Ouldi project blended_learning_conf


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • PAProvide an overview of the aims of our learning design. In order to encourage staff to think consider and think profoundly about the best blend, we have embarked on this year was the curriculum mapping project.
  • Purpose: includes Participants acquiring appropriate new skillsObjective 1 to include case studies of good practice, learning object repositories and learning design tools and methods
  • Focus on strategies for influencing and evidencing institutional impact (Awareness to Application) and some findingsA fundamental objective of the Brunel OULDI project was to encourage lecturers to think profoundly about learning technologies available at Brunel, and to seek insight and ideas about how these technologies can be integrated as part of their learning and teaching strategy at the preliminary stages of course design.
  • To encourage Stakeholder en
  • NPSome of the suggestions and recommendations from our investigations were for example
  • Ouldi project blended_learning_conf

    1. 1. Designing the curriculum: from innovation to enhancement<br />Rebecca Galley Open University (UK), <br />Dr Phil Alberts and Natalie Parnis Brunel University<br />Maria Papaefthimiou, University of Reading<br />
    2. 2. Project aims<br />“Specifically, we need to shift from the traditional craft-based teacher-design (where design draws on belief-based practice and is essentially implicit) to a more systematic, explicit design approach, drawing on empirically derived and validated tools and methods for design”. Conole (2010)<br />
    3. 3. Key aspects: Design as...<br />a conscious process<br />a dialogue with materials<br />a creative process<br />a communicative process<br />a social activity<br />juhansonin http://www.flickr.com/photos/juhansonin/2250554147/<br />
    4. 4. How, when and who with?<br />The OULDI project sees ‘learning design’ as an all encompassing term to cover the process, representation, sharing and evaluation of designs from lower level activities, right up to whole curriculum level designs.<br />We are interested in providing support for the entire design process; from gathering and sketching out initial ideas, through consolidating, producing and using designs, to sharing, reuse and community engagement.<br />
    5. 5. Scope...<br />to support and influence shifts in professional practice and institutional process<br />Detailed curriculum process mapping and feedback<br />Identification of process ‘touch points’<br />Engagement in curriculum process review <br />Recruiting and training support units<br />Workshops<br />Recruiting champions<br />Facilitation/ mentoring<br />Guidance materials<br />Communities and networks<br />Case studies<br />
    6. 6. Implementing change<br />Form a powerful guiding coalition<br />Institutionalise the new approaches<br />Curriculum process mapping and feedback<br />Recruiting champions<br />Create a vision<br />Communities and networks<br />Establish a sense of urgency<br />Consolidate improvement and keep change moving<br />Workshops<br />Communicate the vision<br />Case studies<br />Curriculum design process review<br />Plan for and create short term wins<br />Empower others to act on the vision<br />Guidance materials<br />Recruiting and training support units<br />Identification of process ‘touch points’<br />Facilitation and mentoring<br />Kotter’s 8-step change model http://www.kotterinternational.com/KotterPrinciples/ChangeSteps.aspx retrieved Feb 25, 2011<br />
    7. 7. Evidencing and communicating impact<br />Awareness<br />Staff surveys<br />Curriculum maps<br />Staff surveys<br />Workshop feedback<br />Process documents<br />Reactions<br />Focus groups<br />Interviews<br />Engagement<br />IndividualPractice<br />Institutional Process<br />Case studies<br />Interviews<br />Learn and develop<br />Workshop mid-term surveys<br />Process documents<br />Designs and representations<br />Application<br />Curriculum maps<br />Student satisfaction<br />Student satisfaction<br />Effects on student learning<br />
    8. 8. Aims of Brunel’s Learning Design Initiative<br />Blending face-to-face teaching with e-learning within the context of student needs, the programme, the teaching style of the lecturer and available technologies<br />Encouraging lecturing staff to think profoundly about the best blend at the initial stages of the design process<br />Detailed consideration of pedagogic principles in programme design<br />
    9. 9. Brunel University<br />Learning Design Initiative<br />Mapping the Curriculum Design & Review processes <br />Use of Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)<br />Learning Design Tools : <br />Cloudworks & Compendium LD<br />Blended Learning Design Workshops<br />Compendium LD Learning Design Visualisation Tool<br />‘A process of enquiry that leads to action’ to enhance the situation (Rosenhead & Mingers (2002))<br />A visualisation map (using Compendium LD) of a new course designed during the workshop by one of the Business School Teams<br />Cloudworks Social Networking <br />site for Learning & Teaching<br />
    10. 10. Blended Learning Design Workshops<br />Purpose: Introduce staff to a new methodology for learning design, providing support and guidance for creating blended learning modules / learning activities<br />Objectives<br />Awareness of range of resources / tools / methods available to support learning design <br />Experience of thinking about the blended design process from different perspectives<br />Transferring the experience gained from the design challenge to participants’ own context<br />
    11. 11. Scope…<br />Course design teams were given the opportunity to reflect on the design of their programmes and their personal design practice<br />
    12. 12. Workshop Recommendations<br />Organise workshops at times when School teams are developing or modifying a programme to allow the workshop activities to be more focussed on the development of the programme.<br />Retain the format of the workshop components that the participants found most useful, namely:<br />The opportunity to ‘try out’ more creative or unorthodox ideas <br />Working with colleagues on an activity <br />Having support staff on-hand to answer questions<br />Learning about support and advisory services at Brunel<br />Follow the teams up after a workshop<br />
    13. 13. Curriculum Mapping @ Brunel<br />Aim<br />To review existing curriculum processes at Brunel to discover how best to ensure in-depth consideration of technologies during quality approval and review; namely the ‘Programme Approval, Review, Monitoring and Audit’ processes.<br />
    14. 14. Method <br />Adaptation of Soft System Methodology<br />Source documents and semi-structured interviews, to identify ‘touch points’ within Brunel’s quality life cycle - for the provision of consultation to staff in relation to blended learning <br />Curriculum Mapping @ Brunel<br />
    15. 15. Brunel’s Adaptationof SSM<br />Recommend action plan to areas for improvement<br />Define project requirement<br />1.<br />Define possible changes which are both desirable and feasible <br />7.<br />6.<br />Express current situation <br />2.<br />2.<br />Compare models with real-world processes<br />5.<br />1.<br />3. Module Cycle<br />Real World<br />2. Programme Cycle<br />Systems Thinking <br />about the Real World<br />Build revised visual model to reflect proposed systems<br />Formulate definition of proposed systems<br />1. Institutional Cycle<br />4.<br />3.<br />4.<br />3.<br />
    16. 16. Data Gathering Approach<br />Semi-structured interviews with stakeholders<br />Institutional Level<br />Pro Vice Chancellor for Student Experience <br />Director of Academic Programme Development<br />Senior Assistant Registrar for Quality and Standards<br />Administrative Officer in Quality & Standards<br />School & Programme Level<br />5 Deputy Heads (Learning & Teaching)<br />3 Programme Leaders<br />Module Level<br />2 Module Leaders<br />
    17. 17. Mapping the Current System<br />
    18. 18. Proposed ‘Touchpoints’<br />
    19. 19. Recommendations...<br />Establish the principle of design teamwork within School context<br />Involve the Learning Technology Team in the provision of guidance and advice to programme teams within Schools<br />More detail in relation to innovation, creativity and delivery in the design strategy document (for approval purposes) <br />More detailed section on alternatives for course delivery within the module specification outline<br />Offer induction sessions and workshops on any aspect of the curriculum process, as well as resources<br />
    20. 20. Schools to invite their Learning Technology adviser to participate in the annual monitoring process, or alternatively make reports available to the person <br />Schools to invite their Learning Technology adviser to be an observer during their Academic Process Review events, or be involved in preparation for it, or alternatively make reports available to the person<br />Strengthen the communication channels between the course development teams in Schools and their Learning Technology advisers<br />Recommendations…(Cont)<br />
    21. 21. OULDI @ Brunel project website<br />http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/acad/apdu/researchprojects/ouldi<br />
    22. 22. Project AimsUniversity of Reading<br />Does the Learning Design methodology promote thinking, reflection and discussion<br />Do representations and visualisations of courses or modules promote sharing and collaboration?<br />Does a Learning Design approach meet academic needs in a changing context (e.g. feedback, managing workload etc)?<br />
    23. 23. How?<br />Change process<br />Research culture<br />Bottom up<br />Champions<br />Selection of pilots<br />
    24. 24. Selection<br />Identifying academics<br />Championing technology, innovations in teaching<br />School e-L coordinators, Directors of T&L<br />New enthusiastic staff<br />engaged in a project/committed to a project<br />PGCAP<br />Reward<br />Identified a particular area for engagement with each.<br />
    25. 25. Collecting evidence<br />Encouraging thinking and reflection – Reflective account proforma around evaluation questions sent to pilots<br />Case study proforma<br />to present evidence collected by project<br />gaps<br />Interviews<br />semi-structured<br />
    26. 26. CaseStudies<br />Following workshop participants<br />Following individuals academics<br />
    27. 27. Angela<br />Angela (Workshop participant)<br />Used tools on her own<br />Communicating course designs to stakeholders using visualisations<br />colleagues teaching the same course<br />learners<br />
    28. 28. Joe<br />Visualisations aid the thinking process of the course team<br />Framework to refine existing design practice<br />Focus minds of staff on key benefits to students<br />Aided collaboaration<br />Positive feedback received from students at the end<br />
    29. 29. Andrew<br />Module redesign to include PBL<br />Visualisations identified gaps in the design<br />Promoted thinking and reflection on course design<br />Video diaries<br />
    30. 30. Kleio<br />Design of a module that would be delivered by a team of tutors<br />Identifying the tutors’ different conceptionalisations<br /><ul><li>Communicating the teaching concept
    31. 31. Share understandings about content and process
    32. 32. rather than micro-management focus is on students learning
    33. 33. Reflections and evaluations</li></li></ul><li>Summary of findings<br />Thinking, reflection and discussion<br />Sharing and collaboration<br />Meeting challenges<br />
    34. 34. Success Factors<br />An existing team work and collaborative ethos within groups of academics teaching together<br />Positive attitudes to technology, design and educational innovation<br />Levels of pedagogic competence within the school level<br />New enthusiastic staff<br />Championing the use of technology in T&L<br />Structured Opportunities for course design<br />Time and resource available to lecturers to invest in their teaching<br />
    35. 35. Further reading<br />Project blog: http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/OULDI/<br />Reading University (2010) OULDI Pilot Interim Project Update, 32pp<br />Brunel University (2010)OULDI Pilot Interim Project Update, 6pp<br />Alevizou, P., Galley, R. and Conole, G., (forthcoming) Collectivity, performance and self-representation: Analysing Cloudworks as a public space for networked learning and reflection in Exploring the Theory, Pedagogy and Practice of Networked Learning. Ed.  Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., Hodgson, V. and  McConnell, D.  London:  Springer<br />Cross, S. and Conole, G. (2008), Learn about learning design, Learn about guides series, The Open University: Milton Keynes, available http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/OULDI/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Learn-about-learning-design_v7.doc<br />Conole, Grainne (2010).Facilitating new forms of discourse for learning and teaching: harnessing the power of Web 2.0 practices. Open Learning, 25(2), pp. 141–151.<br />Conole, G. (forthcoming).Designing for learning in an open world. New York: Springer <br />Conole, G. and Jones, C. (2010). ‘Sharing practice, problems and solutions for institutional change – comparing different forms of representation’. In  P. Goodyear and S. Retalis (Eds) Technology-enhanced learning: Design Patterns and Pattern Languages.  Rotterdam, The Netherlands.: Sense Publishers B.V. <br />