Engaging reluctant learners

This was a session facilitated by Clarrie Yates on 23 May 2012. I live blogged as we went along, but Blogger seems to have removed the automatic save function - or maybe something else happened! Needless to say, I lost an entire hour's blogging! Ah well, when it works it works well, when it doesn't it makes you want to tear your hair out and test the aerodynamics of your computer.
So, this will be a rather abbreviated overview of the session rather than anything more in depth. Instead I would encourage you to dip into the recording of the session here: http://connect.vln.school.nz/p82628843/.

If you are interested in continuing and contributing to the the discussion

• Clarrie has created a pretty extensive resource with suggestions and strategies here: http://bit.ly/Kzz6Ua;
• The forum below the event overview has some super contributions from Vicki, Heather, and Brenda (http://bit.ly/LFcCbz); and
• Wi has started a discussion forum around the subject (http://bit.ly/Jyy1mm) to which Melvin has contributed.

The session was very worthwhile with a large amount of discussion and sharing. If you are looking for some ideas around why learners might be reluctant  and/or disengaged, reasons why this might happen, and some strategies as an educator that you might apply, this is a useful recording and set of resources to dip into.
It would be excellent to hear more about how students might be empowered - perhaps through the design of the course, and shifting the current paradigms of formal versus informal learning. So please jump in with experiences and ideas of your own, as well as links to resources.

Image
A bored person (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A different pattern of student engagement: Mature distance students at university

Concept map describing activities offered by universities to encourage integrative learning. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)Ella Kahu started with a definition of mature students as 25 and over years of age. Many mature students are blancing their study with other resposibilities. There is a 29% attrition rate in the first year, and course pass rates are 79% (figures from the MoE; mature students doing bachelor degrees). The project aim was to develop a deeper understanding of student engagement in mature distance students.

Mature students have:

• Equal levels of satisfaction
• Deeper learning strategies
• more committed / motivated
• Different pattern of interaction (less interaction with other students)
• Better able to manage distance (have the life skills and time-management skills
• Experience a lot of role and financial pressure
• alienation and anxiety
• Lack of skills (don't necessarily have the up to date skills required...yet another thing to learn in the first year)
• Overload of first year
• Knowledge conflict

The definition of student engagement for this study comes from the OSSIE: "The time and energy students invest in educationally purposeful activities, and the effort institutions devote to effective engagement". The scales of engagement include academic challenge, work integrated learning, active learning, enriching education experiences, and staff and student interactions.

Ella's research questions are: Which dimensions predict satisfaction and learning? How do age and model of study relate to engagement and outcomes? How do students who consider leaving university differ? Of 1116 first year domestic undergraduate students at Massy, 27.1% are aged over 25. The relationship between engagement and satisfaction - the more engaged students are the more satisfied they are. The students who reported a higher support and more work-integrated learning were more satisfied. This increases to 44% where there was active learning.

Students who considered leaving (27%) were less satisfied, there was no difference with age or mode of study, there was lower learning, and reduced engagement (less supportive learning environment, less integration with work, and reduced academic challenge).

Age and mode of study did not affect the outcomes of satisfaction and learning, but saw more connections between what they were doing within the work environment, but made fewer friends with other students. the distance students scored lower on all levels of engagement.

Key things to consider are:

• Creating a supportive learning environment (academic and social)
• Work integrated learning are related top satisfaction, learning and persistence, and build on strengths of the mature distance students.
• The active learning requires building in choice around asking questions and discussing equally, collaboration with other students...but caution is required.

The limitations of the study include the fact that the OSSIE was developed for practice not research, the timing of the survey, it's a snapshot of a brief moment in time, but it requires more depth (including qualitative). and the view of engagement is behavioural.

Leveraging technology for engaging learning design

Image via Wikipedia
Ashwini Datt and Trudi Aspden presented on leveraging technology for engaging learning design. They first looked at some strategies to encourage students to complete homework. The presenters identified some assumptions around digital literacy and technical skills, and then identified 4 elements for the learning design - authenticity, motivation, scaffolding and skills development (the main focus). Equity was a really important factor too.

The presenters unpacked a diagram that looked at the underpinning aspects of the design, and then gave the context. The course is a First year pharmacy course (p101), and they have about 100 students per year. There is a group assignment that rund through the mid-semester break with 4-5 students randomly allocated per group. A specific example of a student who had to travel to Auckland to complete the group assignment. Trudi had been to a workshop on Wikis, and Trudi had an ah ha moment where she felt that if they put everything online then the students would be able to complete the course requirements online.

Image via Wikipedia

The final design of the assignments include an ePoster, and orapresentation of the poster, a sritten summary of the work, and provide 3 references with justification.All of these were completed online. The presenters wanted to provide flexible access to the resources and tools, to be able to mointor student collaborations in groups tasks and manage assessment of the assignment better, and they were also keen for students to develop some skills that they could use later on. Information and structure was provided through the course  website, and scaffolded inquiry was developed through the format of a webquest. Collaborative learning was conducted via a wiki (Wikispaces), and social bookmarking was encouraged. Exemplars were provided to help scaffold students.

The webquest was designed around a scenario which also aimed to have a social impact aspect rather than purely focussing on the various concerns around a specific disease. The process was outlined as a list of things students needed to do to complete a specific task, along with access to the rubrics that would be used to assess their assignments. Fifteen percent of the P101 course marks are allocated to this assignment. How To guides were provided around using some of the technologies, as well as guidelines for collaboration, confidence and familiarity with working with other people online.

Results: A pre and post assignment survey (54 out of 99 completed the assignment).77.8% agreed that the webquest added value, 51.9% agreed that the webquest contrained enough informaiton, 68.5% would be confident to use them in future assignments, 51.9% agreed that the assignment tasks helped them develop transferable skills, and 75% thought that the assignment developed their ability to work in a team.

Findings: Prividing the tools does not guarantee student engagement; and targeted strategies for fostering group work are needed beyond the provision of collaborative tools.

A really clear presentation that showed lecturers responding to student needs in creative ways...that ended up getting really good results :-) Will be interesting to see where they go next.

Related articles

• Wikis For The Collaborative Classroom (speedofcreativity.org)
• Wikis in the Classroom: Three Ways to Increase Student Collaboration (hollymccracken.wordpress.com)

An integrated faculty model for engaging staff with online and blended learning

Image via Wikipedia
A quick context overview was given of the project and the reasons why they model was developed. The presenters are working at a small multidisplinery institution. They decided to go with a holistic model with four key facets: 1) Inform; 2) Engage; 3) Implement: Collaborative development of online units; 4) Support: community of practice for ongoing engagement.

In 2010 the Dean and Deputy Dean undertook a study tour of the UK & Western Europe. This led to a spark for development. One of the first things that happended was an upgrade in the LMS (summer 2010-11), and then two workshops were developed. Learning design teams were then formed to develop / redevelop online units based on Gilly Salmon Carpe Diem model. Teams can comprise discipline groups, learning designer, suject librarian, technology expert and others as required. The fourth phase involved plans to facilitate formation of CoPs around specific topics. Examples might include teaching large online cohorts, online assessment, and improving student engagement. As yet phase 4 has not been implemented.

Results so far: staff participation at scholars' sessions has been very high - 62% for Gilly Salmon, anmd 60% for David Nicol. In staget 2 the workshop programme 68% attended with a high uptake by sessional staff. Stage 3 (collaborative design was well recieved by participating stqaff, who enjoyed brainstoring their ideas, mapping out their unit, revising objectives, assessment etc. It is yest to be seen how much of the design is ultimately implemented. There are also quesitons around how success is going to be determing (ie one new activity?), or a fully implemented new design?

They have found that the sessions are really intensive and people are totally exhausted (but happy) by the end of the day. Factors for success was seen because it includes:

• Faculty-wide model; and
• Has high level support from faculty management