Curriculum design, implementation and assessment.

Theme 4

Taking risks

Constructive alignment(complicated phrase for a simple

idea)• Have you come across the term? • http://www.engsc.ac.uk/er/theory/constructive_al

ignment.asp

• John Biggs (1999): Teaching for Quality Learning at University, (SRHE and Open University Press, Buckingham

• John Biggs (2003): Aligning Teaching and Assessment to Curriculum Objectives, (Imaginative Curriculum Project, LTSN Generic Centre

activity

• What do you think might be some of the pros and cons of constructive alignment?

Benefits?

• Clarity ( is learning always about this?)

• Objectives clear to students

• appropriateness of assessment

• learning drives assessment

• encourages deep learning

• good for corporate learning?

• good for independent learning

Issues with constructive alignment

• Not easy• http://www.phil-race.com/downloads.html(Understanding)• mechanistic?• Repetitive?

• Ongoing process to perfect and adapt

• Need to be able to adapt modules easily – curriculum development implications

eg ICT in Teaching and Learning

• Kills creativity/ diversity in learning and teaching?• OFSTED - school inspectors --- after spending the last five years

getting teachers to teach to objectives –what was their big critique in the last report -- ???

Have a go -

• Think of a module you teach/or would like to teach

• aim?• Learning outcome?• LTA strategy?• http://www.leedsmet.ac.uk/the_news/change/documents/

Version32AssesmentTeachingLearningStrategy1.pdf

• LTA methods?• Assessment criteria?• Student support ?

Have you ever designed a module from scratch – what do you think is required to design quality modules?

?

What is the reality?

Constraints

• Uni regulations• Faculty regulations• Regulations of associations/ bodies/ societies• Current departmental practice• Admin issues• Technology issues

• Useful to externally examine/validate courses - lots of ideas

Implementation

• theories

• experience

• realities

• constraints

• Variety of appropriate techniques and styles – add interactivity to facility deep learning

Assessment

• Think of time – anytime -- from childhood onwards when someone made an assessment of you which had

• A. a positive impact

• B. a negative impact

Assessment and feedback(pros and cons)

• Summative• Formative – assessment for learning• Ipsative• Diagnostic

• Peer assessment• Self assessment

Feedback

Be sensitive

Can be hard to take

Will – early problems

Marco – consequences of poor assessment

Early formative assessment in yr 1

Accuracy at degree level

• Thanks for mark of 81

Kill your prejudices - assessment at one level is not a predictor of future

learning

• Boyle, R D; Carter, J E; Clark, M A C. What makes them succeed? Entry, progression and graduation in Computer Science. Journal of Further and Higher Education, vol. 26, pp. 3-18. 2002.

Think of attainment levels not fixed ability

• Think of Life-long learning not early labels

• Move to individual assessment -personalised learning

Evaluation – who/how?

• Compare/ contrast

Old /new student evaluations

Staff evaluations/ peer observation

Issues?

When you do it ?

How you do it?

Get feedback when you can – but use it constructively don’t take it to heart

You feel as good as your last lesson/ evaluation

Issues in on-line learning

Bridget Cooper

What sort of things do we mean when we talk about remote, e-

learning?

• What potential advantages might there be for students when using remote or on-line E-learning to students?

• What are the possible disadvantages to students?

• What might the differences be in remote learning compared to face to face learning?

• What are the advantages to tutors?

• What are the problems for tutors?

Ignore the hype!!!Evaluate

Gilly Salmon

• http://www.atimod.com/index.shtml

• http://www.atimod.com/research/publications.shtml

Many similarities to any teaching and learning – -many complex

factors interrelating

7

Classroom ambience and quality of learning dependant on degree of profound empathy

available for individuals

Teacher Curricular teacher /pupil quality Flexibility ratio

Quality/ amount/frequencyTime of positive interaction Quality leading to profound empathy of management

Nature and groupings Facilitative quality of pupils in class of environment

Similarities

• Quality of interaction is central• Needs to be positive - frequent• Emotions fairly central to experience• All groups different• All courses different• All tutors interact differently with students• Careful forethought about structure /materials

helps process – doesn’t predict it however• Enthusiasm crucial• Experience naturally helpful

Learning theory still valid

• However systems not necessarily designed to support process of learning – more for programmers edification

• Designers frequently forget …..emotion and the part it plays in learning

• Remember 93% non--verbal

Differences

• Medium is different – new strange: threatening

• You are at the mercy of the software and technicians – although you always were –

ever arrived to find the door locked –the gate impenetrable? - that cold rejected feeling??

Its bloody cold out ‘ere mate

Its bloody cold out ‘ere mate

It blooming is too!

He’s not wrong..

Fear of the new?

• Doors/rooms are familiar – VLEs are not –

• if you can’t get in you can’t learn – you need a learning space

• some VLES try to make the connection between face to face and virtual learning

• Differences between VLES can be superficial – or significant

• The interface is crucial - ease of use – vital = access – no barriers to learning for learners or tutors

• Needs to be designed for easy learning

• Does it favour interaction or transmission?

• Does it favour machines or humans?

• webCT

• first class

• Boddington

• OU interactive

Interactivity

• http://www.open2.net/learning.html

Gilly’s five stage model

• Stage 1 -- Individual access and the ability of participants to use CMC are essential prerequisites for conference participation

• Stage two - involves individual participants establishing their online identities and then finding others with whom to interact.

• Stage three - participants give information relevant to the course to each other. Up to and including stage three, a form of co-operation occurs, i.e. support for each person’s goals.

• Stage four - course-related group discussions occur and the interaction becomes more collaborative. The communication depends on the establishment of common understandings.

• Stage five - participants look for more benefits from the system to help them achieve personal goals, explore how to integrate CMC into other forms of learning and reflect on the learning processes.

ACCESS & MOTIVATION

SOCIALISATION

INF. EXCHANGE

KNOWLEDGECONSTRUCT

DVPT.

e-tivities:easy cheap

active online learning

e-tivities addresseither one stage of the 5 stage modeland/or movement

between them

• Many institutions/ courses – only using VLES as a repository…….

Solutions• Blended learning = more variety• best of all worlds • Reclaim non-verbal in face to face• Virtual learning works best when coupled with face to

face – communication increases – range of interaction improved

• New tutors start small and build – administrative technical support very variable – make VLE part of course – talk in detail to someone who has a successful course running in your area

• Case studies very successful means for dialogue(example)

• Try sharing a discussion yourselves – log in to webct – go to the PGCHE module – then to discussions – then theme four and read my message - add yours.

• Have put other articles on webct in theme four and will send this powerpoint

• Recent Books and Journal articles by Gilly Salmon

• Competencies for online teaching. Education Training & Development49 (1) :pp. 65-72Goodyear, P., G. Salmon and C. Steeples (2001)

• Academic Integrity in Electronic Universities of the New Millennium: a Practitioner's PerspectiveHigher Education in Europe XXIV (2) :pp. 259-264Gray, C. and G. Salmon (1999)

• Developing Learning Though Effective Online Moderation. Active Learning pp. 3-8Salmon, G. (1998)

• Student Induction & Study Preparation Online. Proceedings of Networks of Skills and Competence: Telematics in EducationJoensuu, Finland, SeptemberSalmon, G. (1998)

• Computer Mediated Conferencing in Large Scale Management EducationOpen Learning (June) :pp. 45-54Salmon, G. (1999)

• Developing Managers Through Online Networking. The Current State of Business DisciplinesS. B. Sahiya (Ed). Rohtak, India, Spellbound PublicationsSalmon, G. (1999)

• Computer Mediated Conferencing for Management Learning at the Open University. Management Learning 31 (4) :pp. 491-502Salmon, G. (2000)

• Driving Through! Online learning for industrial supply chainsThe Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 1 (2/ July) :ppSalmon, G. (2000)

• E-moderating: the key to teaching and learning onlineLondon, Kogan PageSalmon, G. (2000)

• The Business Cafe Project: viewing to browsing? British Journal of Educational Technology 32 (1) :pp. 91-104Salmon, G. (2001)

• E-moderating: turning the e-learning fantasy into realityMalaysian Journal of Educational Technology 1 (1) :pp. 19-27Salmon, G. (2001)

• Approaches to researching teaching and learning online. Networked Learning:perspectives and issuesC. Steeples and C. Jones (Ed). London, Springer-VerlagSalmon, G. (2002)

• E-tivities: the key to active online learningLondon, Kogan PageSalmon, G. (2002)

• Mirror, Mirror, on my screen... Exploring online reflectionsThe British Journal of Educational Technology 33 (4) 383-396Salmon, G. (2002)

• Training Virtual Management TeachersEuropean Journal of Open & Distant Learning 1 (1)Salmon, G. and K. Giles (1997)

• Creating and implementing successful on-line learning environments: a practitioner perspectiveProceedings of European Distance Education Network (EDEN), Bologna, Italy, EDENSalmon, G. and K. Giles (1998)

• Training for Online Working. Managing TeleworkK. Daniel, D. Lamond and P. Standen (Ed). London, ThompsonSalmon, G., K. Giles and J. Allan (2000)

• Creating and Implementing Successful Online Environments: A Practitioner PerspectiveEuropean Open and Distance Learning Journal (February)Salmon, G. and K. E. Giles (1999)

• See Bob Rotherham’s slides on web-site for more ideas on on-line learning

critique

• http://www.phil-race.com/downloads.html• The future of online learning - and 'false da

wns and failed prophets'

• Cooper (2007) -see docs for theme three – Journal of Interactive and Smart technology

• Mayes(2000) Pedagogy, Lifelong Learning and ICT

Tasks for formative assessment

• 1, Prepare a five slide presentation in pairs which raises one issue in your teaching for us to discuss on line and relate it to any theory

(be imaginative –use visuals/links etc) will put on line and discuss) (peer assessment)

• 2. Write a (concise) five hundred word reflective statement which considers how you can relate some of the theories and discussions we have considered to aspects of your teaching.

• Will give you written feedback on this – both can go in your portfolio and can be looked back on in a years time… in your synoptic statement