Monday, October 19, 2020

CRADLE conference 2020 - Session presentations

 

Today’s sessions for CRADLE conference 2020.

Most of the sessions have two presentations. I attend the following:

Then the first session themed ‘learning in a digital world 1’ is with Dr. Adam Brown and Emily Wade from Deakin. They present on ‘Serendipity, imperfection and vulnerability: Harnessing live video for ‘authentic’ teacher performance.

Adam began with providing the theoretical background and approaches.

Proposed the undertaking of ‘the meddlers in the middle’ as the role of the educator as opposed to ‘stage on the sage’ or ‘guide on the side’. Meddlers in the middle reposition the teacher and student as co-directors and co-editors of their social world.

Need to be ‘authentic’ and that authenticity is an effect, not an essence in the context of self-presentation as being performative.

Emily introduced collaborative autoethnography and how digital platforms like Periscope may be used to enable collaborative work. Explained how this was used for their own teaching context and shared reflections on the process.

Very much an academic look into their teaching and a critical reflection into how video impacts on, supports and extends their teaching practice.

 

Session 2: Learning in a digital world 2.

This session chaired by Simon Knight.

On ‘Development of educational tools that enable large-scale ethical empirical research on evaluative judgement' with Dr. Hassan Khosravi from the University of Queensland. Presented on work carried out with others – George Gyamfi, Dr. Barbara Hanna and Dr. Jason Lodge.

Presented on evaluative judgement (EJ), educational tools, conceptual models and examples.

EJ is the capability to make decisions about the quality of work of oneself and others. This skill helps students use feedback effectively, develop expertise in the view and attain autonomy.

 EF revolves around rubrics, self assessment exemplars, feedback, reflection and peer assessment – mostly theoretical.

Educational tools include peer grading and evaluation systems. Most build without the aim of supporting research and they do not allow data harvesting to be undertaken or the set up of controlled experiments. Draws on work of Associate Professor Paul Denny (University of Auckland) on PeerWise and with Professor Neil Heffernan on the ASSISTments ecosystems.

This presentation on the conceptual framework of RIPPLE. Conceptual model described to help promote both EJ and to undertake research on it. System developed for adaptive learning, learnersourcing and peer grading and feedback with EJ strategies of rubrics, self and peer assessment and exemplars. Connected to metrics, experiment design and ethical guidelines and a data repository.

Provides details of the RIPPLE platform.

Shared one study – Can students create high-quality resources? Walked through the process of students creating and evaluating each other’s questions.

The shared a case study and reflections. In general, students’ EJ improved through iterations. Students tended to provide higher ratings when compared to instructors. Found that the rubric criteria may not suit the ‘assessment’ and re-tested new rubric. 

Shared plans for new investigations and encouraged other researchers to make contact to use the tool.


Followed on with George Gyamfi, also from UQ on ‘The effect of rubrics on evaluative judgement: A randomised controlled trial'. As per above presentation, George’s work is completed with Dr. Barbara Hanna and Dr. Hassan Khosravi.

Defined EJ as per previous presentation. Shared work on rubrics (Reddy & Andrade, 2010 and several others) and how these may be used to enhance student learning. These studies tend to be mostly theoretical and does not bring in the perspectives of students.

Overviewed the research methodology and how RiPPLE was used for the study. Participants were undergraduate students (n= 354) learning database principles. The study involved having a control group which completed peer assessments without a rubric and the treatment group which completed peer assessments with a rubric.

Findings indicate rubrics can be a way of influencing how students attend to quality and can impact students’ judgement in assessing the quality of learning resources. However, construct of the rubric is the key! Even without rubrics, learners are able to make judgements but rubrics provided better clarity.


Session three: Assessment of learning 1 :

Session chaired by Zi Yan.

Dr. Sin Wang Chong from the Queen’s University Belfast presented on ‘Student feedback literacy as an ecological construct’. A conceptual look at feedback literacy covering feedback orientation to feedback literacy, feedback literacy in and beyond the classroom and a reconceptualization of the concept. Presentation based on paper published earlier this year.

Shared study on feedback orientation (London & Smither’s 2002) – utility, accountability, social awareness and feedback efficacy. Also Kremmel & Harding (2020) on language literacy – using a spider chart to provide each learners’ literacy. Then Sutton (2012) in conceptualisation of feedback literacy as epistemology (knowing), Ontological (being) and practical (acting). Carless and Boud (2018) appreciate, make judgments, manage affect and take action on feedback. Most recent Carless and Winstone (2020) looking into both teacher and learner feedback literacy.

Feedback literacy is not only a product (Hattie & Timperley, 2007) but also a process (Interpersonal and intrapersonal (Carless & Boud, 2018).

Chong reconceptualised using a ecological perspective (2020 paper) to include the context within which feedback is undertaken (interpersonal, textual, instructional, sociocultural) and the learner’s beliefs, goals, experiences and abilities. Therefore the engagement dimension (as proposed by Carless and Boud – understand feedback, manage affect, make judgment and take action) has added to it the context and individual dimensions(

Introduced the ecological systems theory (EST) as nested or networked EST with micro, meso, exo, macro and chrono systems. Used example from a paper in preparation – process of scholarly peer-review – to explain the framework. Proposed actor-network theory as a means to understand better the inter-connections/inter-relationships of ESTs.

Concluded with implications including how the framework may be applied towards better understanding the contextual and individual contributions to understanding feedback literacy.


The next session is with Dr. Akilu Tadesse from the University of Bergen on ‘Scaffolding feedback in complex dynamic system context: Effect of online interactive learning environments’. Presents on work undertaken with Professors Pai Davidsen and Erling Moxnes. 

 Presented on the 'problem', covered the notion of scaffolding feedback, application of this study and findimgs.

People, even experts, have difficulties in understanding and communicating their understanding of complex dynamic systems. Also difficult to measure improvements in this domain when CDS are difficult to understand.

The study looks into how to enhance students learning of CDS by developing educaitonal feedback to scaffold feedback that supports students learning.

Shared the notion of scaffolding feedback as a continual spiral of building knowledge. Gaps of knowledge are 'filled either by students' own efforts are through support from 'external agents'. 

Used this scaffolding feedback notion to integrate into a personalised and adaptive online learning environment. Learner is presented with a CDS and supported to progress through a sequence of learning activities to attain CDS. 

Shared a 'case study' to help explain the concept of how the platform works. Then presented the research questions - to find out if scaffolding feedback would reduce the gap between existing high and low performing students. Averaged results across 5 tasks. In general, the gap did close as tasks (increasing in complexity) were worked through. 


Overall, a good range of presentations showing the ways digital technologies may be useful in supporting assessments of learning. 







 

 

 

 

 


No comments: