|
|||||
|
The SSBR team will facilitate a series of up to 26 thematic project cluster-group meetings or “assemblies”.Assemblies may take many different forms: seminars, workshops, mini-conferences, shared planning activities, site visits, etc. What they must do is bring projects together in an assembly. Each project will be asked to host one assembly in the duration of the programme. (Guidelines for hosting an assembly.) Each cluster might hold about 4 assemblies. Assemblies may be blended, face-to-face, online, distributed or collocated. The programme will be providing the Elluminate audiographic environment for distributed live meetings but projects would be encouraged to run their assemblies in their preferred environments as they wished. Second Life will be available for those that want to try multi-user virtual environments (MUVEs). Support can be given on the choice and operation of learning environments for project assemblies. Projects can apply through SSBR to the JISC for additional funding to support their assemblies using this form. The main aim of the assembly was to share our experience and demonstrate the tools developed to the JISC (and the rest) community. Even more importantly we needed feedback and input from other JISC projects and experts on the work done so far. The focus was more on the XCRI side of the work the project has carried out. The tool set developed by MUSKET consists of three components:
Although there still remains a lot of work to do, the tools are at a very early beta version stage where they could be demonstrated. From the MUSKET point of view, the day was more than a success. There was a good mix of people varying from totally new to XCRI to field experts bringing different views and perspectives to the day. There were rich discussions regarding the work already being carried out on XCRI in various JISC projects to many paths still open to pursue. Alan Paull started the day by giving an informal but interesting introduction to XCRI, its inception and the various avenues of investigation it has taken. The teams from the University of Nottingham and Liverpool shared their experiences and work done. Two important outcomes for MUSKET from the day:
The next stage for us is to look at vocabularies and semantics in order to make our tools usable by any businesses, employer or individual from outside the academic world who may wish to follow a particular programme. Following the assembly there has already been collaborative meeting s with UWIC on MUSKET’s work on converting word documents to xml via UML model mappings. We hope to have further discussions and collaborations at the meetings on the 22nd July in the West Midlands. Geetha Abeysinghe g.abeysinghe@mdx.ac.uk The main aim of the assembly was to share our experience and demonstrate the tools developed to the JISC (and the rest) community. Even more importantly we needed feedback and input from other JISC projects and experts on the work done so far. The focus was more on the XCRI side of the work the project has carried out. The tool set developed by MUSKET consists of three components:
Although there still remains a lot of work to do, the tools are at a very early beta version stage where they could be demonstrated. From the MUSKET point of view, the day was more than a success. There was a good mix of people varying from totally new to XCRI to field experts bringing different views and perspectives to the day. There were rich discussions regarding the work already being carried out on XCRI in various JISC projects to many paths still open to pursue. Alan Paull started the day by giving an informal but interesting introduction to XCRI, its inception and the various avenues of investigation it has taken. The teams from the University of Nottingham and Liverpool shared their experiences and work done. Two important outcomes for MUSKET from the day:
The next stage for us is to look at vocabularies and semantics in order to make our tools usable by any businesses, employer or individual from outside the academic world who may wish to follow a particular programme. Following the assembly there has already been collaborative meeting s with UWIC on MUSKET’s work on converting word documents to xml via UML model mappings. We hope to have further discussions and collaborations at the meetings on the 22nd July in the West Midlands. Geetha Abeysinghe g.abeysinghe@mdx.ac.uk This one day conference, held on 14 April 2010 was hosted by The University of Reading, and was one of a series of national HEA-sponsored seminars. The aim of the event was to explore a range of tools and methods for giving rapid and timely feedback in ways which stimulate and support students’ learning in the ‘digital age’. It was hoped that by attending this event participants would i) have a greater understanding of when and how technology, such as the use of video, may be used to enhance the timeliness and effectiveness of feed-forward and feedback provision and ii) develop a greater awareness of how technology may be used to support strategic priorities, such as enhancing innovation in teaching and learning. Forty-eight delegates representing 14 different institutions were welcomed to the event by the University of Reading’s Pro-Vice Chancellor for Teaching and Learning, Professor Rob Robson. Erica Morris, Senior Adviser for Quality Enhancement and Assessment at the HEA, then briefly outlined the work of the HEA in promoting research and evidence-based practice and explained that one outcome of the Seminar Series would be a briefing paper outlining key issues for practice. The programme for the day was planned by Julian Park and Anne Crook to enable collaborative exploration of issues relating to feedback and feed forward, through a series of interactive activities designed to promote discussion and highlight key aspects of quality feedback. Delegates were first asked to consider the question ‘How good is my feedback now?’ by comparing their own practice to a number of quotes about experiences of feedback from staff and students at the University of Reading. This brief activity confirmed that the experience is very similar across different institutions. There then followed a ‘round robin’ activity where delegates were organised into small groups to visit each of six ‘stations’ demonstrating the use of different approaches and technologies for supporting and enhancing feedback and feed forward. These included: Interactive Assessment Management System (IAMS) – an online system (via Blackboard) for managing coursework that enables both administrative and academic staff to organise assignment scheduling and coursework submission. Students receive a work submission receipt by email and are able to track progress with marking. Whilst visiting each station delegates were asked to consider the questions: · What technologies currently exist to support feedback provision? · Can technology enhance the quality and efficiency of my feedback? This led to identification of a list of issues and points for further consideration: · Diversity of feedback · Applicability of methods · Do students recognise feedback? · Staff and student training · Consistency · How do I know I am being effective and efficient? · How can I get students to engage with feedback? · Interoperability · Different types of learners and response to feedback · Opportunities for distance learning · Risks associated with new technologies Delegates then worked again in small groups on a semi-hypothetical case study of their choice, to determine what formative and summative assessment would be used for the case study module, issues relating to feedback and feed forward and the technologies that would be used. Case studies that delegates could select from included:
A key issue for all the groups was to consider how technology could be used to keep a balance between efficiency in terms of staff time and quality of the student learning experience. The outcome of this activity was a 2-3 minute video produced by each group which served to provide feedback for the other groups and to illustrate the ease and speed with which video feedback can be produced. The day ended with a panel discussion. Panel members were: Rod Cullen – Manchester Metropolitan University Shirley Williams – University of Reading Elizabeth Page – University of reading Paul Orsmond – Staffordshire University Steve Maw – University of Leeds Julian Park – University of Reading Discussion points included: · How can teaching colleagues be encouraged to engage with feedback and feed forward? · How can we help students to understand what we mean by feedback? · How can we help students adjust to the differences in feedback provision at university in comparison with their pre-university experiences? · Is the academic framework within which we work suitable for the changes we want to make? · How does student-centred learning affect the teacher’s role? · What evidence base do we have that innovative use of technology re: feedback and feed forward is actually effective? Despite a very busy and interactive programme, delegates were extremely well ‘fed and watered’ throughout the day and there was plenty of opportunity for networking and discussion. The event was closed at 3.30 pm by the Pro- Vice Chancellor for Teaching and Learning, who thanked participants and organisers for a very successful, useful and enjoyable day. 26 January 2010
The Co-genT project team hosted a face-to-face workshop on frameworks at the University of Gloucestershire (UoG) Oxstalls campus on 26 January 2010. The event was organised in collaboration with the University of Wolverhampton’s ePPSME Project team, and we were also joined on the day by colleagues from UCLAN’s Telstar Project.
The event began with a context-setting presentation from Professor Stephen Hill (Director of Teaching and Learning Innovation, UoG), focusing on the impact of Government policy directives within the sector and how institutional frameworks have been developed by UoG in partnership with other bodies to facilitate employer engagement and a ‘demand-led’ marketplace in HE (http://resources.glos.ac.uk/tli/lets/projects/cogent/index.cfm). The assembly moved on to discuss the theoretical and practical issues of relevance to the Lifelong Learning and Workforce Development strand of projects which need to be addressed if HEIs are to be able to meet the expectations generated by national initiatives. The assembly considered in detail how key factors impact on the negotiation process with employers, such as the definition of co-funding, the need for standardised contract terms, flexibility to accommodate changes in circumstances and the requirement for a clear return to the employers on their investment. From an academic viewpoint, there is also a need to add value rather than simple aggregate credits, and ensure that the quality of provision is consistent across both work-based learning and standard course modules in terms of the depth of learning appropriate to HE level. The assembly also discussed structural and cultural factors within institutions, and the imperative to ensure sustained financial viability of teaching and learning models within a context of substantial and continuing cuts in public funding. It was recognised that employer engagement is still a relatively new venture in many areas of HE. A pedagogy needs to be established for work-based learning to define and discuss its principles and values, and a solutions-orientated approach is required to address the many practical issues involved. The assembly suggested that the Higher Education Academy Subject Centres could take a lead role in facilitating progress, eg by providing seminars and publications to support employer engagement across the sector. A full report on the Frameworks Assembly is available on the Co-genT project website at http://resources.glos.ac.uk/tli/lets/projects/cogent/ Enhancing Lectures through Automated Capture (ELTAC) AssemblyUniversity of Coventry (18-03-2010)Aims of the Assembly· To explore the question of what staff development needs arise when a new capture technology is being introduced into an institution · To produce relevant collective resources for use by the wider HE community based on common and divergent experiences in implementing capture technologies for learning and teaching · To pool expertise and surface/identify related issues ParticipantsThe Assembly was attended by: Paul Bailey (JISC) Findings from the ELTAC projectDavid Morris welcomed participants and briefly outlined the key findings from the ELTAC project
Programme for the dayThe Assembly was planned as a workshop-style day focussing on purposeful community building and the production of a scoping document, management briefing and scenarios to draw out key teaching and learning, infrastructure and managerial issues for use in staff development. The outputs from the day will be attributed to authors and their institutions and also be available for wider dissemination across the HE sector. Lecture Capture – key issuesThe outputs from the day were informed by initial discussion and sharing of context and issues at individual institutions, which in turn informed the production of a scoping document, management briefing and scenarios. These issues included the following: · Practical issues Technical: Such as server problems when scaling up, bugs in the system, people unplugging wires Room bookings: Some institutions match rooms to student numbers, which makes lecture capture impossible for some groups; Room booking needs to be automated to reduce administration time; Bookings need to be scheduled Audio: Quality issues; Use of microphones in small venues; Ensuring microphones are switched on Video: Is it always needed? Support: How will this be provided? · Pedagogical issues Some lecturers feel that lecture capture restricts their teaching practice Lecturers may need to change the way they teach Re-usability – what are the implications? What is it needed for? What is a good learning package? How can lecture capture be used to increase student engagement? Do students become over-dependent on video? Does lecture capture encourage students to become passive learners? What is the purpose of lectures? · Institutional issues Coordination across different departments Scalability of Echo 360. Alternatives such as Matterhorn might need to be considered Scepticism and resistance from lecturers Suspicion from lecturers that lecturer capture might lead to cuts in staffing Suspicion from the Students Union executive about the motives for using lecture capture Are there opportunities for the University to generate income? Will lecture capture influence competitive advantage? What are the costs versus benefits? What are the legal/IPR implications? Who owns the materials? What are the policy issues? The Lecture Capture Support siteThe ELTAC Team demonstrated the Lecture Capture Support site http://cuba.coventry.ac.uk/lecturecapture/ which is being developed as part of their benefits realisation project. This site is undergoing a ‘repackaging’ process, which will feature a visual redesign and the addition of further content over the next few months. Currently it includes support materials and also examples of electronic lecture capture from external institutions, many present at the assembly.
During the afternoon small groups started to outline guidance materials and case studies addressing the issues raised in the morning aimed at supporting practitioners and institutional managers to implement electronic lecture capture within their institutions. The drafts were to be written up by the project team as the basis for guidance material with contributions and acknowledgements from those present. Future collaboration and community buildingThe ELTAC team is keen to continue collaborating with interested institutions and to expand this network and seek further mechanisms for sharing of expertise and information. Three possible avenues to explore in relation to seeking support in this are: JISC Procureweb – http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/services/jiscprocureweb.aspx JISC InfoNet – http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/ HEA Special Interest Groups – http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ ConclusionThe Assembly was an enjoyable, productive and successful event which provided participants with plenty of opportunity for discussion and sharing of practice. It was clear that lecture capture is of interest to an increasing number of institutions and that collaborative work and the creation of a community will support further development. Future ELTAC Benefits Realisation project activities will also help to support interested institutions. With thanks to Juliet Hinrichsen, Amanda Hardy and the ELTAC team for organising and hosting this Assembly. Jenny Mackness (JISC SSRB Support) Aim of the AssemblyThe aim was to focus on the success and not so successful techniques of engaging employers in project activity and participation with project outputs. The intended outcomes where: · To have an understanding of how other projects have engaged with employers · To share ideas of how to effectively engage with employers · To produce a “best practice” list of methods to share with the wider community
ParticipantsThe Assembly was attended by
- Paul Bailey, JISC/Support Project - Paul Chapman, Leicester College, Libraries and E-Strategy - Kirsty Coolin – SAMSON Project, University of Nottingham - Ruth Drysdale – JISC Programme Manager - Martin Fisk – Assistant Principle for HE, Leicester College - Lisa Gray – JISC Programme Manager - Richard Jones, SMART Project, Buckingham New University - Ian Lindsey – Consultant, Critical Friend for HELLO Project, worked for HEA - Anita Pinkerden, Associate Director (Public Sector) foundation Degrees Forward - Magdelena Slowenska – iWoble Project, University of Westminster - Richard Staniforth – UWIC - Lucy Stone, HELLO Project Manager, Leicester College - Dan Vaughan, Information Learning Technologist, Leicester College - Stuart Wood – SAMSON Project, University of Nottingham
Future EventsLisa Gray is organising an event on flexible provision in response to employers needs on the 27 May in Birmingham. Further details available from PresentationsHello Project – Lucy StoneLucy presented an overview of the Moodle sites developed to support foundation degree students within the college. The HE NET project is working with Dr Sarah Younie from DeMontford University (DMU) to support students progressing to the 3rd year . Of the 600+ learners who went to HE intuitions last year, 61% went to DMU. HENet is using Mahara to support student led activity. Students are familiar with the social networking aspects of the tool. Mentors from DMU meet with students and then support later through Mahara. The project is also exploring trying to link tutors with business contacts using Mahara, allowing employers to advertise work placements. Business development managers in the college have little involvement with HE courses, beyond the validation stage.
SAMSON Project – Kirstie Coolin/Stuart WoodThe University of Nottingham is working with Nottingham Trent University to develop two applications to support employer engagement. They are looking at supporting undergraduate placements and post graduate internships.
The first application allows students to match their skills with employers’ offers of placement students. This system could use the XCRI standard to allow sharing of placement information across institutions.
The second is being developed with a project with the University of Derby and the Scott Wilson Company, who are running a pilot with engineering students, funded by the company. Scott Wilson Company want weekly updates to monitor employees learning progress and also to be aware when they have a lot of course work or assignments to deliver. The applications links in several information streams (CRM, e-Portfolio, etc) and presents this in a single coordinated interface to the employer.
Foundations Degree Forward – Anita PickerdenfDf was set up to support developing FDs, and has achiebed its target of 100,000 learners by 2010. Anita highlighted some common barriers to employer engagement - Employers don’t understand the language in education. - Employers have to meet several people from a college/university to get agreement. - Universities not as responsive as raining providers - DPA not understood – sharing of information on employees achievement. Employer paying for course then they have rights but need to ensure student learning contracts and policy. The fDf employer and partnership relationship publication provides a very detailed overview of hwo to develop successful partnerships with employers. – we should check not duplicating info that has already been produced by fDf see http://www.fdf.ac.uk/page.aspx?id=19 CULN (Colleges of Leicester Network) produce a Do’s and Don’ts of partnerships see http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/lifelong-learning/culn
It takes a large amount of networking to engage employers, building relationships for 1-2 years before getting started with courses. Relationships need to be maintained overtime keeping the employers in the loop and developing the course together. Institutional processes need to change to adapt to the needs of employers.
Magdalena Slowinska iWoBLe – Interactive Work Based LearningThe iWoble project is supporting students during placements providing a space for learning, communication and management. They are piloting support for 50 placements students, working with tutors, students and employers. Magdalena has been supporting and evaluating the process within the institution. The findings are suggesting they need to communicate the purpose more clearly to all involved and adopt a more user friendly platform for delivery.
DiscussionThe discussion explored the role of BDMs in Colleges who protective of business contacts and reluctant to share with HE curriculum areas. So although colleges have good contacts with employers and processes in place to manage these relationships, it has not always been transferred to the HE curriculum areas.
There is a need to define the process and how to manage the relationship for HE courses within the college and to engage the existing BDMs and existing systems. Employers are involved in the curriculum design process and validation. They are also frequently used as experts in courses. However practice is inconsistent and fDf are working on quality with providers (is same happening with QAA?)
Discussion around student placements highlighted the need to provide support to business who offer placements. UWIC for example have 200 placements (rising to 500 soon) , defined processes and technology can be used to offer and effective support service. Need to offer incentives for employers to offer placement, they need to see the benefits of getting involved. Also need to sell the benefits of placements to students, valuable experience, supported by reflection for future CV.
There are several reasons why institutions will engage with employer e.g. placements, keeping the curriculum relevant, input to courses, enhance employability, skills development, etc. Any guidance needs to be targeted appropriately. Employers may be offering placements at many levels, school, college and university.
Is there anything (research) from BCE programme that can be shared? Is BCE a route for supporting BR activities around employer engagement issues?
Time, lunch and a power cut reduced time for discussion and the HELLO project team agreed to produce a wiki with areas for further discussion and to look at developing some guidance materials on employer engagement.
Further informationThe Assembly programme, further details of the presenters and copies of their presentations are available from http://hello.lec.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=10 or contact Lucy Stone lstone@lec.ac.uk . Enhancing Lectures through Automated Capture (ELTAC) Assembly University of Coventry (18-03-2010) Aims of the Assembly
Participants The Assembly was attended by:
Findings from the ELTAC project David Morris welcomed participants and briefly outlined the key findings from the ELTAC project
Programme for the day The Assembly was planned as a workshop-style day focussing on purposeful community building and the production of a scoping document, management briefing and scenarios to draw out key teaching and learning, infrastructure and managerial issues for use in staff development. The outputs from the day will be attributed to authors and their institutions and also be available for wider dissemination across the HE sector. Lecture Capture – key issues The outputs from the day were informed by initial discussion and sharing of context and issues at individual institutions, which in turn informed the production of a scoping document, management briefing and scenarios. These issues included the following:
Technical - such as server problems when scaling up, bugs in the system, people unplugging wires Room bookings - Some institutions match rooms to student numbers, which makes lecture capture impossible for some groups; Room booking needs to be automated to reduce administration time; Bookings need to be scheduled Audio – Quality issues; Use of microphones in small venues; Ensuring microphones are switched on Video – Is it always needed? Support – How will this be provided?
Some lecturers feel that lecture capture restricts their teaching practice Lecturers may need to change the way they teach Re-usability – what are the implications? What is it needed for? What is a good learning package? How can lecture capture be used to increase student engagement? Do students become over-dependent on video? Does lecture capture encourage students to become passive learners? What is the purpose of lectures?
Coordination across different departments Scalability of Echo 360. Alternatives such as Matterhorn might need to be considered Scepticism and resistance from lecturers Suspicion from lecturers that lecturer capture might lead to cuts in staffing Suspicion from the Students Union executive about the motives for using lecture capture Are there opportunities for the University to generate income? Will lecture capture influence competitive advantage? What are the costs versus benefits? What are the legal/IPR implications? Who owns the materials? What are the policy issues? The Lecture Capture Support site The ELTAC Team demonstrated the Lecture Capture Support site http://cuba.coventry.ac.uk/lecturecapture/ which is being developed as part of their benefits realisation project. This site is undergoing a ‘repackaging’ process, which will feature a visual redesign and the addition of further content over the next few months. Currently it includes support materials and also examples of electronic lecture capture from external institutions, many present at the assembly. Developing Guidance Materials During the afternoon small groups started to outline guidance materials and case studies addressing the issues raised in the morning aimed at supporting practitioners and institutional managers to implement electronic lecture capture within their institutions. The drafts were to be written up by the project team as the basis for guidance material with contributions and acknowledgements from those present. Future collaboration and community building The ELTAC team is keen to continue collaborating with interested institutions and to expand this network and seek further mechanisms for sharing of expertise and information. Three possible avenues to explore in relation to seeking support in this are:
Conclusion The Assembly was an enjoyable, productive and successful event which provided participants with plenty of opportunity for discussion and sharing of practice. It was clear that lecture capture is of interest to an increasing number of institutions and that collaborative work and the creation of a community will support further development. Future ELTAC Benefits Realisation project activities will also help to support interested institutions. With thanks to Juliet Hinrichsen, Amanda Hardy and the ELTAC team for organising and hosting this Assembly. Jenny Mackness (JISC SSRB Support) Attached is the Assembly Report from TELSTAR (UCLAN) from their assembly on APEL/PebblePad held on 1 February 2010. Leicester College Aim: To share ideas of how to effectively engage with employers. To produce a “best practice” list of methods to share with the wider community. Room 0.06b, Freemen’s Park Campus http://hello.lec.ac.uk Learning Spaces and Technology: the iBorrow project Date: Thursday 25th March 2010 Time: 11.00am – 4.30pm Location: Canterbury Christ Church University, Description: The conference will look at the lessons learned and insights gained from the iBorrow Project. This partly JISC-funded project provides 200 thin-client netbook devices within the new library and student services centre, available “as easily as picking a book from a shelf”. Desktop virtualisation deployed across a wireless network within the large-scale learning space now provides rich management data supporting an enhanced understanding of how students, academic and support staff are reacting to the way that the new resources have been configured. Who should attend? The conference will be of interest to anyone involved in planning new libraries, learning centres or learning spaces: senior managers, computing staff, library and information specialists. It will also be of interest to academics and other professionals working in learning, information and communications technologies, e.g. student services managers, educational developers, and learning technologists. For more information and to book a place go to http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/projects/iborrow/conference-2010.asp |
|||||
|
Copyright © 2010 Assemblies - All Rights Reserved |
|||||
