OU blog

Personal Blogs

Christopher Douce

Inclusive Student Engagement in Level 1 modules

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Christopher Douce, Monday, 31 Jul 2023, 15:31

On 20 July 23 I attended a short one hour seminar that was all about inclusive student engagement in level 1 modules. The seminar had the subtitle: “a supportive framework designed by current/recent students”. The session was prepared and presented by Catriona Bergman, Olivia Brennan, Norain Imtiaz and Owen Lucas, who were also OU student virtual interns.

The seminar had a bit which shared their framework, followed by a discussion activity. I’ll begin by sharing an abridged version of the framework, and then I’ll go on to sharing a couple of points from the discussion, then concluding with a set of reflections.

Engagement framework

If I understood this correctly, their framework shared a number of themes that relate to the student/tutor relationship. There are six key points, each of which was complemented by a suggestion, or a prompt. For brevity, I’ve edited these into a form that works with my own practice.

  1. Addressing the power dynamic: address the difference in status between tutors and students. What do you do to encourage students to reach out to gain support?
  2. Consistency of communication: regular support and timely responses. How often do you communicate with your students?
  3. Proactive communication: tutors taking the initiative to interact with students. Do you contact students before their assignments are submitted?
  4. Humanising tutors: providing an opportunity to build a relationship. Do you feel comfortable in sharing your own personal experiences?
  5. Assessing communication and support needs: in the opening letter encourage disclosure. What opportunities are there for you to discuss individualised study needs with students?

Tutor and students are unknown to each other: a two-way relationship is important. What opportunities are there for icebreaking activities for students and tutors to get to know one another?

The Hidden Curriculum

There was another useful slide during the first section which was all about the notion of the hidden curriculum. I have come across the idea through the notion of academic literacies. Put another way, this is all about knowing the hidden conventions that relate to study, a discipline, and academic communication.

  • Students might not have necessary skills from their earlier education experience. Tutors can direct students to resources that can be used to develop skills (e.g. numeracy, academic writing skills, critical thinking, IT literacy, etc.).
  • Encourage students to reflect on the skills they may need to develop, and provide (or signpost students to) appropriate resources.
  • Encourage development of TMA writing skills and inform students about the importance of good academic conduct.
  • Encourage students to develop their own study habits to support their learning, and embed this within tutorial and one-to-one sessions. Consider the environment in which study takes place.
  • For the module that you are tutoring, highlight, discuss and critique ideas and practices that can contribute to the hidden curriculum.
  • Ensure students are aware of the different avenues that could be followed to gain support (from the tutor, from the module forums, or from the student support team).

Breakout rooms: what do you share, what don’t you tell them?

It was onto a breakout room discussion, where we were asked what we share with our students, and whether we share any of our own vulnerabilities. The intent behind this was to think about the extent to we may disclose something about ourselves, to engender trust and to demonstrate empathy.

Rather than focussing on sharing of vulnerabilities, the group I was assigned to primarily discussed what information we might disclose to students when we contact them for the very first time. Some key points to share include: our qualifications, whether we have been a tutor on the module before, and something about where we are based in the country. There was also some discussion about the importance of tone, and the phrase ‘professional informality’ was shared.

Reflections

I felt this session offered me some reassurance that I have been doing (roughly) the right thing. One way to formalise some of the points mentioned in the framework would be to devise some form of communication plan. This might mean a summary of what is sent to students and when. It is, of course, important to be aware of what module teams are doing, since they may well have their own communication plan, and sets of reminders and messages scheduled.

I was drawn to the session due to the mention of inclusive engagement, since I didn’t really know what this was, or how to describe it. I found it interesting that the focus lies on facilitating inclusive engagement through sharing, and putting oneself, and sharing aspects of one’s identity to others. The aim of doing this is, of course, to attempt to remove potentially perceived barriers, such as power differences between tutors and students.

Reflecting on this further, I have certainly disclosed more personal information. When tutoring on a module about accessible online learning, I have, for example, disclosed a hidden disability. My view is that context is always really important, whether context relates to the subject, or the tutor-student relationship.

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to the AP student virtual interns who facilitated the session and shared their framework. I hope that the version that appears in this blog matches with its original aims and intentions.

Permalink 1 comment (latest comment by Paul Leo Antoine Piwek, Monday, 31 Jul 2023, 15:36)
Share post
Christopher Douce

STEM Education Research Group - Mixed Methods

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Christopher Douce, Thursday, 26 Jan 2023, 15:48

I belong to a couple of research groups within the School of Computing and Communications; I’m trying to find my research home, after not being involved with research for a while. There’s also an informal group called the STEM Education Research Group, which explores topics that are common to some of the groups that I (occasionally) visit.

On 18 January 2023 I attended a research development event that was facilitated by Ann Grand, Senior Lecturer in Astrobiology Education, that was all about mixed methods.

An example

Ann opened with an example, which was also a research question: how are people using their allotments?

You might count how many people are growing different type of crops, or how many hours a week people are ‘using’ their allotments, or you might try to understand ‘why’ they are using their allotment. The nature of the research question might lead to you choosing different methods: you might gather numbers, or you might want to speak with people who grow things on their allotments. I made a note that there’s a difference between multi-methods to answer different research questions, and mixing of methods.

Choosing methods

I noted down a reference to Tashakari and Cresswell, where mixed methods were described as: “research in which the investigator collects and analyzes data, integrates the findings, and draws inferences using both qualitative and quantitative approaches or methods in a single study or a program of inquiry. integrate everything to produce an interpretation” (2007, p.4)

An important question is: how do decide about to use which methods to use? The answer is: It relates to the overall design of what is being studied.

An important point that I noted down was that mixed methods can often take up more time than if a researcher was only using a single method. This leads to the question: under what circumstances should we use them? What is their value?

A reflection that was made during the session is that controlling for variables in education is profoundly difficult, and therefore, it is almost inevitable that we adopt mixed methods to try to understand what the variables might be. They might also be used to mitigate against the impact of extraneous variables. Also being aware of a range of different evidence may enable you to often understand the question, before even carrying out your research.

My colleague Oli Howson made the following point: “quantitative data is lovely for drawling lines around things but humans are messy and colour/context is important”. Understanding the context can, of course which can lead to other (or related) research questions. A research project might not be about asking or understanding a sequence of questions, it may be more of a messy network of questions which exist within a wider research space.

Value of mixed methods research

Mixed methods can be used to investigate and consider bias, and add meaning to data that has been gathered. One useful quote is by Denzin, who writes: “the bias inherent in any particular data source, investigators and particularly method, will be canceled out when used in conjunction with other data sources, investigation, and methods” (p.14, 1978).

Another quote relates to the application of mixed methods, namely that a mixed approach “facilitates generalization to a wider population, especially when the qualitative sample is directly linked to the quantitative sample” (Hesse-Biber & Johnson, 2015).

There is also the importance of being aware of our own biases and being mindful or how we approach any analysis. These points are related to the subject of reflexivity, which relates to how we position ourselves in relation to any research that we do. Sometimes sharing a little bit more about us (and our position) enables us to add validity to any research that we share.

More than methods…

An important reflection is that the choice of methods is one bit of a much broader picture. Our choice of methods reflects what our research paradigm is, and can link to our philosophy of how we view truth and knowledge. In some ways, using two different sets of methods can be an attempt to bridge conceptual differences between interpretivist and positivist world views. In other words, whether truth (or reality) is subjective, or objective.

The ordering of methods is important. A researcher might use a sequential approach, applying one method after another. 

A qualitative method might be used to identify concerns held by a community, which could then be brought into a survey method to quantify, or to test the extent of concerns that might be held by a wider community. In other words, a quantitative approach could be used to validate a qualitative finding.

Looking from the other perspective, a survey (perhaps using a standard instrument) might signify some interesting or curious results. Qualitative methods could then be used to explore why a certain group of participants hold a particular perspective. In other words, a qualitative approach can be used to provide explanations to accompany quantitative findings.

During this part of the session, there was also a short discussion about the use of literature surveys. Systematic reviews can apply mixed methods. For example, a literature survey could begin with a set of themes that have been identified by a researcher. This identification of themes could be thought of as a qualitative approach. During the next step, a researcher might then to go onto identity how many papers explore or study those themes.

A further example…

Towards the end of the session, we had a look at an example of some educational research which asked the question: what impact do science shows have on attitudes to career intentions? 

I understand a science show to be an engaging demonstration or a talk. In other words, is there an effect on the career aspiration of school children who attended those shows? We had a brief look at some data captured from a research student. This included responses from questionnaires, and responses from a focus group. 

Whilst discussing the research methods applied in this study, there was a further discussion point that emerged, which was about the concept of impact. Specifically, how does ‘impact’ relate to your research questions?

Reflections

Whenever research methods are discussed, there are other broader questions which can and should be asked. These questions relate to the philosophy of research, and the nature of truth, and these discussions inform the research paradigm that you adopt. Before even getting into philosophy and paradigms, it is your research questions that should drive everything. When you know the what needs to be found out, you can then think about the how.

It was great to see Creswell mentioned. I first came across his textbook when studying for my MA in Education. Creswell presents a really detailed summary of what mixed methods research is all about and provides a lot of detail about the methods that can be used and applied.

One of the unexpected points that I took away from this session is how systematic literature reviews can both draw on the quantitative and the qualitive. Thinking back to the literature reviews that I did for my MA and other qualifications, it has struck me that I’ve been applying mixed methods research, but in an informal way. Knowing about terminology makes the informal become formal, and also goes a long way to clarifying processes and how this relates to how research is carried out.

References

Denzin, N. (1978) The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: Praeger.

Hesse-Biber , S. and Johnson, R. (eds) (2015) The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry. Oxford University Press.

Tashakkori, A. and Creswell, J. (2007) Editorial: The New Era of Mixed Methods Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(1)3 DOI:10.1177/2345678906293042

Acknowledgements

Some of the phrases and quotes shared through this blog have directly come from Ann, who kindly shared her slides following the event. In some of the earlier sections, I’ve added some further points and reflections from other periods of study. Many thanks to Ann for running a useful session.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Christopher Douce

Upskilling for cybersecurity

Visible to anyone in the world

During the 4th School of Computing and Communications AL Professional Development Conference  (OU blog post) I facilitated a session about continuing professional development. In that session, some of the tutors shared experiences of what they had done before.

As mentioned in one of the keynote introductions, one area of growth within the school is cybersecurity. What follows is a summary of resources and materials that may be useful for any tutor (or student) who might be looking to move into the area. 

This blog, which is intended for existing OU tutors emphasises OU resources that are available, but useful external resources are highlighted too. Since cybersecurity is a fast moving area, the links and resources highlighted on this page are likely to age relatively quickly.

CyBok

A good place to start is something called the Cyber Security Body Of Knowledge. A recommended area to look at is the CyBok Knowledgebase

The aim of the CyBok is to provide a summary of the topics and subjects that make up cybersecurity. It presents a lot of materials and concepts. Since some of these pages can be (sometimes) quite heavy going, it might be a good idea to look to other resources to get an introduction to some of the areas. 

OpenLearn

The OUs OpenLearn platform has a wealth of useful resources, which are presented in the form of bite sized short courses. OpenLearn has a whole section dedicated to cybersecurity.

This takes us to the following courses:

OpenLearn courses can offer a helpful introduction. When you have finished working through one of these short modules, learners can gain a digital badge (if these things are of interest). You can, of course, reference completing an OpenLearn module on a CV or application form.

OU modules

One of the best ways to upskill and to gain familiarity with a subject is to study an OU module using a tutor fee waiver. Depending on your interests, you can either study undergraduate or postgraduate modules. The undergraduate named degree has the title BSc (Honours) Cyber Security.

Notable modules which could be studied on a fee waiver include:

The school offers a Postgraduate Diploma in Cyber Security which contains four modules:

Postgraduate modules do differ from undergraduate modules in the extent to which students are required to carry out their own research. Students are also required to demonstrate advanced critical thinking skills. Also, since the postgraduate qualifications have an industrial focus, students are often required to relate their work based activity to their studies.

Before studying a postgraduate module, I would recommend any potential student to work through the following Open Learn module: Success in postgraduate study.

Cisco resources

Cyber security is a dynamic subject; computing technologies are continually changing and adapting, often driven by the needs of industry. Industrial providers and businesses need people to know how to use their tools of services. This means there are a lot industry led certifications which are designed to help IT practioners to understand and master their technologies.

One of the world’s leading suppliers of networking systems and technologies is Cisco. To help the users of its systems, it has devised a set of certifications and a learning platform called NetAcad.

Through NetAcad, OU tutors can study a number of short courses that relate to networking and cyber security, gaining digital badges. These badges that can be mentioned to on a CV (and, theoretically, mentioned during an OU skills audit with a friendly staff tutor). What follows is a short summary of free online self-paced study courses that can be accessed through Cisco NetAcad. 

Introduction to CybersecurityTwo key objectives are: “Learn what cybersecurity is and its potential impact to you. Understand the most common threats, attacks and vulnerabilities.” 15 hours.

Networking EssentialsThis introductory level module is described as being able to “Develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills using Cisco Packet Tracer”. 70 hours.

Cybersecurity EssentialsTwo key objectives are: “Understand security controls for networks, servers and applications. Learn valuable security principals and how to develop compliant policies.” 30 hours. 

Introduction to IoTIoT is an abbreviation for the Internet of Things. This course is said to help learners to “understand how the IoT is bridging the gap between operational and information technology systems”. 20 hours.

NDG Linux UnhatchedThe “Start From Scratch” Linux Course, which is described as learning basic installation and configuration of Linux software and get introduced to the Linux command line. 8 hours.

PCAP: Programming Essentials in Python“Learn programming from scratch and master Python”. 75 hours.

OU development events

A final category that is worth mentioning is the continuing professional development events that are organised by the OU. In addition to regular compulsory training that all tutors must go through, there are two broad categories of events that tutors can go to: general AL development events, and school specific events. 

A personal recommendation is that you find the time to attend at least one CPD events a year, just to keep up to date with what is happening across the university. If you’re able to attend more, then so much the better.

Reflections

If you are tutor and you’re thinking about teaching cyber security, some of these suggestions might be more useful than others. One of the best things that you could do is to study a module that you might be interested in teaching, perhaps in combination with some of the other options and materials that have been highlighted.

As well as an OU fee waiver, another source of funding is the AL development fund. This is a small pot of money that can be used for on going professional development that relates to your discipline, which isn’t immediate or directly provided by the university. The fund could be used for attending conferences, or completing short courses.

When upskilling, I find it is important to bear in mind the distinction between cyber security education and training. Whilst industrial certifications have their place, they often emphasise training. Training is about how to solve certain problems. Education is (of course) about how best apply training given a set of circumstances, and to have the ability to quickly gain new knowledge after having acquired and understood some fundamental concepts. I guess my point here is: the fundamental concepts are important.

From a personal perspective, I’ve used the fee waiver to study at least three different OU computing modules. Although I’ve always found studying quite a bit of work, it has always been rewarding. It has enabled me to not only learn about a new subject, but also to learn more about the experience of a student. I’ve also registered for Cisco NetAcad, but I haven’t made much progress. Doing more Cisco self-study is something I need to do.

If you would like to upskill, a final recommendation is to have a chat with your friendly staff tutor, particularly during your CDSA or skills audit conversation. They will have some practical advice about what you can do to ensure that you’re best placed to help students to study a particular subject.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Christopher Douce

4th School of Computing and Communications AL Professional Development Conference

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Christopher Douce, Tuesday, 22 Nov 2022, 16:29

On Saturday 19 November 2022 I attended the 4th School of Computing and Communications AL Professional Development Conference. Like recent years this event was held online, entirely through Adobe Connect. The event was attended by over 60 Associate Lecturers and was opened by opened by Jim Gillen, who introduced the theme of the event, “new directions”.

What follows is a blog summary of the sessions that I attended. I’m sharing this blog so I can remember what happened during the day, as a record of some of the continuing professional development that I’ve carried out over the year but also for anyone who might be interested in what was covered during this event. 

Welcome and introduction

The first session was presented by Robin Laney, Head of School, and John Woodthorpe, Director of Teaching.  The school supports the equivalent of 4700 full time students and around 200 degree apprentice students. The school delivers 53 modules. These relates to 5 undergraduate qualifications and 3 postgraduate qualifications.

Robin shared the school mission, which is to “empower our students and wider society through life-changing learning and excellent research in computing and communications technologies”. 

The computing curriculum is informed by research carried out by the 6 research groups (school website). The school’s research mission is “to advance digital technologies in ways that enhance the human experience”. The research vision of the school is to place people at the centre of research, to focus on context as much as technology, and to creatively (and positively) disrupt across discipline borders.

John Woodthorpe spoke about some recent changes and plans, such as introduction to the new R60 BSc (Hons) Cyber security degree, which is now up and running. Tutors responded to a request to carry out some paid continuing professional development (CPD) and the school was able to appoint more tutors. The school needs to find a way to develop CPD to enable tutors to teach on TM311 Information security and develop a rolling programme of CPD to help tutors to move onto new modules.

Another new(ish) qualification that was mentioned was R62 BSc (Honours) Computing with Electronic Engineering. The qualification has modules from the OU Engineering and Innovation school, which includes T212 Electronics: sensing, logic and actuation and T312 Electronics: signal processing, control and communications. The mathematics for this module is provided through T193 Engineering: frameworks, analysis, production and T194 Engineering: mathematics, modelling, applications

Another qualification that was important to highlight to tutors was R38 BSc (Honours) Data Science which is led by the School of Mathematics and Statistics. This qualification contains TM358 Machine learning and artificial intelligence. This technical module contains materials about neural networks, deep learning, unsupervised learning and adopts a case study approach. Students are also able to choose TM351 Data management and analysis. The mathematics for this qualification is provided through M140 Introducing Statistics, MST124 Essential mathematics 1 and M348 Applied statistical modelling (amongst others).

Concluding the presentation about qualifications, there are two new higher technical qualifications: W19 Diploma of Higher Education in Network Engineering, and W20 Diploma of Higher Education in Software Engineering. These qualifications give students experience of higher education study and provide a pathway to a degree.

The school has a five year curriculum plan. There are plans to redevelop the popular TM112 Introduction to computing and information technology 2, a plan to develop a new 30 credit level 1 module with more programming (since some students may have gained programming experience during earlier study at school), provide a route to recognise prior experiential learning, enhance skills development across all levels, plug gaps in curriculum, and make better use of research within modules. Since there is an increasing amount of focus on AI, the school is also looking to develop a second level AI module, which will potentially open up a pathway through one of the school’s named degrees.

I made note of a couple of questions. One of them was: how can tutors get involved with the work of the research groups? Tutors were encouraged have a look at the research group websites, and also look at the publications that these groups have produced through the university’s Open Research Online (ORO) website, and should feel free to contact individual academics. Also, another route to research is through the university’s STEM scholarship centre, eSTEeM. I also remember a follow up question which related to the terms and conditions of the AL contract. An important point to note is that although tutors are now, quite rightly, permanent employees of the university, their role primarily relates to teaching and student support, rather than research.

Another question related to “filling the gaps” in computing degrees, and how tutors may be able to influence the content of degree programmes and modules. The answer was: speak with module team chairs, and also have a chat with our Director of Teaching.

Parallel Session 1: New and future Curriculum Developments

The first parallel session I attended had the title “AI and Machine Learning, from TM358 to TM470, an overview and experiences tutoring” and was facilitated by Michael Bowkis and Trevor Forsythe. As highlighted earlier, TM358 is the school’s new AI module. TM470 is the undergraduate computing capstone module.

The session is said to present “the motivations behind why AI and ML are featuring in the C&C curriculum”. It began with a definition of AI, which was said to be “the capacity of a computer or other machines to exhibit or simulate intelligent behaviour” (Oxford English Dictionary). Michael shared some instances where AL and Machine Learning (ML) was featured in the news. He shared a video that introduced the concept of deep fakes, and then asked the question: can we design a way to determine what is a deep fake? We were introduced to a deep fake detection platform called FakeCatcher from Intel. There are, of course, other contexts. AI can play a role in defending against Distributed Denial of Service attacks (which is a topic which links to the cyber security curriculum). There is a link here to employability. AI is a subject that features in data science, transport, media, telecoms, banking, healthcare and so on.

Onto a question: what is it like to be a tutor on TM358?

TM358 aims to teach a range of ML techniques by adopting an engineering approach. Tutors need to become familiar with a complex and fiddly software stack (which is a hosted platform on Amazon Web Services). TM358 makes use of Python, Jupyter notebooks, and Tensorflow, which is a library of machine learning tools. The module also emphasises social impact and ethics; students are asked to consider how the AI could be used and misused. Some tips for tutors include: make sure you get the TMA dates into the calendar, learn the Jupyter notebooks system, since it is used for assignments and teaching. Tutors are not expected to run the cloud computing platform, but they are expected to understand how students have used and responded to the platform. Do feel confident in seeking help from other tutors.

There are three TMAs and an EMA, which is a mini project which can help to develop skills for TM470. The module adopts a single component assessment strategy, where the EMA accounts for 60% of the overall module result. By the end of the module a student won’t be an AI expert, a Python expert, or a Tensorflow expert, but will have some introductory knowledge which is a very helpful starting point.

AI has changed. TM358 is unrecognisable from what I studied when I was a computer science undergraduate. When I studied the subject, neural networks were mentioned in passing, and the focus was on algorithmic searching. AI is continuing to change; every day there is something new.

I asked a question to Michael, Trevor and all other tutors: have you had many TM470 projects that have used TM358? Students are only now beginning to base their projects on TM358. A challenge is when some students study TM358 and TM470 at the same time. The TM470 staff tutors try to help, and do their best to ensure that students who express an interest in basing their project on TM358 are assigned to tutors who have machine learning and AI expertise. 

Parallel Session 2: eSTEeM and Research

The next session I attended (and facilitated) had the title “Continuing professional development: Approaches and Opportunities”. The aim of this session was to get everyone talking about what is meant by CPD, and to help everyone to understand how it might be changing.

Here’s the abstract that introduces the session: “The new tutor contract not only changes our terms and conditions, it also means there is change in our relationship to the university, and the university school (or schools) that we teach for. …  Due to the new contract, continuing professional development (CPD) will become a closer collaboration between a tutor and staff tutor. This session aims to ask a series of questions about CPD with a view to sharing experiences, practice, and what opportunities might exist as we move towards more fully implementing the new tutor contract.”

I began the session by highlighting some relevant sections from the new tutor contract terms and conditions; the section that describes Academic Currency and Professional Development, and the new Academic Currency and Professional Development Policy. Different elements make up our academic currency time, AL led time, and time that is agreed with a staff tutor. Importantly, the amount of time everyone has for CPD is different, and depends on what everyone’s FTE is. There are other bits to the AL contract and CPD picture that haven’t (yet) been worked out yet, such as the connection between the skills audit and the AL Career Development and Staff Appraisal (CDSA).

Before putting everyone into one of four different breakout rooms, I posed some questions. The collated results from each breakout room are presented below. Where appropriate, I’ve provided either weblinks or a bit of additional commentary.

What CPD have you done as an AL?

  • Mandatory training; also known as compliance training, which includes GDPR compliance, safeguarding and equality essentials.
  • Applaud; becoming an associate fellow or fellow of AdvanceHE (which used to be called the Higher Education Academy)
  • Scholarship projects and Scholarship of Teaching and Learning; ALs can participate in eSTEeM projects.
  • Cyber Security/Cisco; completion of Networking Essentials and other Cisco courses to prepare to teach on other OU modules; older Cisco certification, such as Cisco Certified Entry Networking Technician (CCENT).
  • Carbon Literacy Training; an Open Learn course facilitated by the OU in Wales. Participants are required to attend synchronous events, and consider two pleges.
  • AL development conferences; such as this school event, or events run by the professional development group.
  • STEMbyALsforALs events; tutor led events that aim to share practice and experience.
  • Module study/fee waivers; studying an OU module, either an individual module, or to work toward a qualification.
  • Used in house resources from my "day job" that are relevant to the OU modules that I tutor.
  • Practice courses; Adobe Connect and a forums practice course
  • Programming with an online lab tool called Replit; used in TM112 online lab research.
  • Ethical Hacking CPD for TM359.
  • Written papers for presentation at the European Conference on E-Learning and presented at AdvanceHE conferences.

What CPD would you like to do?

How can your staff tutor or the university help?

  • Provide induction training for new tutors; the STEM faculty now runs various events for tutors who are joining the university, but perhaps there might be an opportunity to offer a further welcome into the school
  • During the skills audit (and later), the staff tutor could offer pointers to resources, or help to provide resources.
  • The staff tutors could flag modules where there is a shortage of tutors and organise training to help tutors become aware of those modules.
  • Provide CPD in quiet times during the year, such as during holidays, e.g. between June and September.

Discussion points

There were a number of discussion points to emerge from the online session, and the notes that every focus group made during their session. One striking point was a question about the extent to which climate education could be embedded within the curriculum. There is also the importance of how to best embed accessibility and inclusion into the curriculum, 

There were also comments and discussion about the AdvanceHE certifications which are available through the OU’s Applaud scheme. Although the Senior Fellow scheme does require evidence and demonstration of leadership, this is certainly something that can be demonstrated through the AL role. Examples of this might include taking a lead during day schools, online tutorials, or leading with the management of cluster forums. If anyone is interested in creating evidence that can contribute to a higher level AdvanceHE fellowship claim, do have a discussion with your staff tutor.

A question that came out of the discussion notes was: what is SEDA? SEDA is an abbreviation for an organisation called the Staff and Educational Development Organisation. SEDA is a professional organisation that is there to support people who are involved with the professional development of education professionals, typically within higher education. Like the HEA scheme, it has different levels. As a rule, the university doesn’t provide funding for membership of professional organisations, since membership of professional bodies is a personal decision.

It is worth highlighting something called the AL development fund which I understand still exists. The Associate Lecturer Development Fund “is available to support Associate Lecturers (ALs) professional development activities in their role at The Open University (OU) as an AL where no other source of funding is available. Examples might be a non-OU course, module of study or a relevant conference. We ask that all applications show a demonstrable link to development of an AL in their role as a tutor at the OU”. The fund is limited to a relatively small amount of money, and you can only submit claims over a certain period of time. You might, for example, wish to use it to take a professional exam, or have the fund cover part of the cost of a conference. All the university will ask in return is a short report.

One theme that emerged was concerned with research and scholarship. Scholarship of teaching and learning, or scholarship about professional practice is easier to facilitate than disciplinary research which must align with school research objectives. If you’re interested in this area, do get in touch with your friendly staff tutor, who will be really happy to help.

A final bit of CPD that is worth mentioning is the opportunity not only to take OU modules using a fee waiver, but also to carry out doctoral study too. More information about what this might mean is summarised in an earlier blog post, Doctoral research: a short introduction.

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: Introductory Plenary

After a lunchtime poster showcase Rehana Awan, Lecturer in EDI Implementation in Computing and Communications, gave a keynote presentation about equality, diversity and inclusion. 

Rehana spoke about her background and connection with the university. She began as a regional coordinator, became an AL for the access programme, and then an AL for DD102 Introducing the social sciences. She then worked as a staff tutor for Open and Access, and became co-chair of the black and minority staff network. As well as being a lecturer in the school, she is a third year doctoral researcher, looking at the awarding gap for black and brown students.

She asked herself a question, which was: “what is preventing me from moving forward in my career?” Barriers to progress might be physical (in terms of where we live), education, or skills. Having been trained as a social scientist, Rehana asks questions about how society is structured, to further understand what barriers might exist. I made a note of her words: “it is important to think of people’s background and contexts. If we have a better understanding of who people are and where they come from, we can better adapt our teaching, and how to address inequalities”.

Another question was asked: why is EDI important? EDI is now embedded within the University’s strategic plan. It is also a legal requirement under the Equality Act 2010. Also, since the university is made up of a community of scholars, everyone has a responsibility to carry out research (and professional development) to ensure that effective teaching is provided to all students. This links with the university’s student access and participation strategies and plans.

I made a note of a striking statistic. In the UK, there are 22k professors. Out of this figure there are only 41 black women. Just looking at these raw figures, there is clearly a systemic issue that needs to be understood and addressed. A further point I noted down was that we need to develop more representative teaching and research communities. Role models are important.

Rehana emphasised that EDI is everyone’s responsibility. She said that her role is to offer advice about research, awarding gaps and progression rates. In response to some of these challenges, Rehana has set up an awarding gaps implementation group, which consists of colleagues from across the school.

Parallel Session 3: Equality, Diversity & Inclusion

Following from Rehana’s keynote, I chose to attend the penultimate session of the day, Decolonising computing - what that might mean? This event was facilitated by Zoe Tompkins, Steve Walker and Ray Corrigan.

Steve Walker presented the background context: some Universities are considering how to decolonise their curricula. In C&C a Decolonising Computing eSTEeM project is exploring what this might mean for our school, led by Mustafa Ali and members of the critical information studies research group. This has raised some questions: Is the history of colonialism important to the discipline?  If so, what are the implications for how and what we teach?

Terms are important. Some key terms are colonialism, postcolonialism and coloniality. Colonialism is defined as a period of European political domination that formally ends with the national liberation and independence movements of the 1960s; postcolonialism relates to a legacy which has outlived formal colonialism and has become integrated within structures, and coloniality refers to persistent structures.

Decolonising computing education is important across the whole sector, since the QAA subject benchmark suggests that it is necessary to acknowledge and address “how divisions of hierarchies of colonial value are replicated and reinforced within the computing subject”. Since students will be creating social structures of the future, it is important that they have an awareness of some of these concepts.

One argument used is “computers don’t have colour”, but computing can be considered as a social practice, since computing is made by people. Social values can be embedded within software, and these values can be replicated by and within society. There is an interaction (which can be called sociotechnical) between the people and the machines (and software) that is created and used.

Two perspectives were highlighted: historic and contemporary.  The historic perspective highlights that technology is implicated in the development of colonialism. The contemporary perspective is that current practices and artefacts continue to perpetuate colonial impact.

It was said that computing is often viewed as a subject without a history, but this is something I disagree with. It is true, however, that the history of computing is not readily taught in computer science or information technology qualifications. 

An interesting case study that reflects a historic perspective was highlighted, the history of the telegraph in India. In terms of the contemporary perspective, asking the question “where do computers come from?” leads us to further case studies. To create the iPhone, rare metals and minerals are needed to be mined, and these can come from countries that are still enduring a continuing legacy of colonialism. There are links to questions about what happens to electronic waste, and the increasing visibility of green computing and the importance of climate justice.

Another question to ask is: who is involved with establishing technical or computing standards? Also, who (or which organisations) provides and supports infrastructure?

Zoe spoke about a survey that was used to gather answers to the question: what do you think it means to decolonise the computing curriculum? Zoe shared a range of different responses from participants. Challenges to progressing this work may include misunderstanding what the goal is, potential lack of interest, lack of resources, and how to ensure representation.

Closing Plenary

Jim Gillen facilitated a short closing plenary, where some questions were shared, such as how do we continue to engage with some of the topics raised, such as equality, inclusion and decolonisation? Another important question was asked about how the subject of sustainability could be further embedded with the curriculum. 

I have no easy answers to these questions, but making representation is an important thing to do, whenever and wherever we can. Following on from the COP27 conference, I have heard that the university is running a university wide event about sustainability. Having completed some CPD about carbon literacy, one of my commitments is to find likeminded colleagues in this school, and the School of Engineering and Innovation, who share interests in green computing.

Reflections

AL professional development events are always fun events, and this was no exception. I did miss being at a face-to-face venue, so we could share tips and stories over a sandwich. This said, the benefit of an online even is that I get to speak with colleagues that I wouldn’t have otherwise spoken to before. A challenge with these online events is, of course, the digital environment that we use; we’re all at different places and within different physical environments which might present their own barriers.

There were, of course, quite a few sessions that I couldn’t go to. I couldn’t, for example, attend the session about the student support team, or Rehana’s second presentation.

From the session that I facilitated, it struck me that there was a lot of CPD going on! Due to the new tutor contract staff tutors are likely to be taking on even more of a listening role in the future in order to do our best to facilitate the opportunities that everyone needs.

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Jim Gillen and to Sharon Dawes who led the planning of the event, our colleagues in ALSPD, and all the members of the AL development planning group that helped to organise this session, which included Michael Bowkis, Ray Corrigan, Christine Gardner, Nigel Gibson, Alexis Lansbury and David McDade. On the Friday evening before the event, Ray delivered a lecture, which I’ve heard was very well received. Further acknowledgement are extended to Sharon, who kindly proof read an early version of this summary.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Christopher Douce

Access to cyber security day

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Christopher Douce, Saturday, 19 Nov 2022, 14:01

On 9 November 2022, I attended an online webinar that was entitled: the real reason for the cyber skills shortage. The webinar was a part of larger event facilitated by CREST International that was about access to cyber security. 

The event was presented by Matt Lawrence, Head of Defensive Security from an organisation called JUMPSEC.  What follows is a set of notes that I’ve made during the session, which have been roughly edited together.

This blog can be viewed alongside other OU blogs that relate to the subject of cyber security.

The real reason for the cyber skills shortage

A point I noted down was that the “skills shortage cannot be solved by bringing more people into the industry. Instead, we have to work smarter and treat current industry professionals better”. Cyber security seeing significant expansion, which means that many organisations are feeling the strain. This expression of concern was reflected in a slide that contained the words “the root of the problem is not the availability of incoming candidates, but the ability to retain skilled and experienced employees”. 

Some striking numbers were shared: the cyber security workforce shrank by 65k people and 1 in 3 cyber security professionals looking to change their role; clearly this is highly unsustainable. (I should add that I don’t know about the source of these numbers). Further comments were made, such as unhealthy working environments, and the unsustainability of operating models which relies on manual analysis of security events and alerts, and organisations going through acquisitions, which puts strain on security controls.

An earlier point that was mentioned that is worth emphasising was that no certification programme is a substitute of hands-on experience.

How do we deal with the skills shortage? I noted down the words: “sustainability is key; compromise is inevitable.” I also noted down “we can’t predict timing and severity” of attacks and events. Professionals “must prepare for the worst, and be ready”.

How are cyber threats evolving?  There were interesting points about ransomware, the practical inadequacy of cyber insurance, gaps of existing control gaps, or lapsing of expected controls. There will always be mistakes: users will accidentally respond to phising emails and there can be inadvertent lapses in permissions; the basics can go wrong. Put another way, “it is the fundamentals that really matter; this goes for organisations and people”. Significantly, applying more technology isn’t necessarily a solution: “before you invest in new security technology, are you making best use of what you already have”. Matt shared a compelling metaphor: don’t make your cyber security haystack bigger by getting more tech.

Paraphrasing some key points about challenges: responders (to cyber events) may have little or no network visibility, and not be able to respond due to a lack of preparations and too may assumptions. Within an organisation there may be “technical debt”, which is a metaphor I have not heard before. Technical debt (Wikipedia), essentially, means shortcuts. In terms of cyber security, this might mean that services might being adequately patched, or infrastructure might be misconfigured. From an organisational perspective, different employees may have misaligned expectations, there may be few checks and balances, and little understanding of threat and available attack paths.

A further slide summarised some of these challenges that were emphasised in the webinar. Some key points include: cyber security operating models may lead to monitoring approaches that are not fit for purpose, and this may lead to the focus on cyber products (which is a technical fix), which may then in turn lead to other issues, such as a potential lack of accountability.

Principles

How do we deal with all this? There are, of course, no immediate or simple answer. A set of principles were shared, which appear to share knowledge and experience.

  1. Augment people with technology. Don’t consider fancy solutions
  2. Be pragmatic and detect what matters (most relevant to the organisation).
  3. Respond on the front foot. Planning, what are the opportunities to respond.
  4. Avoid dependency to enable progress. A security provider is only as good as the organisation they are protecting.
  5. Be visible and transparent. Evidence of services performing as intended.
  6. Be flexible and adaptive.
  7. Embed continuous improvement. Small steps are better than big leaps.

Reflections

I learnt quite a few things through this seminar, and it certainly got me thinking.

Over the last few years, partly due to lots of changes within the OU, I’ve started to become fascinated about organisations, particularly in terms of how they are structured and how they work. The most important element within any organisation is, of course, people. When it comes to cyber security people are, in my view, the most important element. It is people who respond to cyber security incidents, and it is people who setup and maintain controls.

Some of the points mentioned within the webinar reminded me of previous study of a module that goes by the code M889 Information and Data Security. This module has become M811 Information security, which helps students to think about controls, checks, and balances. This subject can also be found within the OU’s undergraduate cyber security named degree, within the module TM311 Information Security.

Acknowledgements

A big acknowledgement goes to the webinar speaker, Matt. I don’t know Matt; I’ve never met him. I also have no connection with either CREST International, who facilitated a series of workshops and events during the day. The really interesting topics highlighted here comes from the event. Where possible, I’ve tried to quote directly. Apologies for any misrepresentations or getting the wrong end of any sticks. 

Finally, I found out about this event through an email that was circulated to the school. I have no idea who sent it, so I have no idea who to thank. So, whoever you are, thanks for sending it through! 

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Christopher Douce

Examining a Doctoral Thesis - the written and unwritten rules

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Christopher Douce, Saturday, 28 Oct 2023, 09:55

On Thursday 13th October 22, I attended a workshop facilitated by Sara Spencer, Head of Research Degrees, and Emeritus Prof Marian Petre from the School of Computing and Communication, that was all about examining a doctoral thesis, 

The workshop was described as being intended “for research degree supervisors who are new or fairly new to the process of examining PhD and Professional Doctorate theses” and was open to both new and experienced research supervisors. 

The broad aim of the session was to provide an “introduction to thesis examination at the OU”, to provide a summary of “what is involved in examining a research degree thesis”, explore the roles of different participants in the process, and to say something about expectations in terms of what takes place during the examination process, and the role of the viva and thesis.

In some ways, this event reminds me of an earlier workshop that I attended in June 22, which had the title Supporting EdD/PhD students through the thesis and the viva (OU blog). One of the differences between this session and the earlier session, is that this session provides a bit more information about the different roles.

On the topic of blogs that might be useful, this earlier blog, Doctoral research: a short introduction published in October 2022 might be also helpful for prospective students. 

What follows are a set of (edited) notes that I made during Sara and Marion's workshop.

Session objectives

Participants were invited to contribute to an online document to share what they were looking for from the session. Some of the key points included: to learn from the experience of others, to understand what the overall process is, what to do if there are disagreements, to share general tips about how to approach examining a thesis, and how to provide feedback.

The facilitators shared some of their experiences, and begin to discuss some of the roles within an examination, and what happens. Some points I noted down were that supervisors will try to choose examiners who are appropriate (given the focus of their student’s research) and examiners should always endeavour to set their egos aside: it isn’t about them, it is about the student who has written a viva, and their research.

Roles and responsibilities

Marion made the following important points: the viva is a real examination and conducting it well matters. Also, if a student has a flawed dissertation, a student can strengthen their position through the viva process. Conversely, if a student has a strong thesis, but gives a weak defence, the outcome might not be as hoped.

Panel chair

Every doctoral examination has a panel chair. The job of the chair isn’t to ask questions, but to moderate the session, mediate communication between everyone, check that everything is going okay, ensure that procedures are followed, and ensure that everyone feels comfortable. The chair is someone everyone can appeal to if help or support is needed, and call for breaks, if necessary. Unlike the examiner, the chair may not be a subject specialist, but will be someone independent and experienced who understands the process. In contract to the chair, the doctoral supervisors are outside the examination process. 

Examiners

The examiners assess the quality of the research. There will usually be either two or three examiners, and two of those may be external. The examiners read the dissertation thoroughly in advance, and prepare a re-viva report. Under strict confidence, the chair will then share each report with each of the examiners. Examiners are also expected to be familiar with the university’s regulations and must work with the chair to prepare an examination report. They must also be willing to provide clarifications for the student if required and assess any revisions, and conduct a re-viva if necessary.

Although there is an expectation that the viva examination process a relatively short amount of time, examiners may be employed within the process for considerably longer, especially if a student is required to carry out remedial work to their viva.

Observer

An observer is allowed to come along to the viva, and it is typically the lead supervisor. The role of the observer is very limited, and the observer doesn’t speak unless invited to do so by the chair. An observer may well take notes, to help the candidate understand what happened within the viva, and to help the candidate remember some of the detail of the discussions that took place.

Candidate

The candidate is, arguably, the most important person in the room (although it might be argued that the chair is just as important). The whole event is about the research that the candidate has carried out, and to check to see whether they have a thorough and detailed understanding of what they have done, and their subject. An important point is this: there are very few opportunities in life where we have opportunities to talk to a group of other people, at length, about a subject that we are very interested and passionate about. With this perspective in mind, and it might even be possible to think of the viva as a precious and potentially even enjoyable event. A candidate can request breaks via the chair, and always ask for clarifications to any question that is asked.

The procedures

As mentioned earlier, examiners read the dissertation, and the examiners prepares a report 5 days before the viva, which are then shared with each of the examiners via the panel chair. An examiner may form an opinion which may be expressed within the form, but this need not be fixed: “the report is not a contract; it is an initial assessment”. This assessment can change depending on what happens within the viva.

Pre-viva meeting

During the pre-viva meeting, the chair and examiners meet to discuss their view and opinions about the thesis. The report helps everyone to see if there is a consistent perspective. Using the reports, the examiners will form an approach. They will discuss a plan about how ask questions.

The exact approach will be different, depending upon the examiners, thesis, and subject. On some occasions, examiners might start with some very easy questions and then work towards points that really matter. Other examiners may choose to take turns, and some will go through a chapter at a time. Sometimes the external will lead, and the internal will follow.

Before the viva, the chair will have some idea of what is going to happen, and how the thesis will be assessed. The chair also provides and offers any necessary clarification about regulations. An important note is that every organisation is slightly different.

The Viva

This is the key meeting between the candidate, the panel chair, examiners, and any observer. Typically, the chair introduces the panel and provides an overview of what is going to happen.

A viva lasts as long as it takes. It might typically last between an hour and a half and three hours; online takes a bit longer. There should be no particular end time. A point that was made: there is no correlation between the length of the viva and the outcome. Breaks can be requested by any participant, via the chair.

Post-viva meeting

After the viva, the examiners, and the chair meet. The candidate and observer are asked to leave the room, where they discuss what has happened, and what recommendation is to be made. The duration of the post-viva meeting also takes as long as is necessary. If examiners do not agree (which very is unlikely), and there is a formal procedure to take account of this. It was emphasised during this session that this a very rare occurrence: examiners tend to agree.

Recommendation meeting

Everyone meets up again, and the recommendation is shared with the student. 

During this meeting there is an opportunity for the examiners to provide some feedback. Revisions are discussed (if necessary), and the observer usually takes notes. During this meeting, the candidate may ask questions.

An important part of this process is the completion of an examination report form, which contains an outcome. The outcome is a recommendation to a university authority, and the panel offers a recommendation summarising what revisions are necessary, and why.

Outcomes

Assessment criteria for a thesis is presented on the examination report form. Points include presentation and style of the thesis (whether the candidate is able to contribute to academic debates), evidence of the work being a significant contribution to knowledge, whether the candidate show evidence of being able to carry out research in the future, and whether the thesis contain material worthy of publication. 

On the point of publication, both Marion and Sara emphasised that publication is neither necessary, nor sufficient for a PhD; the thesis is a monograph, not a collection of papers.

In the OU, there are a number of different possible outcomes: the candidate is awarded the degree, the candidate is awarded the degree with minor corrections, or the candidate has to make substantial amendments. Other outcomes include: the candidate must resubmit their thesis for re-examination, a degree of MPhil is awarded subject to dissertation amendments, resubmission of thesis for re-viva for a MPhil award, and finally, a student is not awarded the degree and not permitted to be re-examined.

Outcomes will be based on the quality of the submission, and each category has a specific timeframe, i.e., minor corrections might be required to be completed within 3 months, and major correction may have to be submitted within 6 months.

How to be an effective examiner

Towards the end of the session, there was a discussion, where participants shared tips about how to be an effective examiner. I noted down the following points from a PowerPoint slide that directed the session: “the best examiners bring out the best in the student” and “there is a correlation between examiner experience and moderation/kindness”.

Marion emphasised the point: “look for the value in the work; whether it conveys a sense of confidence and contribution” Another point was: It is about people skills, as much as it about technical skills. Also, create a rapport with the candidate before asking any tough (but necessary) questions, such as: what did you enjoy, how did you come to study this in the first place? Make sure that you listen well to all answers.

Judge the work on its own merits and make sure that you don’t impose your (examiners) framework on the candidate’s work. Break down larger questions to smaller questions, and give sufficient time to allow your questions to be answered. Importantly, reflect on your own tone and way of communicating, and potentially mention this to the candidate to put them at ease. Be very mindful of how the candidate might be experiencing stress during the viva, and encourage breaks.

A really important point I noted down was: what does “good enough” look like in your discipline? In the viva, what matters is a pass. Another comment was: very few dissertations are without flaws. Always look to what is good in a thesis.

Reflections

This session made me think about to my own viva. My viva was a positive experience. At the time, I didn’t have a really thorough understanding of what everyone’s roles were. I remember the internal examiner, and the external examiner, but I can’t remember who the chair was. I do remember the close scrutiny of the work that I submitted, and a feeling of being asked some really difficult questions. 

Interestingly, I also remember that the internal examiner really liked a certain aspect of my thesis, where I drew on materials from outside of my home discipline. In retrospect, I think this may have contributed to the assessment that I was capable of carrying out original research, which is such an important part of the process. The point here is that I remembered the nice bits, just as I remember the tricky bits.

In the next two months, I’m going to be an external examiner. Attending this session has helped me to strengthen my understanding of the process, and really emphasised what my role and responsibilities are going to be.

I remember another bit of advice I was given by a colleague when I was preparing to be an external for the first time. The advice was about how to approach the reading of a thesis: “Look to what happens within the methodology. The methodology is about what has been done. Does the methodology make sense, given the research questions?” Whilst this bit of advice is practical, the most important bit of advice from Sara and Marion’s session was: “make sure you’re approachable”.

Acknowledgements

The structure of this blog directly echoes the session that was designed and facilitated by Marion Petre and Sara Spencer. Many of the words within this blog also reflect points made by both Marion and Sara. I hope I’ve done justice to your excellent session!

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Christopher Douce

Digital Technologies Solutions Professional (DTSP) PT Training

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Christopher Douce, Wednesday, 27 Jul 2022, 11:21

In my capacity as a degree apprentice practice tutor, I’m invited to a regular professional development and update meeting which currently takes place on the second Friday of each month. At the time of writing, these meetings are hosted by two colleagues: Chris Thompson and Andy Hollyhead.

This blog post shares a set of notes that were made during a PT training meeting that took place on 8 July 22. The key points on the agenda were, broadly:

  • The OU Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) and our response
  • F2F meeting update
  • Good academic conduct for apprentices

ePortfolio update

The university is introducing a new ePortfolio tool, moving from the current system, which is called OneFile, to a different product. Accounts are currently being created, and training will be provided in September 22 with a view to using it from the beginning of October, when new groups are created. Files and records, such as timesheets will (I understand) be moving between the systems.

Quality improvement plan

A quality improvement plan has been put together by the university following the production of an OU annual self-assessment report (which is an internal evaluation about the quality of the degree apprenticeship provision).

Some key points that are to be looked at as a part of the plan include:

  • Targeted CPD throughout the year, which includes the further development of a supportive observation process to help develop practice, to ensure all PTs and ALs are provided with development opportunities to enable others to become outstanding. Practice tutor meetings are being observed.
  • An intention to link observational practice and improvement to the tutor CDSA process to ensure all apprentices are identified (or presented) in terms of having a RAG status (red, amber, and green), and have individual action plans.
  • Increasing the frequency of contact for learners who are red or amber: If an apprentice is flagged as being amber or red, there’s an additional meeting (which can be claimed back as an additional support session) and there is an action plan that is to be completed, and another follow up meeting in a month’s time.
  • Review all apprentice progress monthly, including a review of individual plans where apprentice progress is rated red or amber.
  • Ensure practice tutors use ‘starting points’ to inform learning plans: the next intake, aim to get a skills audit and commitment statement early, so students can speak about them during the early meeting, to gain a detailed understanding of the needs of students.
  • Practice tutors will begin to discuss ‘next steps’ with apprentices, to understand what their intentions beyond their apprenticeship. I have noted down the point: start picking up at each progress review, to facilitate a career related discussion.
  • Upskill practice tutors to ensure that knowledge, skills and behaviours are reviewed throughout all stages
  • Ensure attendance of apprenticeship mentor (line manager/supervisor) at all Tripartite Review meetings: someone who represents the organisation, needs to be at the meeting. If this doesn’t happen, there should be referrals to the university apprenticeship programme delivery managers (ADPMs).
  • Improve the recording of off the job training: apprentices are told to record their timesheets. This is known to be a contractual obligation. The employer line manager and apprentice has to know that timesheets need to be recorded. If they are no doing this, this needs to be escalated, through the APDMs. If no responses, then the processes for removal from the programme may be instigated. There needs to be an entry every 4 weeks, to show that the apprentice is in learning.
  • Ensure all apprentices receive the minimum number of reviews regularly: every apprentice must have 4 reviews. The only exception is if they have a break in learning.
  • Enhance supportive measure to keep apprentices in learning: develop better monitoring of apprentices, between modules.

A return to face-to-face review meetings

From 1 August 2022, practice tutors are allowed to return to face to face reviews. There should be one face to face every year, and a maximum gap of 15 weeks between each review, and evidence of the planning of the next review (which should be captured on the ePortfolio).

Apprentices returning following a study break

A study break is, simply put, a period of time when an apprentice is not studying their academic of work-based modules. A break in learning might occur due to personal commitments. Apprentices should have the review within 4 weeks of returning to study. Also, a conversation is needed early on during the apprentice’s study of a programme to ensure they are on the right programme.

For the formal part of the meeting, the apprentice, line manager, and the practice tutor must be present. If it is a face-to-face meeting, and there isn’t a line manager, try to find a delegate. It is a funding requirement that these meetings take place. They should, ideally be scheduled two weeks in advance.

If there are students returning from a break in learning, get in contact with them two months before their restart, to make sure they feel they are ready to start learning. Also, ensure they are recording on the job timesheets to provide evidence of study.

Lone working guidance

The university has now prepared some new guidance about lone working, which is appropriate for when practice tutors visit an employer. There’s a checklist, and an accompanying risk assessment, for visiting locations. Practice tutors must review this official guidance when planning a first progress review meeting.

Good academic conduct for apprentices

Good academic conduct is important. In the apprenticeship context, a group of apprentices might start working at an organisation at the same time. Whilst it is certainly okay that peers gain support from each other, and collaborate closely on work tasks, peers should not collaborate with each other when it comes to working on and submitting academic assessments (unless group work is specifically required on an assessment task).

During this session Andy Hollyhead shared a number of slides from a fellow Practice Tutor, Stewart Long. The presentation (which could be shared with apprentices) covers the topic of plagiarism and the difference between collaboration and collusion.

Further information about study skills is available through an earlier blog post and also from the OU Study Skills website, which provides links to some really useful booklets.

Reflections

One of the good things about this session is that it offered reassurance about the things that I am doing well and also offered some helpful guidance about what I should be doing, and ought to be doing more of. 

A particularly interesting point is the link between the apprentice, the employer, and their wider career aspirations. I’m very much a subject specialist, rather than a careers specialist, but I’m certainly draw on my own knowledge of roles and opportunities with the IT and Computing sector and bring them into discussions with apprentices. This said, I do feel that this is an area that I need to develop, or get a bit more knowledgeable about.

I was particularly encouraged that I was doing the right things, in terms of planning for review meetings with employers and apprentices. One thing I do need to do is expose more of the actions that I am taking. Just as the apprentice must record off the job training, in the form of timesheets, I also need to make sure that the scheduled review dates are recorded within the ePortfolio, to ensure that colleagues within the apprenticeship team can see what is scheduled. I have all the dates in my Outlook calendar. I need to transfer them to OneFile (and, eventually, the new ePorfolio system, when it is introduced).

More information about the OU degree apprenticeships are available through the OU Apprenticeship pages.

Permalink 1 comment (latest comment by Jonathan Vernon, Saturday, 30 Jul 2022, 06:11)
Share post
Christopher Douce

Supporting EdD/PhD students through the thesis and the viva

Visible to anyone in the world

On 14 June 22, I attended a CPD session about helping students through their doctoral studies. I attended this session since I support a couple of doctoral students; one through a PhD programme, and another through the EdD programme. More information about the EdD programme that if offered through the Well-being Education and Language Studies (WELS) faculty are be available through this blog.

This session was facilitated by Dr Sara Spencer (Head of Research Degrees, Graduate School) and Dr Sarah Sherlock (School of Physical Sciences, chair of research degrees committee). It seemed to be a relatively popular event, with 23 delegates.

The key headings for the event were: the thesis, mock viva, and post-viva support. I noted down the words, “at this session we will look at common concerns that student’s voice about thesis submission and the viva voce examination and consider possible strategies for overcoming these concerns.”

From the event description, the session had the following objectives:

  • To explore students’ expectations and concerns about completing their doctoral thesis and how they will perform during their viva voce examination
  • To share ideas and practices that can be used to support students during the writing-up phase
  • To share ideas and practices that can support students to prepare for their viva
  • To identify sources of help and support offered by the Graduate School Network and the OU Library that can support students during the writing-up phase 

The Thesis

‘Write up’ is a HESA status as well as a university status; a status that applies for one year only, which is available to students during their fourth year of study. This means that students pay a lower fee during a ‘write up’ year. If they go over the write up year, they may be liable for full fees.  An important difference is that students on Professional Doctorates (such as the EdD programme) are not eligible for writing-up fees.

During the session, I made a few notes from some of the slides.  A key point was that the thesis must meet the requirements of the research degree regulations. Interestingly, things have changed since I submitted my own thesis. Students no longer need to submit a paper copy; it can be submitted electronically. (I remember having to get mine bound by a book binder who worked in the town of Chichester!)

A key point is that a thesis is a monograph. In other words, it presents a single coherent narrative. Also, students can make their own decision about whether they wish to submit. A student doesn’t have to expressly seek permission from the supervisor (but, it is probably a good idea to check with them, just to make sure they think that a student is likely to make a worthy submission). Another important point is that if a student is funded to carry out their research, and to write their thesis, a student will no longer receive a stipend when they make their submission.

One interesting point that I did learn (which was something that I already probably implicitly knew about, but didn’t really know what it was called, since I haven’t needed to think about it) was that a thesis can also include a ‘non-book’ component. In addition to submitting a textual monograph, a student may send in other forms of material to accompany a piece of research. In computing, this might be a software artifact. In design or engineering, this might be some architectural drawings. In the arts, this might even be a video of a performance. 

Mock Viva

The assessment of a thesis was described as taking place in three phases: 1) a preliminary assessment, 2) defence of the thesis at the viva, 3) re-examination of the thesis following revision. Some students have the opportunity to take part in a mock viva which is set up by the supervision team. 

The aim of the mock is, of course, to enable students to be as prepared as they can be to be robustly questioned when they defend their work. Since the viva can be a stressful exercise, a mock can help a student get a sense of what happens in the real thing. I remember when I participated in one: the different supervisors took on different roles. One asked question about the big picture, and the other supervisor asked very specific questions about the details of the text.

An important point was made, which was that examiners can get nervous too! Mocks are also helpful for the supervisors as they are for students.

Exam Panel Nomination

A request was shared to all delegates: please think about the exam panel to ensure that nominations are submitted in good time. This suggested reminded me of something. Whilst my student was carrying out their literature review, I remember saying the following: “do look for people who are doing similar research to what you are doing; they might well become potential examiners”.

The exam panel must be approved by the research degrees committee. It was also said that allocating examiners is one of the most important things that the university does (in terms of the doctoral research process). It was noted that there needs to be a minimum of two examiners. Usually, this should be one internal, and the other should be external (in some cases, they can be both external, if there isn’t the internal knowledge within the school or department). The make-up of the whole panel is important. The experience should be distributed across the panel.

Something that I didn’t (formally) know is that a doctoral examiner works according to a contract; there needs to be an offer, this needed to be accepted, and there needs to be consideration (which means that they are paid for their work). The contract is there to avoid ambiguities, and to enable a route to resolve difficulties if they were to arise.

When an exam panel has been chosen, a good tip (for a student who is going to be examined) is to read the papers that have been written by the examiner. This may give a student some insight about what perspective they might be coming from. For example, they might prefer one set of methods over another.

The Viva

The viva begins with a pre-viva meeting with the chair and the examiners. Observers may only be asked to the pre-viva meeting if there is a specific question that the examiners may wish to ask. In the meeting, the examiners may have a discussion about what the approach is going to be, and what questions to ask.

During the viva, some candidates may be encouraged to give a short presentation of the work to the chair, the examiners, and the observers. The viva may, generally, last between 2 and 3 hours, but will depend on the subject that is being examined. A viva will go on for as long as is needed. Breaks can be requested via the chair. Different examiners may take different approaches. Some may go through a thesis a line at a time; others may take a different approach, asking more broad questions. 

A bit of advice I once gained from a colleague in terms of examining a viva was, obviously, to look to the research questions, and then look to the methodology to learn how a student had tackled a question, and justify their choices.

A comment made during this part of the event was: questions to students might explore their knowledge from across the discipline of study, not just the very specific detail of the text that is being the focus of the exam.

The next step is the post-viva meeting, which takes place between the chair and the examiners. This is where the student has to be left on their own whilst the deliberations take place. If this meeting takes a while, this may not necessarily mean a bad outcome. There is also a bit of administration to complete, such as, the completion of forms, which also includes the agreeing of corrections, and what the panel needs the student to do to pass. All this admin can take a bit of time.

The outcome from the panel is a recommendation that goes to a committee. It is also important to note that a recommendation is different from an outcome.

Post-viva support

There are a range of outcomes from a viva (which are based on the quality of a submission) ranging from student being awarded the degree, resubmission, and re-examination, getting an alternative award (such as an MPhil), through to a student not being awarded the degree and not being able to resubmit (and a couple of other options in between).

Extensions to the correction period are not possible, and students who do not submit by the deadline will fail, unless there are clear mitigating circumstances. To repeat, students are not allowed extensions, as otherwise they will fail. Corrections have to be done on time.

Reflections

Having been through this process from beginning until the end, a lot that was presented within this session that was familiar to me. I was familiar with the various phases, but I wasn’t familiar with a lot of the finer detail, such as the roles of the committees, and what observers can and cannot do. Although I think I had once heard that students are not permitted to submit their corrections late, it was good to be reminded of this!

During the discussions at the end of the session, a really helpful comment was “it [the thesis] doesn’t have to be perfect; it just has to be good enough”. This has reminded me of another bit of advice that I was given about doctoral study. I once thought a PhD was gained by uncovering ground-breaking new bits of knowledge, but this was a misunderstanding about how knowledge generation works. The aim of doctoral research is to add to the sum of human knowledge in some form, and it is certainly okay if a contribution is a small one. Contributions are built on.

Another perspective is that doctoral study represents an extended form of academic apprenticeship. It demonstrates that you can do research, and that you are capable of creating something that is original. Reflecting the above comment, research also builds on the work of others.

Acknowledgements

Very many of these words have been summarised from comments from Sara and Sarah, and the slides that they shared during their really helpful CPD session.

Permalink
Share post
Christopher Douce

Degree apprenticeship: cross-faculty CPD event for Practice Tutors, 10 June 22

Visible to anyone in the world

On 10 June 22, I attended a continuing professional development event for degree apprenticeship practice tutors. I’m a practice tutor for the OU’s Digital and Technology Solutions degree apprenticeship scheme. The university also runs schemes that relate to business, nursing and policing.

This blog post is a short summary of some of the themes that were discussed and explored within this event. It is primarily intended as a record of my own CPD, and I’m sharing it more widely just in case it might be of interest to other delegates, and colleagues who are responsible for the CPD of the degree apprenticeship programme.

The aim of the event was the develop the quality of practice tuition and to share best practice. The event began with an overview, and some definitions. I was surprised to learn that there were 400 PTs (or PT contracts) being managed across the university. Regarding the definitions, a PT was a practice tutor, who is someone who works with apprentices and employers. An AL is an associate lecturer, or a module tutor. 

Quality assurance of practice tuition

The aim of this first session, presented by Anna Colantoni and Barb Cochee was to help practice tutors gain an understanding of the aims of the quality assurance project, and its project deliverables, also providing an opportunity for discussion. 

I noted down that the quality assurance project contained 6 project deliverables which were managed in 2 strands. The first strand was about technology and data strand, which included eportfolio implementation, data infrastructure, and technology infrastructure. The teaching support and quality improvement strand included deliverables relating to practice tuition, governance, apprentice and employer guidance and support.

We were presented with some definitions through a question: what is quality assurance, and what does it involve?

  • “quality assurance is the act or process of confirming the quality standards are being met”.
  • “A programme for the systematic monitoring and evaluation of the various aspects of a project, services, or facility to ensure that standards of quality are being met”.

Examples of activities that relate to quality assurance include the monitoring of marking, gathering of feedback from apprentices or employers, mentoring from staff, and carrying out observations of practice tutor meetings and tutorials.

I noted that there was a difference between quality assurance and quality enhancement. Enhancement means: “improvement of quality brought about through cycles of continuous improvement and innovation”, with the point that there isn’t a final end point, and culture can play a role.

During this session, I also made note of some project outputs. These included the practice tutor quality framework and accompanying papers. These papers relate to tripartite meeting standards (meetings between a practice tutor, apprentice, and the apprentice’s line manager), the tripartite meeting observation process, and a PT professional development framework. Further development activities includes a review of the apprenticeship hub review; a dedicated VLE site, which is used to share information.

Progress review meetings –what should good look like?

The aim of this second session, facilitated by Jo Bartlett, Vicki Caldwell and Lucy Caton (Academic Leads, Practice Tuition, Apprenticeships Change Programme) was to share updates about good practice guidance, share details of the observation of progress review meetings, and to share ideas about good practice and challenges of progress review meetings.

This session explored the tripartite progress review meetings, which take place between an apprentice, an employer and a practice tutor. The meetings were described as “complex, cross boundary working”.

I noted down the following from a summary: the role of the practice tutor is to oversee the work based-learning that takes place; sometimes this can relate to programme requirements, or regulatory requirements. Key tasks can include setting of learning plans, setting of objectives, applying academic learning to academic setting, encouragement of reflecting, opportunities to shadow others. Also, the meetings help the practice tutor understand the work setting and help the apprentice and the employer understand their study and learning programme.

I also noted that it is important that our student (apprentice) feels well supported, and engage in a wide range of activities. In the apprenticeship, the employer has a role of providing opportunities to help learner apply and develop the academic learning.

During this session we were put into different breakout rooms. There was a room about “encouraging reflection”, a room about “addressing barriers to learning”, and two more about “ensuring relevant learning opportunities” and “setting SMART objectives”. We were given a direction: share good practice and something that you may have done to overcome some challenges.

I was put into the “encouraging reflection group”, and found myself amongst a group of PTs who work with nursing and police apprentices. 

A key point was: students need to be encouraged, to understand and develop a reflective mindset. A couple of frameworks were shared and mentioned, such as the “what, so what, now what?” by Rolfe et al. Other models were mentioned, such as those by Gibbs and Kolb. We were directed to the University of Edinburgh reflective toolkit and some OpenLearn resources were mentioned, such as Learning to teach: becoming a reflective practitioner which highlight different reflective models.

Back in the plenary room, we gathered feedback from the different rooms. I’ve managed to summarise feedback from two of the groups.

Barriers to learning opportunities: this group discussed the importance of the learning environment, organisational culture, organisational understanding, and requirements. Other points included he importance of the line management engagement, and ensuring off-the-job time. A PT has the opportunity to emphasise the benefits of the degree apprenticeship to the organisation in terms of student progress and development.

Setting SMART objectives: get the employer to create 3 objectives, which are then used within the discussions that are used within the meeting discussions. Consider how they may be linked to the educational objectives.

Reflections upon supporting learners to apply theory into practice 

Following on from our breakout room discussions about reflections, the next session was facilitated by Sarah Bloomfield (Lecturer in Work based Learning, FBL), Evelyn Mooney (Lecturer, Adult Nursing, WELS) and Anthony Johnston (Staff Tutor, STEM). Rather than focussing only on reflections, this session also emphasised work-based learning, and the role that it plays in a degree apprenticeship.

We were presented a question: what is work based learning? It could be considered to be learning for work, learning at work, or learning through work. A comment was that these definitions relate to a framework that is used within the degree apprenticeship standard, which is about the development of knowledge, skills and behaviours.

Next up was a presentation of an adaptation of Kolb’s reflective cycle, which featured experiencing issues in practice, taking action and trying something new, using theories and concepts to think differently, and reflecting on practice (or, what has been done). Theories can be thought of as tools, or a lens, which can be used to how to look at problems or how things are done.

Another question was: wow can PTs help with the work-based learning? There are, of course the quarterly reviews (which can be tripartite meetings), but also practice tutors can facilitate progress reviews.

In my own work as a practice tutor, I make extensive use of a review form. It was mentioned that on these forms, it would be useful to emphasise which new knowledge, skills and behaviours have been gained. Also consider asking: has there been anything that is new and interesting?

Just like the previous session, we were put into breakout rooms. We were asked two questions: (1) What strategies do you use to help learners apply theory/knowledge into their practice? (2) What challenges do you face in doing so?

During our room, we held the view that it might be useful for practice tutors to have a discussion with a module tutor to understand not only where the student is, but also to get a more detailed appreciation of the module materials.

During the plenary session, the use of forms or prompts to help to draw out conversations were discussed. A useful question could be, “tell me something that you have read that has informed your practice”. Also, asking open questions is important, such as, “tell us about what you are doing at the moment?” Pinpoint something that is helpful for them to focus on. 

Effectively supporting learners with additional needs

This session, facilitated by Michelle Adams (Senior Manager, Disability Support Team) and Claire Cooper (Manager, Disability Support Team) was less interactive, and was more about the providing of information to practice tutors about the support the university provides to students with disabilities.

A student may disclose a disability at any point. If a student discloses a disability to a tutor or a practice tutor they are, in effect, disclosing a disability to the university. When this happens, the disability support team creates a student profile through the use of a disability support form. If appropriate, students are encouraged to apply for the disabled students allowance, and can apply to the access to work scheme.

Disabled student allowances is externally funded by the government, and there are four types of award: specialist equipment, non-medical helper support, general allowance, travel allowance. The university also provides an auxiliary aids team and a small equipment loan scheme to bridge the gap between applying for support, and receiving support. The university provides different interim loan kits. The exact composition of the scheme differs according to the needs of students.

The New AL Contract: your questions answered

I split my time between the last two sessions. I began with the session about the new AL Contract, which was facilitated by Dan Sloan (Senior Manager, AL Services/AL Change Programme) and Sam Murphy (Implementation Programme Lead), and then moved to the other session about peer support.

This session began with some definitions that tutors and practice tutors might see on their contract details. Some key terms and topics were about FTE, and the differences between contracted FTE, delivery FTE, and allocated TRA days.

If you are reading this blog as someone who is internal to the university, you will be able to find a set of resources and posts that relate to the new AL contract. A notable post is one that summarises how your FTE if calculated.

Developing opportunities for peer support

This final session was facilitated by Barbara Cochee (Senior Manager, PT Training and Development, ALSPD) and Olivia Rowland (Content Designer, ALSPD). To facilitate the discussions, we were asked who our peer were, what does peer support look like, what might benefits of peer support might bring, and what support might you need to make this happen?

This session featured quite a wide ranging discussion. We discussed the importance of face-to-face meetings, and the role of module tutors.  It was acknowledged that, for some programmes, there can sometimes be a distance between the academic tutors and the academic assessors. For some apprentices (such as those within nursing programmes), students need to pass the academic studies as well as their practice studies (or, practical skills that they need to master).

A thought that I did have is that, in some ways, practice tutors represent a bit of administrative and academic glue in a degree apprenticeship programme. They exist as glue between academic modules and tutors, glue between employer and programme, glue between the apprentice and the work-based learning, glue between academic and work-based learning, and offer pointers to additional resources, and connecting together different aspects of support together. 

In terms of the practice tutor community that I’m a member of, perhaps the best form of peer support comes from a school perspective, and linked to a particular degree apprenticeship programme that I’m helping to support. I don’t know very many other practice tutors. It would be great to know a few more, if only to more directly understand that I’m offering the right kind of support.

Reflections

I think this was the first event of its type that I’ve been to. It was a large event; there were around 100 delegates. I was a little grumpy about the earlier sessions about quality assurance. I have the view that quality emerges from the relationships that exists between people – specifically, colleagues, tutors, and students.

Hearing about the perspectives from other faculties was helpful, especially in terms of hearing different views about the role of the practice tutor, and what they contribute during the tripartite meetings. Overall, I found the discussions the most helpful, and I would welcome the opportunity to participate in more of these events.

One thing that I would like to hear more about is more stories: stories from the employers, stories from tutors and, most importantly, stories from apprentices.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Christopher Douce

Degree apprenticeship practice tutor development event May 21

Visible to anyone in the world

In addition to being a staff tutor and module tutor, I’m also a practice tutor (PT) . A practice tutor is someone who supports the delivery of the university’s DTS (digital and technology solutions professional) degree apprenticeship programme. There is an important difference between the PT and an OU academic tutor. In the DTS scheme, PT is one of the key individuals in the student’s journey. The role of the PT is to provide a consistent link between the apprentice’s world of work and academic study.

On 15 May 21 I attended what was called a practice tutor development day. The aim of this event was to provide further training and development for practice tutors, and to enable practice tutors to share experiences with each other and the apprenticeship delivery team.

This blog presents a sketch of what was covered during the day. I’m sharing these notes just in case it might be useful for fellow delegates (and fellow practice tutors), or anyone else who might be interested in how the OU is supporting its degree apprenticeship programme. It also represents a summary of one of the useful CPD events that have taken place over the year.

Preparing for Ofsted

This first section was facilitated by Andy Hollyhead, Chris Thomson and Craig Jackson, but much of the material for this session was delivered by Craig, who began with a question: what would the result of a negative inspection be?

Craig presented a broad summary of the Ofstead assessment process, saying something about what happens when an assessment takes place. I noted that four areas will be judged: the quality of education, behaviour and attitudes, personal development, and leadership and management. Craig mentioned that “some inspectors will look at specific areas, such as leadership and management”.

Different types of documents may be scrutinised to gain a sense of what is happening and how learners are progressing. Inspectors may scrutinise how improvements are measured and made and may speak to different members of staff, including apprentices, practice tutors, line managers, central academics, managers and leaders from the ‘training provider’. A decision about a rating will be made via trangulation; looking at different bits of evidence to come to a final decision.

Before moving onto the next session, I noted down a few relevant points that were made by Chris: the role of a PT is to map academic wok to job activities. I also noted that work based learning modules are focussed on work based skills that are not technical in nature, such as project management and personal management.

Tripartite meetings: good practice

This next session, which was about facilitating meetings with apprentices and employers, was facilitated by Alison Leese. Alison began with an important question: why are the review meetings important? They can be used to manage expectations, establish and review individual learning plans, set and plan to achieve success, to share perspectives, they can be used to identify challenges, and to provide feedback.

For the first meeting, it is important to scheduled and prepare for it, and it should be an opportunity to finalise an individualised learning plan and prepare for the first review.

In normal circumstances, there should be one face to face meeting per year. The first meeting is likely to take place face to face. During this fort meeting, there should be the sharing of roles and responsibilities; a discussion about what everyone does, and the introduction of the concept of the module (academic) tutor, and highlighting other roles that exist within the background, such as a staff tutor (a practice tutor line manager), and the Apprentice Programme Delivery Manager, who liaises with the employer or line manager. I noted down the point that the line manager must provide sufficient diversity within a job role to ensure that sufficient experience is gained to enable the learning outcomes of the DTS scheme to be met.

For each progress review, it is important to effectively schedule and prepare. Progress should be documented (currently through the university ePortfolio system) and objectives reviewed. An apprentice’s individual learning plan should be updated should there have been any changes in the apprentice’s situation, such as working location or accessibility needs. After every quarterly review, everything should be finalised within a 10 working day period.

Some points I noted down during the session were: use an initial meeting agenda/checklist, and for each progress review have a review checklist or agenda which may contain points such as: update ILP, objectives and gateway requirements (such as English and Maths skills). I also noted down that there was some cross-faculty induction material that was available on the apprentice hub, such as a summary of Kolb’s experiential learning cycle.

Practice tutors should refer or apprentices if an apprentice is not making sufficient progress, needs additional support, requests change of study programme, or isn’t being provided with the very important 20% off the job time (Gov.uk website), there is a change in job roles, or the line manager is not engaging sufficiently.

Safeguarding at the OU

Safeguarding is the process of protecting children and vulnerable adults from neglect. This is an important subject since the university has over two thousand registered students who are under the age of 18. The OU safeguarding team works with the OU student’s association, the student support teams, and the student resource and support centres (SRSC).

At the start of the section we were asked: how might PTs have contract with safeguarding in their roles? There might be phone calls or emails, or disclosures that take place in other ways, such as through assessments or one to one support sessions.

The university has a responsibility to support its students, and their children, or any vulnerable adults who a student might be looking after. The terminology used to refer to a vulnerable adult is different in different parts of the UK. In Wales the term is: an “adult at risk”. In Scotland, the term is “protected adult”.

An important point was made during this session, which was: “working with apprentices means that they [the student or the apprentice] are supported not just by the OU but also by their employer”.

To refer a student, an email could be sent directly to the safeguarding team, or a webform could be submitted.

Apprentice onboarding, on programme support and offboarding

This session was jointly facilitated by Nathalie Collins, Jackie Basquille and Charlotte Knock. Jackie began by speaking about the functional skills team. Degree apprentice students must gain the equivalent of A* to C, or scores 4 to 9 in Maths and English by the end of their studies. During the onboarding process (or, induction, as I call it), students will carry out a skills audit, will be interviewed, and there will be a review of their job role.

The onboarding (induction) process was summarised as follows: an information advice and guidance seminar, sharing of evidence of a link between job role and a chosen apprenticeship scheme, a core and specialism skills audit (the core skills audit refer to essential knowledge, skills and behaviours), a one to one discussion with an apprenticeship programme delivery manager, and the checking of prior qualifications. All this leads to a signed commitment statement and apprenticeship agreement (which gets stored to the ePortfolio system). When this is done, there is then an induction webinar.

Sometimes apprentices may require breaks in learning; a subject covered by Charlotte. There is an important difference between a break in learning (BiL) and a deferral. A deferral is a postponement of an exam or an equivalent assessment. A break in learning is possible due to a recognised number of reasons, such as (1) an economic reason, (2) long term sickness, (3) maternity leave, (4) religious trips, and (5) Covid related reasons.

The process for a break in learning begins a discussion with a practice tutor, who then speak with an ADPM, who then contacts the organisation apprentice lead. Whether a break is possible or not may depend on exactly where the apprentice is in their studies. An apprentice lead within an employer organisation will need to “sign off”, or approve a break in studies.

Building practice

The final part of the day was all about sharing experiences. We were put into small breakout rooms (with approximately 6 colleagues, mostly fellow practice tutors) where we began to share experiences of facilitating review meetings. We also looked at a short case study, and then went on to discuss the challenges we uncovered in a plenary room.

Resources

During the event, I collected some links to useful resources that were shared through the text chat channel.

Apprentices who are enrolled within the Digital and technology solutions programme are able to access the Apprentices studying the DA DTS site. Practice tutors can also access this page to get an understanding of what students can see.

Practice tutors can access an interactive mapping template (OU apprenticeship pages), which shows the connection between modules, apprenticeship specialisms and the criteria of the qualification. This page also provides a link to a more detailed mapping tool (OU apprenticeship pages).

Reflections

In my very early days of being a practice tutor, I wasn’t entirely whether I was doing the right thing. I enjoyed my first meetings with the new apprentice students and their employers. To prepare, I arrived with meetings armed with a summary of the programme, and I talked everyone through the principles of OU study and what it meant, and then summarised the programme that an apprentice was about to start. Although I seemed to be doing the right thing, I wasn’t completely sure whether I was doing everything right.

I found this session really helpful, since I felt it consolidated some of my knowledge and understanding, emphasised the importance of certain deadlines and activities, and also gave me a steer towards some useful resources which I could use with apprentices during some of their meetings. During the next meetings, I’m definitely going to take the apprentices through the mapping tool, either during online or during face to face meetings.

There were a couple of tools that I heard about that I didn’t know too much about: there were the checklists for the meetings that I need to find, and there’s the practice tutor eTMA system, where we can get more of a view about how an apprentice is getting along. On this point, I need to be clear about boundaries and responsibilities: my role is to help apprentices connect their assessments and academic study to work activity.

One activity that I need to do is to get a more thorough and detailed understanding of the work-based learning modules. I guess that every practice tutor has slightly different levels of understanding of the different modules that their apprentice students’ study. Being an academic tutor on one of the modules on a shared pathway, I feel as if I’ve got a pretty good (if broad) handle on the academic modules. I do feel as if I need to find the time to really nail down my understanding of some of the later work based learning modules. Perhaps this will be the subject of my next apprenticeship blog.

Acknowledgements

This event was organised by the Computing and Communications English apprenticeship team, which comprises of Andy Hollyhead and Chris Thomson. Acknowledgements are also extended from the wider university apprenticeship team who are based in the Business Development Unit (BDU).

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Christopher Douce

Course for External Examiners

Visible to anyone in the world

On 9 November 2018 I attended a continuing professional development (CPD) course for external examiners run by the Higher Education Academy (or, AdvanceHE, as it is otherwise known). The course was facilitated by two OU colleagues: Professor Mark Brandon from the STEM faculty, and Naomi Watson from the WELLS Faculty. What follows are a set of notes that I made before and during the course. A week after the course, I edited everything together so I would have a rough sketch of what happened during the event. 

The aim of the course was to further understand the role of an external examiner, develop a deeper understanding of the nature of academic standards, and to ‘use evidence-informed approaches’ to inform judgements about ‘academic standards and the enhancement of student learning’.

The course was split up into two parts an online component (part 1) and a face to face component (part 2); participants had to complete both of these parts to complete the CPD. An interesting point was that completion was also recorded by the HEA. 

During the event, delegates were given a nicely printed A4 sized book, which had the catchy title: professional development course for external examiners. During the course we dipped into the book and completed a number of activities, writing down some personal reflections and thoughts. From time to time, I’ll refer to the book, the activities, or both. 

Preparing for the face to face session

To prepare, we all had to login to a virtual learning environment and complete a couple of activities (which I summarise below). The introductory information was useful; we were referred to the Higher Education Academy's A handbook for external examiners (PDF).

I also noted down the words: “external examiners gain oversight of assessment process, provide comment about the assessment process to say whether student learning outcomes are met and to offer informative comment on good practice”.

Activity 1: External examining of student work

We were asked to read an assessment briefing paper that described principles of feedback. The briefing paper contained information about learning outcomes, the level of study, information about the task that students had to complete, and provided a marking scheme. There were three learning outcomes: one about understanding, another about designing and a final one about taking account evidence into. Students were required to write a critical review of their own assessment practice.

We had to review three assignments and judge whether the work has been given the correct marks in coordination with the scheme and write a paragraph to give feedback regarding the academic standards of the module based on the assignments.

Activity 2: The external examiner role

This second activity emphasises that external examiners have a duty to help to maintain academic standards, ensure that institution policies and regulations are followed, that standards are comparable with those in other institutions, and to share good practice, and to be a critical friend. 

We were asked to comment on a short series of scenarios: a situation where a course leader asks for help, a situation where we had to deal with differences of opinion between examiners, and to consider a situation where there was low quality student work despite institutional staff working very hard to maintain standards.

During the face-to-face session

The face-to-face session was split into 7 short components (excluding a concluding section). These components had a mixture of listening, group work, followed by individual reflection activities. What follows is a very short summary of notes from these different sections. 

Session 1: Introduction

The first session was an introduction which referred to the QAA’s UK quality code for Higher Education, Chapter B7: External Examining (pdf) Echoing the introduction to this blog, externals are required to ensure threshold standards (QAA quality code, chapter B7, p. 4), ensure that processes are followed, and also ensure that academic standards are comparable between institutions.

During this first session we reviewed the activity 2 scenarios to further understand the role of the external examiner, and to understand the tensions, and to understand how to balance the different demands of ‘the process checker’, ‘critical friend’, and the maintainer of standards.

As a brief aside, it’s important to mention that appointments to external examining posts are made by universities. Examiners are recruited either through personal recommendations (where people are encouraged to apply), or through a national mailing list, which interested academics can sign up to.

Session 2: Variability in academic standards

In the second session we looked at another scenario and were asked to think about the challenge of how we actively score assignments. During the task I asked myself about the extent to which learning outcomes can or should be linked to assessment criteria. In the context of our scenario, a question that was asked (amongst our table) was: do students have access to the marking criteria?

This session had a second task, where we were asked about what issues might lead to variability in academic standards. I made a note of differences between people, tools and the task (nature of assessment).

Session 3: People as a source of variation

An interesting point that I noted down was an assertion that standards are socially constructed. To understand more about what this meant, and the idea of variation further, we were asked to complete another exercise that began with a question: what shapes our standards? Some points that I noted down were: from our institutions, values and beliefs, but also from specialist and professional knowledge of subjects.

Another question that we were asked was: where did you get your standards from? Some answers included: 

  • Influential people and groups such as colleagues and networks
  • Experience of working with students, carrying out assessments, and working within industry 
  • Known and understood professional values and beliefs, such as the aims of higher education and values from a discipline or subject.

Sessions 4 & 5 : Tools and tasks

This activity complemented one of the online preparation activities.  We were asked to look at module specification documents and descriptions that were from different sectors, professions and institutions. We were asked to think about internal reference points, such as qualification descriptors, learning outcomes and assessment guidance and external reference points, such as subject benchmark statements. 

These discussions led to an activity: we were given a set of cards which related to different scenarios that we might observe as external examiners. We were asked to place the cards on a two dimensional grid. One axis had the title ‘internal/external’ (which related to the types of tool the care related to), and the other had the title: ‘high/low effectiveness’. After a figuring out where the cards went, we were invited to have a look at what other groups had done.

Session 6: Profession practice

This session was all about figuring out what to do in certain situations. In our groups we were given a set of different external examining scenarios, and offered 5 different choice cards. After one of the group read out the scenario, we were invited to vote on what we thought was the best course of action. After the voting, discussed why we had chosen to vote the way we did.

It was a fun exercise; there were friendly differences of opinion about what strategies to adopt. I sensed that there was no right or wrong answer, and the best course of action might depend on a combination of different factors, including the institution, subject, and the colleagues that we’re working with.

Session 7: Social moderation and collaboration of standards

The penultimate session featured a couple of videos. There was one video of exam marking of a musical performance, and another video of a project where academics from Australian universities discussed how they would mark different pieces of work. In some respects, the second video (which featured a marking exercise) very much resembled by own experience of being a project marker on a Computing and IT project module. During the co-ordination meeting different tutors would present their views and justify their marks.

There seemed to be an important point underlying this final session, which I noted down, which is: ‘you need to be talking to other people within your subject to understand what the standards are’.

Reflections

All in all, this CPD was pretty good fun! Having had some experience of being an external examiner, I found that some of the discussions directly resonated with my personal experience. 

One of the key points that I took away from the session was a differences between internal and external documents (or tools) that can help and guide the external examiners. 

Although I had an implicit awareness of the distinction, the way that it was made clear was very helpful. In my own experience, I’ve been reviewing course descriptions and marking guides (internal documents) and also having a look at different qualification outlines (external documents). I have also remembered that I have, on occasions, had a look at module descriptions from other institutions (to help me carry out a comparison of standards).

I enjoyed the interactive element and the opportunity to discuss issues with colleagues from other schools and faculties. I don’t have any suggestions about how to improve the course, since it offers a lot of tools and useful tips. The next step for me is to try my best to connect what I’ve learnt to my current external examining contract.

Permalink
Share post
Christopher Douce

STEM new tutor online briefing

Visible to anyone in the world

When I started with the OU back in 2006 I remember visiting a school or a sixth form college in Sussex to attend a new tutor induction day. I remember that it was a very busy event; it was for all new tutors across all faculties. Since the event was held at an unfamiliar school, I couldn’t shake that feeling of going to my first day at school. It was significant, fun, but also slightly unnerving.

Fast forward twelve years and things have changed. Almost all of the OU regional centres in England have closed, and I find myself co-hosting an online equivalent of an induction session with a staff tutor colleague from Science.

What follows is a very short summary of our presentation: ten top tips to becoming an associate lecturer, which took place on the evening of 3 October 2018 for all STEM associate lecturers who joined over the past two years. Much of the credit goes to Fiona Aiken who proposed the idea of the tips.

1. Understanding the tutor role

The module materials that do the teaching, students do the learning, and it is the role of a tutor to facilitate the student’s access to the learning. Tutors are an academic contact for the module; they answer questions that relate to the module materials, run tutorials, mark assessments and facilitate online discussions.

2. TutorHome

The most important website that you will use is TutorHome. Take time to have a look through the TutorHome site. You will find a way to get a summary of your student group, access the module website that you tutor, and will find a link to download and return TMAs. 

3. Introductory email

Introductions are important. When you receive your student group, send a welcoming email to every student. A recommendation is to personalise every one. Tell them something about you and your background (how long you have been a tutor for, and maybe something about your day job). Also, set some boundaries to say how they can contact you. Finally, encourage them to email you back so you can start a dialog. 

4. Setting up your Tutor Group forum

Different modules use tutor groups in different ways. Also, modules have different types of groups, depending on how they’re designed: there can be module wide forums, cluster forums and tutor group forums. Post a welcome message to your tutor group forum and subscribe to it. Encourage students to introduce themselves. Also, take a few moments to set up your TutorHome dashboard, since this is a nice way to get a quick overview

5. Adobe Connect

Like forums, there are different Adobe Connect online rooms for live online tutorials. Different modules will use them in different ways. Some key tips for the using of Adobe Connect are: take the time to complete some Adobe Connect training, make sure that you understand what a layout is and make good use of them, deliver sessions in pairs if you can (one tutor can manage the text window and another can present), consider recording your Adobe Connect session, make sure that you have a good understanding of the aims of a tutorial (refer to the group tuition strategy), gradually build up your expertise by using different features, don’t be afraid to get things wrong (since running online tutorials is hard), always try to include an an ice breaker, expect silence since it is hard to get students to speak, have very regular activities (between every 20 seconds and 2 minutes) and finally: be brave; try things out: we’re all learning!

6. Correspondence tuition

Correspondence tuition is, perhaps, the single most important thing that you will do as a tutor.  It isn’t just marking: it is where you do some teaching and help to facilitate student learning. In many cases it is your main point of contact with all your students, and think of it as a conversation between you and your students. Some points to remember: do return your marking within a ten working day period, make sure that you understand and thoroughly know the tutor notes that have been provided by the module team, and always ask your mentor for guidance.

7. Planning your Time

Since being a tutor is, mostly, a part time role, time is important; you need to plan carefully. Ask yourself the question: what are the constraints on your time? At the beginning of a module presentation write down all the tutorial dates and times. Also, if you’re going to be away for more than a couple of days, always remember to let your students and your staff tutor know. 

8. Looking through your Student List

When you have received your list of students, do take the time to look through your student list. Do pay particular attention as to whether they have any additional requirements (also known as a DA record). Also, you should be aware that there might be certain flags against certain students to highlight particular situations, such as whether they are young students or may be held in secure units. If you’re unsure about the implications or what any of this means, do ask your staff tutor. 

9. Where to get help

Although you will be working on your own for most of the time, it’s really important to remember that you’re never on your own; there is a lot of help and support available that you can always draw on. Key points sources of help and advice include:  your staff tutor/line manager, your mentor, fellow tutors through the tutor forum, the module team and curriculum managers, the student support team (advisors) for non-academic help and advice, and  disability specialists (visual impairment, mental health). Finally, all associate lecturers can become members of the University and College Union.

10. Continuing professional development

The university treats the ongoing professional development of associate lecturers seriously. Tutors can attend a number of online and face-to-face AL development conferences, can make use of something called a staff fee waiver to study OU modules and draw on something called the AL development fund for various bits of academic professional development. Finally, the university runs a scheme called Applaud which can help tutors become Associate Fellows and Fellows of the Higher Education Academy (FHEA).

Acknowledgements

A big thank you to Fiona Aiken who provided the ideas for more than half of this session, and also to Janette Wallace, who deftly managed all the text discussions.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Christopher Douce

HEA 2017 Annual conference: Generation TEF

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Christopher Douce, Monday, 14 Aug 2017, 10:56

A couple of weeks after attending the European Distance and E-Learning Network (EDEN) conference, I attended a UK Higher Education Academy conference that took place in Manchester between 4 July and 6 July 2017. In some respects, it was good to attend both events so close together, since ideas from the first conference were still at the forefront of my mind when I attended the second.

What follows is a conference of report of the HEA event. Like all of these conference reports, they represent my own personal views of the event; different delegates, of course, would have very different experiences. I should add that I attended two of the days: one that concentrated on STEM education, and the other that was more general.

The second day of the conference was opened by HEA chief executive Stephanie Marshall. Stephanie noted that this was the first annual conference for three years. She also hinted at the scale of the HEA, reporting that there were now ninety thousand fellows. A key point was that ‘teaching excellence is a global ambition’ and that discussions about the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) has been dominating recent debates within higher education. The notion of the fellowship was an attribute that can change university cultures to foreground the importance of teaching. Other issues that I noted were the importance of student engagement, student satisfaction, student retention and the idea of creating a ‘connected curriculum’.

Keynote: How digital engagement enhances the student experience

The opening keynote was by Eric Stoller. Eric has built a consultancy about using technology and social media to create digital engagement, with a particular emphasis on higher education.

I’ve noted that Eric said that there are social media skeptics and that social media is a subject that can be polarising. There was the suggestion that social media is all about learning, and the learning doesn’t stop when students leave the classroom. A point I noted was ‘life-long learning should be at the heart of the experience’; this is especially interesting since the life-long learning agenda within my own institution has been fundamentally impoverished due to government increases of tuition fees. It is now harder to study for an entirely different qualification, or to study a module or two with the intention of developing skills that are important in the workplace.

We were presented with a series of questions. One of them was: can social media be used for critical thinking? Perhaps it can. Information literacy is an important and necessary skill when we are faced with working out what news is fake, and what news isn’t. Other questions were: how do we use social media to build communities? Also, how do we connect to others when there’s one of ‘you’ and lots of ‘them’? In answer to ‘how’ you ‘do’ engagement through social media, I remembered that one of my colleagues, Andrew Smith gave a talk entitled ‘how our classroom has escaped’ at The Open University about how to use some social media tools (specifically Twitter) to reach out to computer networking students.

Another broad question was about digital literacy and capability. This immediately relates to another question: is there a benchmark for digital capabilities? A challenge about this perspective is one that Eric mentioned, which is: different people use social media in different ways. Another question was: how about addressing the subject of social media in staff appraisals?

A theme that appears regularly is that of employability. Perhaps lecturers should be ‘role modelling’ to students about how to use social media, since these can and do have implications for employability. Social media can be used to engage students as they become acclimatised to working within a particular institution, helping them through their first few weeks of study.

As Eric was speaking, I had my own thoughts: one way to see social media is a beginning point for further engagement with students; it can be used to expose issues and debates; it should, of course, be a beginning point and not be an end in itself. There are other issues: what are the motivations and incentives for the use of social media amongst different communities?

Day 2: Morning Sessions

The first session of the day was by Anna Hunter from the University of Central Lancashire. Anna’s talk was entitled: ‘What does teaching excellence look like? Exploring the concept of the ideal teacher through visual metaphor’. I was interested in attending this session since I have an interest in associate lecturer continuing professional development, and Anna was going to be talking about her work on a PGCE in HE module (which is a subject that has been on my mind recently). Some of the activities echoed my own experience as a PGCE student; activities to explore views and opinions about teaching and thinking about the notion of academic identity. I noted down a question that was about team teaching, but I didn’t note down the response; the issue of how to facilitate and develop team teaching practice remains both an interest and a question. 

Kath Botham from Manchester Metropolitan University gave a presentation that was also in the form of question: Is an institutional CPD scheme aligned to the UK PSF and HEA Fellowship an effective tool to influence teaching practice? Kath’s research was a mixed method approach that aimed to assess the impact of the various fellowship awards. Some practitioners wanted the ‘HEA badge’ to be seen and recognised as someone involved in teaching and learning’. It is viewed as something to validate practice. Also, gaining accreditation is something that can help lecturers and teachers overcome ‘imposter syndrome’. The question remains: does accreditation change practice? Accreditation can help people to engage with reflection, it can represent an important aspect of CPD and can stimulate personal skills and study development.

Day 2: Afternoon Sessions

After attending a series of short five minute ‘ignite’ sessions, I couldn’t help but attend: ‘Removing the elephant from the room: How to use observation to transform teaching’ by Matt O'Leary and Mark O'Hara who were both from Birmingham City University. This presentation directly linked to the theme of the conference and to a university funded project that is all about online and face to face tutorial observations. We were treated to a literature review, and introduced to a six stages of an observation cycle: (1) observe self-reflection, (2) a pre-observation meeting, (3) observation, (4) post-observation reflection, (5) post-observation dialog, and (6) observee and observed post-observation reflective write up. I also noted down that there was an observer training and development sessions. Another note (which I assume is about the feedback) was: ‘we chose a blank page approach; we don’t want to forms corrupting what we see’, which reflects observation reports that I have personally received. The closing points were important; they spoke about the importance of management buy-in, that there is anxiety in the process, and there needs to be time to have conversations. 

Rebecca Bushell from the University of South Wales asked: Can innovative teaching techniques effectively improve engagement, retention, progression and performance? Rebecca’s innovative technique was to ask her students to create businesses that are funded using micro-capital (student groups were given fifty pounds each). The points were that this was immersive problem based learning that allowed students to share experience. It also allowed to reflect on their experience, and it created learning situations for students on other modules; accounting students were asked to audit their accounts. For me, the take away point was: simulations can expose real challenges that can immediately relate to the development of employability skills. 

Day 3: Opening Keynote

The final day of the conference was opened by Giskin Day from Imperial College London. Giskin taught a Medical humanities course which was all about Putting medicine in a social and cultural context. It is a course that explores the connections between the arts and science, with an emphasis on creativity.

An interesting point that I noted was that much of science is about minimising risk and beating uncertainty. With this context in mind, how can we encourage students to tolerate and manage ambiguity? This, of course, is an important skill in higher education; it is something that is explicitly explored within the humanities, where students are encouraged to be ‘creatively critical and critically creative’.

Another point is that there is a change in student expectation: students are no longer willing to be ‘talked at’, which is something that was echoed within my recent blog summary from the recent EDEN conference that I attended. A question remains: how do we engage students in new ways? One approach is to consider ‘playful learning’ (the notion of games and gaming was, again, something that featured within EDEN). Games, Giskin argued, enable students to develop empathy; they allow students to enter into a safe imaginative space where failure is an option and a possibility.

We were introduced to a speed dating card exchange game that had a medical theme. As a part of her teaching, we were told about a field trip to the V&A museum that was connected to skin, sculpture and dermatology. Students had to find exhibits within the museum and had to decide whether the sculpture needed a medical diagnosis, developing student’s communication, sketching and observation skills. Other games involved role playing where students played the roles of doctor and consultants. There was talk of escape rooms and creative puzzle solving.

Giskin offered some tips about creating effective games: consider the audience, make sure that things are tested, and think about a balance of playfulness and usefulness whilst also asking questions about what would motivate the student players. Also, when planning a ‘game’, always consider a ‘plan B’, since things might change in the real world; a game-based field trip to a museum might become unstuck if a museum suddenly loans an artefact to another institution.

In some respects, Giskin’s presentation was in two parts: the first part was about games; the second part was about her research about the rhetoric of gratitude in healthcare (Imperial College). Her point was simple: grateful people want to express gratitude; it is a part of closure, and an acknowledgement of that expression. The language used with both patients, and with challenging students is very important. I noted down the importance of moving from a rhetoric of coercion to a rhetoric of collaboration.

During the question and answer session, I think Giskin referred to something called the Playful learning Special Interest group (Association for Learning Technology). I found this interesting, since the introduction to design module, U101 Design Thinking uses both the idea of play, and explores design through the development of a game. 

I enjoyed Giskin’s reference to different types of learning approaches; her references to field trips and role play echoes various teaching approaches that I have tried to adopt. During a moment of inspiration I once spontaneously ran a field trip to a university corridor to encourage a set of design students to look at a set of recycling bins! Hearing about other practitioners such as Giskin developing a systematic and more comprehensive approach to designing field trips offers real inspiration and insight into how to develop interesting and entertaining learning events. I remain wondering how to embed these different approaches into a distance learning context.

Towards the end of Giskin’s session, we were each given different postcards, and we were asked to write down the response to a simple question: ‘what teaching and learning tip were you grateful to receive?’ Our challenge was to find the same card as another delegate and swap tips. When I found another delegate that had the same card as mine, a card that had some drawings of some craft tools, I made a point of offering a grateful thank you, which was, I believe, graciously received.

Day 3 : Morning Sessions

During the morning, I moved between different sessions to catch various presentations. The first talk of the morning was by Nagamani Bora, University of Nottingham, who spoke about ‘Curriculum Design - Opportunities and Challenges’. There were references to employability, interdisciplinary and the notion of the spiral curriculum (which was recently mentioned during my PGCE in HE studies). Other points included the importance of involving students in curriculum design and introducing them to international and global perspectives. An interesting point was made about the question of programme level assessments.

Siobhan Devlin who was from the University of Sunderland spoke about ‘Engaging learners with authentic assessment scenarios in computing’. Interestingly, Siobhan spoke about the ‘demodularised curriculum’; bigger chunks of curriculum were considered to be the order of the day. A key point was that authentic assessment needs to reflect real world practices. Siobhan also referenced some of her earlier research that asked the question: what does inspiring teaching look like? Some key attributes I noted were: enthusiasm, passion, adaptability, empathy, friendliness and enjoyment. I also noted down a reference to Keller’s ARCS model of motivation (e-learning industry).

Day 3 : Afternoon Sessions

Christine Gausden, University of Greenwich, continued to touch on the authentic in her talk ‘Embedding Employability within the Curriculum’. Christine is a senior lecturer in the built environment and said that although students might have technical knowledge, they may lack the opportunity to apply that knowledge. To overcome this, practitioners were asked to talk to students, and students were asked to study real live construction project, which links to the earlier point of authenticity. 

After Christine’s talk, I switched sessions to listen to Dawn Theresa Nicholson and Kathryn Botham from the Manchester Metropolitan University talk about ‘Embedding Reasonable Adjustments in the Curriculum (ERAC): A Faculty-wide approach to inclusive teaching’, which relates to my own experience of tutoring on an Open University module called Accessible online learning: supporting disabled students (Open University website). The idea was to embed accessibility in the curriculum (MMU) to such an extent so that personal learning plans could be phased out completely. A solution was to look at what adjustments were being applied, provide a set of standard adjustment and to offer staff training. An important principle was to make sure that all learning materials were available online in advance of a session. 

Carol Calvert, a staff tutor colleague from The Open University talked about ‘Success against the odds’. A key driver the research was the principle of student retention; it was hoped that the project would suggest actions to help students to complete their studies. The key research question was: ‘what can students who we think may not succeed, who have been able to succeed, able to tell us?’ Factors that might suggest challenges include: previous study success, socio-economic status, and level of prior educational attainment. Students offered some pointers: (1) that it was important to start early, (2) that it is important to share and to get network (and to tell other people that you are studying), (3) use a study planner.

To conclude, students that do succeed have a can do attitude. The important question is: how can we foster this from a distance? There were some accompanying actions: the module team could take time to introduce the module and gives students some useful study tips. Another action is to ask students whether they wanted to start study early and then try to make this happen. When asked, it turned out that half of the students on Carol’s module said that they might want to do this.

The final presentation I attended was given by my colleague, David Morse. David talked about ‘Truly virtual teams: twelve years on’. It isn’t a surprise to hear that students don’t like team working, but David made the point that group working is an important element of the QAA computing subject benchmark statement. Twelve years earlier, things were different: students didn’t have broadband, but online collaboration is more about people than it is about the details that surround particular technologies. A question is: what must students do? They must set rules, roles and responsibilities. They must also identify knowledge and skills, make regular contributions to online discussions, give and receive criticism, and apply good netiquette. A tutor needs to be a facilitator and not a manager. A tutor also needs to know when to step forward and when to step back. In response to this, David presented an interesting helical model of team working (which reminded me of a spiral model that had been mentioned earlier during the conference). 

Reflections

I like HEA conferences; they’re always well run, they are interesting and relevant, and represent a great opportunity for networking. In comparison to other HEA events that I had attended this one had a slightly different feel. I think this difference is due to two reasons; the first is the sheer scale of the event. Secondly, due to the fact that it was very interdisciplinary. Whilst I always enjoy meeting people who work in other subjects, I did feel that the sheer scale of the conference made it a more difficult event to navigate and choose the sessions that looked to be the most relevant. These things said, I did feel that the keynotes were well chosen and well presented. The second keynote stood out as being particularly thought provoking, which is exactly what keynote sessions should be.

During the workshop, I also facilitated a session about module design with my colleague, Ann Walshe. We offered a space where delegates could be creative and design their ‘ideal’ or ‘perfect’ module. The resulting designs were fun and playful, and make significant use of different technologies that had been mentioned during the first keynote. 

I’m going to conclude with a more personal reflection. This conference took place in the grounds of the university that was once known as UMIST, which was where I studied as a doctoral student. Wandering around the campus brought back many memories; I remembered how challenging it was. I was trying to conduct research into what was a very specific aspect of computing: theoretical models of how programmers go about understanding software code. I remembered how difficult it was having a part time job whilst at the same time as being a full time student. I also remembered how alone I felt, and this underlined the importance of community, which was also a topic that had arisen during the various sessions.

It not only struck me that community was really important for researchers, but it is also really important as a way to facilitate excellent teaching too; teachers and lecturers need to talk to other teachers and lecturers. In some ways, this was, ultimately, what the conference was all about.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Christopher Douce

RSA: Teaching to make a difference, London

Visible to anyone in the world

On 3 September 2016 I found the time to attend a short event at the Royal Society of Arts (RSA website) that had the title ‘teaching to make a difference’. This blog summary comes from a set of notes that I made during the event.

Over the last couple of years I have increasingly been involved with and have been thinking about how best to provide continuing professional development (CPD) for Open University associate lecturers. This RSA event was all about how to provide CPD for primary and secondary school teachers; I felt that this event might be able to help me in my day job (but I wasn’t quite sure how).

One of the first speakers of the evening was former Schools minister, Jim Knight. I noted down the sentence ‘more than 2 in 3 [teachers] don’t have any professional development’ (I don’t know the extent of whether or not this is true) and ‘most head teachers do professional development’. An interesting point is that this can be connected to regulatory stuff; things that need to be done to make sure the job is done well.

When delivering a CPD session a few months back I showed tutors different models of teaching and learning, some of which were in the shape of a triangle (which appears to be a common theme!) In this RSA talk we were presented another triangle model. This one had the title: ‘what really matters in education’. The model contained three points that were all connected together: trust (and professionalism), peer learning (learning from each other), and the importance of skills and knowledge.

Another note I scribbled down was: ‘there are CPD standards, [but are they] enough?’ I know of one Open University CPD standard or model, but this made me realise that I ought to know about the other CPD models that might exist. 

Two other notes I made were: ‘intangible assets’ and ‘long term mentoring’. I guess the point is that CPD can build intangible assets into the fabric of an organisation, and this can be closely linked to belonging to a community of people who are involved with teaching. The term ‘long term’ mentoring was also thought provoking: was that something that I unexpectedly and implicitly have been doing in my day job?

I also wrote down the phrases ‘learning from failure’ and ‘equip teachers with CPD; personally develop those teachers who stick with it’. In terms of my own teaching experience, I really relate to the idea of learning from failure; sometimes things just don’t work as you expect them to. It is important to remember that it is okay to take risks, and it is okay if things go slightly wrong. Teachers are encouraged to step back and reflect on what went well, what didn’t, and what could be improved the next time round. During the talk, I was also reflecting on the Open University strategy which has the title ‘students first’. My own view is one that reflects my own perspective: I believe in a parallel but unspoken strategy of ‘teachers first’.

Panel discussion

After Jim’s talk there was a panel discussion between four discussants. The first discussant was David Weston who I understand was from the teacher development trust (charity website). He spoke about big differences between schools. I made the note: ‘I feel alive, pushed; tears, nobody attends to my needs’ (but I’m a little unsure as to what the context was). I did note down five points: (1) help teachers learn; students’ outcomes increases, (2) evidence and expertise (I’m not quite sure exactly what this means), (3) peer support and expert challenge, (4) they need time, and (5) senior learners [need to] make it a priority. (I am assuming that ‘it’ means CPD).

The second discussant, Alison Peacock (Wikipedia) CEO of the Chartered College of Teaching (college website) spoke about CPD standards, trust, expertise and the importance of listening. An interesting thought was that ‘pedagogy is all about experiences’. I didn’t catch the name of the next discussant, but I noted down that ‘taking risks means trust’ and that good teaching means stepping into other people’s shoes.

The final discussant was Matt Hood from TeachFirst (TeachFirst website), the organisation that trains and develops teachers. A key question is: what should CPD entail? I’ve noted down: reading, watching and practice. Matt told us about a couple of interesting web resources and programmes: Teach Like a Champion and Urban Teachers.

Reflections

I’ve had a busy few months: between attending this event and writing this summary, I have returned to being a student again (whilst keeping my day job): I’m studying for a Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Education at Birkbeck College. I realise that I’m doing this extra bit of studying for one reason alone: to get additional CPD; to learn how to become a better university teacher.

When I looked at my notes again I’m reminded that the higher education sector can learn a lot from other sectors. I’m also reminded that I really ought to look into whether I ought to become more involved in an organisation like SEDA, the Staff and Education Development Association (SEDA website) now that CPD is quite a big part of what I do.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post

This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.

Total visits to this blog: 1976931