Professor Stephen Billett from Griffith University opens the
second day with his keynote on ‘integrating and augmenting higher education
students’ workplace experiences’. Not possible to separate cognition and
experience / practice. Began with rationale for the topic. Discussed kinds of
educational goals through WIL; curriculum pedagogy and personal practices
shaping WIL; and how work experiences might be augmented. All draws from 3
recent projects carried out across 20 Australian universities. Primary role of
tertiary education is to prepare graduates for occupations, and employers
expect graduates to be job ready. Sets up difficult educational goals due to
complexity and variety of work. To learn for occupations require acquiring
canonical occupational knowledge; concepts (know), procedural (do), and
dispositions (values); situational manifestations; adaptability of principles
etc. Covered the dualities of learning – what the social world affords ad how
individuals engage. Inter-dependent learning is required – not independent
learning. Integration of experiences associated with learning is personal fact.
Stressed importance of learner agency. Role of mimetic learning and critique of
zone of proximal / potential development. Summarised studies. First to develop
agentic professionals through practice-based pedagogies (2008); curriculum and
pegagogic bases for effectively integrating practice-based experiences
(2009-2019); and augmenting students’ learning through post-practicum
educational processes (current). Detailed variety of approaches evaluated to
secure post-practicum outcomes – feedback, learning circles, debriefs etc.
Survey of students to find out what they required – preferences were to assist
to gauge and further develop their occupational readiness to secure employment;
led, facilitated or guided by teachers or experts; low value on peer assistance
and feedback; aligned with purposes and preferred post-practicum processes;
small group activities which are guided by teachers / tutors etc. Critiqued
data, as students’ perspectives counter to current thinking on learner support.
Dr. Karyn Paringatai, Megan Potiki and Professor Jacinta
Ruru then present the second keynote on ‘Poutama Ara Rau: He waka eke noa’. One
of 17 research themes at University of Otago – project has website. Karyn
opened with rationale and background. Goal is to find out how Maori knowledge
and pedagogies can transform curriculum and teaching across many disciplines. Jacinta
provided an overview of the project approaches. An administrator and a series
of summer projects carried out by under and post-graduate students to inform.
Plus a host of workshops, guest lectures, seminars etc. to enhance collaboration
across South Island. Check out language learning app – Aki / Aki Hauora.
Jacinta detailed Te Ihaka, building Maori leaders in law. Megan shared the
experiences on the languages programmes. Described vertical integration between
all 3 years of degree and the support structures provided if year 1 students
become well enculturated as y1 moves into full immersion Maori language very
early. Detailed Kainga Waewae vertically integrated assignment (25%) requiring
students to create a resource ‘know your own backyard’. Peer evaluation and
holistic marking used of communication and facilitation are not usually
assessed in language courses.
After morning tea, parallel sessions convene.
I attend the session with Associate Professor Clinton Golding from Higher
Education Development Centre at Otago University on ‘educating for thinking:
how can we teach and assess thinking?’ Important to build a community – used an
interactive activity to begin the session. Recognised need to foster specific
disciplinary thinking skills. Covered the challenges of teaching and assessing
thinking as thinking is invisble and internal, complex and abstract and tacit.
Recommended ‘making thinking visible approach’. First identity –what thinking
do you want from your students? How do you do that thinking? What are the tasks
to which your apply the thinking? What do you say and do and ask as you engage
in this thinking? Apply to thinking routines for students (reflection). Ask
students regularly and frequently say and ask so they practise and internalise
this thinking? Simplify the thinking to repeatable routines. (what do you mean
by…? Why do I think…? What is a example of…? Provided examples for types of learning (clarification,
elaboration, justification, alternative) and thinking phrases or prompt thinking.
Declarative knowledge is one step
towards moving towards the tacit. Scaffolds placed at the beginning build the
frameworks for developing non-declarative / tacit knowledge required for
sophisticated creativity and problem solving. In summary, identity thinking
behaviours, enculturate students and assess. Check clintongolding.com
Stay in the same room to be in the presentation by Dr.
Arlene McDowell and Dr. Megan Anakin from School of Pharmacy, Otago University on
‘introducing an active learning approach using IDEA (Inquiry – Design – Explore
– Answer) experiments’. Reported on applying Dr. Chris Thompson’s (Monash) work
in her own teaching and evaluation over 2 years to improve the process.
Provided rationale and process. Watch pre-lab video, complete pre-lab quiz,
collaborative discussion, experiment design, perform experiment and report
results. Reported ‘tweaks’ to the process to add challenge for year 3 students.
Provided examples of how lab converted – lab book, process, need to design the
experiment and report results. Shared student evaluations and study to
establish if the approach actually improved student learning. Found students
appreciated the new approach; had greater effect on students’ knowledge of
purpose and process.
Next session is with Dr. Rena Heap on ‘shifting practice through
professional learning conversation and communities. Study from a University of
Auckland initiative to have one person in each faculty conduct a study on
learning. This year’s theme on ‘engaging with elearning’. Rationale for Rena
who is in teacher education, to prepare student teachers for digital fluency
required in today’s and future classrooms. Need to shift from transmission to
modelling approach. Could digital technology be used to help students engage in
the type of learning required for the future. Detailed process of forming
scholarship of digital teaching and learning circles to support teacher
educators. Detailed how to engage staff – email, topics suggested, doodle poll,
excel spreadsheet and options selected. Shared models – Salmon’s Carpe Diem –
scaffolding model – access and motivation, online socialisation, information exchange,
knowledge construction and analysis. Each of the five groups maintained a
google plus site. To support the process, drew on Wengers Communities of
practice and Cochran’s critical factors for success.
After lunch, session with Nicola Beatsonfrom University of Otago with ‘transformational tools and techniques’.
Reporting on a project that has just begun. Summarised background – Universities
generally have access to a range of technological transformational techniques.
However, uptake is low. Used University of South Australia as example of
forward looking institution with a technology learning strategy. So set up
project with UniSA, Monash and several at Otago to find out why the barriers
are to the uptake of tools and techniques at each of these places. Framed by
transformational teaching and social constructivist theory. Approaches /
techniques include active, student-centred collaborative with experiential and
problem based learning. Study asks academics if they had heard of the tools /
techniques, level of frequency of use and their level of comfort. So far, seems
to be driven by individuals as no relationships across age, gender, subject and
rank (professor, tutor, etc.) Themes include ‘no faith in efficacy’; tried it
once but…; own awareness of need or no wanting to change; time; others not
using; etc.
Followed by James Oldfield who looks after digital
technologies for learning from UNITEC on ‘enhancing teaching through virtual
and augmented reality’. Important to match pedagogy to use of VR or AR. They
are tools and in education, important to also look into cost effectiveness.
Provided example of AR in the trades, overlay of visuals to assist with
identification of machinery parts. Use AR or QR codes to assist students to
identify authentic examples in their own context. Provided an example for AR
(using AURASMA – free app) as used to support student use of technology at
Unitec – triggered via QR code on a physical surface – brochure, sign etc. VR
requires more effort and is more expensive. However, an immersive learning
environment is created. Showed an example of how to help tutors orientate into
new teaching spaces. Showed the virtual workplace created by the carpentry
section as part of the eassessment project. Detailed the pedagogical
approaches. The demonstrated how VR images are caught for use in VR resources
using a 360’ camera on a selfie stick. Then demoed a mixed/merged reality (MR)
– blends real and virtual worlds in ways though which the physical and the
digital can interact’.
Final keynote with Professor Welby Ings, from Auckland University
of Technology on ‘the post-heroic teacher: leadership and influence in the age
of anxiety’. Advocates the continuance of common sense and optimism in our work
as teachers. Perhaps having influence is more important than leadership?
Distilled, in his usual way, some gems of thoughts, garnered from his life
experiences. Provided us with a few probing questions to encourage us to think
about concepts of ‘leadership’. Argued for the need to look at leadership as
not ‘heroic’. Change cannot occur if we make enemies with the people who are
best able to support change. Nor can force or protest or disruption cause
change. Yet, society perceives leaders as singular, visionary, problem solve,
fearless, all knowing etc. When we teach, we influence the world around us - we grow the intellectual capacity of the
society we live in. Brought in stories to support themes of the ‘dangers of
being admired’, the threats of ego, the contribution of reform from ‘wherever
you stand’ and the need for tenacity and
disobedience. The person at the back is the leader, supporting the vanguard.
Introduced the concept of the wounded hierarchy – whereby organisational
practices block innovation. Features include micro management, risk aversion,
low trust, reporting requirements / assessment criteria etc. Distributed
leadership possible but not common in the mainstream. So how do ‘disobedient
teachers’ keep going? Post- heroic leadership understand there is more than
more variable, work with more than one group of people with different
perspectives. Need to be able to provide empowerment. So, care for thinkers
like you, refuse to relinquish agency (cynicism is the death of hope), use the
power of the viral (rhetoric is never as powerful as a prototype) and en theos
(passion, hope, agency). Kia Kaha!
Welby provides us with a fitting conclusion to a busy and
enriching day.
No comments:
Post a Comment