ALTC+Round+2


 * We are addressing the following ALTC kep priority areas: **
 * Improving tertiary pathways- introducing EPLE to TAFE programs ??? see note below **
 * Innovation and development in learning and teaching, including relation to role of new technologies. **

After discussion with a few successful ALTC grant recipients it was determined that our initial EPLE plan was more specific and unique that our broader TASTE proposal. So lets get back to where we started from with a clear direction and from a position of difference! ** Effective Pre-Lecture Engagement (EPLE) ** **// An EPLE a day keeps boredom away. //** ** Aim: ** On page 2 Innovations dot point: It has a very relevant statement for us: "...emphasis may also be given to the creative application (teacher development workshops?) of existing innovations in learning and teaching in higher education". Colleague development approach : as a way of transforming higher education through pre lecture activities that enhance student engagement, constructivist learning and and with the development of self efficacy to support their transition from secondary school and/or the workplace to tertiary education. ** Project Outcomes and Rationale ** Deep and meaningful learning experience for students, achieved by better engagement through interactivity ... Have to identify student needs & respond to student diversity. Socially responsive approach to learning and teaching **// From our learning and teaching grant application: //** Students present with a diverse range of pre-existing levels of understanding which makes the pacing of the f2f sessions difficult to customise for students experiencing difficulties as compared to those who are at a more advanced level of understanding. For many students, (especially in their first year), this is exacerbated by the fact that many of them lack familiarity with new discipline specific terminology and hence the confidence to ask questions in a f2f situation to clarify misunderstandings. Teachers grappling with limited time in the f2f find it difficult to provide opportunities for students to interact, reflect and apply knowledge to ‘real life’ authentic learning situations, consequently impeding the fostering of critical thinking and inquiry. Kolari and Savander-Ranne (2007) found that assigning pre-lecture activities that contributed to assessment, enabled 'new concepts to become more comprehensible and deeper understanding easier to achieve when students master relevant prior knowledge.’ These same authors acknowledge that the designing of appropriate pre-lecture assignments is most demanding and requires a great deal of self-reflection and interaction with students on the teacher’s behalf. The benefits of investing this time into the designing of effective pre-lecture activities is offset by the fact that “pedagogies in which teachers are made aware of students’ incoming knowledge enhance learning” and provide opportunities to convert the traditional lecture into a vibrant peer led learning environment (Mazur 2009). Adopting an EPLE approach to enhancing student outcomes also supports a constant feedback loop that is student-centred, interactive and sits with in a constructivist framework (Novak, Patterson, Gavrin and Christian, 1999; Marrs and Novak, 2004). **// From our panel presentation that can be reworded here: //**

Many university lecturers are in the process of reshaping the nature and purpose of face-to-face contact time, seeking to morph the traditional lecture into something that is more interactive and student driven. This shift is apparent in a range of initiatives, for example, such as POGIL (Moog, 2010), Team-Based Learning (Sibley, 2010), Peer Instruction (Mazur, 1999; Crouch and Mazur, 2001), Just in Time Teaching (Carrington and Green, 2007; Novak, 2010), Crash Courses (Willis, 2009) and Integrated Online Learning Modules (Snelling et al., 2009; Karanicolas et al., 2009; Karanicolas and Snelling, 2010; Snelling and Karanicolas, 2010) to name but a few.

Underpinning this changing lecture dynamic is a focus on the content that students are required to cover so that they may be best prepared for, and thus gain maximum benefit from, the face-to-face session. Team-Based Learning, for example, does this in a quasi-traditional manner, relying on readings combined with reading guides and preparatory questions, while the Integrated Online Learning Modules achieves this in a much more contemporary fashion, providing students with multi-media learning modules and online quizzes. In both cases the emphasis is on moving a significant proportion of the ‘broadcast’ material, i.e. the one-way monologues that were the stuff of the traditional university lecture, out of the face-to-face session, and into a format that students access independently and work through at their own pace.

However, designing effective pre-lecture activities presents its own challenges. These activities need to be suitable for students from a wide range of backgrounds and abilities, and with a range of different learning styles and needs. They need to effectively cover the required content while continuing to hold student interest and they need to relate coherently to the upcoming face-to-face session. Without a student perception of relevance, pre-lecture activities will not be carried out at the right time or, possibly, at all.

This project team has been successfully carrying out a diverse range of effective pre-lecture engagement activities over a period of four years, with measurable improvement in student outcomes across a range of disciplines. They have analysed and reviewed the characteristics of effective pre-lecture activities, those that succeed in engaging students while ensuring they acquire the skills and knowledge enabling them to best participate in the face-to-face interaction. Such activities provide a scaffolding of the curriculum, support collaborative learning and nurture problem solving skills; importantly, they should also function as an effective revision tool, for example, in preparation for final assessment. Further to this the team have equally considered the common stumbling blocks for both lecturers and students in transiting to these EPLE teaching and learning modes. A statement about our colleague development approach probably needs to be considered………

** Approach ** The objective of **colleague development** is to propagate this effective learning and teaching initiative that has the potential to transform higher education through increase student interactivity, engagement and ultimately instill skills for lifelong learning. The well established three-step quality assurance strategy of ‘Measure, Manage and Monitor’ (reference) has been extended for this initiative to a six-step process to also include ‘Motivate, Mentor and Maintain’. These steps encapsulate the major actions required in the mentoring process of other academic staff so that their skills in EPLE are not only developed, but also maintained. ** Measure. ** Target strategic courses, i.e. high impact (class size, cornerstone, etc.) or problematic. Measure student outcomes such as average grade and failure rate to identify courses requiring attention. Student perceptions expressed via surveys regarding critical factors including adequate feedback. (student feedback, class size, student diversity, attrition etc.) - assess the need for transition towards more blended models (or, more negatively, to see what's wrong with the course); check the course profile (retention, grade outcomes, SELTs, measurable engagement or ???, student backgrounds, student underlying knowledge) .... also ask students what the issues are ** Motivate. ** Courses may be volunteered by pro-active academics who wish to adopt new strategies and assistance. However, some courses may be identified by others, such as the Head of School. In such cases, the academics may be resistant to change, therefore the core project team must work with the academic to ensure it is a positive, collaborative and non-threatening process. Minimum performance requirements – promotion, SELT, CEQ, etc. ** Manage. ** Management relates to addressing the specific problems in each course (i.e. using the ‘right tool" for the development of EPLE in discipline specific contexts) and also managing the workload of the academic. In other words, strategic topics within the curriculum would be targeted and EPLE changes must be sustainable and would be rolled out over time (i.e. do not change the way the entire course is presented in a single year). CUSTOMISE   Manage the issues, manage/stage a transition to alternative ways of operating, eg. not convert whole course at once but focus on particular topics, work through options in respect of technologies, systems, pedagogical needs (eg as derived from the 'measuring' exercise, by determining what are the critical topics, where students don't achieve critical understandings or outcomes, or where students are in need of more detailed feedback).  ** Mentor. ** Collaborate with academic and teach skills (hands on). One-on-one, step-by-step etc. support and guidance. ** Monitor. ** Develop customised special student surveys (student-to-teacher feedback) to determine their perception of the new teaching strategies. These surveys can be at the end of the course and also during (e.g. online survey open during entire semester) to accommodate a strategy of continual improvement (subject to the consent of the academic involved). Compare grade statistics (assessment outcomes: average grade, failure rate, retention, etc) before and after implementation of the mentoring process. Student focus groups… - outcomes of assessment, retention, SELTS (with special/tailored questions), student focus groups, student outputs (posters, publications, wikis/blogs??) ** Maintain. ** As this process must be sustainable in the long term, the role of the core teaching team would reduce to act as an advisory role in the second year rather than in a hands-on capacity in the first year. ** Dissemination ** The process of training other academics is in itself the primary form of dissemination. In addition, four other main pathways will be used. ** Workshop. ** Collaborative sessions. ** Seminar. ** (i) by mentee to other staff in their school; (ii) by core team - Examples of best practice. Customised to the needs of each discipline, school, faculty and/or institution. ** Publications. ** Research publications (including between mentors and trainees), reports, etc. ** Website. ** Include research publications (by core team and those in the open literature summarising the teaching strategies used in this initiative), exemplars, step-by-step guide, student testimonials, FAQ, advice, etc ** Improved student outcomes ** : progression and retention rates, student satisfaction rates - run customised workshops for people in particular disciplines - will have a web site of strategies, exemplars, advice etc., but it's more than just accessing web sites ** Value/Need for Project ** Larger class sizes with highly diverse student cohort Students need feedback, engagement etc. ..... might relate to first year experience and attrition rates .... need to make students part of the community .... ** Issues facing the sector as a whole: (need literature and statistics for evidence) ** > //students, concurrent with the reduction in recurrent resources."// (Franklin and Peat 2000)
 * Most programs across the sector nationally are experiencing a marked increase in student numbers with little matching increase in teacher numbers and/or resources. " //..... issues arise from the increasing number and diversity of//
 * Enable educators to maximise the use of available resources and social learning tools that require minimal expense to implement and can be customised to the needs of the educator, student and program to enable pre lecture engagement
 * The student profile is becoming much more diverse as students enter higher education through non traditional pathways resulting in a student cohort with different learning styles and levels of pre-existing or assumed knowledge bases. The time spent with students needs to take into account the reinforcement of basic concepts for those with minimal preexisting knowledge and the ability to challenge those with more advanced understandings
 * The difficulty of transition from high school to higher education, or from the workplace to higher education, for first year students is accentuated when programs are delivered in traditional methods which foster anonymity and fail to provide crucial formative feedback mechanisms
 * The development of a community of inquiry, (even in large class cohorts), fosters a sense of belonging and collaboration that eases the sense of alienation that many first year students experience
 * Maximising the effectiveness of the time students have to spend with their teachers, particularly within large student cohorts through effective prelecture engagement activities both face to face and online
 * Developing of a deep and meaningful student learning experience that fosters the application of knowledge and critical thinking skills as the face to face session is transformed through vibrancy and interactivity as students confidence is fostered
 * Encourage and motivate higher education teachers to become more effective educators and self reflective practitioners as they become more in tuned with their students needs through crucial feedback loops
 * Time poor students: fail to attend classes
 * Well documented that students who come prepared to lectures receive maximum benefit from the f2f, but engaging students in the study of pre-lecture material, has long been used in most disciplines, but with varying levels of student engagement
 * Need to maximise the use of social e-learning tools that todays students are accustomed to such as wikis, blogs, facebook. Bring the learning into the world of the student to enhance relevance. // "The future for many Universities will see a continued migration away from a traditional school leaver undergraduate mix, and the rise of diversified delivery models, enabled by e-learning technology. E-learning has matured into a core element of the learning mix.... and move away from the core campus model" // Deloitte Report 2009.

** Summary of Benefits: How this will benefit the sector as a whole(from our google docs) ** ** Intersector collaborations; TAFESA, Otago Polytechnic ** There are existing memornda of Understanding and articulation pathwyas from the VET sector into higher education programs. Such examples exist in health sciences, oral health, engineering, computer sciences others??? By working with TAFESA potential TAFE students who are wishing to further their studies can develop a familiarity with the construcivist and self directed approach to higher education through EPLE activities that transform the face to face session. ** Building on references- **
 * time effective use of f2f; through tailored learning opportunities that have been designed around student needs through embedded inetractivity and feedback mechanisms
 * gets students to same starting point (different backgrounds) (//IG - not quite sure if this can be read as meaning that the whole EPLE thing is not as relevant to the better performing students???. SK.. perhaps it helps to validate their understanding and helps to reduce boredom in the f2f as their peers are also more informed, so content can be taken to a higher level which helps engage the better perfomers as well)//
 * building student level of confidence through meaningful engagement in pre and during lecture
 * face to face can be structured around authentic learning activities-real world applications to empahise the relevance of the learning and hence contribute to student attendance levels to the face to face
 * supports constructivist learning through ongoing feedback loop and increased formative feedback mechanisms
 * provides clear direction for students through the emphasis of key concepts and learningtasks designed around authentic learning??
 * allows for the student self reflection and inquiry
 * encourages team based learning in thef ace to face
 * addresses gardaute outcomes
 * encourages tertiary teachers to become more effective and self reflective which contributes to positive student learning experience and consequently increased retention and progression rates

** References: **

Carrington, A. & Green, I. (2007). “Just in time teaching revisited: Using e-assessment and rapid e-learning to empower face to face teaching.” //ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007//, http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/carrington-poster.pdf

Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). ‘Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results’, //American Journal of Physics//, 69(9), 970-977.

Karanicolas, S., Snelling, C., Carrington, A. & Green, I. (2009) ‘Making the connection: Building student engagement through integrated online learning modules.’ //Proceedings of the Educational Research Group of Adelaide (ERGA) Conference, September 2009.//

Karanicolas, S., & Snelling, C. (2010). “Making the transition: achieving content connectivity and student engagement through flexible learning tools.” //Proceedings of the Distance Education Association of New Zealand (DEANZ) Conference, April 2010.//

Mazur, E. (1999), ‘Peer Instruction: A User's Manual’, //American Journal of Physics//, 67(4), 359-360.

Moog, et al. (2010). Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) website, www.pogil.org, accessed 3 August, 2010.

Novak, (2010). Just in Time Teaching website, jittdl.physics.iupui.edu/jitt/, accessed 3 August 2010.

Sibley, (2010). Team Based Learning website, teambasedlearning.apsc.ubc.ca, accessed 3 August 2010.

Snelling, C., Karanicolas, S., Carrington, A. & Green, I. (2009) “Making the connection: using on-line technologies to determine the learning needs of first year students in a human biology program.” //Proceedings of the First Year in Higher Education Conference, June-July 2009.//

Snelling, C. & Karanicolas, S. (2010) “How blended learning is enhancing student outcomes in a first year undergraduate course.” //Proceedings of the HERDSA Conference: Reshaping Higher Education, July 2010.//

Willis, C.R. (2009) “The use of crash courses to promote active engagement in large class sizes.” //Proceedings of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AaeE) Conference, December 2009//.