UEL Learning & Teaching Conference Keynote

B4bf6e28cb8da372de4eca76c783103f?s=47 Simon Thomson
September 17, 2020

UEL Learning & Teaching Conference Keynote

Title: Physital and Digical – Exploring places and spaces for hybrid teaching in a post-lockdown world.

Abstract: The re-emergence of physical presence for learning and teaching will shortly be upon us, but do we really know what we want from teaching and learning experiences in physical spaces anymore? Physical spaces gave way to digital spaces during lockdown, but apart from access to some specialist resources what is it that we actually need/want physical spaces for? Together in this session we will collectively “crowd-source” our experiences of using digital and physical spaces for learning and teaching, the extent to which we really need our physical learning & teaching infrastructure and the emergence of new digital spaces we may never have thought to venture into before. Is there now an opportunity to finally see “digital” as an equal to “physical” in terms of space selection and use? Influenced by Paul LeBlanc’s Educause article in 2015 perhaps we should be asking ourselves these questions in terms of critical (digital) pedagogy as a post-lockdown sector.

What physical teaching and learning interactions are most critical for student success?
What digital teaching and learning interactions can better replace some physical interactions that previously took place?
What does a truly “hybrid” experience, one that maximises student success and staff well-being, look like in the context of your course?

We will conclude by exploring what this means for the (digital) development of academic staff – what does digitally integrated academic development (DIAD) look like and how important is it within the context of an emerging hybrid teaching model?

B4bf6e28cb8da372de4eca76c783103f?s=128

Simon Thomson

September 17, 2020
Tweet

Transcript

  1. Exploring places and spaces for hybrid teaching. Simon Thomson Director,

    Centre for Innovation in Education University of Liverpool Welcome! This “Teanote” session will begin at 4.30pm LEARNING & TEACHING SYMPOSIUM 2020 Follow us on Twitter: @UEL_CELT #uelLTsymp20
  2. 1. Wiggle the Mouse to open the bar; 2. Show

    the Chat to write questions/comments and see others contributions; 3. Mute your Microphone to reduce background noise and echo; 4. Turn off the Camera to help with streaming; 5. Put your Hand Up if you would like to ask a question. The host/presenter will come to you at an appropriate time to Unmute your Microphone; 6. The Recording of the Session will be started by the host. Webcam on/off Mute & unmute Share screen More options Show & hide chat Attendee list Hang up Raise hand Session Etiquette. LEARNING & TEACHING SYMPOSIUM 2020 Follow us on Twitter: @UEL_CELT #uelLTsymp20
  3. PHYSITAL & DIGICAL EXPLORING PLACES AND SPACES FOR HYBRID TEACHING

    ( I N A P O S T - C O V I D - 1 9 W O R L D S I M O N T H O M S O N @ D I G I S I M
  4. Part 1 “Digital” Conversation Part 2 Learning “Spaces” Part 3

    Digital Development
  5. Part 1 “Digital” Conversation The Pre-Covid Culture

  6. Perspectives digisim

  7. 87% teachers believe new technologies are creating an “easily distracted

    generation with short attention spans” and 64% say today’s digital technologies “do more to distract students than to help them academically.” https://www.pewinternet.org/2012/11/01/how-teens-do-research-in-the-digital-world/
  8. “What we’re labeling as ‘distraction,’ some see as a failure

    of adults to see how these kids process information, ....…….. that the label of ‘distraction’ is a judgment of this generation.” Kristen Purcell, the Associate Director for Research at Pew
  9. Pollev.com/digisim Audience Participation

  10. None
  11. Culture digisim

  12. “Social and institutional contexts are often unsupportive of teachers’ efforts

    to integrate technology use into their work. Teachers often have inadequate (or inappropriate) experience with using digital technologies for teaching and learning.” Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2009). What Is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge? Teachers College Record, 9(1), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.009
  13. The problem is that educational technology has consistently over-promised and

    under- delivered. digisim
  14. The problem is we often talk of “digital skills” as

    if they are divorced from other activities within our learning and teaching experiences. digisim
  15. It is much more about digital relevance than it is

    about digital skills. digisim
  16. “The minimal effect that technology has had on teaching and

    learning is a failure of the field of education not a failure of technology” Weston M. E. (2012) digisim Weston, M. E. (2012). How Education Fails Technology (And What to Do About It) | EdTech Digest. Retrieved March 4, 2019, from https://edtechdigest.com/2012/01/23/how-education-fails-technology-and-what-to-do- about-it/
  17. A point of reference. “Digital Pedagogy is precisely not about

    using digital technologies for teaching and, rather, about approaching those tools from a critical pedagogical perspective. So, it is as much about using digital tools thoughtfully as it is about deciding when not to use digital tools, and about paying attention to the impact of digital tools on learning.” http://www.digitalpedagogylab.com/hybridped/digitalpedagogy/ digisim
  18. Part 2 Learning “Spaces” The Emergence of Hybrid

  19. PRE-SESSION SURVEY

  20. Pollev.com/digisim Audience Participation

  21. None
  22. As of 14 June, use of Microsoft Teams grew by

    894% compared with its base usage during the week of 17 February. In the same period, Zoom use grew by 677% https://info.aternity.com/the-remote-work-productivity-tracker-v5.html The Remote Work Productivity Tracker, V5 White paper
  23. Covid-19 has accelerated the emergence of hybrid teaching. It has

    legitimatised digital spaces for synchronous & asynchronous teaching.
  24. WHY HYBRID? We are using the term “hybrid” to recognise

    the fact that we will need to choose whether we wish to deliver learning activities on campus or online (depending on what those activities might be), in the same way that a hybrid vehicle may use its mechanical engine for some journeys and its electric motor for others.
  25. But have we really thought about what we want to

    use face-to-face teaching for? (And who we are making that decision for?)
  26. This?

  27. This?

  28. This?

  29. This?

  30. This?

  31. PRE-SESSION SURVEY

  32. WHY ON CAMPUS F2F? I find it easier to be

    effective while face-to-face. I enjoy making connections with my students in person. I can easily build a rapport with the students……… I'm also more comfortable with this delivery……In real life I feed off the students and they feed off me. We are humans that by nature love to connect and interact in person. Maybe because it's the classic, and I'm a classic…… we do a lot of physical making to explore our ideas and it feels easier to hold and view models (tactility is important) in a physical space certain elements of my teaching practices……..I find are better face- to-face. what I like the most about my job is the on campus life and the direct contact with students in class The buzz you get from actually being in the same room with students
  33. WHY ONLINE ASYNCHRONOUS? my students are primarily mature and part-time,

    with work and caring responsibilities. In the current situation their commitments may change significantly, and rapidly, so the more flexibility in my teaching the better and asynchronous online enables that The flexibility and choice for learners to work through the content in their own time. There is material for students to get on with and things can be prepared for them before hand
  34. WHY ONLINE SYNCHRONOUS? This is my normal mode of delivery,

    It enables students wherever they may be to join in and participate. My students preferred it. It encourages engagement, especially in breakout rooms. We can still utilise a lot of digital tools and it promotes the development of new pedagogical methods (forces a move away from outdated methods). Safe practice and ability to interact with participants
  35. BUT IN SUMMARY! This is a tough call! Face to

    Face is my preferred mode due to the human need to connect in a physical space, however the benefits of being able to virtually meet, engage with and allow for greater communication from a diverse range of participants mean that both synchronous and asynchronous delivery are on a par. Each mode has it's benefits and downfalls and actually what is most desirable is the opportunity to work in a blended way using all three modes.
  36. PRE-SESSION SURVEY

  37. Part 3 Digital Development Towards a Valued Commodity

  38. As of 14 June, use of Microsoft Teams grew by

    894% compared with its base usage during the week of 17 February. In the same period, Zoom use grew by 677% https://info.aternity.com/the-remote-work-productivity-tracker-v5.html The Remote Work Productivity Tracker, V5 White paper
  39. Covid-19 has required the implementation of the largest global digital

    staff development activity ever seen.
  40. It is much more about digital relevance need than it

    is about digital skills. digisim
  41. “Transformation is more about the human and organisational aspects of

    teaching and learning than it is about the use of technology” Laurillard, D. (2007) digisim
  42. REFLECTION (STAFF) Digital vs Face-to-Face: Comparing previous face-to-face teaching experiences

    to those digital experiences they will have had during the remote teaching period. Assessments: Many colleagues will have had to change assessments due to this situation, some of those changes might be beneficial longer term. Learning Resources: What teaching and reading lists materials were provided/adapted for remote teaching. To what extent could some of these resources be used in hybrid pedagogy? Delivery/Activities: Reflecting on the learning activities that were developed for students and the extent to which synchronous/asynchronous experiences were implemented. Student Engagement: In the context of remote teaching what were the most successful activities for student engagement and what worked less well?
  43. ? W hat physical teaching and learning interactions are most

    critical for student success? W hat digital teaching and learning interactions can better replace some physical interactions that previously took place? W hat does a truly “hybrid” experience, one that maximises student success and staff well-being, look like in the context of your course?
  44. VALUE OF PHYSICAL PRESENCE

  45. BENEFIT OF DIGITAL ACCESS

  46. DIGITALLY INTEGRATED ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT (DIAD)

  47. “The minimal effect that technology has had on teaching and

    learning is a failure of the field of education not a failure of technology” Weston M. E. (2012) digisim
  48. digisim “The minimal effect that technology has had on teaching

    and learning is a failure to value and prioritise the digital development of staff not a failure of technology” Thomson. S (2005 onwards)
  49. Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2017 by tpack.org

    • Content Knowledge: subject expertise. • Technological Knowledge: understanding of how digital & physical can be used in L&T • Pedagogical Knowledge: knowledge and understanding of the process of learning and teaching.
  50. Pollev.com/digisim Audience Participation

  51. None
  52. None
  53. HYPOTHESIS The historical separation of staff digital skills development in

    higher education has restricted the potential impact of technology for learning and teaching. Whilst institutions may wish to see the digital capabilities of their academic staff improve, in reality it has not been seen as a priority area for personal professional development. In institutional curriculum design processes technology use is “bolt on” and not integrated effectively with the pedagogy.
  54. RESEARCH QUESTIONS What is the qualitative variation in which staff

    experience the mapping of their academic staff development activities using the TPACK framework? What is the qualitative variation in which staff perceive the effectiveness of the TPACK mapping process for identifying and planning required PD activities? To what extent is TPACK an effective framework for achieving an integrated academic professional development in a Higher Education Institution?
  55. In relation to the TPACK framework participants complete an online

    survey which maps where they currently spend their development time and where they think they need to spend their development time.
  56. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CK PK TK

    PCK TCK TPK Example A Time Spent Time Needed Instituional Required 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 CK PK TK PCK TCK TPK Example B Time Spent Time Needed Instituional Required
  57. Semi-Structured follow up interviews exploring their experience of TPACK and

    the impact on their professional development approach. • Explores participants experience of the mapping process. • Explores their historical professional development experiences. • Examines the effectiveness of the TPACK framework from the perspective of the participant in terms of their ongoing professional development.
  58. HEADLINES SO FAR TPACK helps participants to see digital skills

    development as equal to other professional development areas (but this doesn't necessary translate into action). Time is a precious commodity and the department (not institutional) culture is what influences where and staff spend their development time. Technology “training” out of context is of very limited value. No participants had ever discussed their digital development needs as part of a formal pdr process. All participants indicated that the framework would be more effective if it was implemented at an institutional level (links to motivation & career progression). The mapping process helped participants identify where they should be spending their development time and influenced their short-term development plans but in follow up discussions it was clear it did not impact on long term professional development planning.
  59. THE POTENTIAL Integration - to recognise and build relationships between

    various development activities being undertaken. Self-Efficacy - To encourage and engage academic staff in self- identified development activities. Equity - Raising the value of digital development in the context of subject and pedagogic development activity.
  60. Digital Capability Subject Expertise Pedagogical Understanding What if academic staff

    development was here? The emergence of Digitally Integrated Academic Development (DIAD.
  61. How do we ensure that the digital development of staff

    is an integrated approach and seen as equally important to content and pedagogical knowledge? In order to maximise the potential of hybrid teaching?
  62. ? S I M O N T H O M

    S O N @ D I G I S I M