced by 33%• High level of student satisfaction

• Year on year refinements and increases in performance indicators since inception

Conversational framework (Laurillard 1993)

• Learning is dialogic and iterative • Four dimensions

– Discursive– Adaptive– Interactive (which includes feedback)– Reflective

Surface approach

• Intention only to complete task requirements and student distorts the structure of the task…– Focus on the signs (words, sentences, formulae etc)– Focus on unrelated parts of the task– Memorise information for assessments– Associate facts and concepts unreflectively– Fail to distinguish principles from examples– Treat the task as external imposition

• External emphasis/focus/motivation(Ramsden 1992 p 46)

Deep approach

• Intention to understand…– Focus on what is signified (author’s argument or concepts

applicable to solve problem)– Relate previous knowledge to new knowledge– Relate knowledge from different courses– Relate theoretical ideas to everyday experience– Relate and distinguish evidence from argument– Organise and structure knowledge into coherent whole

• Internal emphasis/focus/motivation

(Ramsden 1992 p 46)

Surface approaches are encouraged by…• Assessment methods emphasising recall or the

application of trivial procedural knowledge • Assessment methods that create anxiety • Cynical or conflicting messages about rewards• An excessive amount of material in the curriculum• Poor or absent feedback on progress• Lack of independence in studying • Lack of interest in and background knowledge of the

subject matter • Previous experiences of educational establishments

that encourage surface approaches (Ramsden 1992 p81)

Deep approaches are encouraged by…

• Teaching and assessment methods that foster active and long term engagement with learning tasks

• Stimulating and considerate teaching, especially teaching which demonstrates the teacher’s personal commitment to the subject matter and stresses its meaning and relevance to the students

• Clearly stated academic expectations• Interest in and background knowledge of the subject

matter• Previous experience of educational settings that

encourage these approaches (Ramsden 1992 p81)

Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education

Good teachers:• Encourage contact between students and staff• Develop reciprocity and co-operation among

students• Encourage active learning• Give prompt feedback• Emphasise time on task• Communicate high expectations• Respect diverse talents and ways of learning

Chickering and Gamson (1987)

BL spectrum

• DEST* classification– Web supplemented – online participation

optional– Web dependent – online participation

compulsory– Fully online

*(Australian) Department of Education, Science and Training

Web supplemented

• Online aspect optional eg– Links to wider reading– Revision and review materials (eg practical

skills videoclips, formative quizzes)– Online discussion site for tutor/peer and

peer/peer support

Web dependent• The e-learning and F2F components are

both essential– co-dependent eg

• David’s virtual lectures in microeconomics• Mark’s use of WATS in Fluids and Thermodynamics

– separately eg• F2F Lecture and tutorial on topic A and Electronic

Reusable Learning Object** on topic B

**eg http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/morality_play.htm

Fully Online• e-learning route with no (or minimal?)

F2F component – One end of the Blended Learning spectrum– Quality and effectiveness of e-learning

resources and support critical– Although a minority of people may prefer

such an option, it is typically for people who cannot attend

– Eg UH Flexi route for PGCE

Questions to ask?

• How can e-learning opportunities….– enable me to make better use of my F2F

contact time?– give the students greater flexibility in when

and where they study??

ReferencesAnagnostopoulo K (2002) Designing to Learn and Learning to Design: An overview of instructional design models. Available at: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=198

Biggs J (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press

Chickering AW and Ehrmann SC Implementing the seven principles: Technology as the lever. http://www.tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html

Chickering AW and Gamson ZF (1987) New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Applying the Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. Jossey-Bass.See the following for a good overview: http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/7princip.htm

Garrison GR and Kanuka H (2004) Blended Learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education. 7, 95-105

Laurillard D (1993) Rethinking University Teaching. A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology. Routledge, London

Ramsden P (1992) Learning to teach in higher education. Routledge, London

Also see this ‘Module Planner’ site at University of Central England – some of the videos on L, T and A are excellent http://www.ssdd.uce.ac.uk/module/index.php?template=mainpage