DAY 2
After a late finish yesterday which included the conference
dinner, the day dawns fine and warm. I follow the sessions in the stream ‘learning
outside the classroom’.
First up, Timothy Lynch from Otago Polytechnic, Food Design
Institute, with ‘the inevitability of change in work integrated learning’. Drawing
from his work for from his professional practice studies, he reflects on ‘reflection’
and ‘reflection on teaching’. What is the role of teaching when the discipline has
requirements which are at odds with ‘reflective learning’. Hospitality industry
has emphasis on regulatory compliance, speed of production, cost and accuracy!
Summarised his philosophies towards ‘product design’ and overview of principles
of design informing his work. There is a clash between design driven work
integration and traditional work-based product development. Design work is fuzzy
and has many iterations but industry generally more linear. Traditional ‘work-integrated
learning’ has a power relationship skewed towards the employer. Proposes a design
driven integrated learning so that learning takes precedence over productivity.
Therefore, helping to convert the ‘push’ system of supplier driven production
to ‘pull’ system for custom driven needs. Overviewed a student’s project as an
example – developing cocoa husks added value products – including sustainable
process of developing a range of short term (immediate, low cost, no training
required), medium term and long term (higher development costs, production
changes required etc.) Future work demands higher range of capability and
skills to cope with more changeable markets etc.
Second with Dr. Linda Kestle, Kath Davis and Neil Laing from
Unitec and Alysha Bryan from Hawkins on ‘balancing the seesaw – the ups and
downs of delivering vocational education’. Developed a programme at 3 levels – project
delivery staff – managers etc. and cadets at year 1 and 2. 4 years of shared
delivery so far. 5 – 6 modules per year – 150 staff. Work-based learning with
assessment event for each module (group and individual) and final capstone
presentations. Challenges for cadets include range of educational attainment.
For managers was range of years of experience in the industry, some working for
Hawkins and other were sub-contractors. Focus of group work with discussions situated
in projects and practice drawing on the experience of students. Delivery now
shared between Unitec and Hawkins. Continual need to work closely with industry
partner, leadership, co-developed course outlines / content and input from
domain-knowledge experts. Challenge between academic vs industry expectations.
Assessment submissions an ongoing challenge and there are continual industry needs.
Encouraged others to accept the challenges as there are benefits both for provider
and industry based on continued goodwill and generosity from both parties.
Followed on by Rashika Sharma from Unitec presenting on ‘sustainability
learning opportunities through campus research projects – when student (trades
students) involvement matters’. Rationalised the importance of integrating
sustainability into the learning of TVET as skills, productivity and economics
take precedent. However, ‘green TVET’ now a requirement to address environmental
concerns. Curriculum in TVET still deficient in sustainability content. Australia
has Green Skills agreement implementation plan and ‘skills for sustainability standards
framework. In NZ, even after post TROQ (review of qualifications) sustainability
skills are still not visible. Need for TVET institutes to create the change in
the absence of govt. intervention – green campus, green curriculum, green
community, green research and green culture (Majumdar, 2011). Good range of
topics for green research in TVET for students – waste minimisation, alternative
energy, sustainable garden, sustainable housing design etc. provided example
with carpentry students on ‘waste minimisation’. Survey and focus group with
students, also interviews with academic leader and institute sustainability manager.
Found that there is a need to ‘make visible’ and formal, the sustainability initiatives.
The learning sessions are too busy for students to notice the modelling being
availed on waste minimisation. Emphasis must be put on and students’ attention
drawn to sustainability initiatives. Teachers need to be actively involved and
be champions of sustainability. Inclusion into curriculum will be ideal.
Last presentation in the stream from Peter Mathewson from
Unitec on ‘social work and poverty theory and practice: challenges and proposed
research’. Defined social work as proposed by the International Federation of
Social Work. Also defined poverty as condition characterized by sustained or chronic
deprivation of resources, capabilities, choices, security and power necessary
for the enjoyment of adequate standard of living. In developed countries, there
is relative rather than absolute poverty, In NZ, 27% of children live in
poverty and 7% in severe poverty. Summarised the intersection between poverty
and social work. Historically, there was a individualised / moralistic approach.
Moved on to influence of counselling. More recently, neo-liberal dominated
practice focused on individualised or family risk factors and behaviours. Summarised
the approach of poverty aware social work. Make poverty visible, work together –
practitioners and poor, more egalitarian relationship between social and
material needs, active part to challenge the system. How about social work students?
Survey reveals high levels of need compared to average in NZ. Need to align
with radical/critical social work to assert social justice. Poverty is not necessarily
the fault of individuals but social structural issue. Casework not adequate,
needs to be individually orientated. Proposed personal/ political strategies to
support the radical/critical approach. Look into anti-poverty practice framework
for social work in Northern Ireland. Summarised potentialities in NZ. Shared
some proposals for his own research.
After morning tea, I follow the sessions in the ‘lucky dip’
stream.
Firstly with Pavitra Dhamja from Toi Ohomai (Rotorua) and
Mary Cooper (ditto) on ‘seeing is believing – facilitating realism and
recreating experiences’. Demonstrated VR using anko Hololens VR box/goggles. Presented
on advantages and challenges of using AR. Hands-on learning as pairs of
participants try out VR box with phones running YouTube videos. 360 tour of
cell, earthquake simulation etc.
Support colleague Jane Bates from Ara Institute of
Canterbury with her presentation on ‘programme design and development – from zero
to hero’. Introduced rationale for and details / including the team involved,
for the Ara programme design and development process. Presented an overview and
then detailed each of the 4 phases – approval, design, development and
delivery. Emphasis is on learning and how to support the learner. Philosophies
underpinning the process were shared.
Followed by session with Dr. Wang Yi from Wintec on ‘its
about THEM – exploiting learners’ stories for adult ESOL beginners’ literacy
development’. Covered ‘who are our learners’ and rationalised the use of
students’ stories. Learners range in age from late teens to 70s, educational
backgrounds from nil to degree level in their home language. Generally, only
have elementary English. Objective to help develop life long learners. Provided
examples of how stories are created from templates and by using students’
experiences. Also examples of ‘back up’ and spontaneous stories drawing on
daily activities.
The Yusef Patel from Unitec with ‘design studio –
collaboration with Panuku Development Auckland’ with third year Batchelor of
Architectural Studies Students. Covered the process of ‘finding common ground’,
working with students towards their objectives, timeline and outcomes. Detailed
the parameters of the agreed ‘project’. Opportunities to ‘stretch’ students and
work on items not normally covered by Architects (e.g. roads). Detailed principles
(Unitec and Panuku) to be followed as students proceeded with their design. Described critique process from Panuku,
tutors, peers, past students and other industry representatives and students
allowed to address the critique in their final presentation. Shared reflections
on the positive aspects of the collaboration.
After lunch, there is a plenary address with Dr. Te TakaKeegan from University of Waikato on ‘using humour in teaching’. Provided
examples of how he used humour in his teaching of computer science. Encouraged
audience to find their own path and create / develop their own approach. Humour
is useful in establishing a connection and to engage. Humour activates the
dopamine reward system assisting with long term memory, increases attention and
interest, breaks down barriers, provides avenue to connect, relaxes and reduces
stress. Appropriate topic related instructional humour can be very effective in
topic retention. Provided guidelines as to when humour is inappropriate and
presented strategies for incorporating humour.
