Developing Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: What have we learned? Dr Kwansuree Jiamton Dr Margaret Sills ICT Manager Academic Director Health Sciences & Practice Subject Centre King’s College London KILT Conference 4 th July 2007, King’s College London

Outline: Background: About the Higher Education Academy, and Health Sciences and Practice Subject Centre Theoretical Framework Theories of innovation and change Managing change Our strategic aims Our approach and Subject Centre’s activities What happened in practice? What works, what doesn’t? and Why? What have we learned?

Background:

About the Higher Education Academy, and

Health Sciences and Practice Subject Centre

Theoretical Framework

Theories of innovation and change

Managing change

Our strategic aims

Our approach and Subject Centre’s activities

What happened in practice?

What works, what doesn’t? and Why?

What have we learned?

Theoretical Framework (1) Innovation & Change Process: Lewin’s three-stage change model (1952): Three-level change model (Lewin 1952) Organisational change can occur at three levels and each level requires different change strategies and techniques since the patterns of resistance to change are different (Goodstein and Burke 1993). Three-level change model: individuals who work in the organisation organisational structures and systems organisational climate or interpersonal style Unfreeze Change Refreeze

Lewin’s three-stage change model (1952):

Three-level change model (Lewin 1952)

Organisational change can occur at three levels and each level requires different change strategies and techniques since the patterns of resistance to change are different (Goodstein and Burke 1993).

Three-level change model:

individuals who work in the organisation

organisational structures and systems

organisational climate or interpersonal style

Theoretical Framework (2) Theory of Innovation and Change Macro- VS Micro-perspective approach Top-down VS Bottom-up approach Managing change Innovation Triangles Change Management Spiral Model

Theory of Innovation and Change

Macro- VS Micro-perspective approach

Top-down VS Bottom-up approach

Managing change

Innovation Triangles

Change Management Spiral Model

Managing Change:

Change Management Spiral

Our Strategic Aims: To influence the development, implementation, and dissemination of policies that impact on student learning in the health related disciplines To support higher education partners, including those in work/ practice settings, with the development and implementation of their strategies for improving the student learning experience To promote and facilitate the professional development and recognition of educators in the health related disciplines To contribute to the development and dissemination of effective and innovative educational practices To support research and evaluation activities that inform the development and enhancement of learning and teaching in both academic and practice contexts To be a proactive, responsive, efficient, transparent, and accountable organisation To foster a collaborative, inclusive ethos that reflects an agreed set of core values

To influence the development, implementation, and dissemination of policies that impact on student learning in the health related disciplines

To support higher education partners, including those in work/ practice settings, with the development and implementation of their strategies for improving the student learning experience

To promote and facilitate the professional development and recognition of educators in the health related disciplines

To contribute to the development and dissemination of effective and innovative educational practices

To support research and evaluation activities that inform the development and enhancement of learning and teaching in both academic and practice contexts

To be a proactive, responsive, efficient, transparent, and accountable organisation

To foster a collaborative, inclusive ethos that reflects an agreed set of core values

Our Approach and Activities How we introduce change? Establishing network: Advisory Board Learning Teaching Consultants Subject Advisors Key Contacts Need Analysis Our activities Publications – Occasional papers, newsletter (termly), E bulletin (monthly) Special Interest Groups Workshops and meetings eg Festival of Learning, departmental workshops Mini-project grants Student essay competition National initiative support (eg CETLs FDTL4) Collaborations: eg Triple/ EIPEN (IPE), mhhe

How we introduce change?

Establishing network:

Advisory Board

Learning Teaching Consultants

Subject Advisors

Key Contacts

Need Analysis

Our activities

Publications – Occasional papers, newsletter (termly), E bulletin (monthly)

Special Interest Groups

Workshops and meetings eg Festival of Learning, departmental workshops

Mini-project grants

Student essay competition

National initiative support (eg CETLs FDTL4)

Collaborations: eg Triple/ EIPEN (IPE), mhhe

What works well, what doesn’t? and why? (1) The table below gives a regional breakdown of HEI engagement

The table below gives a regional breakdown of HEI engagement

What works well, what doesn’t? Why? (2) Newsletter: 1961 people receive our newsletter e-bulletin: 673 are the primary receivers of our e-bulletin Workshops: 22 events, 500 people attending, including Festival of Learning Departmental workshop Miniproject: attracted 90 applicants from 46 institutions, 11 projects were funded. Student Essay Competition

Newsletter: 1961 people receive our newsletter

e-bulletin: 673 are the primary receivers of our e-bulletin

Workshops: 22 events, 500 people attending, including

Festival of Learning

Departmental workshop

Miniproject: attracted 90 applicants from 46 institutions, 11 projects were funded.

Student Essay Competition

What works well, what doesn’t? Why? (3) We faced some dilemmas as we created a new service: Grass root needs or Policy driven? Do we follow or lead? Resources focused or dispersed? Home grown or imposed? Evolutionary or revolutionary? Evaluation for development or accountability? Practice or theory driven? Are our activities based on substantive theory of innovation and change or on habit and practicalities within a particular budget?

We faced some dilemmas as we created a new service:

Grass root needs or Policy driven?

Do we follow or lead?

Resources focused or dispersed?

Home grown or imposed?

Evolutionary or revolutionary?

Evaluation for development or accountability?

Practice or theory driven?

Are our activities based on substantive theory of innovation and

change or on habit and practicalities within a particular budget?

What have we learned? (1) Innovation and change takes time so how is success measured? A shift from not being aware or even thinking of an issue to contemplating change may be a better indicator than expecting immediate action Planning to embed an innovation into policy and practice Taking action and implementing change Sustaining change Impact on tutors has a roll out outcome for students’learning Change is not based on evidence (derived from codified and/or cultural knowledge) so does the network support this.

Innovation and change takes time so how is success measured?

A shift from not being aware or even thinking of an issue to contemplating change may be a better indicator than expecting immediate action

Planning to embed an innovation into policy and practice

Taking action and implementing change

Sustaining change

Impact on tutors has a roll out outcome for students’learning

Change is not based on evidence (derived from codified and/or cultural knowledge) so does the network support this.

What have we learned? (2) Insufficient time to prepare – the Network offers opportunities to discuss and work through issues Innovation transposed into a different context may not fit Unrealistic expectations of impact and outcome measures Lack of clarity as to who the change will benefit – government, institution, tutors, students or all? Misunderstanding of purposes. Sometimes practice matched theory and sometimes it didn’t and a fine balance between the macro policy level and the micro practice level was evident.

Insufficient time to prepare – the Network offers opportunities to

discuss and work through issues

Innovation transposed into a different context may not fit

Unrealistic expectations of impact and outcome measures

Lack of clarity as to who the change will benefit – government, institution,

tutors, students or all?

Misunderstanding of purposes. Sometimes practice matched theory and sometimes it didn’t and a fine balance between the macro policy level and the micro practice level was evident.

Contact Health Sciences & Practice Subject Centre Room 3.12, Waterloo Bridge Wing Franklin-Wilkins Building 150 Stamford Street London SE1 9NN http://www.health.heacademy.ac.uk Dr Kwansuree Jiamton [email_address] Dr Margaret Sills [email_address]

Health Sciences & Practice Subject Centre

Room 3.12, Waterloo Bridge Wing Franklin-Wilkins Building 150 Stamford Street London SE1 9NN

http://www.health.heacademy.ac.uk

Dr Kwansuree Jiamton [email_address]

Dr Margaret Sills [email_address]