Embedded Files
Guidelines
Guidelines
The CMALT Guidelines state that:
"Statements here might relate to areas such as teaching experience, learning design, curriculum development, work-based assessment, the creation and execution of a programme of training and so on."
Experience in teaching, learning & assessment
Experience in teaching, learning & assessment
My background is in teaching language and academic skills in HE contexts. As I described in the Contextual Statement, I have taught in universities in the UK and Asia, and am now based in Learning Enhancement, where I work with academic departments to support students across the University of York in blended and fully online contexts. I hold the Cambridge DELTA (Merit grade), which is a Level 7 teaching qualification covering practical teaching techniques and the theory behind effective assessment and course design. I have also completed the University Teaching MOOC by the University of Hong Kong and the Google Certified Educator Level 1 and Level 2 courses, and in 2019 became a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (FHEA) after completing the York Professional and Academic Development Scheme. I have also been an IELTS examiner, assessing speaking and writing.
evidence:
Influences on my approach
Influences on my approach
When designing blended learning modules and online self-study resources, my practice is influenced by the principles below (click to show details, or see the summary below).
Biggs’ principles of constructive alignment
Biggs’ principles of constructive alignment
A course developed according to Biggs’ principles of constructive alignment (2003) is based around challenging, relevant learning outcomes. Assessment tasks evaluate students’ achievement of the learning objectives (so requires criterion assessment), bearing in mind that students will learn what they are assessed on, not what the learning objectives state!
Student work is the bridge between the outcomes and assessment, and requires active participation in a range of learning activities in and out of class time. These activities must allow students to use higher order cognitive processes such as analysing, evaluating and creating knowledge (see Bloom’s Taxonomy, below), and often involve interactivity and collaboration.
Bloom’s Taxonomy
Bloom’s Taxonomy
Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956, summarised by Vanderbilt University) is a framework of cognitive processes involved in learning. This is a continuum from basic processes for shallow learning (remembering information) to higher level processes needed for deep learning (synthesising information to create new ideas).
A slightly updated version of the original Taxonomy contains six categories of processes:
Remember: recognise and recall.
Understand: explain ideas or concepts.
Apply: use information in new contexts.
Analyse: organise information, make comparisons, ask questions.
Evaluate: justify and critique arguments and evidence
Create: synthesise information to create new ideas or viewpoints.
Chickering and Gamson’s 7 principles of effective undergraduate teaching
Chickering and Gamson’s 7 principles of effective undergraduate teaching
I feel Chickering and Gamson’s 7 principles of effective undergraduate teaching (1987) work well to support the design of constructively aligned modules. To briefly summarise, the seven principles are to:
encourage cooperation among students.
encourage active learning.
maintain good contact with students.
give prompt, quality feedback.
emphasise time on task.
communicate high expectations.
respect diverse talents and ways of learning.
The York Pedagogy
The York Pedagogy
The York Pedagogy is the UoY’s central teaching & learning strategy, and is itself based on many of the principles described above.
The Pedagogy is mostly pitched at developing at programme level, but some aspects are relevant to module design:
Assessment should challenge students and help them work towards meeting learning outcomes.
Student work should be designed to promote active engagement in tasks and beneficial study practices, such as spaced practice, retrieval and manipulation of previously learned material and collaboration. Students should also be supported in developing effective independent study skills, as this is associated with learning gains.
Staff-student contact should be designed to maximise the efficacy of face-to-face and virtual contact. Particular emphasis is placed on close contact with students, through formative feedback or tutorials, for example.
To (very briefly) summarise, these principles together stress the importance of active and critical engagement to support deep learning. Based on these, when designing modules, blended learning activities and self-study resources, I aim to:
develop challenging learning outcomes that are clearly relevant to learners’ immediate needs (Biggs, 2003; York Pedagogy).
facilitate use of higher order cognitive processes to facilitate deep learning (Bloom, 1956).
facilitate individualised learning (Chickering & Gamson, 1987).
maximise the efficacy of class time and students’ independent study (York Pedagogy).
encourage collaboration between students (Chickering & Gamson, 1987).
facilitate effective formative feedback (Chickering & Gamson, 1987; York Pedagogy).
Learning technology is crucial to support my philosophy of module design, both in terms of creating individual tasks and also as an approach to developing the module as a whole. Without the functionality and efficiency afforded by many LT tools, it just wouldn’t be feasible to offer as rich learning experiences.
When designing online self-study resources, I'm also influenced ay adult-centre learning principles (Knowles et al., 2005) and principles of multimedia instruction (Mayer, 2008); details of these are given in the Specialist Option.
Implementing LT to support this approach
Implementing LT to support this approach
Here are some examples of how I’ve used LT to support this approach:
Self-paced blended learning unit with Google Sites
Self-paced blended learning unit with Google Sites
Evidence:
This is a self-paced research skills unit that I created using Google Sites for a blended learning module. It comprised four sections of increasing difficulty, with text-based information, videos and some interactive content (some self-created, others are OERs). At the end of each section, there is a quiz to check understanding (see below).
This supports the above principles by:
facilitating individualised learning, as students can control the pace and select content that is most appropriate for their current skill level (Chickering & Gamson, 1987).
including tasks that encourage use of higher order processes such as evaluating source suitability (Bloom, 1956).
using class time effectively by giving students control of the lesson let me use class time for mini-tutorials with each student. The same lesson could also be completed in independent study, to allow class time to be used for more active tasks to apply this knowledge (York Pedagogy).
facilitating formative feedback through the quizzes (see below) and click-to-reveal answers to exercises (Chickering & Gamson, 1987).
applying multimedia principles (Mayer, 2008) - extraneous processing is limited by highlighting key information, and chunking content manages essential processing demands.
Task: how do Booleans work?
Extract from 2a_Self-paced research skills unit (Sites)
Students responded well to these tasks, and in informal feedback many told me that they liked having control over the pace and task choice (particularly the stronger students). In an end of course survey, 75% of students reported that they enjoyed working through the online activities. IPC students generally come from a very teacher-led background, and so can struggle to study independently. I felt that the guidance on task difficultly and suggested order of tasks in these units helped students gain some independence and an awareness of resources available for their independent study.
However, Google Sites don't allow much interaction as a platform, making units very text-based. I've recently begun using more interactive and dynamic resources such as interactive tutorials (Xerte) and screencasts (Panopto).
Self-study resources with Xerte and Panopto
Self-study resources with Xerte and Panopto
Evidence:
SO_Building strong arguments_(Panopto) (annotated Slides were also available as an accessible alternative)
These resources were created as part of a pilot project to inform development of a new suite of online self-study academic writing resources. They are stand alone resources that are not tied to a specific course, and can be used by students at their convenience. Xerte allows a lot more interaction and tasks where students can apply skills that Google Sites, so I feel this is a great improvement.
See Specialist Option for discussion of how these resources support effective skills development, and Core Area 2b for student feedback..
Self-study interactive tutorial
Screenshot of interactive task. For full tutorial see SO_How to write in scientific style_(Xerte)
Self-study screencast
Click to expand or see SO_Building strong arguments_(Panopto)
SO_Building strong arguments_(Panopto).mp4Collaborative task with Google Slides
Collaborative task with Google Slides
Evidence:
This collaborative task uses Slides to help students develop their research skills. Students work in small groups to choose a research topic and conduct an internet search to find three suitable sources and also one that is unsuitable, and add these to the Slides. They then consider the other groups’ sources to identify the unsuitable source for the given topic.
This supports the above principles by:
actively engaging students in an authentic research activity (Biggs, 2003; York Pedagogy).
requiring higher-order cognitive processes, namely evaluating and analysing (Bloom, 1956).
allowing individualised learning, as students can choose their own topic and focus on aspects of source suitability appropriate for their skill level (Chickering & Gamson, 1987).
using class time effectively, as the student-led task lets me assist those with weaker research skills (York Pedagogy).
facilitating collaboration, as students co-edit the Slides (Chickering & Gamson, 1987).
Collaborative research task
Click to expand or see 2a_Collaborative task
This is a simple task that could be easily achieved without a collaborative tool like Slides, but I’ve found that the real-time co-editing that Slides allows makes collaboration so much more efficient. Students also always seem to enjoy this task, and like looking through their peers' slides. There can sometimes be some minor confusion with a large number of students working on one document though, so that should be monitored.
Formative quizzes with Google Forms
Formative quizzes with Google Forms
Evidence:
I often use Google Form quizzes for short formative quizzes. This example checks understanding of research strategies, such as using Booleans to narrow searches. Embedding videos and images and to links to other sites makes Forms a richer learning experience than a static text-based quiz.
This supports the above principles by:
giving students immediate feedback on their learning (Chickering & Gamson, 1987; York Pedagogy)
allowing individualised learning by directing students to review or activities if they give an incorrect answer (Chickering & Gamson, 1987).
allowing students to complete the test in their independent study time - this means they can check their understanding effectively, and also frees up class time for more active tasks (York Pedagogy)
Formative research skills quiz
Click to pop out or see 2a_Formative quizStudents seem to appreciate the opportunity to test themselves and get feedback with Forms, especially as it's a bit removed from the tutor.
I’ve so far used Forms only for quick comprehension checks, but they have the potential to be used for much more than this. In the future I’d like to use the ability to go to different sections based on an answer to build self-paced lessons that allow the tutor to work with individual students, or as self-contained activities to support high quality independent study. As this relies on closed answer tasks though, the challenge is to provide opportunities for higher-order processing, rather than focus on skills like recall and classification.
Future practice
Future practice
My current role focuses heavily on creating self-study online academic skills support materials. These stand-alone materials require a different approach to using LT to support blended delivery of a module. A major concern is how to encourage use of higher-order cognitive processes and interactivity when there is no direct interaction with other students or a tutor. My limited experience in creating interactive tutorials with Xerte has so far been positive, and Panopto screencasts have also been received well. I think I still need to think about how to create independent resources that allow students to analyse, evaluate and synthesise though. I'm also learning more about andragogical and multimedia principles to design effective resources. I discuss this further in the Specialist Option.
Quick Navigation
Quick Navigation
Move on to Core Area 2b
Report abuse