I studied BSc Chemistry and continued up to my PhD after which I became one of the first two postdoctoral students in science education in this same faculty. During this time (2012-2013), I was introduced to science education research and I specifically focused on the use of learning technologies in teaching. In collaboration with the other post-doctoral student, Dr Liesl Retief we also took responsibility for the first-year chemistry practicals, and the management of the demonstrators.

In 2016 the chemistry practicals was updated again (fortunately with much improved video recordings), but the core of the changes we implemented are still in practice. The lecturers created videos of their own research labs to relate to the experiments that the first-year students do during practical sessions, and collaboration and reflection are still part of the practical experience. As blended learning coordinator I was fortunate enough to play some part in the update, although in another capacity, when I trained the lecturers on the recording of videos and assisted them with the incorporation of the material into SUNLearn.

After my two-year postdoctoral journey, I was appointed in two half-day positions. I became the first blended learning coordinator (BLC, still named advisor at that time) in the faculty and I was appointed as temporary lecturer for one of the three groups in Chemistry 176. In terms of curriculum development, the highlight during the two years I taught this module, was the Pet Ionic Compound (PIC) project that was funded by FINLO. Prof Ed Jacobs, who was the module coordinator shared his idea of assigning one chemical compound to each of the students, for the duration of the year and then as they progress through the year students test and apply the new chemistry concepts to this compound in order to build a portfolio of their compound which they then present to the class at the end of the year. I was very excited about the potential of the project for fostering autonomy and relatedness and thus I took on the challenge. The final design and implementation of the project again spoke to various aspects of self-determination theory. Students were given the chance to choose the PIC they wanted to work with for the year and they were given the freedom to incorporate additional traits of their PIC into their project. These aspects spoke to the need for autonomy. To some extent the competition aspect spoke to the need for competence. And the collaboration of members in a subgroup to compile a final report and present it together spoke to the need for relatedness. The additional recognition through the certificates signed and handed over by the chair of the AlchemUS student society was a further attempt to support relatedness, as it invited these EDP students into the department, and acknowledged them as legitimate members of this environment (Addendum J: Photos of student presentation and certificate ceremony). Here I need to give recognition to Prof Jacobs who encouraged me to have the brag sessions and get AlchemUS involved. He taught me to become more aware of opportunities that can create autonomy-supportive behaviour and that can build relationships and support the need for relatedness.

After my contract as EDP lecturer came to an end, I was appointed on a full time contract as BLC in the Faculty of Science where I became one of the core members of our Teaching and Learning HUB along with the vice-dean Teaching and Learning, Prof Ingrid Rewitzky and the CTL advisor for the faculty, Dr Hanelie Adendorff. In this role I was involved with development and facilitation of an online training short course for science tutors. This course follows the same philosophy, that teaching is about learning facilitation and one of the core chapters in the first module is about SDT and the role of self-motivation in learning.

Up to date we have had 85 students complete this course which has now been registered as an official short course at the university and we have received very positive feedback from participants (Addendum K: Feedback from two recent participants).

Other faculties, including Law, Medicine and Health Sciences, Arts and Social sciences as well as Military Sciences has since asked permission to use aspects of our curriculum for development of their own training courses (Addendum L: Emails from colleagues). As a result of the increased interest in tutor training and the recognition for the need and value of such courses the university created a tutor training task team that is headed by Dr Gert Young from the Centre for Teaching and Learning to look into formalising tutor training at Stellenbosch University.

“Chemistry graduates should have been supported by their undergraduate studies in developing critical thinking as much as history graduates; in developing teamwork skills as much as business graduates; and in developing their creativity as much as engineering graduates. Otherwise we disadvantage our chemistry graduates, and the organisations that will employ them”. -Taber, 2016

In 2017 I was tasked with the design of a new first-year module for all BSc students. The aim of the module was to embed the development of scientific writing skills and basic computer skills in the context of an inquiry-based interdisciplinary science project (Addendum C: SIC178 module framework). At first, I felt completely overwhelmed. Yes, I did a project with the EDP students and yes, I have collaborated with the language centre before, but EDP was about 150 students divided into small classes. The first-year cohort was over 800 students.

During 2016 Prof Karl Maton for the University of Sydney also visited SU and presented a talked titled “Bringing It All Back Home – The art of building knowledge from diverse sources” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrdCPvrcWNk&t=184s) where he introduced legitimation code theory (LCT) and specifically the Autonomy dimension. In this talk Maton argues that when we use the Autonomy dimension from LCT to design our teaching, we modulate to students how to bring together knowledge from diverse backgrounds.

Thus, I selected to use the Autonomy dimension as a framework for the design of the Science in Context 178 curriculum, which had to bring together two previously separately existing modules namely Scientific Communication skills 172 and Computer Skills 171. Furthermore, I needed to incorporate aspects covered in the University Practice 176 module, offered to EDP students, as the faculty also realised the need for first-year students to also receive guidance on time management, group work skills, study methods etc. (Addendum N: SoTL presentation on the rationale behind the design of SIC178)

This was an extremely rewarding process through which I not only had the chance to become more familiar with the theories and frameworks, but the collaboration between colleagues from different academic backgrounds was an enriching experienced and greatly improved the relationships and communication between the Faculty of Science and the Language Center (Addendum O: Testimonial from Fiona Stanford regarding our collaboration).

Along with using the Carpe Diem process and the Autonomy dimension from LCT as framework, the group projects in this module was specifically designed to support student self-motivation by addressing the three needs of self-determination (Addendum P: Project brief). The project brief places a lot of emphasis on the choice and freedom students have with regards to their project topic. Firstly, they can select out of a large range of very diverse topics and secondly, they are free to focus on any aspects related to that topic, which they find interesting. They are also allowed to decide within their group what the language is they are doing the project in. Since the course is offered in English and Afrikaans (parallel medium) and some of the project groups have students from both language preferences, they can do the project in one or a combination of the two languages.

For practical purposes students are assigned to project groups, based on the topics they’ve selected. However, as these groups bring together people with a similar interest, this supports the need for relatedness. Furthermore, each topic is assigned to a mentor (most of the mentors are researchers in the faculty with a keen interest in the topic) and students can meet with these mentors throughout the 2 terms they work on the project, to discuss their progress and receive guidance. This further supports the need for relatedness and over the years I have received very positive feedback from mentors who were involved with these projects (Addendum Q: Feedback from one of the mentors regarding the group projects). One of our biggest partners in this process has been the Antarctic Legacy of South Africa (ALSA). Ms Ria Olivier, principal investigator for ALSA who mentors those groups that select projects related to Antarctica research, recently gave a presentation on their involvement in Science on Context 178 at the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research’s (SCAR) online conference. In 2018 we were fortunate enough to even take a group of students for a tour on the SA Agulhas II (Addendum R: Photos of ALSA’s involvement).

In terms of competence I believe that the lecture sessions on group work that is facilitated by myself and Dr Hanlie Adendorff does a lot to make students aware of their strengths in terms of group work and helps each individual see the role they have to play and then commit to it through the planning activity that they submit early on in this process (Addendum S: Template of planning activity).

References:

Maton, K. (2016) Bringing It All Back Home – The art of building knowledge from diverse sources. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrdCPvrcWNk&t=184s. (Accessed: 9 September 2020).

Salmon, G. https://www.gillysalmon.com/carpe-diem.html (Accessed: 9 September 2020).