E lecturer feedback of the inclusion of blended learning


Published on

This presentation was delivered at the Faculty of Health Science Research Day 2010, University of the Witwatersrand.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

E lecturer feedback of the inclusion of blended learning

  1. 1. E-lecturer Feedback of the Inclusion of Blended Learning in Undergraduate Occupational Therapy<br />By Paula Barnard-Ashton<br />
  2. 2. Introduction<br />Blended learning = combined and integrated use of e-Learning and face-to-face (F2F) learning activities to develop a community of learning [1-3]<br />The OT curriculum delivery has been a purely F2F, problem-based learning (PBL) design, <br />In 2009 blended learning was adopted :<br />enhance the learning opportunities, <br />optimise communication within the occupational therapy courses and <br />alleviate some of the lecturer time resources<br />
  3. 3. Development<br />Initially courses were designed in Blackboard (WebCT)<br />For the 2010 academic year courses were migrated onto a Moodle platform.<br />All lecturing staff developed and contributed to all the e-learning / online course environments.<br />All OT students have access to the course for their academic year of study.<br />
  4. 4. Aims of the study<br />Document e-Lecturer behaviour in order to determine the level of uptake of blended learning by e-Lecturers.<br />Determine e-Lecturer belief in the value of blended learning.<br />Determine e-Lecturer attitude towards blended learning.<br />Determine e-Lecture Virtual Learning Environment tool preferences.<br />Objective:The results of the study would guide the initiatives and development of enhancements to the blended learning delivery.<br />
  5. 5. Method: Participatory Action Research (PAR)<br />12 of the 13 full time lecturing staff participated.<br />Conducted from January to May 2010.<br />PAR involves a cyclical process.<br />
  6. 6. PAR cycle<br />
  7. 7. The Problem<br />Anxiety about migrating from WebCT to Moodle.<br />Consensus that the VLEs were primarily used in 2009 for posting lecture notes or communicating notices to the e-Learners.<br />E-Lecturer frustrations: <br />use of time (esp.  F2F time-spend on individual student tutoring)<br />academic output <br /> manage their undergraduate teaching responsibilities<br />
  8. 8. Participation Strategy<br />The VLE platform (Moodle) would remain consistent during the 2010.<br />The VLEs would be branded with the label “e-OT”, <br />the characteristic colour of the curriculum year use to present an environmental “feel”.<br />E-Lecturers attended a morning live Moodle training session.<br />E-Lecturers would encourage e-Learners to use the discussion boards to post queries (instead of F2F meetings).<br />E-Lecturers were encouraged to use the quiz tool to generate self-tests or formative assessments.<br />E-Learners would attend a scheduled computer based training session which introduced them to the tools and functions of the VLE.<br />
  9. 9. Action<br />
  10. 10. Investigation<br />Reflection and comment on blended learning at the monthly staff meetings.<br />Online survey, using surveymonkey.com, of the e-Lecturers beliefs and attitude at the end of the first term. <br />E-Lecturer VLE access statistics logged at the end of the first term for the third and fourth year occupational therapy courses.<br />The data were collected in the second week of May 2010 and analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.<br />
  11. 11. Results: Staff Meetings<br />
  12. 12. Survey: E-Lecturer Attitude<br />POSITIVE AGREEMENT (%)<br />e-OT STATEMENTS<br />
  13. 13. Survey: e-Lecturers ranking of use of VLE tools <br />
  14. 14. VLE Access Logs<br />Review of the access logs indicated that <br />83.3% of e-Lecturers actively contributed the content on the VLEs of the third year course <br />and 66.7% to the fourth year courses. <br />Both VLEs have been accessed by 100% of the e-Lecturers during the first term of 2010. <br />
  15. 15. Recommendations<br />Recommendations for the second cycle of the PAR: <br />The migration of the VLE platform to a larger, higher processor server.<br />e-Lecturers should be facilitated to use a broader scope of the VLE tools.<br />Sustain the impetus of blended learning within the DOT by presenting the results of this cycle to the e-Lecturers and triggering the start of the second cycle.<br />
  16. 16. Conclusion<br />The use of blended learning in undergraduate occupational therapy PBL curriculum delivery has indicated full initial e-Lecturer uptake and implementation in the DOT. <br />Though there is still ongoing scope for development, the initial study indicated a sense of success and ownership by the e-Lecturers.<br />
  17. 17. References<br />[1] M. M. Cockbain, C. M. Blyth, C. Bovill, and K. Morss, "Adopting a blended approach to learning: Experiences from Radiography at Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh," Radiography, vol. In Press, Corrected Proof.<br />[2] A. Heinze and B. Heinze, "Blended e-learning skeleton of conversation: Improving formative assessment in undergraduate dissertation supervision," British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 40, pp. 294-305, 2009.<br />[3] J. M. Keller, "First principles of motivation to learn and e3-learning," Distance Education, vol. 29, pp. 175-185, 08 2008.<br />[4] R. McCannon, D. Robertson, J. Caldwell, C. Juwah, and A. Elfessi, "Students' perceptions of their acquired knowledge during a problem based learning case study," Occupational Therapy in Health Care, vol. 18, pp. 13-28, 2004.<br />[5] B. Jung, J. Tryssenaar, and S. Wilkins, "Becoming a tutor: exploring the learning experiences and needs of novice tutors in a PBL programme," Medical Teacher, vol. 27, pp. 606-612, 2005.<br />[6] N. P. Kenny and B. L. Beagan, "The patient as text: a challenge for problem-based learning," Medical Education, vol. 38, pp. 1071-1079, 2004.<br />[7] R. McCannon, D. Robertson, J. Caldwell, C. Juwah, and A. Elfessi, "Comparison of clinical reasoning skills in occupational therapy students in the USA and Scotland," Occupational Therapy International, vol. 11, pp. 160-176, 2004.<br />[8] R. Ellaway and K. Masters, "AMEE Guide 32: e-Learning in medical education Part 1: Learning, teaching and assessment," Medical Teacher, vol. 30, pp. 455-473, 2008.<br />[9] K. Masters and R. Ellaway, "e-Learning in medical education Guide 32 Part 2: Technology, management and design," Medical Teacher, vol. 30, pp. 474-489, 2008.<br />[10] J. Sandars and C. Haythornthwaite, "New horizons for e-learning in medical education: ecological and Web 2.0 perspectives," Medical Teacher, vol. 29, pp. 307-310, 2007.<br />[11] "Blackboard Home," http://www.blackboard.com, 12/05/2010: Blackboard Inc.<br />[12] "Moodle Home," http://moodle.org, 12/05/2010: Moodle Trust.<br />[13] E. Byrne and S. Sahay, "Participatory Design for Social Development: A South African Case Study on Community-Based Health Information Systems," Information Technology for Development, vol. 13, pp. 71-94, 2007.<br />[14] S. Kemmis and R. McTaggart, "Participatory Action Research," in Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed, N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln, Eds. California: Sage Publications Ltd., 2000, pp. 567-606.<br />[15] G. Kielhofner, Research in Occupational Therapy: Methods of Inquiry for Enhancing Practice. Philidephia: F.A. Davis Company, 2006.<br />[16] J. W. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed methods Approaches, 2nd ed. California: SAGE Publications, 2003.<br />