rWorld2

George Roberts’ Work Blog

Extending your online course

Posted by george on December 20th, 2011

Last month I and some colleagues developed, ran and participated in an online course called extending your online course. The course site is here: https://sites.google.com/a/brookes.ac.uk… My reflective blog for this course is here: http://extendingonline.brookesblogs.net/

It was one of the best learning experiences I have participated in in recent years. I mention this now by way of returning to this blog after what could appear as a gap in my activity.

I feel the need to reflect but all I can say is that I feel tired and ready for a break from the academy.

I finished off the working year writing a bid for a grant to go beyond even Extending your online course, helping to lead us into open academic practice in a big way. Fingers crossed.

These are the things that keep it worth working.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Family friendly work-life balance may mean working odd hours

Posted by george on October 8th, 2011

I often wonder about what a family-friendly work-life balance is. I perceive it through certain practices and policies as well as through tacit and explicit assertions and exhortations. Does it mean never sending a work-related e-mail outside the Monday-Friday, nine to five envelope? I have colleagues who adhere strictly to this practice. Others who don't. 

Now, I work in an educational institution. I have a family and kids. Nursery and soon school will be setting the social clock and calendar. And, I make other choices: commuting to work by bicycle (environmental transport policy) and doing something approaching my fair share of nursery runs, cooking and other domestic duties (equality and diversity policy). This means the time available to me Monday to Friday is more like 10:00 to 4:00 with a 40 minute cycle ride either side. I do need a lunch break to refuel. So at most, Monday to Friday, nine to five I can put in about five hours of work a day. This could leave me something like 10 hours a week short of my contracted hours.

I enjoy a working environment, line management and colleagues who are not clock watchers. I do not work all my waking hours. But, I do work in the early mornings, evenings and weekends as well as on the weekdays. However I do also sometimes feel that there is pressure to conform more closely to social norms: that it is somehow wrong or inappropriate to do work that is time-stamped outside the nine to five. Should I go online now and look at the developing conversation on the VLE? What kind of signal do I send if I post a message at 11:00 p.m. on a Saturday night? Will people think I have just rolled in from the pub? Actually, my partner went out. I was with the two boys. One of them woke up at about 10:00, crying. It took 20 minutes to settle him. So should I log on now?

Posted via email from George’s posterous

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Extending your online course

Posted by george on October 7th, 2011

I am developing a new online course on “Extending your online course” (how meta is that). We go live with it on 2 November 2011. This four-week short course focuses on enhancing teaching and learning by using new technology and tools – social media – for interactivity and engagement.

What does that mean? We are going to experiment with new “stuff” to teach with. This has been the most fun I have had at work in a while. The website will go live next week. Contact me (Twitter @georgeroberts) if you want a preview.

The course is primarily aimed at teachers who have some experience of teaching online, those who have done one of OCSLD‘s other online courses, or those who are bold about trying new things. You do not have to be a techie. In fact the course is not really aimed at techies. But, you should be willing to embrace social media technologies for education and get your hands a little dirty when we “lift the lid”. If you are reading this, please forward a link to any of your new colleagues who are getting into blended online teaching.

The course is going to be experimental. We are not going to tell you what to do or how to do it – though we will if we can. We do aim that through this engagement you will discover (and we might as well!) new ways to interact in learning environments and new tools to facilitate that interaction. We will adopt the motto (though not, perfectly, the method) of the MOOC, “… we suggest, you decide”. We will look at not just the tools and techniques, but also the social implications of going on-line through the social media world. Questions of privacy, identity and community in respect to academic practice will be raised. (These questions were explored in a series of online seminars and are the subject of another new course “Academic practice online”, which I am developing for later next year.)

As with our other courses, “Extending your online course” will be taught primarily through asynchronous group discussion. However there will be some use of synchronous audiographic virtual classrooms. We will use Wimba Classroom. It is a lot like Elluminate or Adobe Connect. If you are thinking about participating you might want to put Friday 4 November 1200-1400 (GMT) into your diary for the first of the live audiographic sessions. And, there will be two more live sessions on the two following Fridays.

The course is organised around weekly tasks supported by associated readings. In order to make a full contribution to the course people need to commit approximately a total of 4-6 hours per week to course related activity.

I hope people join!

Posted in Educational Development, Learning Technology, OCSLD online, Teaching | 1 Comment »

Teaching across two sites using “Classroom” audiographics – trials and tribulations

Posted by george on September 29th, 2011

Audiographic tools can enable teaching and the support of learning across two or more sites but our university’s classroom computing infrastructure cannot support audiographic tools: local hardware is not up to the job.
I conducted a trial this week to test these propositions.

Context
Our University has four main campuses. We are structurally divided into four faculties. However, the departments of the faculties are not located together on the same campuses. Faculties are distributed. Inter-campus transport is not great. You need to allow an hour between the end of an event on one campus and the beginning of an event on another. We teach a number of combined honours programmes and some modules are common to several programmes. Students may have seminars on different campuses. Students may be resident on different campuses. Lecturers may teach on different campuses. PhD teaching assistants may work predominantly on one campus and have occasional teaching duties on another. To further complicate matters the main campus is a building site and pressure on teaching accommodation is severe.

For all these reasons, and more, it makes sense to consider whether groups might be distributed between two (or more?) campuses, where a lecturer in a “home” room speaks with people in that room and simultaneously to those in one or more “satellite” rooms.

A scenario in which this seems to make sense is when a lecture is followed by seminar groups, especially if there might be a rationale for holding these break-out seminar groups on different campuses.

An additional benefit would be to enable (rudimentary) lecture capture for later re-play.

The trial
Participants on the New Lecturers Course and Postgraduate certificate in teaching in higher education (PCTHE) are based on all four main campuses and there are also participants from affiliated colleges and other universities.

The New lecturers course is not only supposed to teach the basics of surviving in the classroom, but to push the boundaries of teaching practice.

This week we tried distributed teaching with our “Microteaching” workshop. This workshop is aimed primarily at very new lecturers. Participants gather for a plenary at 0930 in which we discuss teaching observation and peer feedback. And, then at 1000 we disperse to smaller rooms in groups of about 5 participants, each facilitated by a tutor.

We offered participants the opportunity to have their break-out sessions on the campus of their choice while we hosted the plenary on the main campus. In the event, about 17 people gathered in the plenary home room and four people chose to have their session in the satellite room on another campus.

Findings
So how did we do it? What were the challenges? Did it work?

The plenary session was a success in that the lecturer was able to speak to both the “home” and the “satellite” room. Participants in the “satellite” room could see the lecturer and contributed to the discussion, asking and answering questions. Participants in the home room could see and speak with colleagues in the satellite room.

The “home” room would have been better served if there had been a microphone to pick up questions from the floor as well as the lecturer at the podium.

But, there were many challenges, almost all associated with the equipment in the two teaching rooms, and the solutions were decidedly Heath Robinson.

The detail

In advance of the session I installed a “classroom” into the Course VLE site. This was completely unproblematic. The link between Wimba Classroom and Blackboard (WebCT legacy) CE8 worked perfectly.

I then went in to the assigned home room on Monday afternoon to test things out for the distributed teaching session which was to take place on Wednesday.

The plenary home room was one of our newest teaching rooms with a podium full of computing and AV equipment. However web cams are not part of the setup and podium computers are not routinely provided with microphones. We would have to use external USB cameras and microphones. I have a Logitech composite camera and microphone, which works with “most machines”.

I started the podium computer (a reasonably recent machine running our standard Windows XP set-up) and logged in, thereby establishing there was a local network connection. I plugged in the composite camera/microphone. The machine recognised it (which was an initially pleasant surprise). Then I clicked to load a browser. The application loader failed. No browser would load. I tried Firefox, Chrome and IE. Nada. I did a hard reset and waited while the machine rebuilt its registries. Same thing: the app-loader application wouldn’t run. I noticed a sign on the door telling students that, earlier in the day, a last minute room change had been arranged. I guessed it was because no one could get this machine started. I wandered down the corridor, found an administrator who said that someone had mentioned that the machine wasn’t behaving properly and that IT was coming. We called IT again and to be fair someone was there in about 10 minutes. They went through what I had done, determined that the machine wasn’t working, called Operations, took my mobile number, said they would look into it and went away. I had a coffee.

In about 20 minutes they rang back and said they had resolved the app-loader problem. I went back to the room, fired up the machine, loaded Firefox and plugged in the camera/microphone. Now the machine refused to recognise this device and told me I didn’t have the necessary privileges to install hardware. I gave up. got out my MacBook Pro, and plugged in the peripherals, including the room audio-out mini-jack.

I loaded the VLE, started the data projector and ran the Classroom set-up wizard: Java check, certificate check, whiteboard check; no audio. I unplugged the jack. The laptop speakers were fine. The Wimba classroom was working perfectly, video and all. I made sure the volume controls were all turned up. Still no room audio. I turned on the podium PC again. Found a random MP3 and played it with the default audio device on the machine. No sound. (You need to do this in order that people don’t just say, oh, it’s the Mac.) So all the computers were working but the room speakers were not. The podium is locked down. You can’t get at the cables and see if something has jiggled loose. So I put another call into IT services.

This was about 4:50 on Monday afternoon. I said I needed to use audio in the room on Wednesday at 0900. I was given a service “ticket” number, assured that they would sort the room audio and if they couldn’t would bring a set of external speakers.

At 0900 on Wednesday I got to the room, plugged in the Mac and started everything up. But, no audio on the room speakers and no external speakers. I called IT services quoting my “ticket” number. I was told it “… hadn’t gotten to the top yet”. I said I need audio in 10 minutes. I think I sounded grumpy. In about 5 minutes a colleague came running in with an external speaker. At 0930 we were “live” on the web at the advertised start time for the session.

So what about the “satellite” room? We had asked for a “standard teaching room” with the “usual podium setup”. The room assigned had no kit. We were assured that a laptop and projector would be “delivered” and that the room did have the network. My colleague, who was facilitating in that room arrived. There was no laptop and no projector. He got out his MacBook Pro and plugged it into the ethernet port. There was no network at that point. Fortunately he was in range of wifi. The MacBook Pro worked fine. The VLE and classroom worked fine. He called our administrator who chased up the projector, which arrived at about 0935. As there were only five people in the room the on-board speakers were just about adequate.

Recommendations
All (most?) teaching rooms should be equipped with web cams, microphones and (working) loudspeakers. Obviously there would need to be a phased upgrade plan. There should be some (most?) teaching rooms, which also have cameras to capture the wider room and cameras to follow a lecturer who prefers to wander rather than stay at the podium. Room mics are needed to pick up questions from the floor.

Without such an upgrade, I suggest, the value of our investment in the Collaborate suite might not be fully realised.

Posted via email from George’s posterous

Posted in Educational Development, Learning Technology, PCTHE, Technical platform | 1 Comment »

Back to the simple e-portfolio

Posted by george on August 23rd, 2011

Further to my comment in an e-portfolio CoP discussion on Cloudworks (http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/5020 7 April 2011), a colleague raised a question about whether presentation tools can be an aid to reflection. This, led her to wonder about the distinction between reflection and presentation when developing e-portfolio practices. Is there that much of a distinction between reflection and presention?
Maybe there is something like a reflective presentation: i.e. you present to yourself. For this, nothing fancy is needed. MSWord will do fine: keeping a diary. However, as Gordon Joyes suggested in a subsequent comment, the PLE approach does require a fair level of digital literacy.

If I was starting off as a student I think the 2 things I would want to be told about are

  1. bookmarking tools (Delicious, Bibsonomy…); and
  2. reference managers (EndNote, Zotero…).

Although, Alan Cann has written about the challenges of using such tools in undergraduate
teaching (e.g. http://scienceoftheinvisible.blogspot.com/2010/03/begin-beyond.html).

For the more visually inclined a photo sharing site would also be important (Flickr, Picasa…); maybe video (Vimeo, YouTube…).

On top of that all you need is a word processor to pull selected bits together. Master the WP and move on to a blog or wiki (WordPress, PBWorks…). Blackboard? Less said the better, though some people do like that it is a walled garden.

Posted via email from George’s posterous

Posted in Educational Development, Learning Technology, PCTHE, Technical platform | No Comments »

OECD asserts the purpose of higher education is to serve labour market demands

Posted by george on August 22nd, 2011

Higher education institutions are expected to provide education and training relevant to labour market demands, conduct research activities that will build a knowledge-based economy, as well as contribute to social cohesion, regional development and global well-being. They must also strive constantly to fulfil their multiple missions, improve the quality of the education provided, increase their efficiency and demonstrate their contribution to society.

This in a nutshell defines UK HE policy. Ars gratia artis? I don’t think so. But, wasn’t that always a bourgeois luxury? Can we understand “social cohesion, regional development and global well being” through a myriad of local perspectives? Is this only a neoliberal, free-trade, carpetbagging vision? To whom in society must universities “demonstrate their contribution”?

Posted via email from George’s posterous

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Social networks starting to bubble on my horizon again

Posted by george on June 16th, 2011

Just to apologise if I do not do too much connecting through Mandeley (http://www.mendeley.com/). I am wedded to Zotero (http://www.zotero.org/) for citation management and Bibsonomy (http://www.bibsonomy.org/) for folksonomic tagging and bookmarking. academia.edu (http://www.academia.edu/) is starting to bubble a bit with social networking activity. And, of course Twitter. I wonder if Tweetdeck can read the Mendeley newsfeed?

Posted via email from George’s posterous

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Seeking the source for a three-part typology of authenticity in teaching and learning. Help if you can. Thanks

Posted by george on May 26th, 2011

I am seeking the source of a particular three-part typology of "authenticity".
  1. with respect to learners current and prior knowledge, skill and understanding: authentic to the person now
  2. with respect to the epistemology of the discipline/field: authentic to the accepted canons and methodological protocols of the discipline, laws, theorems, etc
  3. with respect to the practice of professionals in the discipline/field: authentic to the messy reality of practice, which at times confounds authenticity

These ideas are informed by a number of strands. Fullick (2004) refers to three aspects of authenticity: creativity, activity, language. Tatsuki (2006), following Taylor (1994) speaks of language, task and situation. Both these three-part typologies are quite similar to mine and I wonder if I have unconsciously paraphrased or adapted Fullick?

In these cases:

  • "language" aligns with my concept of authenticity 1): to where the learners are now: don't buffalo them with jargon too early, etc
  • "task" (Tatsuki) and "activity" (Fullick) correspond (I think) with my authenticity 2): to the canons of the discipline
  • Fullick's "creativity" corresponds, I think, with my authenticity 3) and may correspond with Tatsuki's "situation"

Kreber et al (2007) did a thorough lit review of authenticity, but do not reproduce this three-part structure. They cite another 3-part approach to authenticity in teaching where:

The three pedagogical principles … are (a) learners are validated as "knowers," (b) learning is situated within their experience, and (c) learning itself is conceptualized as mutually constructing knowledge. (Taylor 1991)

 
This, for me, all addresses authenticity 1.

Taylor (1991, cited in Kreber et al 2007) has another three-part conceptualisation:

(i) creation and construction as well as discovery, (ii) originality, and frequently (iii) opposition to the rules of society and even potentially to what we recognize as morality.

This all seems to align with my authenticity 3.

Can anyone shed light on this for me?

Thank you

References

Fullick, Patrick Leslie. 2004. Knowledge Building among School
Students Working in a Networked Computer Supported Learning
Environment. University of Southampton, Faculty of Law, Arts and
Social Sciences, School of Education.

Kreber, Carolin, Monika Klampfleitner, Velda McCune, Sian Bayne, and
Miesbeth Knottenbelt. 2007. “What do you mean by ‘authentic’? A
comparative review of the literature on conceptions of authenticity in
teaching.” Adult Education Quarterly 58 (1) (November): 22-43.
doi:Article. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=27329878&site=ehost-live.

Tatsuki, Donna. 2006. What is authenticity? In Authentic
communication: Proceedings, 1-15. Shizuoka, Japan: Tokai University
College of Marine Science.
http://jalt.org/pansig/2006/HTML/Tatsuki.htm.

Taylor, C. 1991. The ethics of authenticity Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Taylor, D. 1994. Inauthentic authenticity or authentic inauthenticity? TESL-EJ, 1 (2) A-1

Posted via email from George’s posterous

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Draft preprint for discussion. “What do you do with your community IT centre?” First article from PhD

Posted by george on May 11th, 2011

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Evaluation: a reflection in the moment #pcthe

Posted by george on May 6th, 2011

It is the season of evaluations in universities and other institutions of the post-compulsory and lifelong learning sector.Our evaluation strategy has necessarily been informed in the literature of evaluation (Hounsell 2009) and Brookfield’s (1995) “spectacles”:

  • (auto) biography
  • learners
  • colleagues
  • the literature, theory

Dyke (2006) observes we need to do more of this. Evaluation informed by interdisciplinary social science in the critical theoretical tradition. Evaluation has to address:

  • Directions
  • Schedules
  • Impacts

Directions

  • Opportunistic

By all means have a plan, but every moment is an opportunity for reflection. Reflect in practice on the things that can be managed or which are placed in our way to be dealt with: teaching space, time, curriculum. It is best to do so mindfully.

Every programme event or intervention is an opportunity for evaluation.

  • Purposive

Evaluation is, itself, directed towards aims, These may or may not be aligned with the aims of whatever the subject of the evaluation is. Evaluators have perspectives. They should reflect on these and be committed to openness and transparency about them. Openness, itself needs to be bounded, but the boundaries want to be quite permeable (1000 mile question). Boundaries may be necessary for creative turbulence layers. Bringing together diverse peoples to learn from one-another. How does the enterprise address equality and diversity issues? Progress, development and hierarchy may be necessary to create movement. Communities may embrace, among others: discipline, profession, locale, domestic, global. Professional practitioners in graduate occupations and/or disciplines must be current with tools and practices, methods and methodologies, grounded in knowledge, history, language, epistemology.

  • Objective oriented

Structure is provided by course intended learning outcomes or objectives. The lectures, workshops, activities and assessment strive for alignment as well as dynamic instability and points of harmony.

Schedules

  • semi-systematic and structured

Alongside an opportunistic outlook, having tools to hand helps. Start with course aims and outcomes. Use a questionnaire several times over; even if not perfect, comparisons are where the discoveries are made.

  • continuous

Ongoing, no end: hasta la lucha continua. But, there may be many review points, annual planning cycles: major and minor, etc

  • epicyclic

Course cycles, professional cycles, conference cycles, university bureaucratic cycles all run to different periods. Activity is mixed and multi-modal. Evaluation needs to be multi-purposed and reusable.

Impacts

  • emergent

Because of all the above, impacts are going to be emergent as well as planned. An evaluator would expect to see new structures emerge and to see mechanisms in place to encourage this: enquiry-based learning, action learning, learner-led curricula, user-centred design.

  • progressive

Shares in the myth of modernism and the enlightenment, that there is progress and that this is modelled and trained through a ranked education system with levels of attainment, informed by human development psychology. Facilitates learner progression as defined in the plan.

  • developmental

Do differently and better, not necessarily more (Daly 2008). Fail. Fail again, better (Beckett cited in Žižek 2009).

References
Brookfield, Stephen D. 1995. Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publlishers.
Dyke, Martin. 2006. “The role of the ‘Other’ in reflection, knowledge formation and action in a late modernity.” International Journal of Lifelong Education 25 (2): 105-123.
Hounsell, Dai. 2009. Evaluating courses and teaching. In A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Enhancing Academic Practice, ed. Heather Fry, Steve Kettridge, and Stephanie Marshall, 198-211. 3rd ed. Routledge.
Daly, Herman. 2008. Towards a steady-state economy. In The oil drum, April 24. Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »