How to use Sakai and contemporary pedagogy to construct an industry relevant dynamic learning environment.
FSC 200- Introduction to Forensic Science Courses Served BMedSc/BForensicBiotech; Bachelor of Policing; BMedSci/BBiotech(Med-App); BPolicing(Investigations); BSc; Bachelor of Arts; BForensicBiotech Enrolments 2007 : 37 ;7 Internal (AV age 19.5), 30 Distance (AV age 31.7) 2008 : 27 all distance
My Aim Utilise the knowledge and skills of the experienced students in the class Maximise student exposure to different ways in which the same information is viewed by those with a different background and with different career aspirations within the field Promote the development of key teamwork skills Encourage deeper learning
Pedagogical Approach Constructionists Guide on the side, student centred, active learning
Content Delivery Text book – Jackson and Jackson : Forensic Science. Lectures – live and virtual Podcasts – Interviews with industry members Wiki –News, tutorials and class records (fingerprint patterns) All hosted on CSU version of Sakai called Interact
Tool + Aim Scenario driven group assessment 9 teams of 4-5 students Each team own Interact Site Each team member given a role – “scripting” FOA, SOCO, Lab Tech, Lab Manager
The Scenario Assessment 1 – Define role Scenario given to FOA Assessment 2- Action within role and communication with group Break in Case -2nd scene/suspect Roles suspended, one team Group forensic report written as wiki
Interact In Their Words! ST1 “having the opportunity to see the benefits of Interact such as easy access to class material and the feeling of actually having constant lecturer support through the use of the announcements and results of section was a great learning experience which will hopefully be useful in the years to come.”
ST2 ”it gave direct and personal contact via the forums (chat room) to both your group participants and lecture, which I found terrific. As a group the three of us could converse directly to learn from what others were addressing in the group chat room and post our concerns. So for me it was a great Condit to other students both on-campus and DE.” EV1 Interact was fantastic. It was so easy to use (once you knew how) and it was so easy to communicate with fellow students and academic staff. It made life a lot easier.
The Scenario/Constructionist Approach ST3“Another advantage of doing this activity as a group is that by interaction with other students in the subject we were able to gain a greater understanding of the area forensics. …. By working with students who are already involved in the area we were able to learn things that they knew and apply them to our investigation”
ST4“Group work is an effective means of learning especially for those times when I found myself clueless. As forensic scientists interact with the police force and the legal Court of Justice’s group work gave me an inside of the real world it gave me an opportunity to learn how to adjust and respect individual differences. The activity was indeed fun and educational and are very good interactive tool for learning forensic science.” ST5” this group activity has taught me a great deal about both working in a forensic team and in a team in general. And then how much a forensic investigation relies on teamwork and trust between its members that everyone will adequate play their part. Is not only applies in a forensic team but any team. I also learned how to manage my time effectively when trying to fit in with four other people. Is important for me to have my work in on time as the others in the group relying on my work to allow them to do theirs”
Summary: Evaluation Rubric Communication and collaboration 30% of student assessment required ongoing communication and collaboration. Students were given the opportunity to reflect on their actions when the group came together and peer learning and feedback was encouraged.
Summary: Evaluation Rubric Learning Material Subject outline was provided in print and online and include a table showing which role had to do what when. Virtual tutorial using screen capture was created to guide students in how to set up and contribute to a wiki.
Summary: Evaluation Rubric Learning outcomes and assessment Student – faculty contact Chat in teams and general page Phone and email Encourages cooperation among students Team work based Facilitated peer learning Each student had level of responsibility to other students Encourages active learning Enabled students to connect theory with practice and discussion different views on choice of actions Prompt feedback From team members on regular basis and as part of formal procedures From lecturer in response to emailed questions as well as the lecturer joining team chat sessions
Summary: Evaluation Rubric Learning outcomes and assessment Emphasizes time on task Needed to meet deadlines to ensure other team members could do their work Time allocated was proportional to value of the task Incorporation of life experiences and prior knowledge was facilitate for the benefit of the individual and their team. Communication of high expectations It was actually the student’s own drive to not let the team down that created an environment of high expectations Quality of work produced exceeded lecturer expectations Respect diverse talents and ways of learning Content was provided as both text and audio Encouraging peer learning gave all opportunity to demonstrate their strengths and use them for the benefit of others. Teams with mixed backgrounds ensured all experienced what different talents could bring to a project
Summary: Evaluation Rubric Course look and feel and web usability Consistency in tool use and presentation in both general page and team pages. Tool bars and tables of content linking wiki pages were used to promote easy access to all areas.
Summary: Evaluation Rubric Learner support The instructor was available on a daily basis by email or phone Institutional tech support was available 24 hours a day 7 days a week Regular visits to each team site enabled identification of issues and potential problems early and thus facilitate introduction of preventive measure.
But Did It Work ST6 ”I felt that due to my previous involvement in criminal investigations and court procedures I was able to contribute heavily in this respect. I was however surprised that I was so willing to spend time and effort to share my knowledge with the group. Hopefully this interaction has assisted in the overall learning effort of the team. “
Acknowledgements Assoc Prof. Lyn Angel and Dr. Heather Cavanagh CSU technical support and Interact pilot trial team Prof. Ross Chambers and Dr. John Harper Members of the School of Biomedical Sciences and School of Humanities and Social Sciences The Students of FSC 200