E lecturer feedback of the inclusion of blended learning

1,400 views
1,330 views

Published on

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

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,400
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
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 />

×