This section will look in more detail at the reactions of students to the incorporation of the learning platforms discussed so far and how these reactions have been used to inform teaching and course design.

Student profile

The International Pathway College caters to students from overseas who want to study in the UK but who may not meet the direct entry requirements for English language proficiency, years of schooling or relevant first degree (in the case of postgraduates). The term 'pathway' in higher education refers to the academic year that students in these situations can take in order to then study on their desired programme. Students on one of the pathway programmes at the IPC typically take core modules such as language and study skills and statistics, alongside modules more specifically aimed at the subjects within their target departments, and cover topics such as law, business, media and the social sciences.

The majority of students come from mainland China, and as we have a dedicated office in Beijing, as well as a number of colleagues who have taught in China, I had a lot of readily available information about Chinese students and their orientation towards learning and technology. Many of these students do not use the kinds of default Google-based tools that we take for granted in the UK because such platforms are blocked by China's national firewall. Instead, Chinese students use homegrown apps and platforms such as Baidu and QQ browsers and search engines, WeChat for social media and Youku for video streaming. At first I thought these technological incongruencies would act as barriers for students studying online from China, but it was widely reported at the start of the first lockdown that Chinese life had moved online relatively smoothly. Everything from museum visits to yoga classes had successfully adapted to virtual life. This was encouraging for me as a digital materials designer, and when it became apparent that I was to move teaching online, I anticipated that my module would be well received by the Chinese students; however, it quickly became apparent that when it comes to higher education, our student body viewed online learning as a distant second to the physical classroom. This period allowed me to get to know my students in greater detail, and to find out more about their attitude to online learning tools.

In section 1A I discussed some of the pre-pandemic adoptions of learning technology such as the use of Google Sites, and there was also a brief overview of the (generally positive) feedback. However, hot on the heels of that first pilot came the intense period of adaptation and innovation that ensued from teaching entirely online. Some of the new tools that were adopted such as Xerte and Eduflow were introduced in section 1B, and I return to them here to discuss how the students viewed these adaptations, and how their input and feedback continues to shape the development of the module with what looks like, from the vantage point of August 2021, an imminent return to at least some form of campus teaching.

Mode of study

The clearest message that came through from these three questions was that the students miss the classroom. This does not come as a surprise, and has been a consistent theme in broader student feedback and in discussions with colleagues generally. Despite the many conveniences that online study affords, students see the value of a real life classroom experience and in-person interaction. Reassurance perhaps that we are not all destined to be replaced by AI quite yet!

Were the interactive learning objects useful?

More mixed was the response to the questions about the technology we had started using. Did students find the Xerte objects useful? The answers to the second question illustrated above appear to show an even split between enthusiasm, indifference and antipathy. This did come as a surprise given all the work that had gone in to the aesthetics and functionality, and the fact that the students had clearly been working with the material and coming to live sessions reasonably well prepared. The survey questions were given as multiple choice questions only, with no text boxes, (in order to keep them short and simple), so from these responses alone I couldn't tell why students reacted this way. Similarly with the third question, students showed a strong preference for traditional paper-based teaching materials. However, one possible explanation is that the preference for in-class teaching is casting a shadow over the other responses. Are they are simply associating the new digital learning tools with online teaching, which we already know they don't much like?

I felt it was important to investigate further in order to make decisions about the future development of the module, and so I held some in-depth discussions with two of the students who'd responded to try and shed a little more light on what tools, platforms and modes of delivery they felt helped them learn best. Some key points raised by each student are outlined below.

Final comments

Teaching and course design has seen continuous change and development over the past 18 months as learners' needs and context have been dictated by forces outside of anyone's control. Much of the learning has been online, and I and the teaching team have been through a dizzying cycle of adaptation of practice, adoption of new ideas and technologies, evaluation, refinement, occasional defenestration and sometimes, happily, full integration of practice that has better helped me/us meet the needs of learners. The most profound impact on my own teaching has been the way flipped learning and associated technologies have increased opportunities for us to engage students. Whatever the future terms bring, I think a greater focus on student-centered, independent study and shorter, more interactive live sessions will be at the heart of my teaching and course writing. For Chinese students specifically, it is useful to know that although they come from a high tech society, I do not intend to assume that just because technology affords convenience, that it should be the primary driver of change. For me, the experience has reinforced that the classroom is still as valuable in the learning process as any of the new developments and opportunities that I have uncovered during my time working with digital platforms. Nevertheless, the digital adaptations discussed here have shown promise, and in order to evaluate whether or not they are having a positive effect, the student exit surveys and forum meetings will be useful and will give an indication as to whether student needs are being met; however, one of the most effective and information-rich methods of tracking whether or not these methods are improving teaching is through direct feedback from teachers within my team. They have a birds-eye view of the classes and are able to comment impartially on student engagement and the degree to which this greater emphasis on interaction in live sessions is improving teaching and learning.