Last year I played around with Activity Theory as the framework for my teaching and learning research project (Madsen 2009). While that project was about literacy and information literacy, it has occurred to me to use the model as a way of explaining to students what is expected of them when they start at university, and how the system works. It is after all a systems model, and universities consist of systems, whether we like to think of them in those terms or not.
Subject: for the purposes of this model, I am casting the student into this role. The students I deal with are fairly typical for my university: female, mid 20 – 30s, frequently married with dependents, working full time or part time, limited experience with higher education (either personally or through knowing someone who has completed a degree). As such, the typical student is already part of numerous other systems, all of which impact on the attention and time the student can devote to study. This is probably the cause of most of the problems I have to deal with, but it is not something I can do a great deal about. I try to caution students not to take on too much in the one term, but it is often not until three quarters through the term that the reality starts to hit home. At a recent meeting with some colleagues, we discussed providing students with a clearer understanding of the time required to complete the course – ie break it down for them (x hours for reading, y hours for learning activities, z hours for assessments). I am going to try this next year.
Object: From both the students’ and my perspective, the main object of this system is for the student to pass the course, although I would like to add here that I would hope that they learn something as well. I continue to find that one of the greatest challenges I have is how to engage students with the content in such a way that they want to learn at a deeper level and not take the attitude of doing what it takes to pass. I do try and align my curriculum as recommended by Biggs (1999), but I don’t think this is sufficient. Yes, I know the old maxim re bringing a horse to water, but I would like to see more students drink.
Tools: Traditionally, this is where I pretty much stopped thinking about the teaching and learning process. The tools are the things I would use in my teaching. Once these consisted pretty much of a Study Guide, a teaching plan for face-to-face tutorial activities, and lecture notes (death by Powerpoint). I read a link from David’s blog last night that outlined the various approaches to teaching/models of learning that clearly showed that more didactic ways of teaching were appropriate for particular types of learning, ie skills based, and teaching into the nursing program, I can now understand why some of my colleagues are particularly successful with this approach. However, I teach history (of nursing and health promotion), and a much more constructivist, even connectivist approach is much more appropriate for this type of content area. I am also blessed (? cursed) by having access to online avenues of teaching. So I have pretty much ditched the f2f and most of the lecture notes and been experimenting with short audiovisuals, downloaded lectures that can be audio files only, and discussion boards/group pages. I am about to add to my repertoire online quizzes and possibly a blog (still thinking about that). However, I am trying to keep at the front of my thinking, ‘what am I trying to do here?’, and ‘why am I considering this particular tool? so that my selection of the vast array of strategies that are available to me are for very specific learning purposes. I also have to keep the student in mind, and for many of my students, all this computer stuff is really scary.
Rules: I honestly think that although the rules of the game can be found in the various policies within the university (although finding any particular policy is a nightmare in itself), and students are given the Readers’ Digest version during orientation, there are plenty of unwritten ‘rules’ that are not clearly explained to students, or that are not explained at the point in time the student needs to hear them. Seemingly obvious things like ‘read your textbook before you try to do the assessment’ or ‘read the feedback provided’ seem to get missed, to say nothing of referencing systems (and no close enough is not good enough), looking at the marking criteria, and the due date means that is the date the assessment needs to be handed in and not actually started then. I’m going to try using some of the features in Moodle to address some of these better – like using the calender and reminders and having a tips on learning space.
Division of labour: It is using this component of the Activity Theory model that I think also often gets lost. Students have a responsibility toward their own learning that I’m not sure students always understand, particular in a very consumer-driven society. Yes, my responsibilities are made pretty clear to me by my Program Director and by the minimal standards expected of academics, and by the principles of good teaching. However, I’m not sure students are given the same drill. I need to be clearer as to the expectations I have of students regarding things like extension requests, plagiarism/poor referencing, participation in learning activities.
Community: This is the final component of the model, but I am coming around to believing it is possibly the most important. This was the outcome of the literacy and information literacy project I did. As a result, this year I included a virtual lounge in my Blackboard discussion forums and this was really well used by the nursing students who accessed it to form study groups and to link up with others in the course (f2f as well as online through group pages). However, I am wanting to develop this further. I have hesitated to go down this path, but I am going to try linking a small part of the assessment to discussion posts (part of a research project with a couple of colleagues). This time next year we should have a better idea as to the effectiveness of this approach. It is something I will continue to ponder.
I guess as I try out some of these ideas over the coming year, I’ll have a better idea as to their effectiveness. It certainly keeps life interesting.
References
Biggs, J 1999, Teaching for quality learning at university. What the student does, Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press, London.
Madsen, W 2009, “All at Sea”: an Activity Theory analysis of first year nursing students learning to write academic essays’, SLEID, vol. 6, no. 1, online http://sleid.cqu.edu.au
