Colston Symposium 2004

Group C

We ended up with discussion about summative assessment, less about formative (and heard more examples of auto marking, partially-auto).  Could you use IRC as part of formative assessment, getting them to chat?

The IRC experience in Colston: it's difficult to keep an eye on the IRC and blog. Having a monitor at the front might be helpful.  Maybe we don't have the model right, it's subversive, no formal checkpoint, no formal consideration.  It should be better integrated into the session - especially true for undergraduate lectures! - and have pauses, series of checkpoints, time for reflection and discussion face-to-face and then carry on.

We then had a discussion about whether using technology is the only way to be interactive in a lecture?  Q&A.  Example stats course, 80 students, can see on their faces whether they're getting it.  Requires significant level of input from the lecturer.

But as far as today's sessions have gone, we had various accounts of positive experiences of using the IRC, the weblog and particularly using the wireless network - downloading pdf, downloading presentations, shared with other people (though not via IRC), sharing the learning. 

Group C

Discussion ranged around, but not directed towards, any particular question to start with.  We considered Gilly's model and the issue of cost: the feeling is that cost differentials are at least the same (as developing old technologies) but probably considerably more.  This isn't a cheap option.  Actually costs are probably higher - because not looking at replacing, looking at augmenting.

Thinking about what was on / in the tin, it seems we're still asking the same question: what's most appropriate [technology] for what?

Students are time-pressured (not just location-pressured in distance learning context).  Blended learning gives choice, flexibility for students
Similarly useful for activity they can't do, don't have the resource to do any other way.  eg genetics wetlab; geography virtual field trips; classics virtual fieldtrips.

Takes us back to an earlier discussion (this morning) and the need to redefine what the lecturer/lecture is for.  Example from comp sci, programming.  Notes are online.  Why come to lecture?  Free up programming time.  Lectures can offer a rhythm / milestones effect. Lectures more and more are about motivation, enthusiasm, what David May in the panel session calls 'performance'.

eLearning used as a backdoor method to offering training to academics in pedagogy ... back to appropriateness - get the ed. objectives/learning experience first, then think IF need any technology

Group C

Vinnie joined our group, so we had a direct route into this question, although the discussion involved various group members.

Vinnie's question was "What might be the most useful axes of adaptivity for courses with which you are involved?"

that is, what elements of subject content can be adapted?

Some testing of students' prior knowledge (pre-test) of course content is just one element and might not / should not be the only or most dominant element.

Perhaps it's more to do with students' confidence than competence in an area?
Some self-rating of competence can be helpful.

One of the important axes is mode of communication: to have sufficient flexibility in the system to deliver in different ways, different modes of communication (query: students' learning styles - do we 'believe' in the theory of learning styles | in practice)?

The successful outcomes of the course and satisfaction levels may be as much derived from students' ownership/responsibility for the course and having choices within parameters - maybe this contributes more to success of the course than having material that suits a student's particular learning style?

We were reminded that the tutor's role is still important: there's a need to design the programme, not just do some kind of automated adaptive content retrieval

Appropriateness in this is combination of content/delivery package (my notes tail off at this point ... maybe someone else in the group can comment).

Group 2F

We discussed three rough areas

Technology

It would be good if there was better and more well-fitted technology suitable for the purpose for use. The current process for communicating requirements for educational software developers is very bad; resulting in tools that are inappropriate for teaching practice and difficult to connect together - some support is completely missing. We do however expect the tools to improve in the future as technology develops. This will require a better negotatied process of requirements gathering rather than just delivering what one party asks with "I want".

Changing Roles

There was a realisation of an expectation gap in what students expect, or what they were promised and what the teaching they received. This is usually due to uneven application of the technology, or failure of some educators to apply it at all. There is seems to be a role gap - it is not clear where the responsible parties are for some of this support - it tends to fall between libraries, support services, technology services and department staff.

Adaptive course design

This group was rather skeptical about the application here - thinking it might be expensive in time and bandwidth. It seems to be more appropriate for factual based materials than other subjects. It was not compelling that there was a strong need for this.

Group 2H

 Adaptive Learning

Adaptivity should not affect assessment. Learning objectives should be the same. In the real world there’s less chance for adaptive assessment.

Should this depend on the type of content? Our culture of education is assessment driven. It is an area we need to look at. Adaptivity is viewed as something essential. Students are exam-centred. The end point (of learning) is not necessarily the same for each student. Adaptive learning could be more motivating.

What about course development?

You should consider the different type of learners you have, whereas in the traditional you don’t think about that. Teacher adapt all the time. There is not just ONE approach. There are differences in an e-learning vs. a classroom context. Traditionally you use off the shelf materials. There is a pre-determined sequence. There are some products that allow different paths of learning but it is not genuinely adaptive.

In a particular blended approach, there is content delivery and there are discussion threads. In that case, we analyse students learning styles, as an exercise. It is not incorporated to our methodology fully (Masters degree). In another approach, we direct student in a more open fashion. The main aim is to develop collaboration. It’s personal at the group level. Groups will make recommendations at the end. It’s about bringing knowledge into practice.

This might be a rewarding approach. There are scalability issues though. In the school context you don’t have the option to move into a totally online fashion. In higher education there is. Adaptive would work ideally in a 1 to 1 fashion. The real world is 30 to 1.

Group A

Adaptive learning

Adaptive learning of connect is relatively straightforward, but adaptive learning styles then much more difficult. Students may adapt to the lowest denominator, stay on what they are most comfortable with, unless driven by assessment..

Points discussed

Many different types of adaptive learning. How can you link in to assessment?

How does it transfer to different age groups, with different histories. What’s it application to primary school (5-11 age group), secondary, or HE? Especially, given the assessment driven approach to education.

The group wondered about Diana’s presentation – the role of the conversational model to a system that has developed to focus on the delivery of set targets.

Key for scaleability – adaption needs scale, can the technology deliver in a manageable workload for the teacher.

The success of adaptive learning is the same as e-learning, it’s pedagogical design and appropriate screen design for the audience/task.

Question from group ?

How does adapative learning account for learning styles, and how can it be delivered in 4 days

Will adaptive learning provide a rich learning environment or does it increase isolation as you work on your own? What is the role of the tutor and peers, and how can technology deliver this tutor/peer needs.

How does adapative learning and learning to learn fir in with the assignment driven UK education system?

Group G

Stand-in note taker: Claire Furlonger. Factilitator: Simon Price.

Evaluation of the LRC onscreen during the afternoon sessions?

How did people feel having it there?

Initially humorous comments – did develop a more structured approach towards the end. Not actually obvious how it should be used and not intuitive.

Some of group felt it was a waste of time and certainly not of value for undergraduates.

Summarising the talk – who was this for? Some wondered if there were people outside who were reading it. This was the case at the Web conference – but there it was to inform an external audience.

Some web addresses marked up – but could have been done by speaker.

Discussion relating to Gilly Salmon’s presentation. The analogies were not completely understood. Some felt that she thought we had more understanding than we did!

Are we using the right technologies for the right purposes?

We need to bring our own understandings and knowledge to make full use of them.

Questions were found a bit off the wall!!

Vince’s questions

Felt to be very useful to have ability to adapt to students with differing needs and differing previous knowledge and learning histories.

Intelligent tutoring systems from past years which try to establish how people are different and respond to meet individual needs.

Challenges in assessing outcomes of adaptive courses.

Example given of bank of questions. Students are given a random sample of questions for assessment  purposes. Found that it needed to be personalised for courses as well as students.

Example given of  OU software in which test results determined the additional content that would be offered to individual students. Those who didn’t do as well got the full additional content and had loads more work presented to them. Some of those who got more questions right found they had no opportunity to go further in areas in which they were not confident (even if they had got the question correct). They found students preferred to choose their own pathways and areas for further study.

Felt that Vince’s students were re-personalising time after time not for formal learning reasons but possibly because they wanted to find out how the software worked – problem solving!!

If the process is automated where is the role for the teacher? Isn’t that what teachers are so good at – negotiating pathways with students?

Are those who are not as familiar with new technology being disadvantaged? Felt that if the software was well designed and constructed this could be overcome.

Reading onscreen – everyone prints out. Evidence that we engage more with text on paper as we can mark it etc. Speed of reading slows down when reading onscreen and we find it difficult to focus as due to refresh our eyes constantly flick around the page.

The questions are found to be too general – different contexts require very different solutions. Most of the information is so general – a lot more needs to be done to relate it to many different individual contexts.

Question for panel

We have bought the tin – how do we use it and adapt it for our individual needs? How do we enable academics/teachers to use the technology in different contexts eg: undergraduates as opposed to postgraduates; large teaching groups as opposed to small teaching groups; different subject disciplines?

Session 2 - Group D

Questions for the Panel Session – Group 2D: (Facilitator Neil Jacobs)

If the twin goals are to improve student learning and to revalorise (restore value to) teaching, by making both more like research – what practical steps can be taken to achieve either or both of those goals?

What is e-Learning and what mix of technologies and in what contexts (audience, course, etc.) should they be used? And what skills sets do you need to implement them?

What if the tools aren’t there to do what you want to do? The market (products available) haven’t caught up how is this identified

How do you use the transformational qualities of the technologies, when the every day experience of the teacher is in managing large throughput of learners?

Group E: 16:10

• Student expect more from BB and other VLEs. Tutors perhaps have lower expectations e.g. Discussion boards are required by students but tutors don’t know how best to use them. Motivation to use Discussion boards – there needs to be a reason for these to be used.
• In introducing VLE/eLearning - need a professional development programme for teaching staff and time to deliver the curriculum that the institute wants to put in place in 5 years?
• One idea - small centres of best practice in early adoption and use of VLE.  Mechanisms of feedback to pass on success and failures.
• Did you buy the right tin – will your VLE fit with your existing systems and/or technical policies?
• Would all like the means to more easily swap out a poor system or have an adaptive system that responds to customer demands - Open source/open architecture may be one way forward.
• Bad workman blaming their tools – feeling threatened, things are going wrong then you will blame the software. You need a collaborative planned approach to the introduction of a VLE.
• Course development will change if adaptive technologies are introduced, as tutor might have to surrender ownership of the courses.
• Adaptive technologies - There will be the opportunity to lesson to what students will be saying, to “eaves drop on coffee-bar conversations”.