In this post I want to reflect on a conversation I had with Catherine after the talk about how she and her team were able to make such radical changes to the course design across such a range of disciplines and academic staff. Catherine proposed two fundamental factors:
1. Influential Friends
As a learning technologist I have experience and knowledge of course redesign, but suggesting to a lecturer that they reduce their lecture time by two thirds is always going to be met with alarm. What I need is credibility for the change - and Catherine thinks having an influential friend (the Head of Learning and Teaching, a Dean or the VC for example) makes all the difference. Permission and support from this influential friend will give the academic reassurance that enables you to run a pilot, and from the pilot you can build an evidence-base that the suggested changes make a demonstrable difference. After that (assuming you do get good evidence of improved grades/retention etc) no-one will object.
2. Make it Easy
This is a harder one for me to apply in practice. Catherine argues that you should basically do the work for the academics for the first run of the redesigned course. In one of her examples where 560 psychology students are split into 85 groups of 7, it was the learning technologist who managed the groups. In another example using a PRS system (clickers) in lectures, the learning technologist went to ALL the lectures to set up and help operate the kit. After the first run, the learning technologist then did all the evaluations to get the evidence needed to support the changes. After all that, the academic is on their own - but with the confidence of knowing how it all works. I have concerns about the resource and sustainability of this model, but can't argue that it doesn't make a lot of sense.
NOT - eLearning Champions
It's important that eLearning Champions are most definitely not one of the factors for success. Catherine even goes as far as to suggest they are a hindrance. Everyone knows who the champions are - and that they will try whatever the new things are. But everyone else is a bit tired of them and slightly resentful...they also probably aren't the ones who most need your help for the online redesign.
So my job now is to figure out how this model can work given the resources, experiences and courses at Brighton. And if you're 'influential', watch out, I'll be knocking on your door!
1 comments:
Wholly sensible tips - thanks Katie / Catherine. I use the first two approaches extensively, to great effect - and would add a third:
- context is all important. Make sure that the academic department feels like it owns/is driving the design: the design choices should fit with the subject ethos (or be worked into the subject ethos cleverly). This helps integration with both the academics and with the students themselves, who see the contextual relevance.
Finally, congratulations for being brave enough to question 'Champions'. I've always hated this idea - and in the modern world where academic time for research and teaching is so precious, and institutions are moving towards evidence-based effective provision - 'champions' just don't fit and (in fact) hinder as you state.
Alex.
Post a Comment