Rethinking staff learning through collaborative online technology and
the peer learning experience Megan Saville, Julia Philips,
Matt Harding
UNSW Australia: 2014 Snapshot
>> Using technology to sustainably personalise at scale <<
54,517 Student Enrolments
38,828 Student Load (EFTSU)
21,762 Commencing Enrolments
Bachelor PG
Coursework
Masters Coursework
Masters Research
Doctorate
Students by Degree Level
8 Faculties 48 Schools
129 Affiliated Institutes and Centres
Science, Engineering & Medicine
(SEM)
Humanities, Creative Arts & Social Sciences
(HCASS)
Who are we?
Outreach Team (Academic relationship building & outreach)
Services Team (Specialised research & reference support)
Academic Services Unit (ASU)
Background
UNSW Australia assigned copyright compliance to UNSW Library
ASU responsible for fielding copyright & licencing questions!
Development of staff capabilities incorporated into operational plan
P2PU C4E online course undertaken by project team Approval to adapt course provided A C4E adapted and contextualised into C4HE
2013/14
ASU
UNSW Library Operational
Plan
Copyright 4 Education
Copyright 4 Higher
Education
What did we do?
Adapted
Core topics reused and adapted from P2PU C4E
online course
Contextualised
Sourced open higher education content and in-house copyright and
licensing enquiries
Content
Copyright and licensing matters in HE
Focus on OA, CC and OER resources
Collaborative
Simple yet novel use of technology to facilitate
collaboration
Peer learning
Informal peer feedback and formal review within
and across groups
Experience
Ethics approved survey indicates positive
opportunity for CPL
How did we do this?
Creation of dedicated Google
Drive & Docs
Contextualised content developed
3-6 months
ASU staff divided into cross-unit
groups
Introduction and familiarisation with collaborative tools
& content (Weeks 1-2)
Groups collaborated to
create knowledge artefacts
(Weeks 3-7)
Peer review of other groups’ work
(Weeks 3-7)
Capstone added to support meaningful reflection
(Weeks 8-9)
End of course and certificates
… and survey!
Where did this happen?
Google Drive Learning platform
Google Docs & Slides
Content & collaborative knowledge artefacts
Gmail Delivery of linked content
& correspondence
Advantages
• Scalable learning program • Allowed synchronous and asynchronous collaboration and iterative development of content • Consistency across multiple systems • Extended professional learning to collaborative technologies reflecting flipped and blended
learning modalities • Contextualised copyright law with online technologies
Why peer learning?
Continuing professional
learning
Related to workplace practice
Reflects student
experience
Relationship building
Supportive learning
environment
Knowledge co-creation & transfer
Formal & informal learning
Extended from: Webster-Wright, A. (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding authentic professional learning. Review of Educational Research, (2), 702-739
What was the experience? What value do you think this training has provided to you?
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Resources to answer future enquiries
Contextualised copyright for higher education
Great refresher of copyright
Opportunities to collaborate with other staff and share knowledge
Gain familiarity with online collaboration tools (Google Drive)
Opportunity for facilitated professional development
% of respondents
What was the experience? As a result of completing the Copyright 4 Higher Education course have there been changes to your communication with other staff or teams in the library?
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
I have more frequent communication with other
staff/teams
I have more direct communication with other staff/teams
I have more open communication with other staff/teams
I communicate with staff/teams I had not communicated with
before
Strongly Agree
Agree
No Change
Disagree/Strongly Disagree
What was the experience? How would you rate your working knowledge of copyright prior to commencing this course and after finishing this course?
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
None
Basic working knowledge
Functional working knowledge
Very good working knowledge
In depth working knowledge
% of respondents
Before After
Bedding into pedagogical framework: Herrington’s authentic learning matrix
Adapted from: Herrington, J. (n.d.). A matrix of authentic learning. Retrieved from the Authentic learning website: http://authenticlearning.info/AuthenticLearning/
Academic tasks in
academic settings
Realistic tasks in academic
settings
Realistic tasks in a real
workplace
Academic tasks in realistic settings
Elements of authentic learning as evaluation criteria
Herrington, J., Reeves, T.C & Oliver, R. (2010). A guide to authentic e-learning. London and New York: Routledge
Element Authentic Characteristics
Provide authentic context that reflects the way the knowledge will be used in real-life
1 of 2
Support collaborative construction of knowledge 2 of 2
Provide authentic activities 4.25 of 5
Provide access to expert performances and the modelling of processes
3 of 3
Provide multiple roles and perspectives 1 of 2
Promote reflection 4 of 4
Promote articulation 2 of 3
Provide coaching and scaffolding 1 of 2
Provide for authentic assessment of learning within the tasks 2 of 4
20.25/27 (75%)
How authentic was the course?
Herrington, J., Reeves, T.C & Oliver, R. (2010). A guide to authentic e-learning. London and New York: Routledge
What did we learn? • Capstones work to consolidate learning and support critical reflective practice • Professional judgement and self-reflection are not intuitive or common skills
– What constitutes successful completion of tasks, assessments, projects? – Staff training does not necessarily result in continuing professional learning
We have work to do… but we’re on the right track!
Where to from here? The opportunities ahead… For the course: Plan to run again in-house Run a CC BY open version?
For ASU: Confident with copyright triage and MOOC copyright roles Further CPL under development using our online collaborative peer learning framework Change our staff focus from Professional Development to Continuing Professional Learning
For our research: How do we create authentic personalised learning experiences for students and staff?
For UNSW academics and students: Using adaptive learning tools to create a more authentic, personalised, sustainable and scalable learning experience
Thank You and Acknowledgements
• Academic Services Project Team – Matt Harding is an Information Services Librarian in the HCASS team. He has
worked at UNSW since 2014 prior to a career in public and technical libraries. – Rachel Jones is an Information Services Librarian in the SEM team. She has
worked at UNSW since 2007 and previously at UTS Insearch.
– Julia Philips – Megan Saville – Alison Makins, UNSW Library Compliance Officer
Further Reading • Webster-Wright, A. (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding authentic
professional learning. Review of Educational Research, (2), 702-739. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40469054
• Herrington, J. (n.d.). A matrix of authentic learning. Retrieved via http://authenticlearning.info/AuthenticLearning/Matrix.html
• Boud, D. and Rooney, D. (2015) What can higher education learn from the workplace? In: Transformative perspectives and processes in higher education (Dailey-Herbert, A. and Dennis, K.S. eds). Springer:Cham
• The New Media Consortium. (2015). The NMC Horizon Report: 2015 Higher Education Edition. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/publication/nmc-horizon-report-2015-higher-education-edition/
• Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press: U.K.
Top Related