My initial exposure to teaching in the higher education context has been very traditional in terms of face-to-face large (over 100 students) lectures with limited student interaction. My first introduction to learning technologies in the form of clickers (classroom response systems) opened my eyes to new possibilities and I started to explore how I can use these devices to create more interactive lectures, in order to get students more engaged in the learning process. But it was only when I started teaching EDP and I had the privilege to see how prof Ed Jacobs completely changed the way he interacts with students and approach lectures (without technology), that I started to break out of the mould of the traditional lecture setup. As I started teaching under his guidance, I tried to copy his approach and I thoroughly enjoyed the interactiveness and the fact that it put the students at the centre of the class, instead of the lecturer. Yet, I learned that I have to find my own approach. One that suits my teaching philosophy as well as my personality.

Being the centre of attention has (and still is) one of the biggest challenges of teaching a large class, to me. I am not a performer, and I am not a confident speaker/orator. I prefer moving between the students (as I did when I was an undergraduate demonstrator) and interacting with smaller groups. This is one of the reasons I took to blended learning and the incorporation of a LMS so enthusiastically. It allows me to design my module in such a way that I can engage with smaller groups of students and our face-to-face sessions can be more interactive, since the majority of traditional content delivery can take place online. Not only has this flipped approach gained a lot of popularity in the Sciences and there are increasing evidence to support its effectiveness in terms of supporting student-learning (Lundin et al., 2018), it is also more satisfying for me personally, as I believe the interactive engagement during contact sessions is a much more effective use of my skills.

Another aspect of teaching and learning where I have learned a lot and grown a lot, especially over the last 4-5 years, is assessment. Here I need to give credit to the TL HUB, Prof Ingrid Rewitzky and Dr Hanelie Adendorff for numerous long and insightful discussions on this topic. My views on assessment has changed many times over the last few years, and I guess it will change some more in the coming years, as the context of higher education keeps on changing. One thing that I’ve come to understand is that as with teaching philosophies and approaches, assessment approaches also need to be adaptable. It also needs to change with the context to ensure that it keeps on achieving its purpose. Education in general has been very slow to make these changes and adaptations, often to the detriment of the students. I believe that the assessment approach implemented in Science in Context has been a step forward in terms of exploring new possibilities and that it has been to the advantage of the students. I definitely still have a lot to learn, which is also why this is one of the aspects that features often in my research.

Over the last 8-9 years I have been privileged enough to teach EDP students, mainstream first-year students, science tutors and demonstrators, as well as present workshops to new and established academics. Especially during the last few years, with my involvement in the development of online professional development workshops for lecturers, and the development and facilitation of the learning facilitation training (LFT) short course for science tutors I have become aware of the advantages and shortcomings of these different teaching contexts (face-to-face, blended and online) and how much I still have to learn in terms of how to navigate these contexts effectively. The initial evaluation of the LFT that I conducted in collaboration with Dr Hanelie Adendorff has given us much insight into this and has led to a follow-on project on game-based learning, which is currently in the pipeline. These insights also spilled over into my own first year course in terms of how I communicate with students and how we as a teaching team decide which content is more suited to the face-to-face contact sessions and which is more suited to self-paced online delivery. It has made me aware of how the content can dictate the teaching approach and that one size does definitely not fit all.

Finally, there are two factors that has had the most impact on my development as teacher, researcher and teaching scholar. First and foremost is the guidance and mentorship of the Science Faculty Teaching and Learning hub’s other core members, prof Ingrid Rewitzky and Dr Hanelie Adendorff. Their experience, their guidance and the opportunities they gave me provided the space in which I could grow.

Secondly, the collaboration with colleagues from my own faculty, other faculties as well as the Center for Teaching and learning and the Center for Learning Technologies gave me the support and opportunities necessary to attempt and implement many of my research as well as teaching ideas. Without those opportunities I would not be in the position where I could put theory into practice. And I believe that theory without practice is a missed opportunity.

Going forward I wish to expand my collaborations wider than this institution and get involved in a network in the broader higher education sector in South Africa. The LCT community in South Africa is already starting to open up such doors. I’m also looking forward to contributing further to the hybrid learning project at Stellenbosch University where I believe my experience will be of value, but where I also believe I will have the opportunity to learn from colleagues and have new opportunities to contribute to the development of our students as well-rounded individuals that can make a valuable contribution to society.

References:

Lundin, M., Bergviken Rensfeldt, A., Hillman, T., Lantz-Andersson, A., Peterson, L. (2018) Higher education dominance and siloed knowledge: a systematic review of flipped classroom research. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1).