Workshop presented at the Enhancing Student Learning through Innovative Scholarship conference in Sheffield, 20-21st July 2017

1. THE FUTURE OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
WORKSHOP
DR SARA MARSHAM
SCHOOL OF MARINE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
SARA.MARSHAM@NCL.AC.UK
@sara_marine
@alisonigraham
20th July 2017
DR ALISON GRAHAM
SCHOOL OF BIOLOGY
ALISON.GRAHAM@NCL.AC.UK
Enhancing Student Learning
Through Innovative Scholarship
Conference

2. BACKGROUND TO SESSION
 Recent Faculty discussions around L&T have led us to consider the future landscape for the delivery of
STEMM programmes
 Innovation within HE has long been discussed (Eraut, 21975) with a myriad of barriers to
implementing new approaches identified (Cachia et al., 2010)
 With continuous advances in learning technologies and new approaches to L&T becoming embedded,
the question arises; is it possible for us to predict how students in HE will learn in the next five
to ten years?

3. Developments
in HE
Learning
analytics
Learning
gain
Digital
literacy
Student
autonomy
Teaching
excellence
Online
marking
Collaborative
lecture
theatres
Lecture
capture
Recorded
verbal
feedback
PBL
Wikis/
blogs
BOYD
Attendance
monitoring
software
e-
Portfolio
e-
Learning
Peer
assessment
Research-
led
teaching Mentoring
Social
media

4.  Emerged in the literature in the early 2000s (Elliott, 2003; Miller et al., 2003)
 Research suggests substantial benefits of using audience response systems (e.g. JISC, 2005)
 Students enjoy using electronic voting systems, and therefore engage well with the technology and
learning (Martyn, 2007)
 Represents broader trend in engagement with active learning approaches
 Continuing area of research (50+ scholarly articles published to date in 2017)
EMBEDDED APPROACHES: AUDIENCE RESPONSE SYSTEMS

5.  …. and entrepreneurship
 Concept of core skills first recognised in the UK in 1989 (CBI, 1989; Raggatt, 1995)
 Acquisition of the key skills of communication, numeracy, IT, and 'learning how to learn' essential for UG with
generic 'professional' skills for PG; work experience should be extended to a greater proportion of students
(Dearing, 1997)
 Atkins (1999): “The foregoing discussion suggests that universities are unlikely en bloc to change their curricula
radically further in favour of a common, generic employability agenda”
EMBEDDED APPROACHES: EMPLOYABILITY

6.  “Inverting the classroom: a gateway to creating an inclusive learning
environment” (Lage et al.) published in 2000 but momentum gained in the last
seven or so years
 Recent publications focus on effectiveness and challenges
 Why is it not in more widespread use?
 Time to create initial resources
 Resistance to change from staff and students
 Cultural learning expectations
 Subject matter
 Subject knowledge of session leader
 The Flipped Learning Global Initiative was set up in 2016
by Jonathan Bergmann
NON-EMBEDDED APPROACHES: FLIPPED CLASSROOMS

7.  Game-based learning, gamification, ...
 Not embedded, or not yet embedded? Partially embedded?
 Can include traditional games (e.g. board games, card games),
electronic games (e.g. apps, computer games) or using the
principles of game design in a non-game context (Robson et al.,
2015)
 Real life is being increasingly gamified (McGonigal, 2011)
 Varying use in different disciplines and with different games
 Active research field at the moment
NON-EMBEDDED APPROACHES: GAME-ENHANCED LEARNING

8.  What are the upcoming/existing developments/trends
in your institution?
 Add to timeline to indicate when they were
introduced into L&T practice
TASK ONE

9.  Identify activities that have become widely embedded across
institutions - are there any similarities between those activities?
 Do you think these can be used to predict developments that
will become embedded in the future?
TASK TWO

10.  Bottom-up pressure (rather than up-down) – the importance of the student voice. Staff opinion??
 Bottom-up sharing of practice – but how often do they go further??
 Emphasise value of face-to-face. Avoid over-use of technology for its own sake.
 The power of metrics. “Feedback, feedback, feedback…”.
 Students like consistency – has this led to a homogenous learning environment?
 Institutional decisions lead to embedding of ideas – but is this the best way to get buy-in?
 University estate (including furniture) can influence practice. Timetabling (and other “hidden” support e.g. I.T.) is also
fundamental. Students as movers?
 Flagship projects only for marketing/recruitment purposes??
 Genuine buy-in of L&T leaders key.
 Pace of change leading to redundancy relatively quickly.
DISCUSSION OUTCOMES

11.  Atkins, M.J. (1999). Oven‐ready and Self‐basting: taking stock of employability skills. Teaching in Higher Education, 4: 267-280.
 Cachia, R., Ferrari, A., Ala-Mutka, K. and Punie, Y. (2010). Creative learning and innovative teaching. Final report on the study on Creativity and Innovation in Education in the EU
Member States. JRC Scientific and Technical Reports, EUR 24675 EN.
 Confederation of British Industry (CBI) (1989). Towards a Skills Revolution. London, CBI.
 Dearing, R. (1997). Higher Education in the Learning Society. London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
 Elliott, C. (2003). Using a personal response system in Economics teaching. International Review of Economics Education, 1: 80-86.
 Eraut, M. (1975). Promoting innovations in teaching and learning: problems, processes and institutional mechanisms. Higher Education, 4: 13-26.
 JISC (2005). Innovative Practice with e-Learning: A good practice guide to embedding mobile and wireless technologies into everyday practice. JISC/HEFCE.
 Lage, M.J., Platt, G.J. and Treglia M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: a gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31: 30-43
 Martyn, M. (2007). Clickers in the classroom: An active learning approach. Educause Quarterly, 30(2): 71.
 McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. Penguin.
 Miller, R.G., Ashar, B.H. and Getz, K.J. (2003). Evaluation of an audience response system for the continuing education of health professionals. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health
Professions, 23: 109-115.
 Raggatt, P. (1995). Competencies, Attributes and the Curriculum: The Australian Agenda. In: Burke, J. (Ed.). Outcomes, Learning and the Curriculum. London, The Falmer Press.
 Robson, K., Plangger, K., Kietzmann, J. H., McCarthy, I., and Pitt, L. (2015). Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification. Business Horizons, 58: 411-420.
REFERENCES

12. THANKYOU FOR PARTICIPATING
ANY QUESTIONS?
DR SARA MARSHAM
SARA.MARSHAM@NCL.AC.UK
HTTP://WWW.SLIDESHARE.NET/SARAMARSHAM/PRESENTATIONS
@sara_marine
@alisonigraham
Enhancing Student Learning
Through Innovative Scholarship
Conference
20th July 2017
DR ALISON GRAHAM
ALISON.GRAHAM@NCL.AC.UK
HTTP://WWW.SLIDESHARE.NET/ALISONGRAHAM15
Interested in
game-enhanced
learning?
Please get in
touch!