assessment 4€¦ · web viewbefore an institutionalized problem can be processed and solved, the...
TRANSCRIPT
INF536 Designing Spaces for Learning
Assessment 4
Case Report – Developing, prototyping & implementing the Online Learning Model at Charles Sturt University (word count 3128)
&
Critical Reflection
Or via url http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/lisahampshire/2016/10/08/inf536-critical-reflection/
Student name: Lisa HampshireStudent number: 89137301
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 1
Online study is a growth area in Australian tertiary education and as such, there are
ongoing debates and discussions about best practice. While Buchan (2008, p. 98)
acknowledges how complex and challenging the provision of online learning can be,
there is a compelling case to make that moving from traditional delivery to an online
learning model is about much more than technology and providing an IT ecosystem
of adaptive, recurring cycles.(Buchan, 2008, p. 2) Historically, the frame moved
away from one based on the provision of technology where, the discussion centred
around, “how to get faculty to adopt more technology”(White & Weight, 2000, p.
184)to one where online education builds a, “human community”.(2000, p. 185) This
case study examines the conception, leadership and introduction of a model for
learning across Charles Sturt University (CSU), Australia. The Online Learning
Model (OLM) (u!magine, 2016a) is an example of the idea that where the right tools
are in place, designed learning experiences follow(Buchan, 2008, p. 2) creating a
measurable impact on student learning. The OLM reflects scholarship on the many
ways in which delivery, access and progression when studying online pose
significant challenges for everyone in the cycle and that the tools of online learning
are less important than communication, interactions, content creation, achievement
of learning outcomes and the design of learning experiences.(Buchan, 2008, p. 1)
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 2
Case Study: The Online Learning Model – Charles Sturt University
Choice of Process
Before an institutionalized problem can be processed and solved, the problem
itself has to be recognized or articulated, and as Plattner (2013) suggests, it’s
less about framing a problem and more about creating a stable view of it,
“otherwise every solution you prepare may be considered promising by the
stakeholders in one moment and may be discarded in the very next.”(2013, p.
100) Additionally, as the view of the problem changes, people’s ideas about
the solution and what it should achieve also change,(2013, p. 100)“thus they
introduce new criteria for evaluating your proposals”.(p. 100) You can infer
from this that managing a change from a paper distance learning model to an
OLM for a multi-campus, multi-stakeholder institution needs to be done
carefully so the goals of the development team are not constantly moving.
Education Technology specialist Professor Barney Dalgarno began co-
directing CSU’s efforts in 2014 to adopt a new process, called U!magine and
develop and write the formation document establishing the Online Learning
Model (OLM), the institutional response and strategy for distance education at
CSU, “the right leadership is an important factor as well as an ability to inspire
some passion in people”.(Leistner, 2010, p. 59) As Leistner suggests, design
project leaders have to drive the ideas and the process and this means they
must be capable of, “building a clear understanding of the value of
knowledge”.(2010, p. 59) The overreaching aim of developing the OLM was to
build on the long-standing paper distance education model in CSU’s past,
while “capitalizing on our new model of course design and our strengths in
workplace learning”.(Dalgarno, B as cited inGiven, 2016, p. 14)
Once the problem was identified it became possible to begin the process of
formulating a solution. From design thinking, “establishing mindsets and
offering tools which save you from the impossible task of finding ‘the correct
problem view’ or ‘the optimal solution’”,(Plattner et al., 2013, p. 102) to the
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 3
kind of radical change continuum described in Designing from the Inside Out
(unknown, n.d.) there were varying processes to engage with developing the
OLM.
The OLM at CSU is an effort to quantify and map a process that began for
CSU when long standing assumptions about being a premier regional
university and premier provider of distance learning were shattered post Web
2.0 with the arrival of a new information ecology and new competitors eager to
forge market share. Understandings about traditional schooling served as a
metaphor for the new expectations of university learning, “separate
classrooms, minimally furnished and strung along corridors are no longer
appropriate”.(unknown, n.d.) Questions posed in 2000 remain considerations
for today, “what is the promise of technology and education? What is the
reality of the social change it represents? What are the continuing
challenges?”.(White & Weight, 2000, p. 185) As CSU’s Head of Campus
Virtual Don Olcott (u!magine, 2015) suggested recently, “The reality is that all
of our students complete various parts of their subjects in the virtual space.
The Virtual campus needs to be a value-added resource for all our students
and staff while recognizing that nearly 70% of CSU students are studying at
distance.”(2015)
The goal of the OLM was and is to develop, “a dynamic teaching and learning
model that in all its guises improves teaching, learning, and connectedness
across the learning community”.(Given, 2016) It was developed, “to
characterize the learning experience that CSU collectively aspires to for its
online students.”(2016) The OLM has also been part of an iterative process,
and now sits in its second skin as Version 2.(u!magine, 2016c)
The process described here follows Brown and Katz (2011) model of
designing with intent as well as Plattner’s (2013) rules for success in design
thinking: the human rule, the ambiguity rule, the re-design rule and the
tangible rule, meaning “to see what’s happening and to react accordingly in
the world and to construct a way out of complex problems, which usually have
not only one simple solution but often multifaceted, correspondingly complex
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 4
ones.”(Plattner et al., 2013, p. v) In the early 1970’s Rittel (Rittel as cited
inPlattner et al., 2013) developed a ten point plan for the solving of wicked
problems using psychology, but it was created exclusively for the realm of
politics and according to Plattner (2013) “design thinking problems are not like
political problems in all respects.”(2013, p. 98) Surely though, the conception,
funding, ideation, implementation and prototyping of a theoretical model of
learning within a large institution like a university is a political process worthy
of this type of consideration?
Exterior Pressure and Design Constraints
Institutional change by definition requires adherence to institutional policy
frameworks and large swathes of applicable legislation. Australian
universities are governed by the Higher Education Standards Framework
(Threshold Standards) 2015 (Australia, 2015) with new details tabled for
application from the 1st January, 2017. Additionally, they must be registered
under Part 3 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act
(2011)(Australia, 2011), are government accredited via the Australian
Qualifications Framework and report to the Tertiary Education Quality and
Standards Agency. Overseas students rights are protected by the Education
Service for Overseas Students Act.(Australia, 2000) Any redesign of a
learning system or the creation of a new model must therefore be carefully
and constructively aligned with a broad range of existing requirements, even
before the first consultation.
The Nature of Work Groups and Teams
The group developing the OLM, known as U!magine, were deliberately
created as a new and separate team because the process demanded it.
There needed to be a separateness to drive a truly creative change; an irony
given how institutions are renowned for their organisational silos, where even
creative thinkers fall into a paradigm where solutions cannot be found, or if
identified, cannot be implemented. This separateness allowed the prototyping
and collaborative process of the OLM to proceed and importantly, to produce
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 5
change. Version 1 of the OLM became Version 2 without the strictures of
institutionalised thinking to bind it in place. As designer and inventor James
Dyson (2011) says, “hands-on, creative thinking through design and
engineering is a way to avoid prescriptive learning”.(2011) In the case of CSU,
prescribed pathways to the new approach to online learning are able to be
avoided.
OLM Version 2 saw ambiguous elements renamed and reworked through a
collaborative, prototyping process involving education designers and
academics. (u!magine, 2016c) A number of courses were identified for
inclusion in the first wave of the OLM. Element experts utilized their
education design experience to introduce and develop new resources. For
example, Element Lead (interactive resources) Bec Acheson developed
innovative new products across four pilot units of learning, ranging from
Viticultural Science to Information Studies. (u!magine, 2015, p. 6) Element
Lead (workplace interaction) Kerri Hicks addressed this across Human
Resource Management, Nursing, Writing and Midwifery.(u!magine, 2015, p. 7)
Both examples represent prototyping in action and as Kuratko (2012)implicitly
states, “Nothing gets your idea across better than something people can view
from different angles”.(2012, p. 115)
Much is written about prototyping as a technical process where ideas are
implemented and trialled, reworked, reintroduced and ultimately (hopefully)
adopted, because “failure is an important part of the process”.(Dyson, 2011)
However, scholars like Buchanan (1992) and Simon(1973) present a wicked
problem framework where you only get one chance at a solution, which by
rights prevents a prototyping process. This dichotomy illustrates the very
wide range of process available for education designers like those within U!
magine. The U!magine team created an Online Learning Exchange(u!
magine, 2016a) in the form of a website, to explain and expand on the model,
showcase exemplars from the pilots, (u!magine, 2016c) including an
innovative portrayal of prototyping in the form of an interactive interface called
The Mixer.(u!magine, 2016a)
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 6
Status Quo & Experimental Space Design
The Mixer in some ways represents the opaque wall between practical
application of the status quo, and experimental space design. Outside of
presenting new units of study as prototypes of the OLM where it has been
applied, The Mixer presents one of the few visible and tangible products of the
complex process of the OLM development process. It allows anyone to scan
the contents of the model and imagine how it might apply to their experience
of online teaching, learning or education design. The Mixer illustrates, “there
are principles we know will work and combinations of elements that form
pleasing patterns which we can repeat”.(u!magine, 2016b) The Mixer also
serves as a tangible product of a community of practice where people,
“accumulate and construct knowledge in a field” (Yuan & Kim, 2014, p. 222)
with passion, frequent interaction, developed relationships and identity.
The implementation process for the OLM is a work in progress with Phase 1
timed for delivery in 2017. This will include eight courses and about 190
separate subjects redesigned to adhere to the seven point (previously five)
connected student experience: learning communities, interaction between
students, teacher presence, interaction with the professions, flexible and
adaptive learning, interactive resources and e-assessment. Part of the Phase
1 process requires evaluation against criteria, “aligned with external measures
of teaching quality and student engagement with the results used to inform
refinements to the model and the implementation of support processes and
resources.”(Dalgarno, 2016)
Collaboration and Communication
Multidisciplinary team collaboration and communication was an integral
strategy for the Online Learning Model team. Plattner et al suggest it’s up to
a team to communicate their idea in a catchy way including creative
reframing, multidisciplinarity, interviewing for empathy, assuming a beginners
mindset, using affirming mottos, seeking feedback, prototyping and
storytelling. “Storytelling is a means to communicate problem views
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 7
compellingly”.(Plattner et al., 2013, p. 100) An example of how the OLM team
have used catchy and creative communications and storytelling to seek
feedback and creatively reframe an idea was recently published and
distributed online across the university. Headlined, “Project Spotlight:
Riverina Shore”(u!magine, 2016c, p. 10) the story itself within a newsletter,
highlights a new virtual community where students can participate in
embedded client scenarios within virtual homes, health centres and social
spaces. The piece highlights how this newly developed space for learning,
modeled utilizing the OLM principles of student-focussed learning, critical
thinking and interprofessional learning, was communicated to the wider
community.
The task of developing the OLM was a major collaboration with numerous
stakeholders. Firstly, the U!magine team was gathered from a range of
discipline areas, “while collaborator expertise is one of the most important
criteria to consider, we have found that skills in teamwork and in crossing
disciplinary and organisational boundaries are equally important.”(Norris et al.,
2016, p. 120)
Team leadership in U!magine was and is shared between Professor Barney
Dalgarno, an award winning and oft-published educator and information
technology leader, and Professor Don Olcott Jr. whose achievements and
publications are many, but is perhaps best described by his inclusion in the
US Distance Learning Association’s Hall of Fame in 2014. On the team are
experienced teachers, another is a technology architecture expert along with
a Doctoral student whose expertise is in student use of digital technologies in
the home, so as Norris (2016) writes, “an important aspect of engagement is
that the overall thrust of the project needs to resonate with members’
individual research interests and competencies”.(2016, p. 120) Leistner
(2010, p. 65) would add, the organisational culture needs to be built on a
foundation of passion, trust and competency.
In addition to the multidisciplinary team developed within the U!magine group,
education designers were appointed as element specialists to assist with
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 8
professional development so that academics would know how and why to
incorporate the elements into their courses. Education Designer Miriam
Edwards became a specialist in one of the models’ seven elements; online
learning communities, and has been able to watch and guide the model being
rolled out as part of the course design process. She conducts workshops with
academic staff in her specialist area and will continue to do so as required as
part of the iterative communication process. Edwards (personal
communication Sep 30th, 2016) stresses the importance of understanding and
observing how the wider context plays a formative role in academics forming
a view of the OLM, saying the amount and scope of change in CSU’s
administration, including a reduction of schools from five to three, along with a
common support model for professional staff, presents something of a
roadblock to, “getting academics on board during a period of so much
change.”(Edwards, 2016) A case might be made that measuring uptake of
the full suite of the OLM in course design may prove difficult during this period
of flux.
The original model was drafted in late 2014 as part of the draft CSU Distance
Education Strategy. (u!magine, 2014) Consultation and feedback followed,
leading to the publication of the superseded OLM Version 1 in 2015. This
model was workshopped in sessions tagged Conversations About Online
Learning across campuses involving about 200 academics, education
designers and support staff. There were sixteen workshops throughout 2015
led by the OLM team.(Dalgarno, 2016, p. 2) The message from experienced
staff was the OLM represented innovative strategies that could be
implemented across disciplines.(Dalgarno, 2016, p. 2)
Norris(2016) suggests socio-ecological systems provide a good model for
trying to manage transdisciplinary teams, “itself a wicked problem of design”,
(2016, p. 115) noting the scale of uncertainty, conflicting social values,
messiness and complexity at the core of change management when working
with groups and teams. Norton(2012) describes how “complex environmental
problems cannot be comprehended within any of the accepted disciplinary
models available in the academy or in discourses on public interest and
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 9
policy”(2012, p. 447). Developing a model for online learning presents as a
complex environmental problem and as such requires a complex solution.
Messiness could have been the outcome of the OLM development, had a
socio-ecological process model not been used. Rather, using the 2015
transdisciplinary workshop feedback, the U!magine team gathered an expert
core group during April and May of 2016, including their own design and
technology leaders as well as quality learning and teaching leaders and OLM
element specialist education designers. This specialist group then revised the
first model and circulated it to an additional thirty CSU learning and teaching
scholars for further feedback and revision. A significant part of the process
adopted for the development of the OLM is that of revision and a willingness
to change course.(Norris et al., 2016, pp. 120-121)
The resulting seven-sided OLM is a little like Locke’s (2007) ‘six spaces of
social media’, or indeed McIntosh’s (2010) subsequent upscaled revision to
seven. Codifying the methodology of collaboration and process creates a
“fresh format for asking….what they would like to do in a new learning
environment, and then design a flow between the mix of spaces required for
the projects they will undertake.(unknown, 2016)
CSU’s delivery model for online learning began as a 1980’s paper/post model,
where students would receive parcels of learning materials in the mail. There
was a whole industry developed around printing course handbooks and
prescribed learning materials. Unlike other institutions coming into online
learning without a paper heritage, CSU suddenly found a range of courses
with existing distance delivery strategies but lacking a singular vision for
translating these to online delivery. It took plummeting enrolments for
strategists to address the latent assumptions implicit in previous business
positioning of CSU as ‘the premier regional university’ and ‘Australia’s leading
distance education provider’. Destination 2020: A Road Map for CSU’s
Online Future (Wills, Dalgarno, & Olcott, 2016), itself the redrafted version of
the 2014 Distance Education Draft Strategy(u!magine, 2014), sets out a clear
pathway from assumptions about CSU’s existing online learning to a future
system tailored from the ground up. “CSU is at a crossroads. Without a
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 10
complete re-engineering of CSU’s online learning capacity (teaching,
professional development, administrative infrastructure, and out of hours
support services) CSU will continue to lose market share, have a high ED
attrition rate, and will continue to receive poor ratings in national student
satisfaction surveys. Business as usual will not alter these challenges and
failure to address these may, in fact, create further gaps with our
competitors.”(Wills et al., 2016)
If a lesson from Leadbeater and Wong’s (2010) examination of primary
education could be applied to the development of CSU’s Online Learning
Model, it is that “disruptive innovation frequently starts in the margins rather
than the mainstream.”(2010, p. iv) Charles Sturt University was bound into an
old-school distance education strategy and it was this crisis of falling revenue
and enrolments that led them out to the margins. Ultimately, the strategic
design of the process for developing the OLM fulfilled Buchan’s(2010, p. 1) list
of communication, interactions, content creation and the achievement of
outcomes. A recommendation that is not recognized in this case study is that
for other institutions considering a similar move into a more developed and
crafted model of online pedagogy, the process should begin as soon as
possible. Where future-proofing discussions are taking place, powerful
arguments exist for embedding online learning into the framework and this is
applicable whether the goal is to provide only online education, or for places
like primary or high schools where learning online is becoming a normative
feature of education design.
Developing, designing, prototyping and implementing the multi-faceted Online
Learning Model utilizing an expert led community of practice, fully engaged in
a process with measurable and identifiable outcomes has provided a clear
framework for engagement in online pedagogy and filled a gap educators and
theorists have had on how to help learners learn online.
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 11
RECOMMENDATION LIST
When building a framework for designing virtual learning spaces, much can
be learnt from Charles Sturt University’s ideation and implementation of the
Online Learning Model. The following points of practice represent the
recommendations implicit in the case study:
Building online pedagogy is NOT about technology
The goal of an online learning community is to build a functioning
human community
Create a stable view of the problem you are trying to solve so your
goals are not moving with politics or fashion.
Choose a leadership team capable of inspiring passion, but also of
driving the ideas and the process
Understand your market.
Build it and build it again/ideation/iteration/implementation
Design with intent
Map your context – legislative, political, funding, change as part of a
socio-ecological process
Build a separate team to creatively drive the changes to learning
spaces, of multidisciplinary experts capable of crossing discipline and
organisational boundaries
Collaborate with stakeholders for prototyping in a community of
practice
Create expertise hotspots by recognizing individuals who can lead
implementation
Be prepared to change and remodel
Maintain a timeline for implementation
Utilise catchy and creative communication to tell your story
Collaborate and publish
Workshop widely, and then workshop in a more focused way
Question assumptions and rely on literature and research
Mentor implementation
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 12
Reference List
Education Service for Overseas Students Act (2000).
Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act, (2011).
Higher Education Standards Framework (threshold standards), (2015).
Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2011). Change by Design. The Journal of Product
Innovation Management, 28(3), 381. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
5885.2011.00806.x
Buchan, J. (2008). Tools for survival in a changing educational technology
environment. Paper presented at the Hello! Where are you in the
landscape of educational technology?, Australia.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues,
8(2), 5. doi:http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511637
Dalgarno, B. (2016, September, 9th). [The Online Learning Model
Implementation Plan].
Dyson, J. (2011, August 4th). No innovators dilemma here: in praise of failure.
wired.com.
Edwards, M. (2016, 2016, September 30th).
Given, D. (2016). Division of Student Learning Annual Report to the
University. Retrieved from csu.edu.au:
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 13
Kuratko, D., Goldsworthy, M., & Hornsby, G. (2012). Innovation acceleration :
transforming organizational thinking. Boston: Pearson.
Leadbeater, C., & Wong, A. (2010). Learning from the extremes. Retrieved
from retrieved from
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/citizenship/socio-economic/docs/Le
arningfromExtremes_WhitePaper.pdf
Leistner, F. (2010). Mastering Organizational Knowledge Flow How to Make
Knowledge Sharing Work Wiley and SAS Business Series
doi:retrieved from Wiley database
Locke, M. (2007). Six spaces of social media, Test. Retrieved from
http://test.org.uk/2007/08/10/six-spaces-of-social-media/
McIntosh, E. (2010). Clicks and bricks: how school buildings influence future
practice and technology adoption. Educational Facility Planner, 45(1-
2).
Norris, P. E., Amp, Apos, Rourke, M., Mayer, A. S., & Halvorsen, K. E. (2016).
Managing the wicked problem of transdisciplinary team formation in
socio-ecological systems. Landscape and Urban Planning, 154, 115-
122. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.01.008
Norton, B. (2012). The Ways of Wickedness: Analyzing Messiness with
Messy Tools. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25(4),
447-465. doi:10.1007/s10806-011-9333-3
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 14
Plattner, H., Leifer, L., & Meinel, C. (2013). Design Thinking Research:
Springer International Publishing.
Simon, H. A. (1973). The structure of ill-structured problems. Artificial
Intelligence, 4, 181-201.
doi
:http://www.public.iastate.edu/~cschan/235/6_Simon_Ill_defined_probl
em.pdf
u!magine. (2014). Draft DE Strategy. Retrieved from
https://www.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/1169973/Draft-
DE-Strategy.pdf
u!magine. (2015). U!magine Newsletter Issue 2. Retrieved from
https://uimagine.edu.au/about/newsletters/
u!magine. (2016a). CSU Online Learning Exchange. Retrieved from
uimagine.edu.au/csulx/
u!magine. (2016b). Online Learning Exchange. Retrieved from
uimagine.edu.au/csulx/
u!magine. (2016c). u!magine Newsletter Issue 3. Retrieved from
https://uimagine.edu.au/about/newsletters/
unknown. (2016). Module 6.2 The Seven Spaces [INF536 Designing Spaces
for Learning] https://interact2.csu.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-981157-dt-
content-rid-2220132_1/courses/S-INF536_201660_W_D/
module6/6_2_The_Seven_Spaces.html: Charles Sturt University.
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 15
unknown. (n.d.). Designing from the 'inside-out'. Retrieved from
http://www.featherston.com.au/1668/designing-from-the-
%E2%80%98inside-out
White, K. W., & Weight, B. H. (2000). The online teaching guide : a handbook
of attitudes, strategies, and techniques for the virtual classroom.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Wills, S., Dalgarno, B., & Olcott, D. (2016). Destination 2020: A Road Map for
CSU's Online Future. Retrieved from
https://www.csu.edu.au/uimagine/roadmap
Yuan, J., & Kim, C. (2014). Guidelines for facilitating the development of
learning communities in online courses. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning, 30(3), 220-232. doi:10.1111/jcal.12042
Lisa Hampshire 89137301 The Online Learning Model (OLM) 16