Introduction to Reflection

November 2, 2009 at 11:34 pm (1st Year Experience, learning, PG-Cert, Student Support)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Although I had always planned to host a session on reflection and how it could be recorded using Mahara, it was evident that from my last class that a significant number of students required more work to be done in this area. Feedback from the students, both formal (online CIQ) and informally relayed a range of concerns over this issue. Questions raised by the students were:

  • Whether reflections were personal or public?
  • Difficulties with reflecting for the first time i.e. Where to start?
  • How will it benefit their education?
  • How will it benefit their career?
  • How does reflection ‘marry’ with their ePortfolio work?

I had already designed several solutions to the above questions, specifically those that related to Mahara. The student feedback confirmed that theses solutions were valid, however some of the questions raised weren’t addressed in the original design. A major re-write was required. It was also an ideal opportunity for me to show that the students that their input into the evaluation process, was as much for them as it was for me. Within a week, their comments had been acted on and their learning needs were being addressed. I emphasised this during my introduction to the session.

50% of the students had completed their assignment, set last week. As a result, those who did, received formative feedback and went on to to submit more evidence and reflections. There was a flurry of activity on Tuesday evening on Mahara, as students left the work to the last minute, forgoing the benefits of timely feedback. It was also evident that, in a lot of cases, the assignment wasn’t completed solely because of student apathy. There were those who were struggling with the technology itself. The pace at which we went through the Introduction to Mahara session did not suit every student and as a result they struggled to keep up. The CIQ clearly supported this. As a result I have rewritten the next session to allow the students more time to explore the software, with myself in passive attendance, in order to support them if required. I had originally attended the session to be solely on how to gather digital evidence and upload it into Mahara, outlining several techniques e.g. screen capture, online file conversion, hyperlinking etc… I will produce an online resource to cover these aspects and present it on Mahara for the students to use.

I had been disappointed by the initial student response to the CIQ I had posted last session. In order to address this lack of evaluation (though the little I did receive was enough for me to redesign a large portion of the reflection session) I asked each student to fill the form in, there and then. It was the last opportunity to do so as I didn’t want them to mix up the this and last weeks sessions. It was at this point that I reiterated the value of these forms. I am glad that I did now, as several students have commented that they were impressed that I had moved so swiftly in addressing their concerns.

I then outlined a new support mechanism that I had instigated for them, where TPA staff were allocated several students each to support them with their evidence gathering and reflections. I had asked the staff to make at least one comment on each of their students Intro to TPA views. The breakdown was as follows:

Martin – Holly Baxter, Joy Bonfield-Colombara, Nicola Stewart, Alexander Ridgers

Christine – Emily Black, Gillian Tormey, Adam McCall, Rosemary Sims

Jamie – Rachael Brown, Roishann McGuire, Emma Fitzgibbon, Alexander Morgan

Zander – Maisie Cottingham, Sarah Crooks, Rachel McGovern, Elizabeth Milne

Simon – Samantha Burns, Iain Jolly, Ching Long Koo, Simon Legg

Steve – Dougal Gudim, Fiona Nisbett, Hannah Nicol, Barbara Brza,

John – Chris Gowling, Margaret Kiernohan, Siobhan MacIntyre, Ellen Porteous, Sarah Wilson

Ros – Ross Oliver,  Fraser Walker, Danielle Farrelly, Jonathon Towers

I was surprised to hear from the students that a few staff members hadn’t done this, even though the students had posted artifacts and reflections up onto their views. I plan to have a training session in place for the staff as soon as possible as I may have wrongly assumed that they were comfortable with the software and the concept of ePortfolio learning. Those who did receive feedback, found it useful and a positive step towards their own learning experience.

What are you doing here?

I wanted to find a question that was fundamental to the reflection process i.e. What happened?, with the emphasis on ‘what’. To simply reflect on this aspect of a learning experience would be tantamount to writing a diary, a chronological recording of events that happened. By suggesting this as a place to start their reflections the students were in familiar territory, as most had recorded events in this way, at some point in their lives. I recommended that if they found themselves staring at a blank screen (or paper), unable to conjure up words that adequately express their reflections, then perhaps a paragraph or two of recounting what happened would kickstart the process. Somewhere within that simple process the ‘what?’ may transform into the ‘why?’.

Why are you here?

After the initial paragraph had been recorded, the next phase of reflection could be attempted, the ‘why’. Using the three earlier questions we had posed during the PDP session and then as part of the assignment I had set last week, I reiterated their use and suggested that as their reflective practice progressed, the students would begin to create their own questions, perhaps more specific and detailed. Understanding the ‘why’ is the first steps towards a deeper set of cognitive skills. I suggested that, with practice, the learners could develop better analytical and problem-solving abilities. The brain after-all is an organ that requires exercise.

We then discussed the differences between secondary education and higher education. Higher education having different demands on learning responsibility than that of secondary schooling, in so much as the learner is expected to manage their own learning, albeit from within a support network. Most agreed that self-created learning was the most likely to create knowledge that remains with the student on a much more permanent basis than the rote, “parrot-fashion” methods which only served to skim the surface of learning. This open discussion wasn’t intended, but I let it run as I found it invigorating. I could sense the energy in the room change as more of the students expressed their opinions. I had a real sense that the students were indulging in a non-facilitated group reflection. It’s amazing what a simple question can produce.

At some point, I manage to segue into the subject of blogging, or micro-blogging to be precise. As soon as I uttered the word ‘Twitter’ I was met by a chorus of low groans and sighs. It would seem that my chosen subject was somewhat derisory. I sensed another debate brewing…. I outlined the three main uses of Twitter:

  • as a communication medium.
  • as a networking tool.
  • as a micro-blogging/thought capturing tool.

All of which could aid in capturing and gathering evidence in the moment and as a way of reflecting on idea’s through 140 character summaries. I suggested that an effective way to do this would be to RSS feed your tweet streams directly to your blog. In this way the learner has a way of recalling topics for reflection on the same page as they are writing their blogs. With more and more theatre’s and practitioners using Twitter, it has become a direct way of creating contacts within the industry and for knowledge transfer. The debate that ensued seemed to highlight that Twitter had evolved a social stigma, which, it was felt, belonged to a specific type of Web 2.0 user. It would seem that the modern learner and socialite are extremely territorial when it comes to their personal digital environments. It cannot be assumed that any online tool, offered by a teacher, will be eagerly adopted by all digital learners. Their choice of tools are carefully selected to suit their digital identities, an example of this can be found in the devotion Bebo users have to their environment and the distaste they have developed towards the FaceBook clans and vise-versa. The debate was left in the balance, though several students did admit that their opinion of Twitter had been altered slightly and they may try it out.

The session then continued with a short discussion on the topic of blogging proper. The following benefits were discussed on the advantages of using digital reflection:

  • Allows instant feedback
  • Tracks progress
  • Develops deeper cognitive skills
  • Allows media-rich content
  • Can easily be shared or secured
  • Allows collaboration

Again, the issue of making blogs publicly viewable came up, there was a sense of discomfort by a few students at the notion of their personal thoughts and opinions being exposed to a wider public. I realised that, at some point, these students had assumed that because a blog was an online tool, it had to be public. We discussed the options available to bloggers and ePortfolio users which gave them the choice to reflect privately, semi-privately (to an invited audience) or publicly. There is also the option to make online reflections non-searchable i.e. they can’t be located using a search engine. The concept of online learning (blogging) communities was raised, where learners can link, comment and quote from blogs covering a common theme and forming a peer network of reflective practice. A few students also expressed a concern that their writing skills weren’t up to public scrutiny and this would cause them some embarrassment. However, studies have proved that in a high percentage of students who, at the outset, had shown poor creative writing skills, developed these skills to an acceptable level (some excelled beyond the standard) after exposing their writing to a wider audience. Not only did they receive formative feedback throughout, they also developed a self-confidence which motivated them to progress and succeed. I agreed to accept and proof read any students work, before it was uploaded to Mahara and made it clear that their folio’s need not be public at all. I did recommend that their ePortfolio support lecturer, at the very least, should be allowed access for guidance purposes.

Questions?

A statement, not a request. To further emphasise the use of questions to start the reflective process, I suggested that the post heading may be a question e.g. What did I do well during the technical rehearsal today? or Why did I start getting confused in Props class this morning? This may be a useful mechanism to focus the learners reflection and get the process started.

Game-based Learning

I had wanted to introduce game-based learning to my practice for a while, but had never been able to find a suitable platform or game that served the purpose well. I had searched for online management simulations that gave the students variable parameters to experiment with. A critical element of the game had to include the student making basic decisions which would somehow affect their digital environment or virtual situation at the time. It also had to be fun in order to engage the learner. There are many online management simulations (some SCORM compliant) but most were either too complex, boring or expensive and none were 100% suitable to Stage Management. This session wasn’t subject related so I had an opportunity to demonstrate the reflection process with a much simpler (and free) online game. After much searching I found a game which seemed to fit all of the criteria I needed.

I attempted to break down the reflective process and based this (loosely) on Kolbs learning cycle. By using a stage by stage flow chart I portrayed the reflective process thus:

Reflective Process
Reflective Process

I found a game which was simple enough to use as a vehicle to demonstrate this simple model of reflection. It’s called Student Sim and is a basic ‘point and click’ type simulator. The game can be found here.  The students all signed in and I gave them 10 minutes to orientate themselves to the games interface and concept, they were to do this without any instructions. I also asked them to note down any tips that they came across as they played. Some did basic screen captures while others used simpler technology i.e. paper and pen. Having successfully orientated themselves to the software, I then asked them to reflect on the evidence that they had gathered, which they shared to their peers. We then decided to set a common ‘group’ goal and played the game again, for another  10 minutes, with this goal in mind. Again I asked the group to gather evidence by making notes and screen grabbing. As the students progressed through the stages of reflection, I revealed the next stage on the screen, further emphasising the process.

We stopped after the 2nd Action phase as time was running short, but the students seemed to understand. We then discussed the process, contextualising it with theatrical practice. The general feeling from the room seemed to be that there was no need to break down reflection in such detail as most of the learners did this process naturally. I did feel however that it did serve a purpose in highlighting where the reflective phase should reside, as many had admitted to being aware that reflection was a process and had struggled to grasp the concept. It also underlined that reflection was deeply rooted in a practical cognitive process. It will be interesting to review and evaluate the student feedback to this class as the game element was very experimental. I did recognise a problem with this approach, as the session progressed  I felt the students became distracted from the main purpose of the exercise, especially those who became engrossed in the game play. The flowchart, as a visual prompt wasn’t enough, neither was my vocal prompting. However, I was pleased to note that the conversation that ensued was deeper than I had anticipated and the majority of the cohort seemed to understand what I was trying to achieve with them.

I finished the class with another assignment based around reflective practice. I wanted to return to theatre somehow, to leave the students with a contextualised aftertaste. I showed them a short and incredibly experimental production called Fuerzabruta. I had, over the last 3 years, showed this video to 1st year students to inspire them to think outside of the box and that not all theatre plays were stuffy and classical. I asked the students to reflect of their experience of watching the show and highlight moments which inspired them or disappointed them. Which elements worked and which didn’t? Why these elements had this affect and finally; What could have been done to improve the production and their overall experience?

Leave a Comment

PAT to PDP (the missing link)

October 30, 2009 at 12:16 am (1st Year Experience, learning, PG-Cert, Student Support)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

After considerable reflection on how to make stronger links between the Personal Academic Tutorial (PAT) system in the Academy and Personal Development Planning (PDP) framework (as identified in my Lighting a Fire post) I have suggested a solution to my colleagues. By extending our PAT student group support to include mentoring indivduals in reflection and evidence gathering (using Mahara) we add a further layer to thier learning experience.  PAT then becomes interwoven with PDP, using ePortfolio’s as the tool to accomplish this. An equal distribution of  1st year students amongst the lecturing staff from the outset would ensure that every student recieves learning support and each member of staff shares an equal workload.

We have decided to trial this method using a current assignment that I have set the first year cohort (see An Introduction to ePortfolio post). I have assigned a lecturer to a group of 5 or 6 individuals and have asked them to make comment on the views that the students have posted. It is hoped that, by the assignments submission deadline, every student will have a few lines of formative feedback to support them. This may only act as an encouragement to continue, but at this stage, may be enough. Providing this early scaffolding is essential in embedding reflective processes as well as orientating the students in using new tools, which they can use to manage and deepen their learning.

Leave a Comment

RSAMD Mahara

June 28, 2009 at 9:08 am (1st Year Experience, 2nd Year Experience, assessment, employability, Flexible Delivery, learning, PG-Cert, Student Support)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

ePortfolio’s

“An unfolding narrative of a unique learning journey”

(JISC 2008)

How can ePortfolio solution’s such as Mahara provide and enhance employability skills through Personal Development Planning to Academy students?

Current research being carried out by organisations such as JISC and BECTA have identified that e-Portfolio’s can enhance Employability Skills, Lifelong Learning provision, Internationalisation, Retention, Widening Participation, Achievement and Attainment Levels along with offering a high level of Personalisation to the learner. (JISC 2008) With these high level agenda items in mind and a pressing need for an improved Personal Development Planning framework within the Academy, this investigation was both timely and required.

The Academy’s Learning and Teaching strategy clearly states that its mission which, in essence, is to nurture creativity through a focus on the individual through the promotion of innovative methodologies and the exploitation of new and emerging technologies.

The term portfolio has a range of meanings, depending on the context you are engaged with, with Higher Education it can be best described as a collection of artifacts (evidence) presented alongside associated reflections for learning. This archive is collated and drawn on by the learner as evidence of learning achievement. These achievements can then be used to plan targets and set goals. Therefore a portfolio can be associated with the gathering of records which can be used in the Personal Development Planning (PDP) process. The concept of Personal Development Records (PDRs) is closely related to the Higher Educa-tion Progress File, a recommendation found in the Report of the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (Dearing, 1997) and extends beyond that, to incorporate artifacts which may evidence claims made in PDRs. Many institutions are choosing to implement PDP (and to encourage learners to manage their PDRs) through electronic means, often linking this to the term e-portfolio (Ward & Richardson, 2005) .

In 2008 The Academy made the bold decision to implement Mahara as its institutional e-Portfolio solution. It was a bold move as the software was, as yet untested, having only been released two months prior to it’s installation. Two main reasons for it’s adoption was it’s integration with Moodle and that it was Open Source i.e. free. Further to this, the Academy also made the commitment to contract e-Learn Design as consult-ants and to maintain both Mahara and Moodle installations, for a period of 12 months. This move was seen as a positive step towards fulfilling it’s Learning Resources and Student Support Strategy which states, as an objective for December 2009 to “implement Mahara as an Academy-wide platform for Personal Development Planning” . Four Moodle site-wide Administrators were found, including myself and a single Administrator for Mahara (myself), appropriate training was provided for Moodle.

Lessons learned on the JISC funded ISLE (Individualised Support for Learning through ePortfolio’s) Project found that ePortfolio’s cannot be introduced during the academic year. Greater success was found when you introduce them at induction. (ISLE). This Pilot scheme initially focused on employability skills amongst learners at Dumfries and Galloway College. Themed templates were created to provide structure to this process of PDP with categories which included: about me, My CV, my learning style, my interests and hobbies etc… All of which exist as default fields in Mahara, thus reducing the workload of tutors.

Encouraging students to personalize their learning spaces by deciding on layout as well as content can enthuse them to become more creative with their learning. The celebration of achievements can hence be more rewarding, with positive feedback from both peers and tutors acting as motivational devices. Improved retention levels were also recorded during the ISLE Project ranging from 30% to 100% improvement in some cases (JISC, 2008).

Results of an online survey I conducted, where I canvassed the opinion of 79 students and 11 staff members on ePortfolio’s, returned some revealing results. Out of the total number surveyed only 17% currently used an ePortfolio solution and from those, most (13 individuals) used Mahara. When asked the question, “Would you considering using one?” 53% said yes, with a further 36% stating that they “didn’t know” (see Chart 1). This shows that there is an interest worth considering and more promotion of Mahara needed.

Chart 1
Chart 1

When asked what they considered to be the single most important benefit of keeping an ePortfolio, the results were revealing (see Chart 2).

Chart 2

Chart 2

The results in Chart 2 clearly show that Employability would be a major contributing factor towards a learner engaging with an ePortfolio, with the organistaion of work being a major secondary concern. These statistics appear to align with the theory that both professional and vocational focus relies heavily on the development of praxis rather than knowledge alone. In this light, the ePortfolio serves as a developmental log in which to track ‘fitness of practice’. (Beetham & Sharpe, 2007).

In Art, we find ourselves confronted with a series of stimuli, such as a performance, a design, literary text or a piece of music. These artifacts  of learning more than often require our learners to ‘respond’ rather than to unravel an answer. These responses are often aesthetic in nature and require a degree of reflection that involves more than finding a formula which leads to a solution. (Beetham & Sharpe, 2007). Having the ability to present these stimuli as media; .mp4, jpeg, .doc or mp3 etc. provides the learner with a platform to host their evidence alongside their interpretations of it. It is hoped that the outcome would be that the learner has a greater understanding of the artifact.

“focus on creative activity is typical of the arts and that the methodologies (i.e. discussion) used to study the artefactual focus of these disciplines are to some degree themselves inspired by the methodologies employed in the creation of those artifacts.” (Beetham & Sharpe, 2007).

This form of reflective discourse based on the study of existing artifacts lends itself perfectly to the learning artist. The creation of new work commonly inspired by existing work. e.g. a learner uploads an .mp3 to their Mahara view then invites collaborators to listen to it, a discussion builds around the work from within a Mahara group forum. Changes are made to the work based on peer evaluation and the view is opened to the tutor for feedback and perhaps assessment.

The collection of this evidence could be a key driver to PDP being a key element to the UK Governments e-strategy (DfES, 2005). The Center for International ePortfolio Development is based in the University of Nottingham and is proof of the United Kingdoms commitment to research and development of this important learning tool.

To promote employability skills is as much about good learning experiences as it is about work placements or careers advice. (Bloxham & Boyd, 2007). They go on to state that more traditional methods of enhancing employability (entrepreneurship, careers guidance and PDP) do not necessarily contribute to the overall learning environment that is designed to foster employability, as they are often stand alone modules or lie outside of programme altogether. In this respect, there seems to be the need for a tool which draws all of these elements together and is still designed for learning. As the electronic portfolio is essentially a student centered solution, in which the learner has control over who and when their evidence is to be subject to academic scrutiny, then it would be fair to conclude that they can also choose when their work is open for employers to gauge their suitability for employment. Mahara can be viewed externally, allowing the learner to produce a media rich CV, which can be viewed by anyone of their choosing. Access to a particular view can also be time-limited or suspended at any point, by the learner.

In the online survey I asked how often those who completed it reflected  on their learning and whether these reflections were self motivated (non-assessed) or part of their course (assessed).  Chart 3 shows the frequency of reflection:

Chart 3

Chart 3

Now that the statistics were in place (and I was surprised at the amount of reflective practice stated) the task was then to ascertain why the learners were reflecting i.e. was it because they had to or was it because they felt it was a viable learning process?

Chart 5

Is this reflection….?

Chart 4

The findings here are even more surprising, it shows that learners are prepared to take ownership of their own learning where reflective practice is concerned. Thus going some way to prove that reflection is seen by a cross section of students in the Academy as an effective way to learn. Couple these statistics with those who outlined an interested in finding out more information about Mahara (85% of those surveyed wished to learn more, while 10% did not) and there is a clear case for further investigation.

To find out which methods were used in reflection I asked ‘how’ these learners reflected, giving a choice of the most common tools available. The results were mixed (Chart 6) and dependent on the learners definition of nomenclature e.g. a log book could be considered a journal by some. What is interesting is that 89% of those surveyed considered themselves to be computer literate which aligns closely to those interested in pursuing an interest in ePortfolio’s, yet most reflections seem to be recorded using analogue (paper-based) tools. One could conclude that this was due to the learners preference. Though when asked if the Academy should be doing more to promote Mahara, the response was that 58% thought so, 6% thought the Academy shouldn’t be promoting it and 35% didn’t know we even had one!

Chart 6

Chart 6

Mahara also has social networking functionality which has great potential to create both formal and non-formal learning environments. The ability to build communities of practice within a rich learning environment has obvious collaborative and knowledge sharing potential. This approach could open the door to both self and peer assessment models. These assessment skills are seen as valuable in developing lifelong learning skills such as self-evaluation, giving feedback, justifying a point and negotiation skills (Boud, 2000). Furthermore Stefani reminds us that “If assessment processes are intended to enhance student learning then it follows that students must be able to reflect on their current attainment” (Stefani 1998: 346, cited in Bloxham & Boyd, 2007). The skills required to develop objectivity (needed for self assessment) by reflecting on their own work, carves a path for the learner to direct their own work and thus making steps towards becoming autonomous learners. (Bloxham & Boyd, 2007). Peer feedback is often more accessible to the learner, being that it is not ‘emotionally loaded’ (Black et al, 2003:77) being that the language of peers is much easier for the student to understand, digest and evaluate.

When asked the question, “How often are you required to collaborate with others on your course?” (Chart 7), the results were as expected on programmes that involved both group and individual tuition. Only a 3% minority perceived that they did not collaborate at all, it should be a serious consideration to offer a support platform for these students to enter the fold and be able to reflect and collaborate with other learners. There is scope here for further development in cross curricula design and implementation, there would seem to be strong evidence that student aspirations stretch to include both peer feedback and a more collaborative environment in which to learn.

Chart 7

Chart 7

The final chart (Chart 8 ) was based around formative feedback and it’s perceived quantity available on individual courses. This question was purely subjective i.e. “What are your feelings on formative feedback?”, this was done intentionally as I wished to gauge student perception rather than objective fact. Feedback, or the amount of, is an academic responsibility and the student perception of this is dependent on the individuals requirements. A student who is struggling will percieve that they require more formative feedback, delivered in a timely manner. Race recommends that; “ if assessment is the engine that drives learning (Cowan cited in Race, 2007) then feedback is the oil that lubricates the cogs of understanding” (Race, 2007). Boud goes on to add that, “Assessment methods and requirements probably have a greater influence on how and what students learn than any other single factor. This influence may well be of greater importance than the impact of teaching materials.” (Boud, 1988).

I order to ascertain student perception of formative feedback provision within the Academy I asked, “What are your feelings on formative feedback?” with options depicting quantity rather than quality:

Chart 8

Chart 8

These statistics seem to suggest that there is a balance needing addressed in this area of learning. It has often been alleged that the Academy is heavy on summative assessment and light on the side of formative assessment. With these statistics in place it would seem that this is indeed the case. ePortfolio provision can address this issue head on, with 24 hours access to student evidence and reflection, more importantly it is the learner who opens their portfolio’s for scrutiny by tutors. This places the procurement of feedback firmly in their own hands.

Recommendations

The following are recommendations for the implementation of ePortfolio-based practice within the Royal Academy of Music & Drama, in order to address the findings in this investigation:

1. Staff training on the use of ePortfolio’s with particular emphasis on Mahara as a tool to enhance learning and employabilty within the student body.

2. The implementation of a robust framework for PDP in which ePortfolio provision can exist.

3. The introduction of ePortfolio-based learning at induction at the very latest.

4. Further investigation into allowing new and incoming 1st Year students to access and build ePortfolio’s on Mahara.

5. The introduction of a pilot scheme to encourage FE feeder courses to implement ePortfolio provision within their institutions as a recruitment driver.

6. The introduction of a pilot scheme to encourage employers to access final year students work as a recruitment driver.

Bibliography

Dearing, R (1997) Report of the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (The Dearing Report) http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/ncihe/

(accessed 18.06.09)

Developing a progress file for HE: Guidelines on HE progress files http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/progressfiles/guidelines/default.asp

(accessed 18.06.09)

Ward, R & Richardson, H (2005) Report to the JISC: Generic guidance for stakeholders implementing Personal Development Planning through e-portfolio systems http://www.erdee.org.uk/natsem/eport_seminar_report.pdf

(accessed 18.06.09)

ISLE: Individualised Support for Learning through ePortfolio’s, http://isle.paisely.ac.uk/default.aspx

(accessed 19.06.09)

Bloxman S & Boyd P, (2007) Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education: A Practical Guide. Open University Press, Berkshire

Stefani, L.A.J. (1998) Assessment in partnership with learners, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(4): 339-50.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and William, D. (2003) Assessment for Learning: Putting It into Practice. Maidenhead, Open University Press.

Beetham, H & Sharpe, R et al (2007) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing and delivering e-learning. Oxon, Routledge

Boud, D (1988) Implementing Student Self-Assessment, HERDSA Green Guides Vol.5, University of New South Wales, Australia

Race, P (2007) The Lecturers Toolkit: A practical guide to assessment, learning and teaching, Oxon, Routledge

Boys, J & Ford, P (2008) The e-Revolution and Post Compulsory Education: Using e-Business models to deliver quality education. In association with JISC. Oxon, Routledge

Leave a Comment

PDP

April 3, 2009 at 8:59 am (1st Year Experience, 2nd Year Experience, employability, learning, PG-Cert, Student Support)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In order to provide a more organised framework for my reflections on our current investigative assignment I have opted to look at the ‘bigger picture’ before focusing solely on Mahara and e-Portfolio’s in general. From my reading I have ascertained that Mahara is just one of many e-Portfolio systems currently in use in HEI’s nationwide, widening the scope of the investigation finds that e-Portfolio’s are primarily used as tools in which to implement vital area’s of personal development planning (PDP) systems. PDP itself, is central to the overarching employability theme and in many ways can be thought of as the catalyst that drives this governmental enhancement.

I feel that in order for me to grasp the concepts that underpin e-Portfolios, I should start by investigating the pedagogy behind PDP, touching on the Quality Assurance Agency’s (QAA) Employability Enhance Theme along the way.

The QAA Scotland/Universities Scotland Joint Working Group (JWG) was constituted in 2002 with the primary remit to implement PDP within the sector. In doing so, it firstly identified three core features that embody PDP:

a) the ability of the student to undergo a self-audit process that enabled the student to become more effective in their own learning.

b) a process embedded as far as possible within the existing curriculum and activities and

c) that the process should be holistic and take in as much of the students experiences in HE as possible.

(QAA Scotland, 2007)

From these three features a framework was drawn up from a series of focused prompts that helped students review their own progression within their HEI. These focused learner questions (FLQs) became the core drivers within a framework for effective learning known as ELF (Effective Learning Framework). If looked at in diagrammatic form, ELF has three main domains of learning progression depicted as Academic, Career and Personal (see Fig.1), where these area’s overlap a key FLQ can be found and where all three domains overlap with each other , a central process of self review resides.

Fig.1 ELF

Fig.1 ELF

Why was this required?

In 1997, Sir Ron Dearing published a series of reports, collectively known as the Dearing Report, which outline 93 recommendations for Higher Education in the UK. Recommendation 20 was as follows:

20. We recommend that institutions of higher education, over the medium term, develop a Progress File. The File should consist of two elements:

—a transcript recording student achievement which should follow a common format devised by institutions collectively through their representative bodies;

—a means by which students can monitor, build and reflect upon their personal development (Dearing, 1997)

There was/is an apparent need to develop and embed lifelong learning within HEIs, breaking down the idea that learning stops upon graduation, but instead should be a continual process which carry’s on into the careers of students. This was a shift away from the more traditional notion that students were only required to engage in purely tacit learning, instead learning itself would be considered a skill vital to employability. The process would begin at the application stage to the candidates chosen HEI with a series of FLQs, thereafter keypoints would be marked within the learners educational pathway with more questions at each point. The hope is to support learners in developing their self-analytical, exploratory, questioning and planning skills, empowering them to take control of their own learning by placing them firmly in the center of it. These skills are also much sought after by graduate recruiters.

‘a set of skills, knowledge and personal attributes that make an individual more likely to secure and to be successful in their own chosen occupation(s) to the benefits of themselves, the workforce, the community and the economy’ (York, 2004, cited in Higher Educational Academy, Ward 2006)

The Self

At the heart of PDP lies the ‘self’. The notion of self-directed learning underpins the entire process, wherever you look within the PDP environment you will find ‘self’ being the most coined word. From an employers point of view, self-management, self-promotion, self-evaluation, self-awareness, self-reflection and self-analysis are all key to successful employment. Couple these skills with a willingness to learn and the student is ready to present themselves to a waiting employment sector as well as to other programmes of study.

Evidencing your learning

It is likely that most institutions carry out PDP activities whether they know it or not. The important question of whether they evidence their learners progression or not is valid. Within the School of Drama in RSAMD, we use a number of PDP solutions the most obvious being reflective journals, work placements, personal academic tutorials and employability skills training. The PAT system has been overhauled in the last 12 months, with core changes to it’s structure and intent. Although it has been tentatively linked to an overall PDP framework (indeed, the entire framework in itself is a tentative and perhaps overly cautious attempt) there hasn’t been a drawing together of PDP resources as yet, the PAT system is due to be evaluated next term. It is hoped that stronger evidencing of this process as an element of PDP will be high on the agenda. The other ‘less developed’ PDP elements listed ‘float’ around the PDP environment with no concrete base. How we  process critical incident feedback will be central to the success of PDP within the Academy and the collation of such data, in terms of assessment, is still under-developed. Crucially, the lack of a robust framework for these activities has made the learning experience around PDP wholly unsatisfying to the student, as it is still unclear on how the different elements ‘join up’ to create a larger holistic picture of thier career pathways.

The JWG recommend several ways of implementing FLQs into the curriculum and suggest key progression stages at which learners and institutions can pose new questions. Suggested stages to begin to embed the process and examples of suitable FLQs follow:

  • Pre-entry into HE:

Which career path should I take?

Which institutions best suits my needs?

  • Starting in HE:

What strengths do I bring from my previous studies?

What can I do to prepare myself for my new experiences at university?

  • Settling in (personal):

What can I do to meet people and develop new friends?

What experiences do I have of personal, inter-personal and financial management?

  • Settling in (Academic):

Have I located all the resources? e.g. tutors, rooms, library etc…

Do I understand what is expected of me?

  • Considering permitted changes to the curriculum:

Did I choose any class as an experiment with the thought of quickly changing to another one?

Am I now considering this change and its implications?

  • Mid-term stocktaking:

How do my experiences on the programme so far match my expectations?

What seems to be valued by people who specialise in my main subject interest?

Do I still feel motivated?

(HEA, 2006)

It is vital that we (both tutors and students) develop these questions into praxis. How we collate, disseminate and reflect on our answers will determine what our course of action will be. On route, a range of skills will be developed based around the ‘self’ with clear achievements, goals, barriers and actions that need addressed before progression can take place.

It is, as they say… in our own hands.

Dearing, R. “Welcome to this site.” BEI Search. 02 Apr. 2009 <https://bei.leeds.ac.uk/Partners/NCIHE/>. [Accessed 02.05.09]

Higher Education Academy, 2006. Personal Development Planning and Employability, Higher Education Academy, York.

QAA Scotland, 2007. Effective Learning Framework – Using focused learner questions in personal development planning to support effective learning, QAA 138 02/07, Mansfield.

1 Comment

Mahara

March 22, 2009 at 11:24 am (Flexible Delivery, learning, PG-Cert, Student Support)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

logo_mahara

Another assignment, this time to investigate specific processes within the Academy and   to present our findings back to the group after Easter. I had intended to try and avoid a  technological topic this time around and to concentrate on more traditional teaching methodologies, however the inclusion of Mahara as an option was far too tempting to ignore. My rationale was simple: I wanted to. Since the new install of Moodle, Mahara has sat there on the front page like a green genie awaiting a master. Once again the PG-Cert has afforded me an excuse to step forward and motivate me into action.

Work has already progressed on general PDP within the School, though it has been slow and uncertain of itself. Introductions to PDP have been delivered to 1st Years, but little evidence of progress has been evident. Surely it must involve more than simply outlining the concept to them? The added value of PDP to learning appears to be obvious and the rationale is robust, I just haven’t come across any institutional evaluation of the concept. The whole concept, in my opinion, requires a firmer and much more directed approach, its success lies in the first year experience. I believe Mahara could be the vehicle to inspire and drive the process forward.

What is it?

An electronic portfolio or ePortfolio is a generic term encompassing as wide a range of types and products as there are reasons for using them. The simplest starting point is to consider an ePortfolio as an extension of the paper based-portfolio, bringing with it the obvious benefit of making a portfolio of evidence portable and shareable anywhere that you have Internet access – “the new generation of the three ring binder” JISC My World Project Final Report, Roberts. 2006

In fact, an ePortfolio has a much broader scope as an online collection of reflections and digital Artefacts (such as documents, images, blogs, resumés, multimedia, hyperlinks and contact information). Learners and staff can use an ePortfolio to demonstrate their learning, skills and development and record their achievements over time to a selected audience.

“ePortfolios … are personal on-line spaces for students to access services and store work. They will become ever more useful as learners grow up and start moving between different types of learning and different institutions” Secretary of State for Education and Skills, UK, January 2006.

They have the potential to provide a central, linking role between the more rigid, institution-led learning management system and the learners’ social on-line spaces.

There are sound applications for the learner, the teacher, the institution – and sometimes combinations of the three. A teacher and learner for example can be one and the same person, with differing requirements from the same ePortfolio. It can be used to create collections of artefact’s to share with fellow students, peers, family and friends, to present to potential employers and to complement applications for research funding. In short, it is an on-line space from which to manage your life, learning and goals. Mahara (2007)

Although Mahara is built on the same modular system as Moodle (it can be stand alone or integrated, to an extent, with the VLE) it would appear to be fundamentally different to implement. Moodle has a very structured framework in which to operate, it has clearly set out activities and resources, which could be considered to be user-friendly. It is after all a course management system, where all content is defined in neat blocks of information, moderated and presented by educational facilitators. Mahara however, is primarily student centred. It can only evolve with a high level of student engagement. The students build their ‘views’ themselves and grant permissions to other users to participate in their self generated content.

Groups and Fora are generated by learners who wish to expand their learning beyond the curricula (though Mahara can be used for assessment purposes if required). Artifacts (user generated objects such as mp3′s, jpegs or documents) are uploaded onto a ‘view’ page, then access is opened to anyone that the students require to view them. Fora can be used for social purposes or as a vehicle for learning communities to thrive. All of these facilities, empower the student to explore and centre their own learning under their own volition.

Learning – Reflective learning, personalised learning, lifelong learning

An ePortfolio is an ideal tool for meeting the needs of established and emerging pedagogy and approaches to learning.

Reflective learning is “..a form of mental processing that we use to fulfil a purpose or to achieve some anticipated outcome. It is applied to gain a better understanding of relatively complicated or unstructured ideas” HE Academy Guides for busy academics, no 4, Moon 2005

An ePorfolio allows for building in reflective activities for learners and staff, through blog functions and the creation of ‘Critical incident diaries’ in which users reflect on their learning and experiences over a given period or activity. For example, this could be reflections on how a student dealt with a problem, or processed some new information on a given topic. This can become a two way process with a tutor or peer providing feedback via the same diary.

It works as a user-centred, personalised learning space allowing the user to shape the way they present themselves to the world. Content and layout can be personalised to create multiple Views which meet the specific, differing or changing requirements of the user. This ties in with one of the key tenets of personalised learning, that students become key partners in the design of learning to suit their needs.

“Personalising learning involves thinking about knowledge as an active process. Students get to be informed, active participants in their own learning, they contribute to decisions about what learning can work best for them, and they have a much better understanding of how they are progressing.” Minister of Education, NZ, 2007 (Mahara 2007)

Mahara (2007) About E-Portfolios [online] Available at: http://mahara.org/view/view.php?id=3 [Accessed 23rd March 2009]

Mahara (2007) Learning – Reflective learning, personalised learning, lifelong learning [online] Available at: http://mahara.org/view/view.php?id=3 [Accessed 23rd March 2009]

1 Comment

RoME – The Rise of the Mobile in Education

March 14, 2009 at 5:14 pm (Flexible Delivery, learning)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I have just returned from a rare event in the world of educational technology; Apple have finally stuck their head above the parapet in the UK and co-hosted an event with Handheld Learning with the title The Rise of Mobility in Education.  It didn’t didn’t take me long to discover the mnemonic RoME in the title, which seemed a highly appropriate hash tag to use on Twitter, as I intended to tweet throughout the event. Scheduled for two hours and situated in Apple’s Executive Briefing Center in the heart of London I was fully aware of the rarity of such an event as Apple have been very quiet about the educational uses of their mobile devices. The iPod range being the most popular mobile device in history. Of course my interest was more vested than simply my usual passion for all things Apple, I have an iPod Touch pilot scheme running currently and this was a rare opportunity to be in the company of experts.

I just prayed that the event wasn’t going to be another product pitch or technical dissemination on why the iPod is the only gadget for education. I wanted to hear about pedagogy, learners and those who facilitate that learning, in fact, as I walked along Regent Street prior to the seminar I became resolute that if the event was pitched at the sales/technical level then I would ask determined questions about the latter. I had done a little preparation by familiarizing myself with the chapter on mobile and wireless learning (pg180-190) in Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age (Beetham, Sharpe et al, 2007). I created another mnemonic to summarize and aid me in remembering the basic characteristics of ubiquitous, mobile, learning technologies. It was;

Situated

Informal

Mobile

Personalized

Learning

Experience

Simple and effective.

As it turned out, I had no need for this invasive tactic as the lecture was purely embedded in educational paradigm.  Our speaker, Gordon Shukwit (Worldwide Director of I.T & Learning, Apple) introduced himself and was quickly off the mark. An explanation of how pedagogy, content and technology can overlap following the  TPACK model (see Figure 1) ensued. This model clearly shows how the three primary constituents of knowledge can form a complex interplay, creating hybrid knowledge where they intersect.

TPACK Model

Fig.1 TPACK Model

“Considering P and C together we get Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Shulman’s idea of knowledge of pedagogy that is applicable to the teaching of specific content. Similarly, considering T and C taken together, we get Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), the knowledge of the relationship between technology and content. At the intersection of T and P, is Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), which emphasizes the existence, components and capabilities of various technologies as they are used in the settings of teaching and learning.

Finally, at the intersection of all three elements is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). True technology integration is understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three components of knowledge. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) and a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator). Effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, [transactional] relationship between all three components.” (Mishra & Koehler, 2006)

I had not come across this framework before and, for the first time, I recognised a model which I could adopt for the m-SM project and possibly a whole lot more besides. It was one of those moments in which you can feel a ‘shift’ happen in your logic, perhaps this was that ‘defining moment’ I had been looking for? The framework itself is still at the early stage of development but has made it beyond theory into praxis, with several case studies available. The most informative of which being Brigham Young University’s Instructional Technology for ElEd and ECE course. On the course website can be found links to a number of trainee teacher’s reflections in which they have evidenced the use of the TPACK framework in their practice. The blogs can be found here.

Shukwit continued onto how students are required to be ‘librarians’ and understand classification systems in order to access content, drawing comparisons with folder structures and libraries. He asked the question, “How do students know when to delete a folder or portion of content?” and how multiple views of content can be ambiguous, demanding a need for content creators/organisors to be clear and succinct.

The next model presented was entitled the Technology Adoption Life Cycle and was based around Rubens’ SAMR model of ICT integration. The model is a progressive four tiered adoption scheme which begins with Substitution, followed respectively by Augmentation, Modification and finalizing in Redefinition. See Figure 2;

SAMR Model (Rubens, 2006)

SAMR Model (Rubens, 2006)

A explanatory podcast with audio by Ruben can be found here.

It is strange to think back to a time when using a spellchecker was considered cheating by a great number of institutions. These attitudes are to be expected and are often necessary for the innovators to control their innovations, they serve to open the idea to a greater degree of open scrutiny, challenge assumptions and eventually mold it into a more streamlined concept. This concept  can then become embedded in society.

“When Technology fails (it’s learners) it’s Technology itself that gets the blame, never the content or pedagogy.” (Shukwit, 2009)

The Digital Learning Environment (DLE) has been driven by an ‘us’ or shared ideology and three basic types of technology have been the vehicles for this i.e. tethered, portable and mobile. It would be timely to give definitions to these innovations:

Tethered: wired technologies such as desktop pc’s.

Portable: can be wired on wireless such as laptops and tablet pc’s.

Mobile: wireless and can ‘fit into your pocket’ such as mobile phones, PDAs and mp3 players.

Tethered and portable technologies are predominantly shared user content and collaborative devices where the emphasis is on networking. Mobile however carries it’s own unique learning qualities, where the emphasis is on ‘me’ and singling out students as individual learners with their own requirements and needs. Hence the emergence of Individual Learning Plans (ILP) in which the student takes control of their own learning e.g. downloading content ‘as and when’ they require it to be used ‘as and when’ they please. Teachers can now identify a learners specific requirements and ‘push’ content to that learners device, or the learner can ‘pull’ content from content rich servers.

Apple’s iPhone Enterprise Programme allows content to be delivered and received in this way. It bypasses the now standard iTunes (us) model and utilizes a fundamentally different and ‘me’ centered approach, where learners target or are targeted by educators for content pertinent to their specific learning needs.

The remainder of the seminar was presented around the iPhone Enterprise Programme and all of it’s merits, I have to admit that the proceedings became overly technical and resembled the instructions on the back of a MicroSoft product package (sorry Apple!) and I switched off. I did however manage to ask a couple of questions to which the answer’s were wholly unsatisfactory I felt. I asked whether or not ActiveSync was a robust system to which  ‘no comment’ was pretty much the reply, Shukwit was either unable to comment on another companies product or unwilling to. I had assumed that since Apple were engaged with this particular Microsoft product they would be wholly endorsing it as ‘secure’, in this sense, I was suprised at the reply. The reason I required confirmation was not a sleight on MicroSoft, but more to assure my own institution (who are extremely reluctant to install AciveSync due to ‘horror’ stories they had heard) that ‘even Apple’ considered it safe enough to use. Now I am left with the feeling that it is either not secure or Apple simply couldn’t or wouldn’t confirm this for whatever reasons. Several other attendee’s tried to push the question farther nut where met with the same dance.

The other concern I raised was the lack of a quality camera and video capture on the iPhone/Touch making it less suitable for educational purposes than other similar mobile devices. The reply was similar to my previous attempt, I was requested to add it to the feedback sheet we were all given because “we like to listen”. On that note I left the seminar bursting with inspiration, by the time I had reached Regent Street the inspiration had dissolved into frustration. In that short journey in the lift I remembered what I faced back at RSAMD. ActiveSync was the key to unlocking a great resource in both educational and productivity terms, these rumors of it being vulnerable were stemming a potential groundswell of technological enhancement. Paranoia was the real enemy here, as well as an ignorance of how technology, content and pedagogy can be a trinity to be reckoned with.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record. 108(6), 1017-1054.

Ruben R. Puentedura. Transformation, Technology, and Education. (2006)

Shukwit, G. ( March 12th , 2009). in proceedings of the The Rise of the Mobile in Education seminar, London, UK.

7 Comments

Micro Teaching Assignment – Links

March 7, 2009 at 12:09 pm (assessment, Flexible Delivery, learning, PG-Cert, Uncategorized)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The following are links to other pages in my WordPress account that specifically deal with the Micro Teaching Assignment in chronological order:

The Brief

Initial Concepts

Blocking Concept

Podcasting

Contexts

Simplify

Mentoring

Dry Run

The Lecture

Gathering Reflections

Evaluation

Leave a Comment

One of ‘those’ days…

February 17, 2009 at 10:03 pm (1st Year Experience, 2nd Year Experience, learning)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

You can plan all you want before a class, but one thing that is sure to ruin you’re day is resources. I’m not going to dwell on detail here as moaning hardly constitutes critical reflection. Suffice to say, things got a bit mixed up room-wise causing me to think on my feet a bit more than usual.

I began the day with my usual email and Moodle checking before attending individual tutorials with the 2nd Year SM Students. They are nearing the end of a very long module (P4/5) which began last November. The aim of these tutorials was to give the final formative feedback for the module and a chance for the students to respond. I also asked them to think about perceived gaps in their knowledge, so I could facilitate further learning on their behalf and before they progressed to a more senior allocation (next term).

Next term has been designed as an experimental one. All but one of the students are dedicated to one production for the duration of the term with time at the end to reflect. Two are to take on the role of Stage Manager and the remaining pair are allocated as Deputy Stage Managers, all of them are ready to progress and I made this clear to them. Of course there is still work to do, but that is what next term is in place to achieve. It is a time for them to experiment and try things out for the first time, instead of relying on me to tell them what best practice is, I want them to discover this themselves through exploration. In many ways, this is the most important module that they will undertake while at the Academy. They get to set their own standards and goals. I will, of course, be there every step of the way guiding and coaching in context. The A2′s are basic stripped down ‘bare-bones’ productions, an ideal playground for them to learn their craft with enough head-space for them to investigate and hopefully innovate.

I have laid the foundations for this innovation, giving them brief introductions into e-documentation and online collaborative tools, though innovation may emerge in areas other than these digital realms. Perhaps team management or any number of necessary inter disciplinary skills will lead them to develop that factor ‘x’. All of this can be achieved with this forthcoming module, it’s a far cry from the ‘meat grinder’ approach of two years ago and one more conducive to learning.

In the afternoon there was a production meeting for the next A3 studio show, which one of the 2nd Year students were Stage Managing. She (Emma) was to attend, so I requested that the other 3 (Kieron, Vicky & Anne) attend also with the view of using the meeting as a class. We were to sit at the back and observe, making notes on the process for discussion later on that afternoon. However, only Emma turned up for it which was really quite disappointing as we had moved room in order to especially accommodate the extra people. This is the first time that anyone in the Academy has used part of the production process in this way, actually as a direct learning experience, albeit in a completely discrete way.  Usually we would sit with the students directly allocated to the production and be part of teh process ourselves. I wanted the students not involved to analyse and evaluate the process for themselves, sadly the opportunity was missed this time. I plan to use this approach throughout the A2 and A3 productions next term i.e. as observation platforms for students at all levels and especially if they are not involved in the show itself. I feel that I may have a struggle on my hands with certain Directors who still see TPA Students as their to purely support their own agenda’s and students. I am determined to see the end of this approach.

The problem I have always found with RSAMD is the ongoing struggle it has with deciding whether it is a producing theater to support the performing courses, for financial gain or for artistic reputation or an educational establishment which provides the best learning environment for ALL it’s students. At times it feels as if this dichotomy will tear the place in two. Thankfully, this attitude is gradually being phased out, with the PG-Cert becoming a grand catalyst in this progression.

After the meeting I had scheduled a ’round table’ discussion for any Stage Management student that worked on Love for 3 Oranges (Opera 1) earlier this module. This included a 3rd year SM & DSM, four 2nd year ASMs, the 3rd Year SM for Opera 3 (who is feeling anxiety about her coming role next term), and four interested 1st Years. The room we were situated in was wholly inadequate, so in a spontaneous decision decided to hold the mini-event in the bar of the Universal. The idea behind this was one that I have harbored for several years, it encouraged a forum for discussion from a varied group of students who ranged from the curious to the informed. It was a chance to unwrap the Opera and ask questions of each other. I was worried that the conversations would dry up shortly into the discussion but I feel that those who worked the Opera found it cathartic. While the others were given an opportunity to hear it ‘from the horses mouth’, so to speak.

The 1st years have a big presentation on Friday which I also hoped would provide a direct and final font of information for it. The OvD Project (Opera vs Drama) has been running for several weeks and cover both last term and this one. See here for more details.

The session lasted for 90 minutes before I had to leave, so I called a halt in proceedings and left them to discuss the topic more in my absence. The reality is that they probably changed the subject to alcohol choices soon after I left!

Leave a Comment

Stage Management ICT

February 13, 2009 at 10:05 am (2nd Year Experience, Flexible Delivery, learning)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This morning I had my first attempt at an ICT Class, specifically for Stage Managers. To be honest, I wasn’t happy with it and it is definitely and area that requires further development. I was guilty of under-planning, assuming that I could engage my class simply with the technology itself. I underestimated how difficult it was to engage the Facebook generation with specific online activities using Web 2.0. Give them a fast internet connection and they instantly take ownership of their own browsing and do not completely focus on the task at hand. However, a balance was reached as the class progressed, the time that we lost with ‘distractions’ such as Twitter and Facebook was regained almost instantly with the expertise and speed the class brought to completing the tasks I set out.

Noticing Twitter windows hidden behind behind the ‘task’ windows (which became active when I returned to my own workstation) a realisation hit me, I had openly encouraged the use of these technologies in the past and had reflected about their use in classroom environments, now I was actually engaging in my reflections. Up until that point in the morning I had been ‘instructing’ and that left a bad taste in my mouth. I swiftly changed my tact and was thankful that I hadn’t commented on these ‘distractions’ yet. I started to encourage the students to openly Twitter about the class, which they had already been doing (I discovered later when viewing the tweet streams). Personally, the whole dynamic of the class changed for me, I didn’t mention it as I wanted to see where this openness would take us.

We had started working with Google Docs, for a long time I had been aware of it’s potential for Stage Management. One of my personal goals was to explore eDocumentation and how to distribute and share paperwork electronically. Google had supplied a fantastic tool for this purpose. We set up accounts and began to work on several files I had uploaded. After a brief discussion on the benefits for Stage Managers, it was clear that the students found it useful but only if everyone used it. Collaborations would be fruitless without participants. It was a brief introduction, but a useful one, awareness had been established but further self determined orientation and development was the next stage.

We moved onto to exploring the possibilities behind Scribd, an online publishing web facility that allowed participants to upload files for viewing and scrutiny. I had used this in the past for the purposes of research and wanted the students to glimpse it’s potential. Again, we set up accounts and began to explore the basic premise behind this powerful yet simple tool. I had uploaded our Deputy Stage Managers Handbook and, as with Google Docs earlier, we all linked our accounts in order to share resources. This Web 2.0 tool was more suited to learning and research than to Stage Management, but I wanted this morning to be for both learning and professional practice.

After a short break, we stepped into the world of Wiki. Using PAPERCLIP (Stephen Macluskie’s innovative site for technical theater collaborative solutions) we added our very own m-SM project and began to explore Wiki script. Covering the basic’s; uploading photo’s, hyperlinking and page layouts we build a page for the project. This should now give us a base to expand the m-SM project. Through our explorations we also discovered how to link directly to the iTunes applications store, opening iTunes on the host machine in the process. Creating Wiki’s in PAPERCLIP will become an assessable part of their learning in the near future. This tool will eventually replace the old ‘box file’ system which is traditionally used to archive production paperwork. Another example of RSAMD Stage Management attempt to modernise an industry that still uses archaic paper-based systems, which are less efficient and unsustainable.

The next tool we looked at was Diigo, a social bookmarking site. This is an excellent resource in which web pages can be centrally bookmarked, portions of text highlighted, commented on and finally shared. Highlights and comments are saved with the bookmark, drawing the attention of fellow collaborators to the relevant sections. In turn, comments can be returned and collaborations are built. All of this can be done ‘live’ while surfing, using a series of browser plug-ins, meaning that you only have to return to your profile to review your bookmarks at the end of a browsing session. Another important research tool.

We finished the session with 15 minutes on Moodle and the students filled in a couple of Critical Incident online reports that I had set up earlier. For those who finished (or had already completed the task prior to coming to the class) they were given time to ‘play’ online with any of the tools we had used today.

The general consensus was that, as an introduction to these facilities, the class was useful. Some were more engaged than others and each student had different opinions on the resources we had covered. Each student showed a level of individual expertise and I felt the issue of engagement drifted from student to student as they crossed into thier own comfort zones. This, of course was to be expected. We all agreed that a regular series of SM ICT classes should be in place throughout the course, allowing orientation to take place. I also want to stage similair classes were skills sharing through peer learning can take place i.e. a student with particular interest and expertise using a specific e-Tool or software solution can lead a session with their peers. This would open up a host of learning opportunities, as yet untried, within Stage Management.

Leave a Comment

Reflections on Reflections

February 4, 2009 at 9:32 pm (1st Year Experience, 2nd Year Experience, Flexible Delivery, learning, Uncategorized)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

“Life has evolved not in terms of the ways the past has an impact on the present, but in terms of the ways the past is present in the present.”

-Edwin Friedman

One of my goals was to lay the foundations of reflection within my teaching practice. I feel that I have taken the first steps towards this goal, not only by committing to my own reflections (which I felt I would have to do regardless, as I wouldn’t ask my students to engage in a process that I didn’t), but also encouraging reflection within the student cohort. Building a reflective, learning community was always going to be a slow and long process, I have tried to lead by example on this. Committing myself to blog regularly and to commenting on each student blog as they are posted has proved to be time consuming but at the same time greatly rewarding. The sense of empowerment I get when a reflection leads to positive action cannot be over emphasised. Not only do I feel a sense of progression, but is also a stimulating invigorant to do more.

Judging from some of the early reflections by the 1st Year cohort, they share my enthusiasm. If I have been guilty of anything during this inititiation process then it has been that of zealousness. I have often had to pull back and apply ‘brakes’ to my encouragement.

I have nurtured a small group of analytical thinkers from within the student cohort that seem to be natural reflectors. Everything I read and learn about reflective practice gets passed on to them as they blog. I try to make the language palatable in my comments, formatively feeding back on the reflective process itself, as well as the subject matter they are using as a foundation to their analysis. This form of gentle scaffolding seems to be having an effect as I am beginning to see traces of self  and peer evaluation in their posts.

In addition to my own encouragments, I have asked the students themselves to nurture and comment on each others posts. It is hoped that this will embed a culture of ‘linked thinking’ and true collaboration. Empowering the students to center thier learning through both self and peer reflection.

Leave a Comment

« Older entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.