Not too much facilitation going on (PBL Conference, March 2011)

950 views
785 views

Published on

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
950
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • before I start background information me this is part of an MSc dissertation in Blended and Online Education I first discovered PBL when at Sunderland Uni, participate in a 2-day workshop with by Maastricht Uni Sticky notes 1 each two boxes/columns fill out and then swap To ask everybody at the beginning What would you need the most in online learning What would you miss the most in online learning Anybody there? Online PBL within Academic Development an experiment --- Active Student centred Collaborative Real-life, ill-structured problems, triggers Different models Introducing to research
  • why? PBL active, inquiry-based learning Effective elsewhere To experiment (online) PBL PBL not widely used in AD no evidence of fully online PBL in AD useful for PgCert? open education multi-institutional collaboration --- PgCert important time for new academics develop new skils transform their thinking alteration of beliefs around teaching and learning start shaping their teaching philosophy (Donnelly, 2008)
  • Connectivism (Siemens, online) Technologies enable Web2.0 to deliver, support and learn (Oliver and Omari, 1999) (Kear 2011) Technologies are equally beneficial for PBL (Juwah 2002; Ge et al 2010; Donnelly 2005) and are used in blended and online programmes, but also in traditional face-to-face settings, to extend engagement outside the classroom and with larger groups (Hmelo-Silver et al 2009).  
  • Donnelly (2002) implemented an online PBL module within a PgCert programme based on the model of Computer-Mediated Collaborative Problem-Based Learning (CMCPBL) (Savin-Baden 2003) itself based on CSILE (Scardamalia and Bereiter 1994) in which small groups worked together synchronously and asynchronously to co-construct new knowledge through the application of online PBL.
  • PBL facilitator (face-to-face) Important role (Savin-Baden, 2003) Guide for students to become self-directed and discovery learners Research on the impact of facilitation – limited (Hmelo-Silver, 2002)
  • 8 academics 2 academic developers 10 in total across the UK 2 groups of 4 Rationale about size: pedagogical – online collaborative learning learning more effective in small groups (than face-to-face). Methodological: (phenomenography)
  • Salmon’s (2004) 5 stage model:   Familiarisation with technologies Socialisation with tutors and peers Exploring PBL and sharing Execution of collaborative PBL task Peer evaluation and tutor feedback (salmon) 5 stage model (in chronological order) access and motivation online socialisation information exchange knowledge construction development
  • why? PBL active, inquiry-based learning Effective elsewhere To experiment (online) PBL PBL not widely used in AD no evidence of fully online PBL in AD useful for PgCert? open education multi-institutional collaboration --- PgCert important time for new academics develop new skils transform their thinking alteration of beliefs around teaching and learning start shaping their teaching philosophy (Donnelly, 2008)
  • student centred active and inquiry based learning approach learning through real-life problems/scenarios/triggers ill-structured and open-ended no right or wrong answer in small groups facilitated delivery and assessment strategy
  • 8 academics 2 academic developers 10 in total across the UK 2 groups of 4 Rationale about size: pedagogical – online collaborative learning learning more effective in small groups (than face-to-face). Methodological: (phenomenography)
  • 8 academics 2 academic developers 10 in total across the UK 2 groups of 4 Rationale about size: pedagogical – online collaborative learning learning more effective in small groups (than face-to-face). Methodological: (phenomenography)
  • 8 academics 2 academic developers 10 in total across the UK 2 groups of 4 Rationale about size: pedagogical – online collaborative learning learning more effective in small groups (than face-to-face). Methodological: (phenomenography)
  • 8 academics 2 academic developers 10 in total across the UK 2 groups of 4 Rationale about size: pedagogical – online collaborative learning learning more effective in small groups (than face-to-face). Methodological: (phenomenography)
  • Neville (1999): novice students with little experience of such learning (PBL) would probably benefit from directive tutors who where knowledge experts. Neville (1999): More experienced PBL students require less direction and become increasingly self-sufficient.
  • TESEP stands for transforming and enhancing the student experience through pedagogy http://www2.napier.ac.uk/transform/Transcripts/TESEP_3E_Approach.pdf
  • Not too much facilitation going on (PBL Conference, March 2011)

    1. 1. “ Not too much facilitation going on” Issues in facilitating online PBL within Academic Development Chrissi Nerantzi Academic Developer University of Salford [email_address] capture on sticky notes and swap What would I need the most during online learning? What would I miss the most during online learning?
    2. 2. <ul><li>to introduce and evaluate an online PBL approach within Academic Development and explore if and how it could be used within the PGCAP </li></ul>overall research aim ‘ Relatively little research has explored students’ experience of facilitation’ (Savin-Baden 2003, 56) Focus: online facilitation within PBL
    3. 3. New pedagogies and Technology-enhanced PBL blended PBL online PBL
    4. 4. Online PBL within AD <ul><li>PBL module (Donnelly 2002) – model used: Computer-Mediated Collaborative Problem-Based Learning (CMCPBL) (Savin-Baden 2003) based on CSILE (Scardamalia and Bereiter 1994) </li></ul><ul><li>CMCPBL also used for this trial </li></ul>
    5. 5. Supporting online collaborative learning (Thorpe 2002) “ ... seems to be extremely important in an online learning activity.” (Chernobilsky et al 2005, 61) The role of the facilitator
    6. 6. the online trial
    7. 7. structure & timeline <ul><li>complete PBL task </li></ul><ul><li>Share findings with other group </li></ul><ul><li>Peer and tutor feedback </li></ul><ul><li>Closure </li></ul><ul><li>Create online space </li></ul><ul><li>Find participants (AD, PgCert participants) – SEDA </li></ul><ul><li>(AD) familiarise with technology and PBL </li></ul><ul><li>(AD) exploring PBL </li></ul><ul><li>(AD) work on PBL scenario, assessment criteria, peer feedback template </li></ul><ul><li>(AD) finalise PBL scenario, assessment criteria, peer feedback template </li></ul><ul><li>(AD, P) familiarise with technology </li></ul><ul><li>(AD, P ) socialise </li></ul><ul><li>(P) explore PBL </li></ul><ul><li>(AD, P) grouping </li></ul>Salmon (2004) 5 stage model http://www.atimod.com/e-moderating/5stage.shtml
    8. 8. PBL scenario theme: assessment and feedback <ul><li>“ Just finished marking 150 essays, the one and only assignment for this challenging module. I can’t understand why students don’t do well! Is one essay too much? I have been using this essay title for the last 10 years – I love it! – and students just don’t seem to engage with it, not even the brighter ones, which is really strange! </li></ul><ul><li>I have given the students an extensive reading list and during the lectures I always tell them that they can ask me if they don’t understand something. Not sure what I am doing wrong… Students have never complained about anything and the module evaluation is always positive. </li></ul><ul><li>They had a whole month to write the essay… but I know that many just do it a few days before the handing in date. At least they hand it in I guess. Writing feedback is a hard job! I don’t know these people. I see them 2h a week over 10 weeks and there are 150 of them in the lecture theatre. I find it really time consuming and am not sure if they read it. Am I wasting my time?” </li></ul>
    9. 9. 5-stage model (Mills, 2006)
    10. 10. Web 2.0 ‘ Tools like blogs, wikis, media-sharing applications and social networking sites are capable of supporting and encouraging informal conversation, dialogue, collaborative content generation and the sharing of knowledge, giving learners access to a wide raft of ideas and representations.’ (McLoughlin and Lee 2008, 641)
    11. 11. Web2.0 toolkit
    12. 12. blog wikis web-based ‘calling’
    13. 13. method and data collection and analysis
    14. 14. … there are limited ways in which individuals experience the same phenomenon (Marton 1981) ‘describe qualitative variations in people’s experience of phenomena’ (Dortins 2002, 207). <ul><li>Data collection </li></ul><ul><li>individual remote interviews </li></ul><ul><li>surveys (initial and final) </li></ul><ul><li>reflective accounts </li></ul>phenomenography
    15. 15. Remember? You were asked at the beginning What would I need the most during online learning? What would I miss the most during online learning?
    16. 16. Findings
    17. 17. we synchronous communication
    18. 18. <ul><li>learning in multi-disciplinary teams </li></ul><ul><li>learning with colleagues from different HE institutions </li></ul><ul><li>the opportunity to participate </li></ul><ul><li>learnt a lot from the trial and the issues experienced </li></ul>we also
    19. 19. <ul><li>Time available and extent of task </li></ul><ul><li>Technology was frustrating for some </li></ul><ul><li>Working 100% online problematic </li></ul><ul><li>Asynchronous communication slowed things down </li></ul><ul><li>The social element was missing, no community feel </li></ul><ul><li>Facilitation! This was the biggest issue of all and recognised by participants and the facilitators themselves </li></ul>main issues
    20. 20. I never, ever, ever have been involved in anything fully online either as a learner or as a tutor or any other thing.
    21. 21. Time Managing time Timing of the trial Technology Selection Quantity Communication Asynchronous is slow Synchronous is better Lack of communication Group Yes to multi-institutional collaboration Yes to multi-disciplinary groups Lack of community Group size Rules PBL task Scenario suitable Questioning suitability of scenario PBL Yes, to online PBL Yes, to blended No to PBL PBL in PgCerts Facilitators say yes Participants are sceptic Reflecting Purpose Sharing Time Privacy Facilitation Clarity of role Lack of support More structure Better preparation Assessment Feedback Facilitators concerned Participants: feedback was welcome
    22. 22. Clarity of role “ I personally think I would have found at least clarification what the facilitator would do, and again, I might have missed it and it may be my lack of experience, but then again any student who is coming for the first time to do PBL, will have that lack of experience. If I had been told, that the facilitator is there basically to mop up any really serious issues, somebody who is really ill, completely unable to participate before the facilitator steps in, fair enough, I am not going to have kind of support and then I would have to step up to the plate and be a leader.” “ . .. not being sure myself where things were, what we were doing...”
    23. 23. Lack of support “ I felt a bit like, I was not knowing which direction I was taking and a bit sort of in a doubtful sort of perspective, whether I’m actually reading the right material, whether I’m going to the right things, whether I’m following all the right stuff that I’m needing. yeah a little bit in the dark. [...] I feel there was a bit of, not too much facilitation going on. [...] I would have encouraged people to, to read the scenario together. Because I think that the initial, do the scenario, read the scenario together and then once you read it, maybe for a very brief time, read it together and, so say “ok, go and think about this, and maybe pay attention to these points a little bit more and maybe come back and we’ll discuss a bit more and then”. Something along those lines” “ I was probably not confident as I would normally do in the sense of directing people and helping people, facilitating as I would normally be.”
    24. 24. More structure “ Potentially creating more of a structure, where it would be expected to interact on a more regular basis” “ I really should have had perhaps more structure in arranging meetings with the group…”
    25. 25. Better preparation “ PBL depends on very thorough planning” “ I think because it is an online trial, I didn’t realise how I wasn’t prepared, if you see what I mean. Had I known, perhaps I would have had more preparation [...] had I done sort of more research myself it would have helped.”
    26. 26. Discussion – Recommendations around online PBL facilitation
    27. 27. <ul><li>“ Facilitators new to problem-based learning often feel that it is better to say less – or even nothing – so that the students feel that they are taking the lead in the learning.” </li></ul><ul><li>(Savin-Baden 2003, 50) </li></ul>“ [...] students new to problem-based learning , [...] (feel) that the lack of direction is duplicitous because they feel it is the facilitator’s way of avoiding a declaration of their own agenda and concerns. (Savin-Baden 2003, p. 50)
    28. 28. coaching : push>pull (Neville 1999; Savin-Baden 2006)
    29. 29. <ul><li>Communication, communication, communication! </li></ul><ul><li>More hands-on approach required initially! </li></ul><ul><li>Task setting and timelines </li></ul><ul><li>Use the structured PBL model and PBL tutorial process </li></ul><ul><li>Use available technologies for (a)synchronous collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Lay the foundations of a learning community </li></ul>PBL facilitators engagement
    30. 30. Progressive online PBL framework Facilitation modes (Heron,1989, 1993) Student perspective TESEP 3E (Smyth,2007) Hierarchical (directive) Enhance Co-operative (partnership) Extend Letting go (autonomous) Empower
    31. 31. online training for PBL facilitators Ongoing support Orientation tour Facilitation for 3c Use PBL structure and process Build community! Main recommendations
    32. 32. references <ul><li>Bowcott, O (2011) Open University may be in its 40s – but students are getting younger, Guardian onli ne, 3 January, available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/jan/03/open-university-students-younger [accessed 4 January 2011] </li></ul><ul><li>Chernobilsky, E, Nagarajan, A & Hmelo-Silver, C E (2005) Problem-Based Learning Online: Multiple Perspectives on Collaborative Knowledge Construction, in CSCL '05: Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning (2005), pp. 53-62.   </li></ul><ul><li>Donnelly, R. (2002) Online Learning in Teacher Education: Enhanced with a Problem-based Learning Approach. Mimeo, Dublin: Dublin Institute of Technology. </li></ul><ul><li>Dortins, E. (2002) ‘Reflections on phenomenographic process: Interview, transcription and analysis: Interview, transcription and analysis’ in Quality Conversations , Proceedings of the 25th HERDSA Annual Conference, Perth, Western Australia, 7-10 July 2002, 207-213. </li></ul><ul><li>Downes, S (2010) New Technology Supporting Informal Learning , Journal of Emerging Technologies in Web Intelligence , 2(1), pp. 27–33. </li></ul><ul><li>Herron, J. (1989) The Facilitator’s Handbook. London: Kogan Press. </li></ul><ul><li>Herron, J. (1993) Group facilitation . London: Kogan Press. </li></ul><ul><li>Hmelo-Silver, C E (2002) Collaborative Ways of Knowing: Issues in Facilitation, in: ·  Proceeding CSCL '02 Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Foundations for a CSCL Community , available at http://elc.fhda.edu/faculty/faculty_docs/facilitation.pdf [accessed 12 January 2011]. </li></ul><ul><li>Marton, F (1981) Phenomenography – describing conceptions of the world around us , Instructional Science, 10, pp. 177-200. </li></ul><ul><li>Meiszner, A (2010) The Open Education Movement , 24 April, available at http://www.openedworld.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=21&Itemid=25 [accessed 6 January 2011] </li></ul><ul><li>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] </li></ul><ul><li>Neville, J A (1999) The problem-based learning tutor: teacher? facilitator? evaluator?, Medical Teacher , 21(4), pp. 393-401. </li></ul><ul><li>Savin-Baden, M (2003) Facilitating Problem-Based Learning, Illuminating Perspective , Maidenhead: SRHE and Open University Press. </li></ul><ul><li>Savin-Baden, M (2006) The challenge of using problem-based learning online, in: Problem-based Learning Online (2006), pp. 3-13, available at http://mcgraw-hill.co.uk/openup/chapters/0335220061.pdf [accessed 12 January 2011].  </li></ul><ul><li>Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1994) ‘Computer support for knowledge-building communities’ in The Journal of Learning Sciences, 3(3), 256-283. </li></ul><ul><li>Smyth, K. 2007. ‘TESEP in Practice The 3E Approach’, available at http://www2.napier.ac.uk/transform/TESEP_3E_Approach.pdf [accessed 1 January 2011] </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>
    33. 33. extra slides
    34. 34. I participated in a couple of online programmes. Speaking personally, I hated it! There is no scope for discussion. I spent my days sitting in front of the computer. Communicating via email, offering feedback to students, writing things. ... learning needs to be quicker being able to communicate directly with students, it is part of a social process, it shouldn’t be sitting in front of a computer again... I can learn from it, do I enjoy it? No!
    35. 35. findings Now I know, what I am doing, yes, I would do it again. And it would be quite interesting I think that what pilots are all about because then you can decide what works what doesn’t work and so, I would do it again. If is more structured I can see that it could be used for undergraduate, maybe not for first years, but for second year. The times we got together we got lots of things done. I enjoyed the early stages: I was quite excited about this and very keen to be a part of it. The possibility of how online collaboration might work. I was quite excited about this and very keen to be a part of it. The possibility of how online collaboration might work. In terms of doing the task, I think we got on very well. PBL really good for a long term project. I think it is a nice way of learning maybe master’s students. There is a lot that can be done with it but it is huge... It was very positive. Especially because we all came from different, different backgrounds.
    36. 36. findings I never, ever, ever have been involved in anything fully online either as a learner or as a tutor or any other thing. I wanted to connect I would have liked to come away feeling it was more of a community being created. In my group, there was really lack of communication and I am as guilty of it as anybody else. I was quite excited about this and very keen to be a part of it. The possibility of how online collaboration might work. I didn’t feel the facilitators particularly engaged with the participants which was a big drawback to this process. I felt like virtually walking in the darkness, going to a wrong direction, hitting a wall that suddenly coming up and when I need help, no one responded right away. There was a lack of real human contact eye-to-eye, smile, feeling the other’s real presence.

    ×