A A A

Summer school: Technology and Change in Higher Education

By Clive Young, on 20 July 2013

summer_schoolLast week with colleagues Martin Oliver and Cat Edera from the Institute of Education (IoE) Stafanie Anyadi and I ran a very successful summer school entitled ‘Technology and Change in Higher Education’. Both the IoE and ourselves have related projects under the JISC Digital Literacies programme and we were keen to explore some of the issues around emerging practices, roles and identities related to the changing technological environment.

On the first day Stefanie and I focused on the issues that had been highlighted by our The Digital Department project and the work we had done around the CMALT programme. We were fortunate to have a very lively group of participants; academics, support staff and administrators who were very happy to share ideas and experiences.

We first explored the notion of changing identities, how rapid technological and institutional change resulted in a fluidity of job roles, often expanding quite extensively from the standard job descriptor. Individuals seemed to be creating their own ‘operational space’, often moving flexibly between ‘academic’ and ‘administrative’ or support roles. This was not exactly the ‘third space’ professional enviroment that Celia Whitchurch [link to Celia's paper] described – although some of our participants identified themselves as such – but a more adaptive professional environment in which previous academic/support boundaries were blurred. This fluidity was not without its problems. Several challenging issues were discussed.
  • Authority had to be self-generated instead of being inherent in the job role
  • Individuals had to create their own networks of influence.
  • Professional development and career progression routes were less clear
  • The boundary-jumping aspect may be ‘transgressive’ and challenge institutional ideas of identity and affiliation
  • It might be difficult for colleagues and the institution to relate to fluid roles and recognise individual expertise
  • This may result in border or ownership issues of issues that can be manifested as barriers
  • Recruitment and induction into these ‘personally-constructed’ roles can be another problemThe group noted that restructuring if well implemented could be way of providing a ‘snapshot’ of these dynamic changes and route for the institution to accommodate them.
summer_school_groupThere were many positives. Such adaptive roles could help students navigate though existing ‘chains of support’. The importance in this respect of the Teaching or Departmental Administrator was mentioned several times. Technology could play a large role in providing a breadth of support for students and staff but often a human ‘broker’ was still much appreciated.

We completed our session by exploring the important role of new pedagogies in this process, how as e-learning had become mainstream it needs a wider group to support it. More communicative designs (using forums especially) also encouraged changes in the types of e-learning support needed and this was particularly evident in distance learning and high-tech blends of campus learning, which often took on aspects of distance learning anyway. Indeed the complexities of the increasingly rich digital environment needed skills in how to ‘signpost’ students, how to engage students in communication, how to ‘align’ their activities with the learning outcomes, but also how to support them in the wider range of digital literacies required.

 

First cohort graduates from Digital Department supported CMALT programme

By Stefanie D Anyadi, on 21 January 2013

First CMALT cohort

The first cohort of UCL teaching administrators and learning technologists has graduated from the workshop programme supporting accreditation as certified members of the Association for Learning Technology designed by the Digital Department project team. For further information see http://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/news/cmalt

 

 

CMALT 2013 – the return of our popular e-learning portfolio programme

By Clive Young, on 20 December 2012

Certified Membership, Association for Learning Technology (CMALT)

Portfolio-Based Professional Accreditation

  • Do you use Moodle, Turnitin, Lecturecast, Opinio, My Portfolio, the UCL Wiki? Do you use Email, text, Facebook to contact students, do you read or contribute to blogs or Twitter etc. or use other technologies to support the student learning experience?
  • CMALT is a chance to learn about, share and implement good practice in the wide range of technologies that support our students’ teaching and learning. As one of our first group of candidates found: “Working together with colleagues from across UCL was helpful in terms of discovering and developing good practice”.
  • CMALT is a national peer-based professional accreditation scheme developed by the Association for Learning Technology and an opportunity to certify your growing skills and experience in learning technology.
  • Why not join us to work towards a CMALT certificate?

UCL’s The Digital Department project offers a pilot programme to support teaching administrators and other colleagues for working towards CMALT. This is the second year we are running it and last year’s cohort had an excellent success rate.

1.      What does it involve?

Completion of a descriptive and reflective portfolio of about 3,000 words, demonstrating your knowledge in four core areas: operational issues (constraints/benefits of different technologies, technical knowledge and deployment); teaching, learning and/or assessment processes; the wider context of legislation, policies and standards and communication/working with others, plus one specialist option subject.  We will run monthly workshops to discuss and work on the core areas of your portfolio, and provide you with a mentor from our team to work alongside you and to ensure you successfully complete your certification portfolio.

2.      How long does it take?

It takes about six months from start to submission.  Our first cohort estimated it took around 20 hours in all to complete. The new 2013 cohort will start in February 2013.

3.      How much does it costs?

It costs £76 to register as a CMALT candidate under the UCL scheme.  In many cases last year the candidate’s department was able to cover the fee.

This is an excellent opportunity to support your professional development with lots of support available.

For further information on CMALT, please visit the ALT website at http://www.alt.ac.uk/get-involved/certified-membership

Please register your interest with Alison Gilry a.gilry@ucl.ac.uk as soon as possible.

We will hold a meeting to provide further information for prospective participants at 3.00 pm on January 15th 2013 pm (location to be confirmed).

Digital literacy – some frequently asked questions

By Stefanie D Anyadi, on 14 December 2012

Have a look at some questions and answers regarding improving digital literacy in the latest JISC Inform: http://tinyurl.com/cojy54s

JISC logo

TA Training Needs Analysis (TNA) Workshop

By Clive Young, on 10 December 2012

Many thanks to all those who attended the TNA workshop on 6th December. The workshop was run jointly by the Project and Jo Lambert, ISD IT Training Manager. It was designed as a follow-up from our TA Questionnaire from earlier in the year which established UCL use of digital tools, confidence and interest in using new tools. The TNA workshop aimed to analyse a bit deeper what TAs do in practice and map this against tools and especially training.

The project is conscious that although we have developed materials around e-learning as part of the CMALT programme, a whole range of university and productivity tools are also used by UCL TAs and we wanted to think how they could be supported. Jo worked with the group to identify common admin tasks, for example around communication, assessment and attendance management. Early in the new year she will report back to the project and the UCL TA community to suggests how common tasks can be mapped to tools and training. We will also be working with Jo to identify any gaps in the current support and training provision.

CMALT 2 – the return of our successful e-learning programme

By Clive Young, on 10 December 2012

As many of you know some 20 TA colleagues started at the beginning of the year on our ambitious and experimental programme to support our colleagues through the Association for Learning Technology’s Certificate Membership of ALT (CMALT). Over half have now successfully completed the e-learning portfolio and such is the interest in the programme at UCL we are now planning another run, starting early in the new year. We are also encouraged by ALT who describe it as their most successful group CMALT programme ever! Perhaps even more importantly the participants report they found it both interesting and useful in the development of this growing component of their work.

We will be sending out more publicity and information soon, but in the meantime if you are interested in the programme, please contact Alison Gilry (a.gilry@ucl.ac.uk).

Back in action

By Stefanie D Anyadi, on 29 November 2012

Our blog has had a rather long summer break although there has been quite a lot of activity. One of the outcomes we have achieved is the successful accreditation of a cohort of teaching administrators as Certified Members of the Association for Learning Technology.

We developed a programme of workshops and arranged mentors to guide teaching administrators through the accreditation process with an excellent success rate. Feedback and the completed portfolios show how this has encouraged reflective practice as well as an exchange of ideas between colleagues from across UCL.

Enabling innovation and change – Part 1

By Clive Young, on 24 June 2012

At the ICA Network conference: Educating the Net Generation in the Life Sciences at the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano last week one of the main themes was how universities can support innovation in today’s fast moving and emerging educational environments characterised by social media and cloud services. This is undoubtedly a challenge. I gave a keynote on our The Digital Department (TDD) project and how we were beginning to uncover a complex pattern of digital literacies and identities that needed to be developed and supported to enable any significant change in this area. I admitted this could be overwhelming but TDD also points to a community-based model of change which might help us achieve our ambitions.

I started by reminding attendees of an older model of change the MIT90s transformational model which was used a few projects in UK HE in the early 00s both to describe and benchmark where universities were in a technology change process.

Basically this model any innovation always started with localised projects then became co-ordinated in some way before becoming integrated with mainstream workflows in a transformative stage and eventually were embedded in the processes of the university (review, quality, finance etc). Only then could innovative change really occur at an institutional level.

Like any reductionist model MIT90s has its limitations but it does highlight the problem of moving from local to institutional innovation. Essentially it emphasises there are a number of steps to go through (whatever you call them) to enable this to happen.

To understand the steps better we can now apply the familiar Rogers 1962 model of diffusion of innovations. Rogers provides the human perspective of change and you can usefully align MIT90s stages to Rogers to see which groups of staff might be involved in each stage. In short the innovators initiate localised projects and but it is only when change becomes coordinated  and then transformative that the majority of staff become engaged.

It is now well understood to ‘break out’ change from the innovators to even the early adopters (i.e. go from localised to co-ordinated) is challenging first identified by Greoffrey Moore (1991) as the ‘chasm‘. Over a decade ago Jamie McKenzie (1999) noted that the chasm occurs because  ”the characteristics of late adopters are profoundly different from those of early adopters” and – after Moore – “crossing the chasm between these groups…requires a mammoth campaign that includes special attention to the vastly different needs, perspectives and demands of the late adopters. He concludes “what works for pioneers does not work for the later group“.

To me this begins to explains the ‘chasm’, why processes of change are slow in universities and the  persistent problem throughout the HE sector of why so many very good educational innovation projects fail to become mainstream and fade away as funding dries up.

In the next blog post I’ll suggest how these insights may be combined to provide a more sustainable, practical and perhaps productive approach of change drawing on what we have been  doing with TDD and other initiatives.

Credit: Rogers diagram

 

Emerging hybrid staff roles in the new e-learning environment

By Clive Young, on 21 June 2012

Keynote for ICA Network Educating the Net Generation in the Life Sciences, 21 June 2012, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy

 

Two types of digital literacies?

By Clive Young, on 16 May 2012

As part of TDD Alison and I attended an interesting JISC workshop on ‘digital literacies’ yesterday. There was much emphasis on how skills and practices contributed to both academic and personal online identities. However the literacies supporting each might be different. A distinction emerged from discussions with programme ‘synthesis consultant’ Helen Beetham.

  • Professional/academic literacies and identities, characterised by specialist tools like SPSS, CAD/CAM, LaTex, GIS tools and the academic tools Moodle/Lecturecast/Turnitin. They tend to have  a steep learning curve but the literacies are usually quite well integrated into modules and ‘owned’ by the department and/or the institution.
  • Personal/social literacies/identities  – characterised by cloud-based web services such as blogs, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Flickr, YouTube –  designed/promoted as ‘easy to use’ and not usually integrated  unless  part of the academic subject itself (investigating digital technologies etc) and therefore not ‘owned’ by anyone (…should they be?).

There is significant possible overlap, however, where cloud-based services could be used directly in to support academic study (blogs, media etc), to engage in discipline-based ‘research 2.0 activities’, to develop portfolios for employability and establish a professional online identity.

This seems the area where the institution may be able to take more ‘ownership’ – the academic application of web service tools. Some universities (or academic departments) reported they had set up wikis covering technologies and techniques that students themselves can contribute to. It was suggested such wikis could be ‘seeded’ by student volunteers or interns.