Increasing Inclusivity: Developing a HEA Accredited Teaching Course for Librarians - Kirstie Preest & Claire Sewell
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•139 views
Presented at LILAC 2022
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Increasing Inclusivity: Developing a HEA Accredited Teaching Course for Librarians - Kirstie Preest & Claire Sewell
Similar to Increasing Inclusivity: Developing a HEA Accredited Teaching Course for Librarians - Kirstie Preest & Claire Sewell (20)
More from IL Group (CILIP Information Literacy Group)
More from IL Group (CILIP Information Literacy Group) (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Increasing Inclusivity: Developing a HEA Accredited Teaching Course for Librarians - Kirstie Preest & Claire Sewell
- 1. Increasing Inclusivity Developing a HEA Accredited Teaching Course for Librarians Kirstie Preest (she/her) Librarian and Fellow Murray Edwards College Claire Sewell (she/her) Research Support Librarian (School of Physical Sciences)
- 2. The problem... "Academic libraries need librarians who are skilled instructors and who understand how to use pedagogically sound approaches for generating evidence of student learning. However, the core MLIS curriculum fails to adequately prepare graduates to meet these demands, either as teachers or as researchers." Gammons, R. W., Carroll, A. J., & Carpenter, L. I. (2018). “I never knew I could be a teacher”: A student-centered MLIS fellowship for future teacher- librarians. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 18(2), 331-362.
- 3. Course development Initial 3 day in person course Launch of 9 month blended learning course Development of CILN Framework Emergency pivot to online Launch of 6 month online course 2013 2017 2019 2020 2021
- 4. Current programme January Course introduction and developing a teaching philosophy. February Learning theories and information literacy frameworks. March Backwards design. April Inclusivity in teaching and moving teaching online. May Feedback and evaluation. June Nano-teach sessions.
- 5. Assessment 1. 2. Portfolio Nano-teach Reflection on monthly prompts. Develop a personal teaching philosophy. Complete CILN Teaching Template. 15 min session on any topic. Created using backwards design model. Audience of peers with constructive feedback.
- 6. What our learners say Average increase in: Confidence Experience pts pts 4 3 Self-paced content Live online sessions Overall course 100% excellent Increased pedagogical knowledge Covered areas relevant to practice Delivering nano-teach increased confidence 100% 75% 100% Strongly agreed
- 7. What our learners say Changes to practice “I used the template to identify learning outcomes, tech and resources that would be needed and … to ensure I kept to time.” “I made sure my presentation was inclusive as possible, fostering a 'safe-space' environment for all to share personal histories.” Professional development “It increased my confidence exponentially … by showing me how to be a better student and teacher.” “I have learnt how to critique other sessions I attend and note what works well in various situations.”
- 8. What did WE learn? Learning from each other is key. Moving the course online increased inclusivity. Learners will find their own ways to learn. Always more to discover.
- 9. Next steps Pursue formal accreditation Creating a community Building on the basics Push our own boundaries
- 10. Find out more Read more about the initial course development: https://bit.ly/CILN_TLFL Contact us: Kirstie - kirstie.preest@murrayedwards.cam.ac.uk Claire – ces43@cam.ac.uk Talk to us – come find us and say hi! With our thanks to River Cronin, Jo Harcus, Isla Kuhn, Catherine Reid & Meg Westbury for their work on course development.
- 11. Claire Sewell Research Support Librarian University of Cambridge Email: ces43@cam.ac.uk Telephone: 01223 765670 Twitter: @ces43 Kirstie Preest Librarian and Fellow Murray Edwards College Email: kp361@cam.ac.uk Telephone: 01223 762202 Twitter: @kirstiewales
Editor's Notes
- Welcome to the session. Introductions. Here to talk to you about the teaching skills course we have been developing at Cambridge, share our experiences and what's surprised us along the way.
- As is usual with these types of project, it all starts with a problem that needs to be solved. In academic libraries (and frequently in other sectors) there is a growing need for staff at a range of levels to develop teaching skills. Whether teaching is a core part of their role, they offer relief teaching or they are working at a service desk, there are many opportunities for teaching skills to be put into use. Many of the skills needed can be developed 'on the job' through trial and error but this doesn't always tell us why a particular approach works. Librarians might come to learn that teaching something a certain way with a certain group is preferable but if they don't understand the reasons behind this then how can they replicate this success? Having a thorough grounding in pedagogy is important for library staff not only to understand their teaching initiatives but also to make the best of the often limited time they have with their students. There is not always time to work on an approach – you see students for a single session over the course of their studies and that's it. Training is available but: It's not consistent across library school programmes. It might be a single session in a longer course or an elective option not everyone can take. Academic institutions are increasingly realising that pedagogical knowledge is important for their teaching staff and are offering in-house programmes which address these needs. Many of them are mapped to the Higher Education Academy (now AdvanceHE) framework meaning that at the end of the programme learners come away with a recognised teaching qualification. However, many of these courses are aimed at university teaching staff who operate a different teaching model and do not address the needs of library staff such as the one-shot session, induction tours or dealing with questions on the enquiry desk. These assumptions about teaching practice mean that these in-house programmes often have a limited use for library staff who have to translate the lessons outlined to their practice. Generic teaching courses don’t look beyond traditional methods of teaching to take into account library specific interactions such as the enquiry desk interview, tours of the library and other interactions with users. This is certainly the case at the University of Cambridge. At the same time, we have a growing number of roles where teaching is a core competency so we felt that this needed to be addressed. Developed over a number of years, the Teaching and Learning for Librarians course aims to offer a solid knowledge of pedagogical approaches, demonstrate how they are relevant to library teaching and make sure that the teaching we provide is as good and as inclusive as it can be.
- The current course is the end result of an iterative development process which goes back almost a decade. 2013: First recognised the need for this type of course. Librarians in Training – in-house general training programme for library staff. Ran as a three day intensive in-person course. Two days of taught content and a nano-teach informal assessment to put learning into practice. Feedback was positive but learners felt that it was a lot of material to take on board in a short space of time. Taking three full days away from the day job was also a hassle. Course was delivered ad-hoc – 2014, 2016, 2018. 2017: Cambridge Information Literacy Framework launched. Gave us something local to tie the course to – framework competencies and teaching template. The 3 day course was brought into the CILN strand dealing with staff training. The group decided that the course should be further developed to support the other CILN strand and the framework. The teaching template was also brought into the course once that had been developed. 2019 Nine month blended learning course developed. Linked to the CILN Framework. Mix of in-person day schools and online content to work through asynchronously. Programme ran from Sept-May. Content mapped to HEA Framework – teaching industry recognised qualification. Allows us to gain same qualification as our lecturing peers (good for recognition in an academic library setting = not an 'other' qualification). Way to consolidate practice and learning on teaching. 14 learners signed up but only 5 finished sue to COVID hitting half way through the course. Not enough time for participants to give as they were reacting to the immediate switch online. Feedback on content was positive but struggled to retain learners/get them to attend all compulsory in-person sessions despite setting clear expectations. 2020: Like everyone else we had to undertake an emergency pivot to online during this initial cohort. Meant a rethink of how some of the content would be structured – online vs in-person. Some learners understandably had to drop out. Introduction of extra content on moving sessions online in response to pandemic. 2021: Learnt lessons from this shift online. Course now entirely delivered online – mixture of live online sessions and static content. Condensed the course into a six month programme – involved shifting content and rethinking delivery formats. What do we REALLY need synchronous online learning for? What can be achieved with asynchronous? Gave us a chance to really think about how we could make this course as inclusive as possible and practice what we preach. Although we were concerned that people would be put off by an online only course.
- The course is delivered via Moodle, looking at one/two topics per month. Six months = six modules – can see the topics covered on the screen. Able to replicate the content of the nine month course in six months, although in less depth than before. This is not necessarily a bad thing! Each module = materials created especially for the course (both written and video), third party content (embedded and links) and curated lists of recommended/additional readings. Supplemented by online activities hosted in Padlet which participants can complete in their own time. Allows asynchronous interaction as learners can see other responses. We also offer regular drop-in sessions on aspects of the content. Offers a chance for informal discussion and/or facilitates catch ups with learners. Each learner is assigned a course leader as a personal tutor = key point of contact, can ask questions/raise concerns. Can take advantage of opportunit or not as needed. Modules offer a combination of live and asynchronous learning – one month adopts a flipped learning model where learners are asked to watch video content explaining elements prior to attending online practical workshop. We also try to use a range of tools to deliver elements including Zoom, Teams, Padlet and Jamboard. This mixture of approaches might seem chaotic but it's done deliberately to expose learners to different tools and approaches to delivering content. Want them to see how different tools can be used to give them ideas or even help them learn approaches they dislike = part of the learning experience. Course content = mapped to the UK HEA/UK Professional Standards framework. Professional standards for those involved in teaching in HE – both support staff and academics = universal qualification that is recognised across both groups. Puts librarians on par with academic colleagues – rightly/wrongly they recognise this qualification as it's something many of them have/are working towards. We aimed to have the course professionally recognised in 2020 so that learners completing would automatically achieve AFHEA. Deadline was missed due to COVID and effort to switch content to online so need to wait for next cycle. However – current mapping means that completing the programme gives learners all they need to complete a portfolio for AFHEA using the evidence they have built up during the course. Several learners from past cohorts have indicated that they want to pursue this so we are looking at how best to facilitate this. Important to point out that although inclusivity and online teaching have their own module in April it is a running theme throughout the course. Felt that these topics were very linked. We try to practice what we preach with learners whilst showcasing different approaches to lead by example. Still more work to do as a process of continuous learning for all involved.
- The course is assessed in two main ways. Portfolio: Learners compile a portfolio of material over the course of the programme. They are encouraged to do this as they proceed through the course but this isn't policed. Learners are introduced to reflective practice at an early stage. They are encouraged to relate the concepts discussed to their own practice. We offer monthly prompt questions to get them thinking and they are encouraged to write as much or as little as they like. Helps to set the learning in their own personal context. Each participant is asked to develop their own personal philosophy of teaching and share it at the end of the course. This includes their instinctive feelings about the way they approach teaching and can be backed up with the knowledge gained on the course. It is intended to be very much a working document to take and develop beyond the programme. CILN Framework has its own teaching template to aid in session design. Learners are encouraged to complete the template in stages, both to help with lesson planning and to showcase the template itself as a resource. Reflections from learners have actually helped to suggest areas for improvement to the template. Nano-teach: Second component is delivering the session outlined in the session plan. Learners give a 15 minute presentation on a topic of their choice – have had sign language, mindfulness, Polish language lessons and traditional library sessions to name a few. Mixture of work and non-work topics – some people use it to trial a session they want to deliver to students, others just teach on something they are familiar with. Key element of both nano-teach session and lesson plan = backwards design = process of working backwards from intended outcomes of a session to develop methods of education and assessment to meet these goals. Session is presented to an audience of cohort peers who are asked to offer constructive feedback to help improve delivery and session – verbal and recorded anonymously on Jamboard. Learner also carries out verbal self-reflection immediately after session. This is recorded and added to the board which the learner can take away and use as the basis of their portfolio reflections. Approach aims to build connections between theory and practical application in a way that works for the individual learner. Have introduced a marking rubric for current cohort – fail/pass/distinction to allow us to showcase truly exceptional submissions.
- Response from learners has been phenomenally positive – in some ways which we weren't expecting. Start with the stats from our second cohort (most recent to complete and first to complete course in current format) = n18. At the start of the programme we ask learners to self-report their levels of confidence and teaching experience on a scale of 0-10 – 0 = not at all, 10 = very. Asked to re-rate after nano-teach session. Average increase of 4 points for confidence and 3 for experience. Learners who had low levels of confidence at the start of the course showed a greater improvement than those who showed higher levels of confidence a the start – this was to be expected. Format: learners rated both the self-paced elements and the live online sessions as excellent, as well as the course overall based on their experience. We weren't expecting this result, especially concerning the online elements which we thought might be off-putting to people. We discovered that learners actually appreciated the online method of delivery and that it helped to enhance accessibility. Learners found it easier to attend online with less travelling time and could better fit sessions into their schedules. Response to questions on content was equally positive with high scores for increased knowledge of pedagogy, relevance to practice and increasing confidence through practical teaching.
- We also gathered some qualitative comments. Changes to practice: Learners were already starting to incorporate elements from the course into their teaching practice. The main themes = using the teaching template as a way to structure sessions and building in inclusivity. Very pleased to see that these were the main outcomes of the course for people on a practical level – cohort really embraced accessibility and inclusivity discussions = we all shared personal experiences which helped to start some really interesting discussions. Personal/professional development due to the course: Has also helped learners with their own professional development goals. Obviously a much more individual experience but to tease out a couple of comments – was lovely to see that it increased people's confidence in their own abilities – both those they already had and those they gained during the course. Interesting comment about being a better student and teacher – by demonstrating different ways to learn online, helped to show people what worked for them as students and got them thinking about how they could translate this into their own teaching. Theme continues in comments on being able to be actively critical of teaching sessions = valuable skill. Can see what works or not and bring this back to their own teaching scenarios. Especially important as we still deal with the shift to online learning. We want people to be critical learners and question things so responses such as this were lovely to see.
- Learning from each other is a key part of building inclusivity: We have learnt as much from our students as they have (hopefully) learnt from us. Course brought together library staff from across Cambridge with their diverse personal/professional experiences and expertise. Synergy - learnt ways of being inclusive as a group that we wouldn't have known or considered individually. Opened our eyes and broadened our definition of inclusivity. Helped that course leaders shared our less than perfect experiences of teaching = helped to demystify. Moving the course online actually increased our ability to be inclusive. This happened slightly against expectations – we worried that it would actually make the course less accessible but it had the opposite effect. Learners have told us they prefer online. Geographic spread of libraries in Cambridge = across the city. Can make travel and time spent getting to sessions an issue e.g. a one hour session can actually take three hours with travel time. Self-paced content fits in with altered working patterns caused by COVID. Linked to this = learners will find their own ways to learn. We were worried that the pivot to online would mean that we lost the benefits of getting people to interact. We also built in lots of flexibility to the course and offered routes through the content. BUT learners developed their own routes through the content. Too many prescribed options can actually be confusing. Clear signposts are the best way. Learners developed informal mentoring support. Some people worked through the content together, others preferred to go alone. Possibly something we can formalise with future cohorts but I wonder if this is needed? Would this actually disrupt something that is working rather than help? Should we just let it happen organically? Perhaps the biggest lesson for us was that there is ALWAYS more for us to learn: As teachers As programme designers As inclusive practitioners = course is as much a professional development opportunity for US as for our learners.
- First step is to get through the next few months and complete with our latest cohort. This will give us two runs of the course in its current form and a better idea of what's working or not and how we can improve this. Our main goal is to pursue formal HEA accreditation. As we said earlier, we missed out on this last time due to timing but we would love to be able to award a qualification at the end of the process. Some of the portfolios submitted by our last cohort were outstanding and although we know they will form the basis of strong submissions it broke our hearts that we couldn't just award something there and then. Accreditation will also help to incentivise participation in the course. We are also looking at other forms of accreditation to open it up to a wider group of participants e.g. CILIP short course accreditation. We want to create a community around the course, drawing together previous cohorts to learn from each other as we have done within group. As we've said, we all learnt so much from participants that it would be great to continue to build on this and create a community of practice of teaching librarians to discuss pedagogical approaches and developments. It would also be good to keep the momentum going, especially around inclusivity. We can't rely on one or two individuals, we need to make this a core element of teaching so the more people who can help the better. We have developed a course that we think covers the essentials of teaching in an academic library. But academic libraries aren't the only sector. What do law librarians need to know about teaching, or those working in public libraries? We want to explore the idea of creating bespoke modules in collaboration with other sectors and build on the basics so that people can tailor the course to their needs. And finally but perhaps most importantly, we want to push our own boundaries. Currently the programme isn't formally resourced and run on top of already busy day jobs = not sustainable. Would like to get more people involved and develop some formal structure. Also want to push ourselves to learn more about how we can make this course as accessible and inclusive as possible. Always more to learn and we are eager to start.
- We'd love to talk to people more about this if you're interested. If you want to find out more about the initial development of the programme you can read our blog post on the CILN blog. You can contact us via email or just come and say hi at the conference – we'll be here for the whole event. With thanks to others from the Cambridge community who have contributed to the development of this course of the years. Any questions – we can try to answer them.