Posted by & filed under Choosing a Specialisation, CMALT.

This week we explore participants’ individual areas of specialisation in learning technologies. Use the Project Bank https://cmaltcmooc.mosomelt.org/project-bank/ to share a Blog post or VODCast describing an area of specialisation relevant to your context.

We will also schedule a Hangout later in the week where participants can discuss and share their specialisations.

Reflect upon why you have chosen this specialisation?

Comment on one another’s PODCasts or VODCasts giving feedback.

As well as the core areas, CMALT candidates are required to demonstrate evidence of independent practice in one or more specialist options. This reflects the fact that, although there are common areas of work for learning technologists, practice is extremely diverse and everyone specialises in something different.

Your specialist topic should reflect an area where you have particular expertise. This may be unique to you or common across your team, but goes beyond what would be expected of any learning technologist.

In describing your specialist option you should refer to the CMALT principles and values:

  1. A commitment to exploring and understanding the interplay between technology and learning.
  2. A commitment to keep up to date with new technologies.
  3. An empathy with and willingness to learn from colleagues from different backgrounds and specialist options.
  4. A commitment to communicate and disseminate effective practice.
Because these are specialist options you should be clear what makes your work distinct from common practice; many people teach on online courses, but designing and delivering fully online courses requires specific skills and would be considered specialist. . Similarly, many teachers provide blended learning, but developing and sharing guidelines for such practice or working with a distinctive blend of contexts might distinguish your work as specialist. It may be that your specialist option is common amongst the group that you work in as you all work in a similar area; that is perfectly acceptable.Evidence for your specialist activity is likely to be very specific but could include: reports, papers or presentations you have written; this could be backed up by a job description plus written statements supporting your specialist knowledge from colleagues, clients or managers; active membership of professional or other bodies; certificates of completion of specialist training programmes or courses.

Posted by & filed under Choosing a Specialisation, CMALT.

This week we explore participants’ individual areas of specialisation in learning technologies. Use the Project Bank https://cmaltcmooc.mosomelt.org/project-bank/ to share a Blog post or VODCast describing an area of specialisation relevant to your context.

We will also schedule a Hangout later in the week where participants can discuss and share their specialisations.

Reflect upon why you have chosen this specialisation?

Comment on one another’s PODCasts or VODCasts giving feedback.

As well as the core areas, CMALT candidates are required to demonstrate evidence of independent practice in one or more specialist options. This reflects the fact that, although there are common areas of work for learning technologists, practice is extremely diverse and everyone specialises in something different.

Your specialist topic should reflect an area where you have particular expertise. This may be unique to you or common across your team, but goes beyond what would be expected of any learning technologist.

In describing your specialist option you should refer to the CMALT principles and values:

  1. A commitment to exploring and understanding the interplay between technology and learning.
  2. A commitment to keep up to date with new technologies.
  3. An empathy with and willingness to learn from colleagues from different backgrounds and specialist options.
  4. A commitment to communicate and disseminate effective practice.
Because these are specialist options you should be clear what makes your work distinct from common practice; many people teach on online courses, but designing and delivering fully online courses requires specific skills and would be considered specialist. . Similarly, many teachers provide blended learning, but developing and sharing guidelines for such practice or working with a distinctive blend of contexts might distinguish your work as specialist. It may be that your specialist option is common amongst the group that you work in as you all work in a similar area; that is perfectly acceptable.Evidence for your specialist activity is likely to be very specific but could include: reports, papers or presentations you have written; this could be backed up by a job description plus written statements supporting your specialist knowledge from colleagues, clients or managers; active membership of professional or other bodies; certificates of completion of specialist training programmes or courses.

Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

This blog aligns with the CMALT accreditation core area 4: Collaboration and Communication- “Relevant evidence would include… …how you have worked with others to solve problems.”
Describe
During the last week of one of our third year modules (Managing Complexity in the Acute Care Environment) we provide students an opportunity to reflect on- and “self check” their current knowledge before study week (and examination). We provide problem-based learning throughout the semester alongside the examination case scenarios. This made another “mock” scenario in the final lecture redundant, with detail then covered in the week tutorials. Another issue was that some staff were not available for the final lecture, though a “self check” to encourage student centred feedback was deemed beneficial.
I suggested to the Paper Coordinator that with the front end of the lecture comprising a “what to expect” presentation (providing students with expectations of process on coming to the examination, timing, example questions related to learning outcomes and a short question time), I could organise a quiz to address specific learning outcomes for the second half of the lecture (45min). To enable this, I asked the relevant lecturers to provide me questions along with multi-choice answers (Evidence 1). These were included in a Google Form (Quiz) and a shortened link and QR code was provided to the students in the lecture (Evidence 2). Students completed the quiz in the lecture and were provided an overview of the “current”results based on those already submitted. Once all had completed the quiz (n=110), individual scores and correct answers were released to the respective student’s email address.
Reflection
What was great about using Google Forms for the quiz (rather than what was available through our university platform), was that as lecturers, we had a “real time” account of what the students were up to, and what questions they found difficult. For example, the report of Responses indicated the “frequently missed questions” which include questions with a correct response of less than 50%. With the first of six tutorials occurring straight after the lecture, any issues could be addressed promptly in those sessions based on the responses. The Google Form (quiz) also allowed students to work at their own pace as we had provided additional time to what we timed the quiz to take 35 minutes. Some completed in 30 minutes, others completed just outside the lecture time. It also provided students some delayed feedback- with a comparison with others who had completed. This acted basically as a prompt “kick-in-the-pants” for those that needed it 2-3 weeks out from the exam; and a “pat-on-the-back” for others that had scored well. We chose not to look at the individual scores and single students out (was a formative assessment), though we did provide an opportunity for students to contact us or ask questions in the remaining tutorial time and/ or via email.
While the learning was based on memory recall prompting reinforcement of acquired knowledge (Behaviourism- Brown, 2006) and supporting a teacher centred approach to learning; it did align with the module’s learning outcomes and provided the students an indication of the depth of questioning we would be using during the assessment (Constructive Alignment- Biggs & Tang, 2011).
What resulted from this quiz, was a more interactive review lab and better results for the module compared to previous year. While there were some other minor changes with the delivery of the assessment, the formative “nudge” for the student to have some feedback on their current knowledge status in preparation for the examination, did have some positive influence…
Reference
Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2011).Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does.(4th Ed). McGraw Hill: Berkshire, England.
Brown, T. H. (2006). Beyond constructivism: navigationism in the knowledge era. On the Horizon, 14(3), 108-120. Doi: 10.1108/10748120610690681.

Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

This ecology of resources is for a level one foundation course for which the targeted learner is the one who has not been very successful in the formal secondary school setting. The aim is motivate them to learn by exploring other ways of learning and thinking and talking about their thinking and how they learn. We have therefore looked at the the tools that teenage learners use in their everyday lives which we could incorporate in their educational journey because these help to :
  • Engage them-the use of social media tools was agreed on because learners are familiar with them already and it helps them to communicate, interact and socialise within an educational environment. Most of them do not want to communicate because they have encountered failure before, so by letting them use social media in their learning journeys, they will initiate communication while experiencing emotional and social engagement without even thinking about it or worrying about failing.
  • The use of social media is under girded by the social learning theory (Bandura) and the social constructivist theory (Vygotsky) where these learners are learning from one another through observation, imitation and modelling and knowledge is co-created along the way.
  • Social media helps to flip the classroom such that these not so motivated students learn so much out of the classroom sometimes without even realising it and that learning can be followed up, refined and extended in the classroom.
  • Social media tools can also be used to improve their their reading and writing with support from their tutors and peers. they are also going to be used for assessment as they capture and reflect on their learning and and storing it in their online portfolios.
  • This way of learning has never been trialed with this cohort of students but i guess we will see the results next year when the programme runs and then evaluate.ecology of resources 2

Posted by & filed under CMALT, Collaboration.

Collaboration and communication are key attributes for educators and our graduates. Laurillard et al., (2013) emphasise the benefits of collaborative curriculum design and the role of modelling collaboration and communication skills to our students. Weaver et al., (2012) also argue for the value of collaborative research to improve teaching practice. The fourth core area of a CMALT portfolio requires CMALT candidates to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in communication through working with others.

Use the Project Bank to share examples of how you collaborate with your peers – this could be an interactive Google Map of research presentations or a team project, a G+ Community, a social media hashtag, a Twitter ‘Moment’ of a collaborative event, etc… Also a reminder to create an ORCID profile and share it with the #CMALTcMOOC G+ Community if you have not yet done so at http://orcid.org

For example, you can find a collection of ORCIDs from the ASCILITE Mobile Learning Special Interest Group at https://ascilitemlsig.wordpress.com/member-orcid-portfolios/

You can also find example collaborative SOTEL research clusters at http://sotel.nz/about-the-cluster/

We will also schedule another group G+ Hangout for a live discussion this Friday morning 9:30am NZ time.

In your CMALT portfolio: Evidence statements could describe the way in which your work involves collaboration, for example through participation in a team or acting as an interface to other groups.

Relevant evidence would include reflection on collaborations with others, reports outlining your activity within a team process, how you have brokered support for a particular initiative (for example from a technical or legal support service) or how you have worked with others to solve problems.Where your evidence involved collaboration, please acknowledge the contribution of others. You may also chose to discuss how you select appropriate forms of communication.Think how some of the tools we have explored throughout #cmaltcmooc could be used to provide evidence of communication and collaboration – for example a collaborative Vyclone video of you and your peers discussing an issue relevant to a course, or an archived Google Plus Hangout On Air with a guest lecturer or a working group, etc…

 

References:

Laurillard, D., Charlton, P., Craft, B., Dimakopoulos, D., Ljubojevic, D., Magoulas, G., . . . Whittlestone, K. (2013). A constructionist learning environment for teachers to model learning designs. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(1), 15-30. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00458.x doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00458.x

Weaver, D., Robbie, D., Kokonis, S., & Miceli, L. (2012). Collaborative scholarship as a means of improving both university teaching practice and research capability. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(3), 237-250. doi:10.1080/1360144x.2012.718993


Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

The first piece of legislation I will reflect on is the [New Zealand] Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCA) (2003), specifically sections 12, 15 & 16 which outline the authority to the establishment, accreditation and monitoring of a healthcare programme- namely an undergraduate physiotherapy degree.

Section 12 (Qualification must be prescribed) http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2003/0048/latest/DLM203387.html
Section 15 (Requirements for registration of practitioners) http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2003/0048/latest/DLM203390.html
Section 16 (Fitness for registration) http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2003/0048/latest/DLM203392.html

One of my more recent roles has included Programme Leader of Curriculum for an undergraduate physiotherapy programme. This role included assisting other lecturers with development of teaching, learning and assessment and ensuring academic quality of the programme to the university Board of Studies and subsequently the Committee on University Academic Programmes (CUAP). Alongside this, the New Zealand Physiotherapy Board (NZPB) accredits our programme as the designated authority under the HPCA (2003).

As a Programme Leader, ad hoc and formal feedback from the clinical supervisors indicated that students were struggling with their reflective practice during their fourth-year placements. With a limited ability to be self-critical (both positive and “gap-finding”), this was causing some conflict during the weekly supervisory meetings. It was also evident that the supervisors themselves did not have a consistent structure for their own reflective practice which made it difficult for the students to “tune-in” to what was expected at subsequent clinical placements.

The New Zealand (NZ) Ministry of Education’s document on Effective pedagogy in the NZ Curriculum highlights that “Reflective learners assimilate new learning, relate it to what they already know, adapt it for their own purposes, and translate thought into action. Over time, they develop their creativity, their ability to think critically about information and ideas, and their metacognitive ability (that is, their ability to think about their own thinking)” (p34). Reflective practice can be categorised primarily as reflection-in-action (thinking reshapes what we are are doing while we are doing it) and reflection-on-action (making sense of an action after it has occurred). The latter may appear more passive, though it does provide students with the opportunity to review their clinical experiences in order to describe, analyse, evaluate and then inform learning about their practice. While there may be widespread acceptance of reflective practice in teacher education, professional groups and some disciplines in the healthcare sector, it is relatively new to physiotherapy practice in New Zealand which is required by the HPCA in 2003.

One of the purposes of the HPCA (2003) is to ensure “lifelong competence of skills” to ensure health and safety of the public. While peer review has been anecdotally practiced in physiotherapy, reflection on practice can be seen as more personal, and indeed considered only to be negative criticism by some- even if not the intent. Education of the purpose, and strength of constructive criticism and self-reflection therefore is required- for those delivering and receiving feedback, and when self-reflecting. In order to embed these skills into clinical practice- it was thought best to be more overt about reflective practice throughout the four-year programme- building reflective skills as the students progressed. Rather than introduce a blanket change- and pull the rug out from all papers (see what I did there…), as Programme Leader I looked to already established papers that reflective practice would align well with already established teaching and assessment. This was – in my mind- more subtle (some might consider covert), to enable minimal disruption to the overall programme. It required some consideration- firstly with respective paper coordinators, other clinicians, then the Programme Committee. In the first year- students reflect on their culture and how this might impact on their interaction with patients (Evidence 1- TTiPP) using Gibbs’ (1988) model (including describe, feelings, evaluate, analyse, draw conclusions and action plan). In second year the students go out on a one week placement and are asked to consider the experience based on the Reflective Statement recommended by the NZPB (Evidence 2- POMFI). Prior to group assessment of their “first patient” on-campus, reflective practice using the Gibbs model is reinforced alongside that of Barksby, Butcher & Whysall (2015) using the acronym of REFLECT (recall, examine, feelings, learn, explore, create and timescale) (Evidence 3- MND). The students are then encouraged autonomy in reflective practice – to use self-selected models and additional resources in their third-year clinical placements. Here, reflective statements incorporated into a submitted ePortfolio (Evidence 4- PPP). The statements include a description; reflection on what went well; what could have been better; what have learnt from the experience; and an action plan for the future- again simulating requirements of the NZPB and subsequently the HPCA (2003). This better prepares the students for their fourth-year where they are evaluated by clinical supervisors (Evidence 5- PPI).

It is understandable that the embedding of reflective practice into the curriculum has been completed over a period of time (2013-2017). Though it is pleasing to say that as the “lifelong competence of skills” of reflective practice are developed to meet HPCA, the clinical supervisors were indicating that they were better equipped to provide constructive feedback on reflective practice and direction for clinical learning. Overall- these lifelong skills are adopted by the students more readily as they are introduced in increments, and have been reported to be invaluable as new graduates and when audited by the NZPB.

References

Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by Doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. London: Further Education Unit. ISBN 1853380717.

Barksby, J., Butcher, N. & Whysall, A. (2015). A new model of reflection for clinical practice. Nursing Times, 111(34-35), 21-23.


Posted by & filed under #CMALTcMOOC.

This is my attempt of the V & R Map. It was rewarding doing this because it made me realise 
how many technologies I have used but never committed to using consistently.
I have both been both a consumer and a producer however, still not very 
confident with the production bit of it for the whole wide world.Quite 
confident to produce for private school-wide or for my class
however, in this knowledge economy I think it is worth being both, so that 
you can be involved in the peer-review process. IMG_8763 (2)