"Better groups, better feedback, richer inquiry? Using wiki technology to improve the learning environment in problem-based learning" Fiona McKie-Bell CETL Assessment for Learning and School of Applied Sciences Northumbria University

Contents Background Student feedback Staff perceptions Transferability Problems? Too close for comfort?

Background

Student feedback

Staff perceptions

Transferability

Problems?

Too close for comfort?

Background – the history Level 5 semester-long module, running PBL style Students set “real-world” problem to develop experimental protocol. Weekly work-sheets/group tasks in session, continued in own time (?!) 3 Lab sessions to run and refine working experimental protocol Poster in “conference” style and interrogation (individual)

Level 5 semester-long module, running PBL style

Students set “real-world” problem to develop experimental protocol.

Weekly work-sheets/group tasks in session, continued in own time (?!)

3 Lab sessions to run and refine working experimental protocol

Poster in “conference” style and interrogation (individual)

Background – moving on… Successful in developing PBL approach – improved engagement, student satisfaction and achievement Assessment unsatisfactory: Individual poster sessions (“product”) Assessing group-work problematic Groups showed real development – not reflected in poster. Usual problems associated with group-work New assessment needed

Successful in developing PBL approach – improved engagement, student satisfaction and achievement

Assessment unsatisfactory:

Individual poster sessions (“product”)

Assessing group-work problematic

Groups showed real development – not reflected in poster.

Usual problems associated with group-work

New assessment needed

The “wiki”- the intention One for each group (private) Potential for anonymisation Agreed “rules” – weekly submission in return for weekly feedback Used as repository for information/sharing Collaborative space Reflection (especially after lab sessions)

One for each group (private)

Potential for anonymisation

Agreed “rules” – weekly submission in return for weekly feedback

Used as repository for information/sharing

Collaborative space

Reflection (especially after lab sessions)

The Wiki – the result More engagement out of session (surprising times of day!!) Attendance “ Brittle” groups – technology as “hook”? Generally improved environment (sessions in IT labs) - Facilitated further use of technology Better quality information gathering, evidence of collaboration/conversations Dialogue - between staff and students (more regular, better questions, more debate) Ease of feedback – instant evidence of its use!! Monitoring improved Appropriate early intervention with problem groups Process genuinely assessed Fairness, equity of individual contributions to group Insight into group-work, collaborations, student “conversations”….

More engagement out of session (surprising times of day!!)

Attendance

“ Brittle” groups – technology as “hook”?

Generally improved environment (sessions in IT labs) - Facilitated further use of technology

Better quality information gathering, evidence of collaboration/conversations

Dialogue - between staff and students (more regular, better questions, more debate)

Ease of feedback – instant evidence of its use!!

Monitoring improved

Appropriate early intervention with problem groups

Process genuinely assessed

Fairness, equity of individual contributions to group

Insight into group-work, collaborations, student “conversations”….

Evaluation – what the students told us…. Formal questionnaires – Likert scales and open-ended questions Conversations Comments in wiki itself

Formal questionnaires – Likert scales and open-ended questions

Conversations

Comments in wiki itself

Supporting group-work? We used the wiki to work together as a group outside of class time We used the wiki tool to work on-line as well as face-to-face I found using technology helped us work together as a group We used the wiki tool to work on-line as well as face-to-face The wiki felt like “just an extra task” and was not helpful to our group 15/17 15/17 17/17 0/17 17/17

We used the wiki to work together as a group outside of class time

We used the wiki tool to work on-line as well as face-to-face

I found using technology helped us work together as a group

We used the wiki tool to work on-line as well as face-to-face

The wiki felt like “just an extra task” and was not helpful to our group

Fairness The wiki tool made me feel that the tutors could assess individual contributions to the group more fairly. The wiki helped make all group members participate 15/17 13/17

The wiki tool made me feel that the tutors could assess individual contributions to the group more fairly.

The wiki helped make all group members participate

Privacy I was worried about privacy, or what I said on-line because I knew the tutors could read it. 0/17

I was worried about privacy, or what I said on-line because I knew the tutors could read it.

Overall experience I would like to use the wiki tool again when I have group-work to do. I was more interested in this task because I was able to use technology e.g. internet, wiki, e-mail, text etc. to help me work I would only want to use the wiki in group work if it contribute to the final marks 17/17 6/17 3/17

I would like to use the wiki tool again when I have group-work to do.

I was more interested in this task because I was able to use technology e.g. internet, wiki, e-mail, text etc. to help me work

I would only want to use the wiki in group work if it contribute to the final marks

Open student comments Facilitated communication (e.g. geography) Fair workload Shared space for ideas – increased collaboration Regular submission keep on track (and helped with absences Regular feedback/communication with staff (accessible) Repository of information

Facilitated communication (e.g. geography)

Fair workload

Shared space for ideas – increased collaboration

Regular submission keep on track (and helped with absences

Regular feedback/communication with staff (accessible)

Repository of information

The negatives “Competition” to be first

“Competition” to be first

….the “Insight” “ Also more ideas and information on the family that the weed killer belongs to could be an idea and whether they all effect photosynthesis. Perhaps we could look up literature to help us and see if any other experiments have been done similar to ours. How would we display our results? calibration curves?? or any addition to ideas that are already here. These are the questions that i propose to you HULK, GOOSE and the steve who doesnt have an ultra cool name yet. well done mav!!! tremendous work, shame you left us with nothing to do! ”

Other issues - discussion Transferability – would the heavy dependence on technology transfer to other cohorts? Ethics – should we be observing group work in this way? Moreover, is it appropriate/necessary to assess it? Resourcing – small cohort, resources might limit class based work. Is it right to assume personal ownership of PC/internet connection? Relationships – does this affect the relationship between staff/student (intimacy) – and is this a negative thing?

Transferability – would the heavy dependence on technology transfer to other cohorts?

Ethics – should we be observing group work in this way? Moreover, is it appropriate/necessary to assess it?

Resourcing – small cohort, resources might limit class based work. Is it right to assume personal ownership of PC/internet connection?

Relationships – does this affect the relationship between staff/student (intimacy) – and is this a negative thing?