ASTRINGENTS.pdf Pharmacognosy chapter 5 diploma in Pharmacy
Teaching Approaches Menu Workshop - SEDA conference 2014
1. A ‘menu’ of teaching approaches to transform
engagement with technology-enhanced learning
Stuart Hepplestone, Senior Lecturer in Technology Enhanced Learning
Dr. Ian Glover, Senior Lecturer in Technology Enhanced Learning
Workshop at the 19th Annual SEDA Conference, 13-14 November 2014
2. Agenda
Agenda
14:00-14:05 Workshop opening: Welcome, introduction to the
workshop and agenda
14:05-14:25 Presentation: Background and approach to the
project
14:25-14:40 Activity 1: A look at the project resources
14:40-15:15 Activity 2: Sample scenarios
15:15- 15:20 Presentation: Dissemination and engagement
15:20 Workshop closing: Audience questions and final
comments
3. About this workshop
• Opportunity to engage with the
‘Teaching Approaches Menu’ and
associated resources to assist academic
staff in effective use of these approaches
and the technologies that support them
• By the end, delegates will:
• understand how and why SHU has
taken a pedagogy-first approach to
TEL
• have an awareness of the variety of
teaching approaches in use at SHU
• consider refining the resources for
their own contexts and frameworks
4. Sheffield Hallam University and TEL
• 4 faculties; 700+ courses
• 34,000+ students; 2,100+ academic staff
• Blackboard Learn and Blackboard Collaborate are key institutional tools
• Many other online and physical technologies available
5. Context
• Teaching often uses safe, familiar
methods
• SHU has the technology, and
Minimum Expectations for e-learning,
but usage can be low
• Desire to transform student
experience through:
More active and engaging learning
More varied teaching approaches
Better integration of technology
• National Changing the Learning
Landscape (CLL) initiative provides an
opportunity for change
6. About the project
• Our project is aim to:
raise awareness of the role that technology can play in enabling innovative and
engaging approaches to teaching
• Our objective is to:
develop a resource that will assist colleagues in identifying different teaching
approaches and the technologies that can support and facilitate these strategies
7. Project approach
• SHU-based – covers practice at SHU
• Grassroots – all academics invited to
take part
• Constant refinement – updated from
feedback
• Project steering group drawn from
across SHU, including:
Students’ Union
Academics
Central and faculty TEL support staff
8. Project development
• Survey Workshops Draft ‘menu’ and materials/case studies
• Follow-up staff and student workshops to generate further information and
refinements
9. Activity 1 (15 mins):
A look at the resources
1. Key resources:
The ‘Menu’
Worksheet to develop action plan
Workshop activities
2. Additional resources:
Case studies
‘Top Trumps’
3. Share your feedback with the room
10. Activity 2 (35 mins):
Scenarios
On your table is a description of a typical
teaching issue:
1. As a group, discuss the issue and use the
resources on the table to select a
teaching approach to address it
2. Identify some technologies that could
support the selected approach in
addressing the issue
3. Share your ideas with the room
11. Internal dissemination
• Workshops:
Open to all
Tailored for specific groups
• Training faculty TEL staff
• ‘Restructuring’ TEL activity
• Promotion through:
Blogs
Mail-outs
Targeting influencers
Presentations to course/subject teams
SHU-wide and faculty conferences
12. Lessons learned
• Senior support vital to get the ‘non-innovators’ involved
• Local focus helps people see value in project
• Avoid jargon to help get, and keep, people engaged
13. Next steps
• Expand current ‘Menu’
• Support faculty staff in running
workshops
• Workshop on PGCert
• Workshops for other institutions
• Follow-on project – ‘APPETITE’
14. Contact
Stuart Hepplestone: s.j.hepplestone@shu.ac.uk
Dr. Ian Glover: i.glover@shu.ac.uk
Blog: blogs.shu.ac.uk/shutel
Editor's Notes
Want to shift from a primarily lecturer focused model to active and student focused.
SHU results generally strong, but if not improving then falling back relatively
Desire to build employability / soft skills as part of all courses, typical lectures and group tutorials limits this.
Lots of factors contribute to continued reliance on familiar approaches:
Don't know what else is possible - sharing practice seems limited
Don't have time to make changes
Don't have confidence to try out new things (which may not work)
"It was good enough for me, so it it's good enough for them"
Physical spaces and timetabling restrict creativity
Students expect lectures at university
Large range of technology is available but generally underused:
Blackboard VLE often just a file repository - minimum expectations of elearning (2013) helped improve this, some faculties developed an expanded version.
Blackboard Collaborate still 'under the radar' despite people asking for this type of product
Clickers used in a few areas
Interest developing in Google Apps, but few people using them
PebblePad in a couple of areas for several years, recently made available to all
MyKnowledgeMap, Augmented Reality, mobile here and there. (Mobile usually not making full use of capabilities, just a more convenient laptop)
External services - social media, TedEd, video, non-powerpoint presentation tools, etc. - used by some.
Pockets of outstanding practice - generally the same people or subject groups, though.
Wanted to draw out the varied and highly effective practice happening across the institution and use this as the basis of a project to encourage staff to think about their current teaching and tech. use, identify changes and put them into practice.
All staff encouraged to take part at every stage - calls for participation through blog, word of mouth, faculty contacts, email, etc.
Involvement by key stakeholders in directing project, including students both through SU and directly (Holly and Nick & James).
Survey of current practice ~ 40 respondents. 3 Qs: What do you currently do, what works well, what not so well? No specific technology focus but encouraged to share anyway
Information collated by me and Stuart, supplemented by what we were already aware of and some things that lecturers had expressed a desire in.
'Framework' drafted and taken to staff workshops > 100 participants (including many who don't usually engage with us)
'Framework' renamed to 'menu' - less formal and procedural sounding. Idea to encourage people to view the resource as something that you use to find something that you would like.
Supporting materials developed - case studies, 'teaching nuggets', workshop activities, blog posts,etc.
Another round of workshops (initially aimed at staff, but SU ran own version for students too after they saw the value of ours) to verify that the materials were appropriate and useful. Also helped identify other aspects that could be changed or added.
Current dissemination approaches
'Restructuring' - Staff at workshops have particularly found the introduction of this common language useful and we are trying to ensure that our work fits with that language. tying our own activity with the approaches on the menu, e.g. roundtables on Reflection and PBL as well as specific technologies, case studies to show how tools can be used with specific approaches, etc.
Importance of process needs to be made clear by senior faculty and institutional staff - helps get time during away days, inclusion in course design / revalidation process, time out for staff to attend workshops, etc.
That people might know some names on the menu can't be underestimated, makes it seem acheivable (they are working in the same or very similar environment with many of the same challenges) and can be another point of contact. Also encourages staff to contribute as it will help raise their own profile. Shows that we aren't demanding a complete overhaul of practice.
We know (most!) of the technical and pedagogical jargon, but it puts lots of staff off - they don't want to learn a whole new, complicated vocabulary to get involved. Simplification helped staff engage and allowed us to get students involved too. Stripped the language back to the basics, e.g. don't use 'Pedagogy' in any of the materials.
'Menu' and materials will continue to evolve - though the paper version is getting unwieldy. e.g. may pull "Assessment Types' Column into another similar document which will allow further resources, case studies, tutorials, etc. on specific types with references from the CLL menu.
Centre eventually hope to fade out of the workshops and allow the faculty staff to organise and run their own workshops - we'll be on hand to provide additional support and continue developing the resources.
2014 project - target one group (subject team, programme, etc.) in each of the 4 faculties - APProaches to Engaging Teaching using Innovative TEchnology (APPETITE)