I don’t think for a minute that it is any one of the factors that I have changed in the way I am teaching this course this year that is responsible for these changes in thinking (and I hope learning), but could  be a combination of all. I am also not ruling out that it just might be this cohort of students as well. Either way, the idea of providing gaps in which learning can be stimulated has intrigued me.

Mindful learning has a number of dimensions: openness to novelty; alertness to distinction; context sensitivity; multiple perspectives; present orientation (Siegel 2007, p. 237). It may be that as first year students, learning within an online classroom, and (for many) learning about history, there is undoubtedly a great deal of novelty in my classroom. Whether students themselves are open to that novelty depends very much on themselves. I have tried to smooth the way as much as possible so the levels of anxiety are not disabling, but there will certainly be those who are not open to this novel experience for a number of reasons. My very style of teaching has always tended towards highlighting differences and exploring the grey areas so there are numerous instances throughout the course that draw attention to distinction. Furthermore, history is context based and full of discrepancies, so the very subject area lends itself very nicely multiple perspectives. Finally, I have become more aware over the years of bringing the concepts I have been teaching to the present – to try and provide some linkages for students as to the relevance of these historical events to the present culture or status of nursing. I know I have been increasingly mindful of my teaching over the past couple of years. I didn’t know I was essentially encouraging ‘mindful learning’. Hmm, yet another little synchronicity. Had a few of those lately.

Seigel, D 2007, The mindful brain, WW Norton & Co, New York.

However, aside from these issues, I have enjoyed interacting with students again. In the large class I teach (over 500 students), I have been encouraging students to work in groups and I have set up group pages for them. While I generally leave the groups to work things out for themselves in terms of how the group operates and what tasks are undertaken/what content is mulled over etc, it has been lovely keeping a bird’s eye on the development of these groups. I have watched them really get their teeth into the primary source data and share their information around. Maybe it is a sign of a generation that is used to working with virtual strangers across vast geographical distances, but I am amazed at how quickly these groups have jelled and have just ‘got into it’.

I created a quiz for students to do that consisted of 5 questions related to their readiness to learn (background; learning style; preferences in teaching styles; preferences in resource use; how organised they were at the start of term). I guess not surprisingly those that completed this quiz early (in O week), were the organised ones, who generally liked to learn fairly independently and were comfortable with the online environment. I dare say I will not get a representative result with this quiz in terms of learning styles and preferences for all the students as it is likely only those who are already quite comfortable with the technology will actually complete the quiz; those who are assessment driven probably won’t take the time to look around at what is available to them on the online site. However, I am optimistic that the bunch of students I will be working with contains some really motivated students who really do want to learn and are throwing themselves into their studies. I have to admit it is very refreshing to watch.

The other addition to my teaching this year is a practice referencing quiz. I can see that a number of students have gone into this quiz 3 and 4 times already and it appears they are using the feedback provided as a way of learning how to reference. One student, for example, did this and then did the Assessment reference quiz and scored 100%. I am certainly fielding very few questions on referencing thus far, which is a change from previous years, so maybe this sort of resource helps take the angst out of referencing a little, and thus allows the discussion forums to be mostly focused on exploring the content. I hope so because although I have articulated both procedural and declarative knowledge as part of the outcomes for this course, I think somewhere along the way I have ended up focusing more on the procedural stuff in response to student queries etc which has taken away from really working through the important stuff. This is something I will keep an eye on as the term progresses. I guess only time will tell whether the thought I put into the design of the course etc will result in deeper learning for the students. That was my intention, anyway.

I have been reading about neuroplasticity (a friend lent me a book called The brain that changes itself). This lead me down the path of how meditation can impact on ways of thinking and that there are likely to be physiological changes. I didn’t realise it, but there has been research into this very issue for some 30 years or more. Dan Siegal’s book, The Mindful Brain, outlines these linkages. I am now very comfortable with the idea that a transformative experience that occurs over time (as it would appear is the most common pathway) can be explained by neuroplastic science. I can see that something that changes our perspective, a disconcerting experience that causes one to deeply reflect and question underlying assumptions can be a trigger to ‘reconfigure’ neural pathways that over time and practice are reinforced (‘neurons that fire together wire together’). What I am unclear about, however, is how to explain what happens with an epiphany. What can cause a sudden ‘rewiring’?

As I’m learning more about transformative learning, the principles are becoming clearer at an individual level, and I’m starting to get my head around community transformative learning, but there is still so much to learn and understand. I can see this area of inquiry is a rich and deep one and one that will take quite a bit of exploring.

References

Doidge, N ?, The Brain that Changes Itself, ?

Mezirow, J & Taylor, EW 2009, Transformative Learning in Practice. Insights from Community, Workplace and Higher Education, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

Seigel, DJ 2007, The Mindful Brain, WW Norton & Co. New York.

Interestingly, my first thoughts were thank goodness at least this is something in L&T that is research-based! but although Taylor makes the point that transformative learning is the most research and discussed theory in the field of adult learning, he also points out there are many aspects that would benefit from more research. Of particular interest to me (and the research projects I am currently involved in) is the fact that there has been an almost exclusive focus on the formal educational setting with little research being in less formal contexts. This is particular relevant to my thinking re the community-based cardiac rehabilitation project I am about to commence in the new year.

Taylor also mentioned the lack of research into the long-term benefits/effects of transformative learning which very much relates to the second chance adult education project we hope to kick off next year as well. In regards to transformative learning, both of these projects we will be embarking upon take very much the community perspective rather than an individual perspective (although recognising that the community is made up on individuals). When I stop and think about it, while I have read a couple of papers that don’t necessarily focus on the individual, I have to admit, I don’t recall reading too many that have looked at transformative learning in quite the way we will be. This could be a good thing or not so good and could simply reflect the lack of thorough reading up I have done to date.

In regards to preparing to teach my first year students next year, this paper was useful in reinforcing my thoughts that I can introduce a number of the strategies used to foster transformative learning in my courses, but that I have to be very careful because of a number of factors: the maturity of the students involved; the huge variation in experience in the student cohort; the online nature of the teaching; the readiness of students to want to engage in a transformative process; the morality associated with asking them to do so; the numbers involved (in one of the courses). All of these factors mean that I risk pushing some students beyond their comfort zones that is detrimental to their learning because I find it difficult to know students individually given the numbers and the nature of the online learning environment. I feel pretty confident in my ability to manage the emotional responses of students in most situations in the face-to-face environment, and to a lesser degree over the phone. I have also experienced a number of situations online where I have diffused emotionally charged situations and I have reflected at  length on the emotionally responses of students to online learning, and even encouraged it. I have to admit, however, that I am more apprehensive of managing these emotional episodes in an online environment – I suppose because I don’t have all the visual cues I would normally rely on and I can’t use all the communication strategies I would usually call upon (eg tone and volume of voice). Taylor points out that there has been little research into the emotional responses of students or in the role that emotion plays. Intuitively, I suspect quite a bit more than is revealed in the limited research that has been undertaken.

Hmmm, something else to think about.

References

Taylor, E 1998, ‘Transformative learning: a critical review’, ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, no. 374.

Taylor, E 2007, ‘An update of transformative learning theory: a critical review of the empirical research (1999 – 2005), International Journal of Lifelong Education, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 173-191.

What struck me as I was thinking about this site is that I have spent so much time thinking about different aspects and trying to balance the various requirements – you should teach history x way, you need to consider y when dealing with online courses, you have to take into account z for first year students etc – and yet none of this is really evident to any of the students. They simply see a few lines of words, a number of tasks (hopefully they see there is some relevance to these tasks), links to other bits and pieces. It really does remind me of a duck swimming on water – serene on the surface but working like mad under the water line. Maybe that is how good teaching should be – invisible, seamless – like good health and not noticed until it isn’t working as expected. Hopefully all the thinking time and reading and reflection that I have been doing over the years has contributed to more efficient and effective webbed feet.

Ah, now to swim onto the other course site….

Nursing also does this to itself. For a century and a half nurses have been torn between recognising their own worth and being the handmaidens of doctors. There has been much written about this tendency of nurses towards embracing the technology of medical science in a way that enhances their self esteem and social standing, but there has not been much written about the intelligence of nursing. The historical research I have done highlights again and again that these intelligences have not been recognised by nurses themselves and that there is almost a barrier to wanting to recognise the intelligence associated with nursing – hence the dogged attachment to skills and practice that is directed by someone else. Cohen picks up on this when he points out that when we admit our own intelligence, we also have to accept responsibility.

The ‘ah’ moment for me therefore had two aspects. One, I have to question whether I am also guilty of reinforcing the boxes students and limitations students place around themselves. I have to take an honest look at the way I approach and perceive the students who do not engage in the classes I teach. I don’t need to worry so much about those that do participate – they are already at a place of being ready to question their own boxes. Rather, it is those students who do not participate in any activities, who enrol but never hand in anything or who rapidly drop out. Am I doing something in these first few weeks of term (and of their university experience) that reinforces messages being played in their own heads, ‘I don’t belong here. I’m too dumb’?

The second component relates to my own attachment to the history of nursing and recognising that providing students with these concepts at this point in their learning is probably not always appropriate. This is not to say that I am devaluing the work I have been doing or that I don’t think nurses don’t need to know and understand their past to be able to make sense of the career in which they are entering. Clearly I strongly believe nursing’s rejection of its own history has been problematic. However, this may not be where many of the students are at. When I reflect upon those students who have reaped the most benefit from the course, it is RNs who are doing the post-reg degree. These are the ones who have experienced the culture and disconnect within nursing and for whom understanding the history helps them join the dots. Younger, inexperienced students often don’t get it and see the course instead as an academic exercise – some enjoy it as such, others do not but learn to appreciate why it is necessary to have this understanding.

My challenge therefore is how to engage those students who question their own intelligence and ‘right’ to be at university so they may come to examine their own assumptions about themselves; to engage those students in the relevance of history for their future career aspirations; and to challenge those students who are wanting to engage and learn the subject area – all at the same time across a class of over 400. This is why teaching this class has to be done online so I can offer a variety of avenues at once. I feel like I’m back to teaching the three levels within the same aerobic class – or at least found a way that I can manage this better. That hasn’t provided me with all the solutions or strategies to deal with this, but I think I’m on the right path and it is a path that I can apply to both the nursing students and the health promotion students, although the latter are a much smaller class and I suspect that provided my workload doesn’t blow out as it has over the past couple of years, I may be able to implement some more personal strategies in this class. The bigger class, however, reinforces for me the importance of directing my energies towards building a sense of community because I cannot develop a personal relationship with so many students. I think herein lies the key – I don’t have to, but by encouraging students to support each other, I may be able to address all challenges.

Hmmm, I think I’ve got a better understanding of the problem, still a little short on solutions.

Reference

Cohen, L 1997, ‘I ain’t so smart and you ain’t so dumb: personal reassessment in transformative learning’, in Cranton, P (ed), Transformative Learning in Action: insights from practice, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, pp. 61-68.

Given the content of this blog, I could very strongly identify with her experiences, in particular that of journaling one’s inner thoughts in a more public place. For her, this was through including her reflections as part of her doctoral studies. For me, it involves using this blog.

One of the other chapters that I also read this morning picked up on the either-or issue that Dewey wrote about in 1938 that I commented on the other day. In this case, Clarke (1997) explains how Western society arrived at this point. Where once we took a more inclusive view of the world, over the past 2000 years we have increasingly identified ourselves as ‘either/or’ rather than ‘both/and’. I like the both/and concept and it fits rather nicely with a quote I read a while back about the sign of an intelligent mind was to be able to hold two opposing thoughts at the same time and be okay with that. Unfortunately, I can’t remember who came up with that little gem, and I’m not sure that I am always okay with holding opposing thoughts at the same time although I suspect I am more of a grey thinker than black and white. I also suspect that as I continue to learn about learning and teaching that I will also delve deeper into my own assumptions and habits of mind leading to further transformative experiences. I hope so because this journey is turning out to be a rather intriguing one and even over the past few weeks since commencing this blog, I have learned so much.

References

Clarke, JE 1997, ‘Of writing, imagination, and dialogue: a transformative experience’, in Cranston, P (ed), Transformative learning in action: insights from practice, Jossey-Bass Publications, San Francisco.

Wilcox, S 1997, ‘Becoming a faculty developer’, in Cranston, P (ed), Transformative learning in action: insights from practice, Jossey-Bass Publications, San Francisco.

So where did all of this come from. Coincidently, I had ordered John Dewey’s, Experience and Education the other week and it arrived on my doorstep a couple of days ago. This book was written in 1938 and it outlines his philosophy of teaching and how learning needs to be embedded in experience. The book was written some years after the ‘progressive’ movement in schools in the USA had started, and I gather Dewey was involved in instigating this movement. As such, he had had  chance to reflect on the ‘traditional’ as well as ‘progressive’ modes of teaching and learning. Interestingly, he starts the book with a discussion about either-or and notes that while there was much to criticise about the traditional way of teaching and learning (ie very ordered and highly disciplined classrooms, rote-learning, little interaction between the teacher and students etc), he also pointed out that challenging these things does not necessarily mean doing the opposite as some within the progressive schools had obviously been doing. That is, it is in the practice of teaching and learning that needs to be looked at carefully and that regardless of how sound the philosophy upon which the learning and teaching has been based, interpretation into practice is ultimately what matters.

As such, I suspect it was Dewey and co who started this whole passive/active learning thing and there are some things that I need to keep in mind. Firstly, while there are lots of things I like about Dewey’s philosophy and I gather he was been influential in the Work Integrated Learning movement within universities (I attended a conference last year and his name came up more than once), Dewey was writing in the 1930s and his focus was not on adult learning but on the learning of children. Secondly, this book in particular (and I haven’t read any others to be able to make a general statement) seems to have been written with a specific purpose in mind that was relevant to a specific time period and context. Thirdly, it is based on a philosophy and there is no hard data or rigorous research/evaluation included in the book. While these things do not in and of themselves discredit the book, and I believe there is much that can be applied to a university setting in the 21st century, I need to be aware of these things.

What I do like about the book is that as I was reading, I keep coming back to the Activity Theory, which was also initially formulated in the early 20th century, around the time of Dewey, but in a very different context (Vygostky was a Russian psychologist). However, they have a number of principles that are similar when applied to a teaching and learning situation. First of all, both recognise the need for rules. Dewey talked at length of the need for rules to be agreed upon by all players, but rules were needed nevertheless (it would appear some of the progressives had reacted to the rigid rules of traditional schools by trying to teach and learn with out any rules or agreed-upon social regulations - not sure how one learns in anarchy). Second, both place a huge emphasis on community or on the social context. One of Dewey’s key principles of learning is is based on the concept that ’all human experience is ultimately social; that is involes contact and communication’ (p. 38) and his criticism of traditional teaching was that this element of the social was not adequately taken into account. Third, both acknowledge the work and participation of all players, both teachers and learners (and the broader community). That is, learning is something that the student does and the role of the teacher is to plan and implement circumstances in which learning can occur provided the student is willing to participate. There is a division of labour here and it is contingent on both parties to do their bit. This is where the issue of active learning comes in. The other three components (subject, object and tools/instruments) also seem to be similar between Dewey and Vygotsky and would also be quite readily agreed upon by most. Indeed, most teaching and learning I think has focused on these three without taking into account the bottom of the triangle of the Activity Theory.

So where to from here? I think there are a number of ‘principles’ of learning and teaching that I can work from at this stage, even while I am still learning myself about the evidence that may or may not support these (or at least aspects of them):

1. Learning is a social activity. While it can be a very personal experience and can occur within quite isolated circumstances, it is likely most people draw on their interactions with each other to stimulate changes in thinking (Scott 1997 picks up on the social vs personal learning). As such, activities that provide opportunities to interact with each other are more likely to afford learning than in a more isolated, unidirectional transmission of knowledge (Dewey’s view of traditional teaching, and one could argue the traditional lecture that has no interaction would fall into this category), but that is not to say that isolated, unidirectional modes of teaching do not result in learning in some people some of the time and in certain circumstances this may be the most appropriate mode of teaching/learning.

2. Both learners and teachers have to buy into the interactions in order for learning to occur (from both perspectives) or at least so there is a greater potential for greater learning to occur. As a teacher, my responsibilities are to provide the circumstances and situations that encourage students to want to interact, but I have to also accept that some students come into this classroom with so many other issues going on in their other personal activity systems that their capacity to interact may be significantly reduced.

3. An overt (and if possible mutually agreed upon) set of rules provides the framework within which the interactions occur. Working in an institution, some of these rules I cannot change, but within my own classroom (and increasingly this classroom is created within a LMS with its own possibilities and limitations), I can negotiate to a certain extent some of the rules with the students. Having said that, it is much more likely the rules can be negotiated when there are 40 students in the class than when there are 400 and since I teach at both extremes, I need to think about different strategies for different groups. In both situations, however, the rules need to be made clear to all.

That’s probably as many principles as I can manage at this stage as I start to set up my Moodle sites for next year and plan out my activities.

References

Daniels, H 2001, Vygotsky and pedagogy, Routledge, London.

Dewey, J 1938/1997, Experience and education, Touchstone, New York.

Scott, S 1997, ‘The grieving soul in the transformative process’, in Cranton, P (ed), Transformative learning in action: insights from practice, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco,pp. 41-50.

1. Sharan Merriam: Adult learning theory

Sharan picked up on the fact that there are some global shifts occuring at present that are impacting on adult learning: globalisation, instant communication, knowledge age (information doubles every 73 days), and rapid change (half life of knowledge is decreasing, especially in some discipline areas).

She gave an overview of how adult learning theory has changed, from androgogy in the 1980s to self directed learning in the 1990s and now more focus on transformative learning theory, however presented this as a means of building rather than radical changes. Thus:

Androgogy: increased self direction as we age; accumulation of growing reservoir of experience; readiness to learn related to life role and social role; more problem solving orientated and immediate application; more internally motivated (Knowles 1980).

Self directed learning: upwards of 90% of adults engaged in independent learning project; in these adults plan, carry out, evaluate own learning; learner interested in and ability to engage in SDL varies and may depend on the situation; SDL in taking control of own learning.

Transformative learning: is about change – dramatic and fundamental change in way we see ourselves and the world; often begins when important event (disorienting dilemma); results in a change in perspective as result of examining assumptions.

Context of learning. Sharan noted the context of learning was sometimes forgotten as most theories of learning were based on the individual and not the context, but we need to consider where learning takes place (situated cognition) and recognise the importance of community and workplaces as sites of learning (non formal learning – 80% of learning in workplace is informal learning).

Situated cognition was context based, tool dependent (ie used the equipment in the environment) and socially interactive.

Communities of practice (Wenger 1998) were described as groups who share ideas, collective meaning-making, members with different levels of knowledge, learning is key to community of practice, context must allow for informal learning to occur, access to information, and community teaches and learns from its members.

Critical learning theory picked up on shifting focus from individuals to structures of society and shape learning, recognises inequality and asks critical questions re who decides, whose interest, who benefits, how are interests negotiated.

More recent approaches to adult learning include embodied/somatic learning (recognising the wisdom of the body and emotions and not just cognition - when our bodies tell us something – ‘we are feeling creatures thta think, not thinking creatures who feel’); spirituality and learning (connected to learning through meaning making, gives lives coherence, but in order for this aspect to be incorporated, there needs to be a safe and supportive space to allow spiritual connection to occur, use of dialogue and visualisation); and non-Western ways (life long journey not bound by institutions, what counts as knowledge being questioned, involved whole person).

The implications of these more recent theories are the need to make practical and authentic learning, develop critical thinking skills, examine our own assumptions and fostor holistic learning.

2. Curtis J Bonk: The world is open now

This person is the author of the R2D2 model of learning I have written up on my whiteboard (I have now found out this forms the basis of a book, Empowering online learning: 100+ activities for reading, reflecting, displaying and doing, which looks quite interesting). However, the guts of this presentation were based on his new book. He comes from the premise that with the electronic age and increasing availability of mobile devices etc, nearly everyone in the world can access and learn from the internet and other ways that were not conceivable some years back. Some interesting websites that he flicked up were quite good, including:

Terry Anderson’s e-book, Theory and practice on online learning that is available free (http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/)

Academic Earth ( a repository of lectures) (http://www.academicearth.com)

Merlot (an educational network and repository) (http://teachereducation.merlot.org)

3. Patricia Cranton and Edward Taylor: Transformative learning theory

I have to admit to being rather disappointed with this presentation (and I don’t think it was just that I was anticipating this presentation more than anyone else who presented), but rather I suspect they are both better at writing than they are with this type of forum. Ed in particular, mentioned that he did not teach online, although Patricia has been teaching online for around 9 years. Essentially they gave an overview of TL:

Definition – how adults make meaning of experience, an encounter that is discrepant with current beliefs, engages in dialogue with self and others, includes reflection that leads to a revised perspective so the person acts in new and different ways.

We don’t transform students, but we can create circumstances to encourage deep reflection on assumptions, in an environment that is supportive and challenging.

Common program elements (aside from the ones listed above) – purposeful and heuristic process, confronting power and engaging difference, imaginative process – create opportunities to go beyond rational thinking, leading learners to the edge (of comfort zone), fostering critical reflection, modeling (one’s own transformative experiences and questioning own assumptions).

They put forward benefits of TL in an online environment, but I couldn’t see that these were any different to teaching online advantages as normally outlined (more likely to open up, discussions remain accessible, plenty of time to reflect, no one looking at you, immediate links to alternative resources), but that may be because I have found teaching online somewhat transformative anyway.

They noted that when teaching in the online environment it was helpful to use more expressive language (because of the absense of non-verbals); maintain strong teacher presence; encourage interaction between participants; create an informal conversational discussion based environment (to encourage social construction of knowledge).

Strategies for fostering TL online include: engage learners in making decisions about content and process in the course (not sure how I would manage this at an undergraduate level); use provocative materials containing discrepant points of view; ask challenging and thought provoking questions; encourage students to challenge each other in respectful ways; model critical reflection and self-reflection; use arts-based projects and activities.

Patricia uses the cafe/virtual lounge quite a bit throughout the term, and to encourage a more casual atmosphere, says something like, ‘I am sitting here with my cup of tea and biscuit…’ – using the idea that introducing food helps to make connections with people.

4. Randy Garrison & Norm Vaughan: Blended learning in higher education

Again, another presentation based on a book that has been published by the conference organisers, but it does have some interesting models and ways of looking at this issue. They define blended learning as:

• organic and thoughtful integration
• fundamental redesign of course
• strong and weak approaches (this was interesting as the weak approach was where online activities were simply added on vs strong approaches that involved a complete redesign of the course whereby all activities had a specific purpose).
• Blended learning contained synchronous and asynchronous elements, online and on-campus elements.

The authors have put together a Community of Inquiry Framework and indicated there is a growing evidence that community is a key factor in successful online/blended learning. Social presence is more important at the beginning of the term, but towards the end, teaching and cognitive presence tend to take over as this is where meaning on the content occurs.

They emphasise ‘teaching’ presence as opposed to ‘teacher’ presence to incorporate any teaching that students do and to share leadership. However, teachers did need to show timely presence and this was related to student satisfaction and increased perceived learning as well as increased sense of community.

They have formulated 7 principles of blended learning:

• open communication and trust
• critical reflection and discourse
• create sense of community
• support purpose of inquiry
• ensure student sustain collaboration
• ensure enquiry to resolution (not sure what this means, I may have missed this one)
• assessement is congruent.

I’ve just realised I have missed the session on building community online (Rena Palloff & Keith Pratt) – so will need to update this later.

1. James West and Margaret West: Using wikis for online collaboration: Wiki frames in 7 easy steps

I very nearly didn’t watch this one. I guess because I didn’t really understand what a wiki was or how it could be used. Whenever I hear of them being used, there seems to be mixed reactions. However, I can get it now and can see how and where a wiki could be really valuable. For a start, the collaborative research projects that I am working on could use a wiki as we write up the project.

The 7 steps outlined for teaching and learning uses are:

• Define the wiki purpose
• Classify wiki learning domain
• Define wiki desired outcomes
• Frame the wiki – ie provide a shell for students
• Kick off the project for the students
• Develop group roles and ground rules
• Determine assessment measures

The authors put up the website: http://www.wikiframes.pbworks.com for further reference. They use the activities around the wiki keeping in mind Blooms taxonomy.

My thoughts were to include the option of a wiki for the students’ group pages in my nursing and health promotion courses so if the students opt for compiling a group posting for the discussion board, they can more readily work on this within Moodle.

The authors also suggested checking the process to encourage participation.

2. Rena Palloff and Keith Pratt: Assessing the online learner: resources and strategies for faculty

I have to admit to having this book on my shelf (have had for some months) and not reading it. Perhaps I will do so now with a little more enthusiasm then when I initially flicked through it.

The authors emphasise the need to use a combination of assessments: tests and quizzes; written papers; and collaborative assignments to promote ‘best practice’ and minimise cheating. They put up a pyramid I quite liked that had retention rates for lectures at 5% at the top through to teaching others as 90% effective for retaining information (see book, p. 19) and suggested assessments should be aimed at the bottom half of the triangle (discussion activities, practice by doing, teaching others).

Assessment should be:

• learner centered, including self-assessment (noting that quizzes are instructor-centered when used as assessment). This means students are provided with time and opportunities to practice and apply the knowledge.
• Design grading rubric for discussion as well as assignments and collaboration.
• include collaborative assessments through public posting of papers with comments from students to students.
• Add column in rubric with ‘what do you think’  to encourage self-assessment (I like this and it would be quite easy to do)
• Encourage students to develop skills on providing feedback
• use assessment that fits context and outcomes
• assessments should be clear and easy to understand and likely to work online
• Ask for and incorporate student input into how assessment should be conducted
• Ask for feedback on assessments
• Quizzes can be used as part of formative assessment – eg have quiz set up after reading chapter (I have already organised this for next year, but it is about the content of each module)

Authentic assessments:

• Take the form of application activities eg simulation, role plays, case studies
• Portfolios can illustrate ongoing knowledge acquisition and application
• Effective demonstration not only acquisition of knowledge but ability to apply that knowledge in professional and other settings
• Effectively assessment through use of rubric

Benefits of online learning community approach (which was really emphasised – and the subject of another book I happen to have on the shelf):

• learners empowered to understand own capability for learning
• learners have responsibility to themsleves and others in learning process
• Collaboration can lead to fundamental change in thinking
• student participation and satisfaction are increased
• plagiarism and cheating potential to decrease

Strong plug of breaking assignments into parts and assess along the way rather than all at the end to decrease plagiarism (I do this with Assessment 1.2 and 1.3 which are both formative and summative for the end of term essay).

Overall, I have to take a much better look at the books produced by these two authors as I got quite a bit from this session.

3. Elizabeth Barkley: Student engagement techniques

This presenter was inspiring and I found this session the most engaging of the ones I watched this morning. She noted that to be ‘engaged’ meant being motivated to learn + active learning; that engagement was where these two concepts overlapped and was a product of motivation and active learning.

She has a really unique way of assessing her students. She divides all the learning activities in the course according to Blooms taxonomy and assigns weighted points (to a total of 4000). Students then choose which activities they need to do to get to the desired target (honours students needed to reach something like 3200 while undergraduate students needed to reach 2800 points). This meant students accumulate points as the term progressed.

She showed a clip using a think-pair-share activity in the f2f classroom (ie pose a question, have students think about it, share their thoughts with someone else and then share with the class). She suggested the activity can be used in an online environment as a united posting (and this is what I will be having students do as part of their assessment next year – or at least the option of doing this).

Notes that there wer ethree conditions for active learning to take place:

• Sense of community!
• Appropriately challenging activities – must be difficult enough to be challenging but not so difficult to be demoralising (finding the balance in a large class with diverse points of the continuum of ‘getting it’ can make this difficult so you don’t tip some students over the edge)
• Learn holistically – the brain learns best when there is cognitive, emotional and physical involvement.

I think it was mentioned that this speaker has a book that is about to be released. This would be one to look out for.

4. Robin Smith: How to get through to content and through to students

This was a good presentation, although I found it a little of a downer after the previous speaker (always a problem in conferences). Again, I have a copy of Robin’s book and after listening to her presentation, I think it will be easier to follow the book.

Highlights were:

• understanding experts have a filing system and upon hearing new knowledge are able to catagorise it immediately and file it away in a way whereby it can be retrieved again quite easily. Novices don’t have a filing system so they have discrete bits of knowledge in random order thereby taking much longer to retrieve any one piece of information.
• Lecturers can help novices by providing them with some categories as part of the course content – eg with a lecture – group into up to 7 catagories and have students summarise the content into those catagories (see page 118)
• Graphic syllabus. I really liked this idea and although I have used this idea in some forms, I hadn’t thought to use it for each lecture to show how this particular lecture/module fits into the whole. ( eg I could use this for EPN with the whole being building towards professionalisation of nursing and each week highlighting a different perspective – Robin mentioned using an umbrella as the graphic as an example)
• Chunking content into smaller bits, so rather than a 50 minute lecture, have 5 – 7 minute segments that are separated by a transition slide/activity (see p. 122) (I have often done this in my lectures when I do them ‘live’, but need to incorporate this into the recorded sessions)

5. Jonathan Finkelstein: Producing great podcasts

I hadn’t really thought about doing regular podcasts, but can see the some advantage in this, particularly as it seems to be relatively quick and easy (she says who has no skill at all in this type of  thing).  Jonathan defined Podcasts as: media files, easily recorded, distributed via the web, syndicated feed, playback online, on computer or via portable media outlet. From a substantive perspective they are: short, serial, branded, edgy or opinionated, between the lines, suitable for multitasking.

He puts forward 10 ways podcasts can be used in courses:

• to introduce or clarify assignments and tasks, to help connect with students to increase retention.
• Feature an expert (eg record via Skype – good idea)
• Bring discussion threads together
• Todays public announcement (PMQ – regular question time)
• Core content (but to be wary of recording 50 minute lecture) – keep for what are the guts of course, for concepts that are difficult to grasp, for foundational concepts, to help explain the most difficult parts, and to portray your enthusiasm or passion for the content, or for story telling
• to be course ‘docent’ eg museum guide
• get outside and guide through field trips
• quick tip series
• how-to modules
• Learners to do podcasting – eg interview each other, use role plays

Notes podcasts have a power of intimacy (ie whispering into the learner’s ear) and that it is important to be yourself.

In all, this morning has been very well spent and I have lots to think about (and some serious reading to do!).

References

Palloff, RM & Pratt, K 2005, Collaborating online. Learning together in community, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

Palloff, RM & Pratt, K 2009, Assessing the online learner. Resources and strategies for faculty, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

Smith, RM 2008, Conquering the content. A step-by-step guide to online course design, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.