Developing a collaborative learning design framework for open cross-institutional academic...
-
Upload
open-education-consortium -
Category
Education
-
view
94 -
download
0
Transcript of Developing a collaborative learning design framework for open cross-institutional academic...
“Developing a collaborative learning design framework for open cross-institutional academic
development courses”
Exploring learner experiences in open cross-institutional and cross-boundary professional development courses in higher education,
a Phd project work-in-progress
Chrissi Nerantzi, Manchester Metropolitan University, United Kingdom, @chrissinerantzi
Chrissi Nerantzi @chrissinerantzi, Academic Developer, CELT, MMU
Glossop where I liveManchester where I work
My favourite place on earth
I still LOVE ice
cream
My boysWhat recipe?
Playful
Overview
1. Context2. Research questions3. Methodology4. Progress5. First findings (surveys + phenomenographic analysis)
Context• Open practice• Informal cross-institutional provision• Academic development (professional development staff teaching in higher education• Collaborative learning• How open collaborative learning is experienced in these settings
https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7137/13875633534_bcc5f14993_c.jpg
Harnessing opportunities, experience new ways of learning and developing
Research questions
RQ1: How are open cross-institutional academic development courses experienced that have been designed to provide opportunities for collaborative learning?
RQ2: Which characteristics of open cross-institutional academic development courses influence learners' experience and how?
RQ3: Drawing upon research findings from research questions 1 and 2, what are the key features of a collaborative design framework for open online cross-institutional academic development provision?
• Decentralised CPD with other institutions and linking to and sector-wide activities (King, 2004; Bamber, 2009; Crawford, 2009)
• Working together! To embrace open practices based on collaboration (The Cape Town Open Education Declaration, 2008)
• Collaborate to compete (HEFCE, 2011)
• Freeing education, cross-institutional collaboration (Nerantzi, 2011)
• Join-up, open-up (European Commission, 2013)
• Cross-institutional development (Smyth et al., 2013)
• Break out of institutional silos (Cochrane et al. 2014)
• Connecting universities, future models of HE (British Council, 2015)
• Cross-institutional consortia (NMC HE Edition, 2015)
open-up & join-up
Cros
s-in
stitu
tiona
l col
labo
ratio
n
Year first appeared
Framework Type of framework Formal/informal
Designed for mode of application
Adaptations Education sector Open education
1971 OU SOL (Supported Open Learning) model (Swan, 2004; McAndrew & Weller, 2005; Jones et al., 2009; also mentioned in Weller, 2014; Jones, 2015)
Conceptual Formal Distance learning
Blended learning, online learning
HE
1985 Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) (Stahl et al., 2006)
Conceptual Formal, informal
Learning supported by technology
Schools, HE
1991 Community of Practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991)
Evidence-based Informal Learning Online learning, Blended learning
2000 Community of Inquiry framework (Garrison et al., 2000; 2010)
Evidence-based Formal Blended learning Online learning HE
2002 5-stage model(Salmon, 2002; Salmon, 2013)
Evidence-based Formal Online learning
Blended learning
HE MOOCs
2002 Conversational Framework (Laurillard, 2002)
Conceptual Formal Learning supported by technology
HE
2009 3E Framework (Smyth, 2009)
Evidence-based Formal Blended learning Online learning FE, HE
2012 Online Collaborative Learning Theory (Harasim, 2012)
Evidence-based Formal Online learning HE
2013 7Cs of the Learning Design Framework (Conole, 2013b)
Conceptual Formal Blended learning, Online learning
HE MOOCs
2014 5C Framework (Nerantzi & Beckingham, 2015b)
Conceptual Formal, informal
Online learning Learning supported by technology
HE Open courses
Phenomenography (Marton, 1981) uncovering variations of conceptions of the collective experience as they are described
Method: Semi-structured interviews (Fontana & Frey, 1994)
Purposeful sampling often used in phenomenography to maximise ‘information-rich cases’ relevant to research (Patton, 2002)
Sampling strategy: Collective case study approach (Stake, 1995)
Methodology
Case 1
https://fdol.wordpress.com/fdol132/
132
Informal collaborating institutions
Open Education Europa Teacher Contest Finalist 2015
@BYOD4L
@OpenNetLearn
@FOS4L
Case 2
https://courses.p2pu.org/en/courses/2615/creativity-for-learning-in-higher-education/
Informal collaborating institutions & partners
Creativity for Learning in HE by Chrissi Nerantzi for CELT, MMU is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Open Education Europa Teacher Contest Finalist 2015
Shortlisted for Credo Digital Award for Information Literacy 2016, highly commended
Offered also duringOEW16
#creativeHE to be offered then again!
Commonalities of cases FDOL pilot (FDOL131)
University of Salford and Karolinska Institutet
Case 1: FDOL132University of Salford, Karolinska Institutet and Manchester Metropolitan University
Case 2: CreativeHEManchester Metropolitan University, London Metropolitan University, University of Macedonia, Creative Academic and Lifewide Education networks
Cases
Based on academic development courses linked to existing institutional module at postgraduate level in at least one higher education institution
Cross-institutional participation of colleagues from at least two higher education institutions
Collaborative learning as choice
Development using freely available social media platforms
Openly licensed courses using a creative commons licence
Developed or co-developed by researcher
Facilitated by a small group of distributed facilitators
10 12 8 Duration in weeks
Feb – May 2013 Sep – Dec 2013 Sep – Nov 2015 Dates
Optional, in small groups using PBL with peripheral and core participation
Optional, in small groups using PBL
Optional, in small groups or pairs using a variety of pedagogical approaches agreed with learners
Collaborative design features
Collaborative: University of Salford and Karolinska Institutet
Collaborative: University of Salford and Karolinska Institutet
Manchester Metropolitan University Development
Certificate of participation Open badges for participation
Recognition for open learners
n/a At the University of Salford: approved Flexible, Distance and Online learning module at postgraduate level as part of the PgCert in Academic Practice. At Karolinska Institutet: Part of study towards the accredited development courses 2-weeks or 5-weeks.
At Manchester Metropolitan University: Part of the Creativity for Learning module, option to also use work towards FLEX 15 or FLEX 30 modules. All three are part of the MA in Higher Education.
University of Macedonia: part of MA in Lifelong Learning
Formal study option
n/a n/a London Metropolitan University: part of Take5 initiative.
Study linked to further local engagement opportunities
Research design
Case 1 FDOL132
(2013) (n=19)
Case 2 #creativeHE
(2015) (n=14)
Initial survey, 19 Qs (n=25)
Final survey, 11 Qs (n=22)
Individual phenomenographic interviews (n=22)
Pool 1 Organisaton 4 categories of description
Pool 2 Collaboration 3 categories of
description
Pool 3 Cross-Boundaries 4 categories of description
Outcome space – to create
Collaborative learning framework – to create
Phen
omen
ogra
phy
(Mar
ton,
198
1)
All data collected December 2015
Details Case 1
FDOL132
Case 2
#creativeHE
Case 1 + Case 2
Expression of interest 20 28 48
Completed consent form, participants in study
19 14 33
Completed initial survey 17 8 25
Completed final survey 11 11 22
Interviews 11 11 22
Some of the findings so far…
Frequency (n=23) %
ISQ 15: In which country do you live?
UK 13 57
Sweden 6 26Canada 2 9
Norway 1 4
Uganda 1 4
ISQ 18: What is your highest qualification?
Doctoral qualification 10 40
Masters qualification 11 44
Undergraduate qualification 2 8
Other 2 8
ISQ 2: Please indicate your employment status
Full-time 20 80Part-time 4 16
Voluntary 1 4
ISQ 3: Please indicate your employment sector
Higher Education 22 88
Public Sector 2 8
Further Education 1 4
survey data: demographics
independent study [ISQ 12]
being supported by other learners [ISQ 12]
being supported by a tutor/facilitator [ISQ 12]
participating in a structured course [ISQ 12]
using media-rich resources (video, audio, animation etc.) [ISQ 12]
participating in group tasks/group projects [ISQ 12]
feedback on work [ISQ 4]
informal recognition for study (certificate) [ISQ 4]
study towards a qualification/academic credits [ISQ 4]
Participate in a specific course unit/topic only [ISQ 5]
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Combining ISQ 4, ISQ 5 and ISQ 12 (%, n=22) responses and FSQ 6 (%, n=22) indicating how effective/valuable the below activities are for
learning (FDOL132 & #creativeHE)
Final survey (FSQ 6) % (n=22)Initial survey (ISQ 4, ISQ 5, ISQ 12) % (n=25)
survey data
An opportunity to reflect on the course via an open questionFSQ10: Is there anything else you would like to share about the course?
(FDOL132 & #creativeHE, n=15)Positive comments – course level Challenges – course level- Enjoyment- Learning- Individuals from different backgrounds
and cultures - Students and educators learning
together- Opportunity to link course to own
practice- Give something back to the community- Raised self-awareness
- Initial challenges with the technology- Time issues- The need of course learning outcomes
was challenged
Positive comments - group level Challenges – group level- Potential increase in motivation and
engagement recognised- Value of synchronous communication
and collaboration
- Synchronous communication and related time constraints
- Cross-cultural challenges experienced- PBL approach seen as too complex- Lack of clarity about participants working
towards credits and related confusion
survey data
Countries of residence of participants FDOL132 & #creativeHE (n=22,
interviews only)
13
4
3
1
1
male50%
female50%
Gender of interviewees(FDOL132 & creativeHE)
academic developer
lecturer
learning technologist
librarian
postgraduate student
retired
consultant
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Interviewees' occupations(FDOL132 & creativeHE)
Data linked to Interviews
7 April 2016 Pool of Meanings
Cross-boundary learning through modes of participation… as a blurred formal and informal learning experience… as a valued informal learning experience… as an assessment challenge for formal participation … as an opportunity to explore recognition for learning
Cross-boundary learning through time and place… as a continuum… as an interruption
Cross-boundary learning through culture and language… as inclusion… as exclusion
Cross-boundary learning through mixed professional contexts… as fertiliser… as discomfort
POO
L 3:
Cro
ss-B
ound
arie
s
Cross-boundary learning through culture and language
… as inclusion
“I like the basic concept of the course. I like the fact that I was collaborating with participants not only professional backgrounds, but linguistic background, cultural background educational background. […] We had to remember again our English. Not only in a written dimension, but in an oral one too. Something that was totally challenging. And, of course, the rest of our participants who were heroes to hear us, they supported us and never made any statement or insult, for example. They were really encouraging and supportive. In that way they were trying to, I think, they were trying to set up ‘we’re not here to judge you about the fact that maybe you, make errors or you mix perhaps some words and I don't know what else, but we’re here to share our thoughts, opinions, ideas’. And, of course, there was an image that was shared in the community that was ‘never judge a person who doesn’t speak your language. He just knows another one’. So this motto was, was present in the, in the community. No one never said anything about errors or syntax, syntactical or grammatical errors.” C1 “We were from two different countries in my group. And that was, I think that was more attractive for me rather than different institutions. I mean if everybody was from UK, maybe because I think, or I feel that I know the UK system and how it works, maybe it wouldn't have made any difference.I see how things are working in different countries, because maybe we are taking things for granted. Maybe I think that everybody's doing e-learning in a certain way, for example. And then I realise that they are doing it differently or they're not doing it or, you know? So from that point of view it was good. […] I think that I felt good of contributing with my experience to what they're doing. So when, they ask something, and I saw that it can work in a certain way because we have done it here in UK I could tell them what we have done and then they can experiment. So from that point of view it felt good, of sharing information.” F7 “We were more people at the beginning in the PBL group which can be difficult to handle. But I think the Google hangout works better than Adobe Connect when you are like 6, 7, 8 people in a discussion. But then we were more like 3, 2, 5 people and of course it is smaller group, it is easier to feel safe, to feel connected with the people there and in the end we really were 3 Swedish people left so we could speak in Swedish. And that of course is our native language, that made it perhaps easier to communicate. We were writing in English and talking in Swedish. It would have been bizzar if we were talking English to each other. But perhaps, I mean if there was a fourth person there, sometimes the facilitator was participating and our discussions were in English.” F6
Cross-boundary learning through culture and language
… as exclusion
“I find it useful to learn from other people's experiences. The international nature. I think it's useful, I think it was, it was useful to share those experiences, um, but I think sometimes the language barrier, like there was a lack of confidence from some members of the group, which was fine in some aspects, um, but meant that in discussions it felt like the UK people tended to take over. Not because they, you know, they wanted to, but I always got the impression it was, like a lack of confidence, and, to be honest I would probably find it quite hard if I had to do it in a foreign language and keep up with the following a conversation, to be able to do that.” F2 “I felt a little bit anxiety, because I have 1 year, 2 years my English I can understand very well but I don’t use it. I had a long time to use my English. So the language it was problem for me. But I find it a challenge to make it better. […]I didn't feel the confidence about my writing skills. So I read it [the information] and I read it again. I couldn’t manage the time. I couldn’t realise how many hours I could use for a specific section because, I was trying to read and read again my texts. And I lost, I was losing a lot of time during this process. […] I didn’t participate in a group, because I didn’t feel confident about the language and I felt a little bit, I felt the pressure I didn’t-, I wanted to have a little time to adjust in the community and it was in the last week I feel more confident to communicate, to react with others. But it was the last week.” C10
Open learning as a collaborative design
… empowering… enabling… constraining
Open learning as a facilitated experience
… facilitative and supportive… lacking direction and instruction… controlling
Open learning as course planning
… organisation aided participation… organisation was challenging for participation
Open learning as resource- and activity-based
… helpful… challenging
POO
L 1:
Org
anisa
tion
Collaboration as engagement in learning
… immersive… dipping in
Collaboration as shared product creation
… satisfaction with group product… dissatisfaction with group product
Collaboration as social interaction
… valuing each others’ presence… missing each other’s presence… disapproving of others’ actions or behaviour
POO
L 1:
Org
anisa
tion
Research design
Case 1 FDOL132
(2013) (n=19)
Case 2 #creativeHE
(2015) (n=14)
Initial survey, 19 Qs (n=25)
Final survey, 11 Qs (n=22)
Individual phenomenographic interviews (n=22)
Pool 1 Organisaton 4 categories of description
Pool 2 Collaboration 3 categories of
description
Pool 3 Cross-Boundaries 4 categories of description
Outcome space – to create
Collaborative learning framework – to create
Phen
omen
ogra
phy
(Mar
ton,
198
1)
Research questions Expected Contribution to knowledge
RQ1: How are open cross-institutional academic development courses experienced that have been designed to provide opportunities for collaborative learning?
RQ2: Which characteristics of open cross-institutional academic development courses influence learners' experience and how?
RQ3: Drawing upon research findings from research questions 1 and 2, what are the key features of a collaborative design framework for open online cross-institutional academic development provision?
Recommendations and guidance on how collaborative learning can work in open online cross-institutional academic development contexts. Outcome linked to RQ1.
Refinement of explanations of pedagogical models and frameworks used in open courses in the context of cross-institutional collaborative learning linked to academic development. Outcome linked to RQ2.
Development of a collaborative learning framework and guidance on how this could be used, adapted and implemented in cross-institutional academic development provision. Outcome linked to RQ3.
Is this really the answer?
http://www.wiziq.com/teachblog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/shutterstock_193471262.jpg
Please share your comments & observations
ReferencesBamber, V. (2009) Framing Development: Concepts, Factors and Challenges in CPDFrameworks for Academics, in: Practice and Evidence of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 4, No. 1, April 2009, pp. 4-25.
British Council (2015) Connecting Universities: Future models of higher education. Analysing innovative models for Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka An Economist Intelligence Unit report produced for the British Council, January 2015, available at http://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/britishcouncil.uk2/files/new_university_models_jan2015_print.pdf
Cape Town Meeting Participants (2008) “The Cape Town Open Education Declaration,” online], available from: http://www.capetowndeclaration.org/read-the-declaration
Cochrane, T., Antonczak, L., Keegan, H. & Narayan, V. (2014) Riding the wave of BYOD: developing a framework for creative pedagogies, in: Research in Learning Technology, Vol. 22, 2014, pp. 1-14.
Crawford, K. (2009) Continuing Professional Development in Higher Education: Voices from Below , EdD thesis, University of Lincoln, available at http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/2146/1/Crawford-Ed%28D%29Thesis-CPDinHE-FINAL%28Sept09%29.pdf
European Commission (2015) Draft 2015 Joint Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the Strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (ET2020). New priorities for European cooperation in education and training, Brussels: European Commission, available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/documents/et-2020-draft-joint-report-408-2015_en.pdf
European Commission (2013) High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education. Report to the European Commission on Improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions, European Union, available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/higher-education/doc/modernisation_en.pdf
Fontana, A. & Frey, JH. (1994). "Interviewing the art of science" in NK Denzin and YS Lincoln (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 361-376.
HEFCE (2011) Collaborate to compete – Seizing the opportunity of online learning for UK higher education. available at: http://bit.ly/gZIoBB
King, H. (2004) Continuing Professional Development in Higher Education: what do academics do?, in: Educational Developments, Issue 5.4, Dec. 2004, pp. 1-5, available at http://www.seda.ac.uk/resources/files/publications_25_Educational%20Dev%205.4.pdf
Marton, F. (1981) Phenomenography – describing conceptions of the world around us, Instructional Science, 10, pp. 177-200.
Nerantzi, C. (2011) Freeing education within and beyond academic development. In: Greener, S. and Rospigliosi, A. Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on e-Learning, Brighton Business School, University of Brighton, 10-11 November, pp. 558-566, Academic Conferences International.
NMC Higher Education Edition (2015), available at http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2015-nmc-horizon-report-HE-EN.pdf
Patton, M. Q. (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.), Thousand Oaks: California: Sage.
Smyth, K., Vlachopoulos, P., Walker, D., Wheeler, A. (2013). Cross-Institutional development of an online open course for educators: confronting current challenges and imagining future possibilities. In Carter, H, Gosper M. and Hedberg, J. (eds.), Electric Dreams. Proceedings ascilite 2013 Sydney. (pp.826-829)
Stake, R. E. (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
The Scottish Open Declaration (2015), available at http://declaration.openscot.net/
The Wales Open Education Declaration of Intend (2013), available at http://www.oerwales.ac.uk/?page_id=4
“Developing a collaborative learning design framework for open cross-institutional-boundary
academic development courses”
Exploring learner experiences in open cross-institutional and cross-boundary professional development courses in higher education,
a Phd project work-in-progress
Chrissi Nerantzi, Manchester Metropolitan University, United Kingdom, @chrissinerantzi
trip funded by