context Academic DevelopmentPostgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice
the online trialfamiliarisation socialisation collaborative PBL Mills (2006) 5 stage-model sharing, feeding backCSILE (Scardamalia and Bereiter 1994)Computer-mediated collaborative problem-based learning(CMCPBL) (Savin-Baden 2003)based on Salmon (2004)
Data collection• individual remote interviews• surveys (initial and final)• reflective accounts
findings linked to online cross-institutional collaborationmulti-disciplinary groupsgroup sizerulesfacilitationcommunitytechnologies
discussion• value cross-institutional practices• networked learning and the creation of broader communities of practice (Wenger et al, 2011)• online PBL enabler for collaborative learning• decentralised but supported delivery models• pick ‘n’ mix technologies and learning spaces
Using existing resources and expertise more effectively through sharing and exchange with othertowards cross-institutional institutions. programmes Utilising freely available social media tools and technologies, accessible to or owned by learners, enabling enhanced connectivity, thereby increasing buy-in. Adapting and creating resources collaboratively, preferable as OER and sharing with other learning communities. Developing and delivering sessions, modules and programmes in collaboration and partnership, thus enriching institutional offers. Providing learners the opportunity to connect with other learners beyond module and programme level and become active members of more open learning communities. Using opportunities for collaboration and shared pedagogical and subject-specific research and scholarly activities to raise standards of teaching and create good relationships among institutions, transforming competitiveness into cooperation – aiming for a common good.
latest developments cross-institutional module Flexible, Distance and Online Learning (FDOL) Research to develop an open PBL model
references• Marton, F. (1994) “Phenomenography as a Research Approach”, Husen, T. and Postlethwaite, N. (2nd ed) The International Encyclopedia of Education, Vol. 8, Pergamon, pp. 4424-4429, available athttp://www.ped.gu.se/biorn/phgraph/civil/main/1res.appr.html [accessed 7 May 2011].• Mills, D (2006) Problem-based learning: An overview, available at http://www.csap.bham.ac.uk/resources/project_reports/ShowOverview.asp?id=4 [accessed 5 March 2010]• Savin-Baden, M (2003) Facilitating Problem-Based Learning, Illuminating Perspective, Maidenhead: SRHE and Open University Press.• Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1994) ‘Computer support for knowledge-building communities’ in The Journal of Learning Sciences, 3(3), 256-283.• Wenger, E., Trayer, B. and de Laat, M. (2011) Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: a conceptual framework, Rapport 18, Ruud de Moor Centrum, Open Universiteit, available at http://www.social-learning- strategies.com/documents/Wenger_Trayner_DeLaat_Value_creation.pdf [accessed 3 June 2011]
Freeing Education within andbeyond Academic Development Chrissi Nerantzi Academic Developer, University of Salford www.adu.salford.ac.uk email@example.com @chrissinerantzi
cross-institutional collaboration"Communicating with people from otherinstitutions was one of the best aspects of thetrial, it was good to exchange ideas withpeople from other institutions [...] it was noveland exciting – this aspect kept me going onthe trial really!"
multi-disciplinary groups“It was very positive. Especially because we allcame from different backgrounds. Enriching myexperience a lot. Because, I was a scientist and Ilooked at the problem in a very scientific way.Divided it in my head and categorised it. And theywere more global and social and personal. I didn’tthink very much on the personal aspect, aspect,as I told you, first of all, I was very sort of puzzledby the scenario and I felt, because I didn’t see theproblem to solve. And they saw the problem moreglobally and they had that insight that I didn’tperhaps have.” back
group size“Actually we lost one person and that mighthave been a blessing actually. Just in terms 3people are easier to organise than 4.” back
rules“The basic manners and etiquette must beclearly communicated at the beginning; Forinstance at the beginning I was apologising tocut others writing, but I later found out that itwas taken for granted. I wished that we had adiscussion on those very basic ethics andmanners working online within our team.” back
community“real human contact–eye-to-eye, smile, feelingthe other’s real presence”“the sense of writing into a black hole”“I would have liked to come away feeling itwas more of a community being created” back
facilitation“The chief thing that the trial highlighted forme was the importance of the facilitator to thesuccess of the project. It is a lot more workdoing things this way, and the facilitator needsto be pretty “hands on" in the absence of face-to-face meetings between group members.” back
technologies“I was curious about the choice of tools. Werethey what facilitators felt comfortable with? Iam happy online. I forget how dauntingpeople find the technology. [...] Oh!, it is reallycomplicated. [...] How to buy in? To give themthe initial knowledge-base. People areselective of which platforms they use.” back