O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.

EMBED explained

61 visualizações

Publicada em

Presentation by Stephan Poelmans, KU Leuven on EMBED, during the EMBED Launch in Edinburgh on 2 September 2019.

Publicada em: Educação
  • Seja o primeiro a comentar

  • Seja a primeira pessoa a gostar disto

EMBED explained

  1. 1. Stephan Poelmans, KU Leuven, Stephan.Poelmans@kuleuven.be Faculty of Economics and Business LIRIS research group
  2. 2. EMBED as a strategic partnership
  3. 3. Purposes of EMBED • Track BL practices, conditions, strategies and policies in a systematic manner • Assess the degree of maturity of BL in HEIs • Provide a framework for enabling optimization or change
  4. 4. Working towards a maturity model 1. Literature study 2. Repository of BL cases (mainly BL courses), interviews with lecturers, course designers and policy makers 3. Interviews BL experts, outside the EMBED project (Delphi study) o Framing blended learning, teaching and education o Define & refine dimensions and criteria of the MM o Describe maturity levels 4. Follow-up: revision/validation, multiplier events, MOOC
  5. 5. 1. Blended learning: learning as a result of a deliberate, integrated combination of online and face-to-face learning activities. 2. Blended teaching: designing and facilitating blended learning activities. 3. Blended education: the formal context of BL (practices) that is determined by policies and conditions with regard to the organization and support of blended learning. Definitions in the EMBED project
  6. 6. VALUE OF EVIDENCE, EXPERIENCE AND Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) - When backed up by research and/or practical evidence a course or program design is reinforced. - The extent to which CQI processes and products are embedded in a course or program, determines the maturity level of a BL approach. - These allow course instructors/designers to continuously improve BL courses in an iterative manner ACTION LEVEL AND KEY ACTORS - Three action levels : the micro, meso and macro level. - Main actors are: instructor or instructional designer & students (micro), teams or bodies for decision making a.o. program coordinators and heads of teaching and learning centers (meso) MATURITY concept relates to the degree of formality and optimization of the design, evidence-based decision making, documentation and continuous quality improvement Assumptions
  7. 7. 1. BL course design process planning and design of a course structure 2. BL community and instructor presence extent and types of individual and group interactions during BL activities, focused on LC building 3. Variety of BL materials in order to facilitate content – communication – construction learnig activities 4. Personalization and learner control extent to which learners are able to modify or control particular features of the BLE to their individual needs 5. Re-usability, sharing and openness of BL course degree to which a BL course is shared and/or can be (re-)used 6. Studiability balance between study load, learner experiences and achievement of educational objectives Micro – Dimensions and criteria
  8. 8. Existing frameworks - Graham & Woodfield - Strategy - Structure - Support - E-learning Maturity Model - E-xcellence (EADTU) - Quality score cards for BL - … Meso – Dimensions and criteria : Evolution within Embed Program Level 1. Program Design Principles: Program Coherence 2. Program Design Principles: Alignment of blended learning tools 3. Program flexibility 4. Program modularity 5. Program Experience: Student Learning 6. Program Experience: Study Load 7. Program Experience: Inclusiveness Institutional level 1. Institutional support 2. Institutional strategy 3. Sharing and openness 4. Professional development 5. Quality assurance 6. Governance 7. Finances 8. Facilities
  9. 9. Micro level: BL PRACTICES IN CONTEXT Sample Overview (N=26 cases) 6 Embed partner universities • Humanities 7 (philosopy, linguistics, cultural studies, psychology) • (Business) Economics & Information Management 6 • Exact Sciences & Research Methods 10 • Medical Sciences 3 Interviews with lecturers and an online survey (frequency of learning activities and tools)
  10. 10. I think the fundamental reason [to start with BL] is to give more meaning to your classes. That is one reason to start BL. Another thing is that if you start BL, you need to think about your design. Filling 2 hours in a [conventional] lecture for a group of students is easy. Creating a BL design requires thinking: why, for whom, added value? _ lecturer
  11. 11. General Learning activities General Activities N Online Offline Online & Offline Instructor-led Student-led Lectures/Tutorials 24 19 21 15 23 3 Exercises / Assignments / Problem Solving 21 18 12 10 8 12 Small Group Work 14 10 11 7 1 9 Workshops // Seminars 13 7 9 4 4 6 Student generated content (e.g. Video's, articles, exam questions) 12 12 2 2 3 6 Student Presentation 11 7 8 4 1 7 Reflective journal 10 10 0 0 1 8 Panel/ Discusion /Debates 10 7 8 5 2 7 Demonstrations 9 6 7 4 6 2 Q&A sessions 8 4 6 2 4 1 Guest Lectures 6 4 3 1 4 0 Polling // Surveys 6 3 3 1 5 0 Project 6 5 2 1 0 4 Brainstorming 5 4 4 3 1 4 Labs/Practicum 5 2 4 1 0 1 MInd--mapping 5 3 4 2 0 4 Role play // Simulation 4 0 5 0 3 3 Excursions 2 0 2 0 0 1
  12. 12. Communication & Evaluation Activities Communication Activities N Online Offline On & Off Instructor -led Student -led Announcements 22 22 11 11 21 1 Consultations (office, online, ...) 16 12 12 8 5 5 Notifications 16 16 3 3 15 1 Discussion session/forum 21 20 8 7 8 13 Evaluation Activities NR Online Offline On & Off instructor -led Student - led Feedback 17 15 9 7 11 5 Final Exam 17 5 15 3 16 1 Other student-generated contents (Blogs, reflective journals, Website,..) 16 2 4 0 0 11 Peer Review 13 11 7 5 2 11 Essay 9 6 4 1 5 3 Commenting on readings / annotations 7 7 1 1 0 3 Portfolio 7 7 0 0 3 4 Marking with Feedback 7 6 2 1 7 0 Quiz 6 5 1 0 6 2 Project 6 4 3 2 1 3 Final Presentation 5 3 3 1 0 4 Product Development 4 4 2 2 0 4 Mid-semester Exam 4 2 3 1 4 0 Clicker Evaluation 3 3 0 0 3 0 Report 2 2 0 0 0 2 Poster 2 1 1 0 0 2 Mid-semester Presentation 0 0 0 0 0 0
  13. 13. Tools & Resources Tool name N In a few activities half of the activities most activities all activities PPT slides 21 5 5 7 6 Weblinks 18 4 6 4 5 Readings 17 2 3 6 6 Textbooks 13 3 2 5 2 Recorded Lectures 12 3 5 2 1 Aynchronous Discussion (individual or group) 12 5 3 3 0 Handouts/ Lecture notes 9 5 3 1 2 Desktop recordings (such as screencasts) 9 2 6 1 0 Smart Device 8 2 2 1 3 Unit outline / Learning Guide 8 1 0 1 5 Web Course Platforms 8 0 1 3 4 Blog (Individual or group) 8 0 4 0 1 Synchronous video/audio chat (e.g. Skype) 8 5 1 0 0 Office Tools 7 0 2 3 2 OER 6 0 2 1 3 Authoring tools 5 3 0 2 0 Learning Analytics 5 4 1 0 0 Subject Specific Software 4 1 1 1 1 Wiki (Individual or group) 4 4 0 0 0 Webinars 4 2 1 0 0 Social Media 4 0 2 1 0 News & Curation Tools 3 0 1 0 2 Personal Information Systems (e.g. Evernote, OneNote,…) 3 1 0 2 0 Live Streaming of Lectures 3 2 1 0 0 PPT with audio 3 3 0 0 0 Interactive Textbook 2 0 2 0 0 Recorded Webinars 2 1 0 0 0
  14. 14. BL PRACTICES IN CONTEXT Multiple cases @ KU Leuven and TU Delft
  15. 15. COURSE DESIGN • Lecturer’s aims: freeing up lecturing time to apply theory and support problem-solving in the classroom, ‘trying something new’, internationally local, FtC, integration of MOOCs into a BL approach • In few instances: evidence or experience inform BL course design • But there is ‘self-reflection on alternatives in order to optimize learning outcomes’ VARIETY OF BL MATERIALS • Limited number • Media and technology selection > availability https://limel.pageflow.io/ervaringen-mooc#39499 https://storyform.co/@veerle.vanrompaey/once-upon-a-time--b7322494feee#
  16. 16. TU Delft KU Leuven Textbook Slides (audio-supported) Recorded lectures (video) YouTube Smartphones Screencasts Weblinks MOOC (edX) Wiki Mymathlab Maple TA Textbook Slides (with audio) Recorded lectures (Video’s) YouTube Smartphones Screencasts Weblinks MOOC (edX) Learning analytics Wiki, Blog IT modeling tools (Merode, UML) Design tools (Drupal),… Less frequently used tools: Wiki’s: e.g. “But the year before I made a wiki and I said okay, students can put together their own set of notes and combine things, it ended at being basically only one student really contributing “ Online communication tools such as forums have limited to no success. Students do not use them (or very limited)
  17. 17. BLENDED EDUCATION CONTEXT – Support SUPPORT AND INCENTIVES (THAT WORK) • Design of courses, evaluation, redesign including planning • Development of online materials, e.g. videos • Funding from various sources, e.g. from faculty • Extra staff, e.g. teaching assistants • Follow-up, e.g. sharing experiences with colleagues • Technical, either centralized or faculty-based help desks • Project-oriented approach within a design team (>< ’find your way’)
  18. 18. Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that if you make the material crisp and clear, as nice as you can, that all your problems are gone. Be very sensitive of whether the material is not too good, so that your students have the impression that they understand that, they did understand the story but they don’t understand the concept. I think it's worthwhile doing so. But they have to be aware that it will cost time. It will not save you time. It will probably increase the efficiency of the course, but it will not save you time as a lecturer. Don’t make everything blended … And so the good things from the past, the good old lectures : keep them ! And next to this, do things with a team ! A team of 2 or 3 is enough. And then you have to go for it, mind the details, the quality of audio and video, appointments with students, a study guide. Choose your pet project and go for quality and detail. _ instructors
  19. 19. Course design process Community and instructor presence Variety of materials Personalization and learner control Re-usability, sharing, resources and openness Studiability KU Leuven Common practice Experimentation Experimentation Experimentation Common practice (limited) Embedded practice TU Delft Common practice, with ‘advanced’ aspects Experimentation Common practice Experimentation Embedded practice Embedded practice Preliminary maturity levels: - Experimentation : limited design driven - Common Practice: comprehensive design-driven, evidence-/experience- based - Embedded Practice: comprehensive design-driven, evidence-/experience- based and deliberate embedment of CQI processes and products in order to continuously improve a course in an iterative manner
  20. 20. BL at the Institutional level @ KU Leuven and TU Delft
  21. 21. CASE 1 – TU DELFT 22 500 students 5200 staff members 1 campus 8 faculties Approximately 300 out of 1600 teachers are involved in online and/or blended learning Every student will have at least 1 BL course Strategic framework 2018-2024 ‘Impact for a better society’ CASE 2 – KU LEUVEN 57 200 students 20 500 staff members 14 campuses 15 faculties Strategic framework 2018-2022 ‘On crossroads, for a sustainable society’
  22. 22. TU Delft Teaching Lab
  23. 23. KU LEUVEN EDULAB – Virtual classrooms
  24. 24. TU DELFT Strategy SPEARPOINTS BL explicitly mentioned: ”Innovation in teaching and learning through a blend of online-and on-campus education” (p.14) Related: OER, incentives for educational innovation, operational excellence, campus infrastructure CULTURE OF INNOVATION IN TEACHING & LEARNING • experimentation with and development of different types of education, including BL courses and programs • evidence-based university education
  25. 25. A strategy to stimulate the use of BL, as part of a policy to enhance study success, in the bachelor programs (2012-2013) • Directors of education & the executive board • As part of an agreement with government to increase study success • Focus on review of curricula, active learning, including BL Since 2013: An ‘early adopter strategy’ for online learning • The executive board • Focus on MOOCs , open courseware, also BL BL strategy until 2018 • Top-down and bottom-up approach TU DELFT Strategy
  26. 26. KU LEUVEN Strategy SPEARPOINTS BL mentioned as part of technology-supported education or multicampus education: “For some learning goals, the best working method is the traditional lecture (…) Other learning goals benefit from a combination of face-to-face education and e-learning.” (p.32) “(…) multilocation learning calls for a better coordination between e-learning and face-to-face education.” (p.31) • BL is not explicitly mentioned, but, recently: • A new educational strategy : focus on online assessment, a better network infrastructure , learning analytics, virtual reality, Micromasters and Moocs • Hiring educational technologists • The KU Leuven Learning Lab: • Increased collaboration between the Educational Development Unit collaboration with the technological Support Unit • A more recent Educational and Technological support, structure and strategy towards BL course designers • Since 2015: targeted call to kick start MOOCs • MOOC team in place to offer support for design and development • Since 2018: targeted call for IDL project (innovative digital learning) • Focus on Assessment & feedback • 10 projects selected
  27. 27. 1. Maturity at strategical level from consolidated to systemic implementation o formal advocacy by university administrators and departments o strategic facilitation of wide-spread implementation 2. Maturity at the structural level systemic implementation o robust structures involving academic unit leaders for strategic decision making o institution-driven evaluations addressing BL outcomes 3. Maturity at the support level systemic Implementation o well established technological support to address BL/BT needs o robust BL course development process, systematic promotion and dissemination o well established faculty incentive structure for continuous training and implementation TU DELFT – Preliminary analysis
  28. 28. 1. Maturity at strategical level from consolidated to systemic implementation o “Administrators identify purposes to motivate institutional adoption of BL” o “Tentative policies adopted and communicated to stakeholders, policies revised as needed” o But: “Individual faculty members implementing BL” (So at the moment: bottom-up initiatives – individual passionate teachers 2. Maturity at the structural level consolidated implementation o “Emerging structures primarily to regulate and approve BL courses” o “Efforts to designate BL courses in registration/catalog System” o ” “Not yet formal evaluations in place addressing BL learning outcomes” 3. Maturity at the support level from consolidated to systemic implementation o “established technological and educational support to address BL/online needs of all stakeholders” o But: o “Exploration of faculty incentive structure for faculty training and course development” o “Experimentation and building of a formal course development process” KU LEUVEN – Preliminary analysis
  29. 29. Sources • Interviews with policy makers & the Educational Support Unit • Strategic plan TU Delft 2018-2024: ‘Impact for a better society’ https://www.tudelft.nl/en/about-tu-delft/strategy/tu-delft- strategic-framework-2018-2024/ • Strategic plan KU Leuven 2018-2022: ‘On crossroads, for a sustainable society.’ https://www.kuleuven.be/english/about- kuleuven/strategic-plan

×