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.
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…
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
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.
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.
The move to Waterside is fast approaching, and there are a number of important deadlines this year for us as staff members getting ready for the move. With this in mind, here’s a quick timeline that tries to pull together what’s happening when in preparation for the move. It’s intended to help you see what help is available to you, to support you in meeting these deadlines, and also how you might be able to use some of this work towards another target many of you have for the year – gaining your HEA Fellowship.
Of course, different members of staff will have different targets and priorities, and not all of these are reflected here. Some Faculties and subject groups might also have their own internal deadlines for institutional projects like the UMF Review, so always check if you’re not sure. We’ve tried to capture the ones that are generally relevant to most academic staff, but if we’ve missed any, please let us know!
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.
I was looking for a song lyric that had been bugging me when I came across an old 1975 video of The Temptations and I ended up watching it (am easily distracted). It didn’t have the lyric I was looking for but it did help me to reflect on an operational issue I am currently facing- an experience of ‘technology (only partly) enabled learning’
I seem to always want to change things. I think a part of this is always wanting to push myself to keep learning. Change keeps learning alive. Perhaps we only learn through change? It also means I find myself on shakey ground or is it shaky ground – even the word is unstable.
Tempted by change and drawn toward the affordances of technology I tend to jump in and give new technologies a go. Act now- reflect later.
This semester I have been teaching 150 students in a health ethics module. I’ve been playing around with audio assessments as I realise that so much of their assessments across their degrees are in written form, yet as future health professionals so much of their communication will be oral. I started last semester with asking students to use their phones (or some other device) to record an audio response to one of the assessment questions and to provide an accessible link so it could be graded. I thought this would be an easy task! However this caused all sort of issues and many students, despite videos I made with suggestions for Apps that would help with this, were unable to easily manage this process.
This semester I decided to try a different approach and use one of the audio tools embedded within our institution’s LMS, Blackboard. I figured that maybe the Blackboard team would at least be able to support any glitches along the way, which is very helpful when I am the only staff member appointed to this paper.
So, I’ve been using Voice Thread. Students are provided with a link and (simply!) record their response, save and submit. You guessed it- not so simple in practice!
Despite a short Youtube clip plus screen shot instructions from the Blackboard team some students still had problems making and saving a recording. The Voice Thread tool allows students to save a recording without submitting. the submit button seems to not be in an intuitive position. It is difficult for the grader to know whether work has or has not been submitted. Load times are slow so getting started with accessing audio files for grading takes a while with 150 students. Next semester I have close to an additional 100 students so this becomes a real issue. Furthermore, Voice Thread currently sends a notification to students when feedback has been given. Ideally it would be great to have the ability to time release feedback to ensure all students get feedback at the same time.
On the plus side, Voice Thread allows for audio feedback and it’s been a lot of fun listening to my students and then providing an audio recorded message for them. It is a nice connection to complete an online paper.
Reflecting on my dabbles with audio assessments makes me realise that my relationship with technology is very trusting – I am tempted and leap in. Invariably there are issues. In many cases technology creates small pockets of time when I am seriously frustrated and within that small window I have a distorted sense of my precious time being used up at an enormous rate of knots. But there is something that continues to draw me to try new things, to continue to be tempted, to dabble, to sometimes fail and to continue learning along the way.
The shaky ground is familiar territory- continually creating an environment where personal and learning boundaries can be stretched. As The Temptations say in the clip:
“Standing on shakey ground (standing, standing)…And I love standing on shakey ground”
This post links to the following element of CMALT:
a) Understanding and engaging with legislation, policies and standards
[Statements here should show how relevant legislation, has influenced your work. You are not expected to have expert knowledge of all of these areas, but are expected to be aware of how they relate to your current practice. These issues will vary depending upon the country and Government policy.]
New Zealand legal context
Education Act 1989
For my first piece of NZ legislation to reflect upon I have chosen the Education Act 1989, specifically Section 162 (4) (a), which sets out the requirements for being a tertiary institution in NZ.
Section 162 Establishment of institutions
Section 162 (4) (a) (v)
In recommending to the Governor-General under subsection (2) that a body should be established as a college of education, a polytechnic, a specialist college, a university, or a wananga, the Minister shall take into account—
that universities have all the following characteristics and other tertiary institutions have 1 or more of those characteristics:
(i) they are primarily concerned with more advanced learning, the principal aim being to develop intellectual independence:
(ii) their research and teaching are closely interdependent and most of their teaching is done by people who are active in advancing knowledge:
(iii) they meet international standards of research and teaching:
(iv )they are a repository of knowledge and expertise:
(v) they accept a role as critic and conscience of society;
Section 162 (4) (a) (v) of NZ’s Education Act (1989) provides the requirement for universities in NZ to “accept a role as critic and conscience of society”.
Being very aware of my role as critic and conscience of society has always been a core part of my role as an ethics lecturer. In essence, like Socrates, in my role as ethics lecturer in a health faculty, I am trying to facilitate the ‘thinking student’ rather than a compliant, passive health professional. To achieve my own crusade in this direction I am very fortunate to sit outside the various disciplines I teach. Not only is my background not that of a nurse, an oral health professional, a medical laboratory scientist, a psychologist, an OT or any other of the 8 disciplines I teach but the small team of health law and ethics where I am situated resides outside all these departments as well. This creates distance, which may be disconcerting for students who anticipate being taught by ‘one of their own’- a nurse, an oral health practitioner, but at the same time it facilitates the luxury of being the outsider, the naive inquirer – the person who asks – why do you think that? why do you do things that way? Where do you get advice? What is your purpose as a nurse, as a medical laboratory scientist?
So, you get the picture- I get to ask questions- lots of them. I get to ask questions that have no answers. I get to pose questions to students who are used to answers, to certainty, to absolutes, to things that can be measured, things that count.
I am not diminishing the fact that teaching content and knowledge is a core role of an health educator – to equip future health professionals with knowledge of skills for what can be known. To also equip them with research and enquiry skills so they can adequately keep abreast of knowledge as it changes in their field.
But aside from teaching and research there is this other part of my role- this critic and conscience- what an awesome job description – it is a licence to provoke, to challenge, to be that naive inquirer, to model provocation so that students will learn to think for themselves and, to challenge those in authority if need be.
Within my academic networks we often refer to this role of critic and conscience and as we have adopted many of our university practices from overseas, including the UK, I had assumed this was a common component of being an academic.
It was only when I came across The January 2017 Times Higher Ed article by Graham Virgo, pro vice-chancellor for education and professor of English private law at the University of Cambridge that I realised that this isn’t an attribute or responsibility of academics in other countries. Professor Virgo argues it ought to be and cites our NZ Education Act as legislation to aspire to. As he says, academics needs to “ embrace the freedom to develop new ideas, test received wisdom and examine controversial and unpopular positions.” https://www.timeshighereducation.com/comment/university-critic-and-conscience-society
In a climate where free speech is under threat it is good to know the law protects me but also mandates that I must be that critic. Health care can be a very political industry. Not only do I need to be that critic but I need to help my students develop their responsibility to also be those critics and the conscience of society; to be the ones who stand up for their patients, to challenge inequitable structures and ask the difficult questions.
This law definitely impacts on my use of educational technologies. Technology helps me to be that critic and conscience but also to foster these skills in my students.
Critic and conscience enabled through technology
The Values Exchange is web and App-based learning community for ethical deliberation of health and social care issues, based on the Socratic approach of questioning. It supports students to consider controversial scenarios independently but upon submission of their views they gain access to the thinking of all other respondents. It has a fairly flat structure in that all users can load scenarios and all respondents get full access to all response. It is underpinned by values-based decision-making, which values all perspectives.
The AUT Values Exchange home page; www.aut.vxcommunity.com
This semester we have explored social issues, for instance the legalising of recreational marijuana and whether more companies should offer reproductive egg freezing but also we have used this technology to debate technology itself, with recent deliberations on whether parents should be banned from posting photos of their children on Facebook or whether CCTV surveillance is justified. Students report that through its use they build confidence to better understand how they think, and why, as well as valuing being able to learn broad perspectives from their peers – perspectives that are arguable all ‘ethically’ correct. They say this helps them better understand others they work alongside as well as their patients as well as helping them thinking more deeply about everyday issues as well as ethical issues related to their practice.
I see them taking on the mantle as critic and conscience when they tell me they are now initiating family and peer discussions on ethical issues in society and when they get in touch after graduation to post a topical issue for current students to consider. For other colleagues who teach topics with greater objectivity (eg anatomy and physiology), there is perhaps less room for being that critic. That places extra onus on me to carry the critic role given the nature of the topic I teach. I am legally obligated to be outward looking and that role seems somewhat easier with technology.
Early 2017, I was cornered in one of those “corridor conversations”… “Todd, you know something about technology. Can you help us with a proposal to purchase a 360 camera we want?”. This lead me to consider some of the potential constraints and benefits of education with mobile technology; what was required in terms of the technical knowledge; and how to support and deploy this new-found knowledge (without intimidation).
Selling the idea of purchasing technology to managers who have little knowledge (or interest) can be difficult at the best of times- more difficult in times of budgetary restraint. It required a rapid introduction to the technology- namely a borrowed LG 360 cameras– and a “showcase” of how they could be used. As a healthcare lecturer, I utilised one of the clinics to take a “Snap”, download and introduce some “hotspots” in the virtual environment and developed a Seekbeak to be presented. The manager was sold on the idea- and TWO (not the intended one) were purchased for the School.
While I was unable to make the presentation to the manager myself- educating others proved easy as the software and use of the camera was relatively simple- a selling point in itself. Being mobile, the camera could be taken into the allocated 15-minute session, a snap taken and shown on the associated app, and my prepared Snap was showcased as a potential output. Mobility also enabled presenting Snaps of classroom, clinical and case scenario utility- both with the still images and video 360 environments. Being a clinical programme, having students “immersed” in the scene provided more engagement than having the scenario presented on paper or verbally.
While mildly costly (NZ $330), they are midpriced compared to competitor cameras. We have found some the app had some inconsistencies with the Wi-Fi– though this could be a result of the Wi-Fi environment, rather than the device itself. With times of change, there can be some resistance, so further education and support was instigated when selling the idea to the manager…
Deployment and Support
Support and education was deployed in three ways: (1) Introduction workshops at a School-wide Education day. This included two workshops where small groups could hear previous utility, were given a scenario that they needed to setup, capture, then post for others to view within the allocated 20 minutes (fortunately the Wi-Fi god was working for us that day and all was achieved…). This stimulated thoughts from those attending as to how they could implement it in their programmes and case studies. (2) development of a “how-to cheat-sheet”- something that can be referred to in advance and during use; and (3) Availability of someone “in-house” (me) and university-wide to help develop the captures. This has so far included clinical orientation packages; complex home case scenarios; community concussion scenario for assessment; and an interprofessional collaboration. These cameras are now available for all staff to book and use across two campuses.
It is anticipated that in the future, students- instead of lecturers- will critically reason key elements when dealing with certain conditions and embed this reflection in 360 virtual case scenarios for their peers.