Universities (particularly their managers) talk a lot about innovation.
“We need to innovate”
“This is innovative”
“Our environment fosters innovation”
And this is what people outside academia would expect from a university. Lots of bright, enthusiastic people, in the same space, working together, innovating.
As an academic manager I am wary of how being innovative is something that might be quantified as a ‘performance indicator’. This prompted me to reflect on my experiences of working with academic staff, and I have come to the conclusion that while there might be targets to recognise, negotiate and manage, it is essential that the emphasis should be on developing a culture of innovation. This culture emerges when the following characteristics are evident:
Diversity of thought – we must embrace difference and use it as a catalyst for action.
Growth mindset – universities are full of hard-working people, but it is a resilient mind that enables the persistence and self-belief to keep plugging away.
Encouraging risk-taking – we should learn from start-ups; fail fast and learn.
Sensitive communication – effective communication is the lubricant for dissemination of ideas between colleagues and external stakeholders.
Agility – an ability to ‘duck and dive’ in response to external pressures, but also opportunities to innovate at all levels, especially systems within universities.
Collaboration – perhaps collaboration is talked about more than innovation in universities, but it is the ability to work together across boundaries (often political) that results in a tangible outcome.
Efficient workflows – we need to learn from the Software Engineering profession; automate the tedious, error-prone processes, and focus on quality enhancement, so that we can invest more time on learning and teaching innovations.
Supportive leadership – perhaps the most important. The foundation stone upon which the enablers can be built. But leadership is not just about the hierarchy and titles. Successful academic departments are awash with empowered academics who lead in different ways.
The challenge, therefore, is how can we create such a culture.
Innovation is rife within the curriculum. I see it all of the time. Academics working with students in interesting ways, creating things, exchanging ideas and becoming new versions of themselves. And it’s easy for staff to become weary of constant demands for innovation.
However, building a culture of innovation is not necessarily about focusing on more innovation. That is the danger of those pesky performance indicators.
A culture of innovation is more about creating the conditions for innovation, rather than the innovation itself.
I’d like to see more of this thinking within management and leadership, and it is incumbent upon academic staff to consider how they might use management positions within Higher Education Institutions to effect the change that we desire. How might the experience of innovating with our students inform a new outlook for university leadership?
But it’s not all down to the managers and leaders either.
How can we transfer the benefits of learning and teaching innovations to university systems and practices?
If we can crack this, the innovation performance indicators shall only be reporting success.
Professor Richard Hill is Head of the Department of Computer Science, and Director of the Centre for Sustainable Computing, at the University of Huddersfield, UK. Richard advocates using the processes of research to design and deliver innovative curricula, and he has led the transformation of several large portfolios in the field of Computing education. Richard received a National Teaching Fellowship in 2022 recognising his inclusive approach to academic leadership and he is also an Advance HE Principal Fellow. Richard also has interests in academic development and servant leadership, and he has published a guide (https://tinyurl.com/coaching-academics) to using a coaching approach with academic staff. He also maintains a blog and newsletter about academic productivity at https://profrichardhill.com.
Imagine if mutual flourishing was central to a regenerative education system – human flourishing in the more than human world. Imagine if learning was transdisciplinary, and intergenerational, in community with each other and nature – imaginative and beautiful learning that prioritises learner agency, creativity, critical thinking, complex problem solving and ethical decision making.
How do we integrate imaginative learning and teaching into our daily work? As educators, we have a shared purpose to co-design a creative and imaginative approach to learning and teaching based on a clear set of values. As role models in teaching and learning, we can invite imaginative, creative, and playful pedagogies by manifesting these habits of mind each day. Cultivating the conditions for curiosity, imagination, and creativity is vital in nurturing these dispositions in our students and staff. At Bath Spa University we want to develop learners who are curious, creative, and confident to learn imaginatively alongside others in the community and in the natural world.
At Bath Spa University we are researching experimental sites for pedagogical innovation (Hay 2021a). Forest of Imagination is a long-term research project that invites everyone to have a conversation about the importance of our collective imagination and our connection to the natural world. As part of our university mission as a creative social enterprise, we emphasise social value, social impact, and the importance of social and environmental justice. Our creative methodology drives our ambition to be professionally creative, making creativity visible. We engage students, educators, and cultural and creative partners in creative and reflective practice that places curiosity, creativity, and confidence at the heart of a creative pedagogy.
An imaginative approach to teaching and learning celebrates differences and diversity in expression between students and staff. As tutors we can actively value the concept of playful learning, using our collective imagination and creativity to seek creative solutions to complex problems and contexts. These spaces of possibility and dialogue open up our imaginative learning potential as co-learners.
Nurturing curiosity and creativity develops confidence in both learning and teaching and, in collaboration with colleagues, is enhanced through supportive learning communities. Prioritising curiosity, imagination and creativity encourages us all to explore, experiment, and reflect through transdisciplinary experiences, and through opportunities for active learning and authentic multi-modal assessment. Staff and students engage in collaborative activities through the co-creation of learning and research.
Students aspire to their future careers through developing their academic and employability skills, and their creative confidence. Students are challenged at the forefront of their disciplines through the connection of curricula with research, professional practice, and knowledge exchange activities, including environmental sustainability through the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Our curriculum, learning resources and activities are diverse, inclusive, and accessible, enabling a sense of belonging, opportunity, and creative ambition.
Thinking about the conditions for cultivating creativity, we can create opportunities for inviting authentic learner agency to develop these imaginative and creative skills, for both individual and collaborative learning. Valuing this space of pedagogic emergence and possibility is vital to co-create inquiry and learning in an intra-disciplinary space. Noticing and witnessing learners’ engagement is also important in this process – how they are listening, exploring, creating, taking risks, being playful, curious, making connections, communicating ideas, reflecting, and constructing meaning.
We need to co-create learning spaces that are personal, connecting, trusting, inspirational, creative, open, and inclusive, to invite learning that is joyful and complex – transdisciplinary, intergenerational learning in a community for human flourishing in the more than human world. Learning is like a forest, everything is connected (Bateson 2023).
References and further reading
Bateson, N. (2023) Combining, Triarchy Press, Axminster
Benn M., Hay, P., Rigby, S., Sapsed, R., and Sayers, E. (2020) ‘Creative Activism, Learning Everywhere with Children and Young People’ Forum Volume 62, Number 1, 2020
Eisner, E.W. (2002) From episteme to phronesis to artistry in the study and improvement of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Educaton, 18, 375-385
Hay, P. (2021b) ‘Spaces of Possibility: reimagining learning’ International Journal of Art and Design Education. Volume 40, Issue 1
Hay, P. (2022) ‘School Without Walls. Education 3-13 International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education. Volume 50, 2022. Pp 521-535
Hay, P. (2023) ‘Children are Artists: supporting children’s learning identity as artists.’ Routledge, London
King, H. (2020) Future-ready Faculty: Developing the characteristics of expertise in teaching in higher education. Proceedings of the International Consortium for Educational Development conference, ICED2020
Dr. Penny Hay is an artist, educator and researcher, Professor of Imagination Centre for Cultural and Creative Industries, Reader in Creative Teaching and Learning, Bath Spa University and Founding Director House of Imagination. Signature projects include School Without Walls and Forest of Imagination. Penny’s doctoral research focused on children’s learning identity as artists. Penny is the strand leader for Creative Pedagogy in the Policy, Pedagogy and Practice Research Centre, Associate Director of TRACE at Bath Spa University, Chair of Imagination Research Space, and co-chair of the eARTh research group focusing on education, arts and the environment. She was recently the co-investigator on an Erasmus+ project Interstice in Europe researching the space between art, children and educators, and artist-researcher on the AHRC funded Rethinking Waste Compound13 Project in Mumbai. Penny was awarded an Honorary Fellowship at Arts University Plymouth and a Fellowship in Imagination at the Centre for Future Thinking; she is a National Teaching Fellow and Fellow of the Chartered College of Teaching, with awards from Action for Children’s Arts, Thornton Education Trust, Landscape Institute and Creative Bath.
Compassionate, positive, and caring interactions in learning and teaching are important because they can create psychological safety, encourage engagement, and develop a sense of belonging for everyone (Burke & Lemar, 2021). Thoughtful staff-student interactions allow students to develop the skills and confidence to make them successful in life. Where there is compassion, mistakes can be made as necessary for learning and without fear of judgement (Brown, 2016). Demonstrably person-centred approaches can help to mitigate the challenges some students experience. However, do we have the skills and confidence to support students in a way that is more human and compassionate, and which requires more openness and vulnerability? How can we ensure that students feel cared for yet challenged to achieve their best? Asking academic colleagues to adopt compassionate pedagogy alone is unlikely to produce a transformational change in their interactions with students. Colleagues must be supported to do so, leaders must role-model the behaviours of care and compassion, and courageous leadership needs to be visible (Della-Latta & Burkett, 2021).
The role of staff in creating the conditions for compassion, empathy, care, kindness, and concern is evidenced as a core requirement for a student experience that allows students to thrive (Waddington, 2017). Compassionate pedagogy contributes to positive interactions between students and tutors which build confidence and competence leading to a more positive experience and potentially a greater commitment to life-long learning. Being in a state of contentment, safety, and connection allows for students to be driven to engage in their learning (Waddington, 2017).
A related aspect of being a compassionate practitioner is that of carrying out culturally responsive teaching (CRT) where tutors actively adopt inclusive practices which recognise the diverse backgrounds of their students and provide diverse learning environments (Sanger, 2020). When student diversity is understood and valued, the learning environment becomes richer for everyone. Humanising teaching in online environments is even more important when minoritised students of colour are shown to be less likely to achieve compared to their white or Asian counterparts (Pacansky-Brock et al, 2020). There is clearly a need to develop the knowledge and confidence to adopt inclusive practices in all types of learning environments.
There are some simple guideposts that can be used to ensure compassion and inclusion are at the forefront of our approaches to learning, teaching, and assessment, and our approaches to working with each other:
Avoid assumptions apart from the assumption that everyone is experiencing unseen challenges and deserves our compassion
Operate from a place of abundance, there is space for everyone to thrive
Give opportunities for collaborative reflection – what went well, what could be done differently
Seek to learn about differences and think about how diversity can be appreciated
Offer mutual respect and authenticity for genuine learning relationships
Compassionate and inclusive pedagogy does not exclude or diminish any individual and gives everyone the opportunity to learn, thrive and succeed.
References
Brown, B. (2016). Brené Brown encourages educators to normalize the discomfort of learning and reframe failure as learning. About Campus, 20(6), 3-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/abc.21224
Burke, K. & Larmar, S. (2021) Acknowledging another face in the virtual crowd: Reimagining the online experience in higher education through an online pedagogy of care, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(5), 601-615, https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2020.1804536
Della-Latta, J., & Burkett, K. (2021). From popular theory to practical application: How Brené Brown’s theories of courageous leadership inform the fields of international education. Adult Education, and Online Education. In B. Kutsyuruba, S. Cherkowski, & KD Walker (Eds.), Leadership for Flourishing in Educational Contexts, 163-176.
Sanger, C.S. (2020). Inclusive Pedagogy and Universal Design Approaches for Diverse Learning Environments. In: Sanger, C., Gleason, N. (eds) Diversity and Inclusion in Global Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1628-3_2
Alison is an Associate Dean Teaching and Learning at Sheffield Hallam University and has over 25 years of experience in higher education. She is a teaching and learning specialist with research interests in higher education practice, digitally enhanced learning, inclusive practice, physiology of exercise, and public health.
Over the last few years, I have been supporting colleagues in developing their own scholarship and what that might look like. For me, scholarship can take many forms and helping colleagues to take those first steps and seeing that what they are doing is in fact scholarship can sometimes be the revelation that they need! I talk a lot about ‘Everyday Scholarship’ and the idea that colleagues can be doing little things that they maybe don’t realise are actually making a difference and then how they can take those little nuggets and build them into something bigger in terms of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL).
We can sometimes get bogged down in complex explanations of what something means and going back to basics is perhaps where we need to start. I had a bit of a revelation one day while driving home from work and listening to a podcast about SoTL. The same words seemed to keep coming up when having conversations with colleagues and while listening to the podcast. The words that kept coming to my mind about SoTL were Passion, People, Place and Plan. As a result, I created The Four Pillars of SoTL!
When thinking about SoTL I believe that it starts with where your passion lies. Here are some key questions that guide my thinking around that. What is it that brings me joy and what would I like to take forward in terms of my SoTL?
We then need to think about the people involved in SoTL projects. Who is my tribe? Who will help me to take this forward?
We also need to think about where the project is going to take place? Is it locally within the institution or is it wider than that?
Finally, we need a plan! Building a plan from the beginning will really help you to navigate your way through any SoTL project.
These Four Pillars are a great starting point for getting your SoTL thinking caps on and building your projects. If you want to see a visual representation of the Four Pillars of SoTL you can find it on the National Teaching Repository (NTR).
During this #LTHEchat, I encourage you to discuss and explore what these Four Pillars of SoTL mean to you and how you could use them to encourage colleagues to get started or keep going with their SoTL.
Utrecht Roadmap for Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (UR-SoTL), https://www. uu.nl/en/education/centre-for-academic-teaching/educational-scholarship/scholarship-of-teaching-and-learning/utrecht-roadmap-for-scholarship-ofteaching-and-learning or https://tinyurl.com/2wfz2p43
Biography:
Laura Stinson works as a Senior Academic Practice Developer within the Centre for Academic Development and Quality (CADQ) at Nottingham Trent University. She leads the Trent Institute for Learning and Teaching (TILT) community which involves leading on all TILT Schemes & Awards, TILT Practice & Scholarship Groups and the NTU Annual Learning & Teaching Conference. Laura also supports the development of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning at NTU providing development opportunities for colleagues as they progress through their career at NTU.
In recent years, higher education institutions have faced increasing pressure to enhance student progression, satisfaction and engagement. This situation and a very competitive environment have encouraged more universities to move away from teacher-centred approaches to teaching in accordance with student-centred initiatives, including technological tools, outdoor learning practices, and authentic assessment. One of these initiatives involves the development of fun activities in class.
However, there is not a clear definition of fun in learning. Instead, there have been different synonyms, such as entertainment, amusement and enjoyment (Lesser et al., 2013). Moreover, research has demonstrated that enjoyment positively contributes to student engagement and intrinsic motivation to study (Bond et al., 2020; Sharma, 2021) and for that reason, there are new teaching initiatives orientated to develop a fun learning environment. In this tweet chat, we will explore the extent of embedding fun in the learning environment.
Definition
The definition of fun in learning is still unclear, although some authors define it as an emotion that triggers student engagement and motivation in learning (Reeve, Cheon and Jang, 2020). For that reason, there is a need for further research on this concept, its definition and its impact on higher education.
Ludic pedagogy
Despite the lack of a consensus on the definition of fun in learning, some authors identify the overlap between the meaning of fun and play (Maier, 1980). This has led to the conceptualisation of Ludic pedagogy; a novel teaching and learning philosophy that promotes fun in higher education (Lauricella and Edmunds, 2023). This pedagogy relies on four principles: fun, play, playfulness and positivity when developing an effective learning environment (Lauricella and Edmunds, 2021), where:
Fun: is the motivator factor that provides the stimulus to do the activity.
Play: is the learning activity that is practised in class.
Playfulness: is the attitude of the students and educators.
Positivity: is the desired affect and feelings after carrying out the learning activity.
Benefits
Despite there not being a universally accepted definition of fun in education, some authors have identified the benefits of this as learning environment as including: student engagement and motivation due to strong positive emotions (Krashen, 1982); higher assessment grades and student retention (Klingbeil, 2023); and higher motivation and creativity in lecturers (Klingbeil, 2023).
Challenges
Despite the benefits of fun in learning, there are some barriers to its understanding and implementation in higher education including:
A traditional view of education that is a hierarchical, serious, structured, and instructor-led approach that leads to prejudice towards the concept of fun in education (Meilleur, 2021), claiming that it lacks academic rigour.
Lack of training programmes and limited resources to develop a fun learning environment (Cloke, 2023).
Difficulties in building a sense of community in the classroom so that students will be able to take risks and learn from mistakes to promote learning (Meilleur, 2021).
The perception of high workloads that hinder the development of fun learning activities (Lesser et al., 2013).
How we can embed fun in learning
Despite its detractors, increasing numbers of practitioners are embedding fun in teaching and learning through different initiatives including:
Gamification: Implementing games in higher education can take different forms, including video / board games, quizzes, polls, and surveys on which students will gain points when answering the correct answers.
Humour: Positively impacts on student anxiety and improves their retention of information and self-esteem (Lesser et al., 2013). It can take the forms of images, text and real stories in the learning content. However, the main challenges reside in finding the appropriate and relevant humour to the learning lesson and the different student responses to humour (Lauricella and Edmunds, 2021).
Outdoor learning activities: Such as field trips can develop a fun, enriching and transformative learning experience. At the same time, they promote higher-order learning, increase the interpersonal skills of learners, and create a sense of ownership over work (Jones and Washko, 2022).
Artificial intelligence (AI): Virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) are tools that can bring forth an environment of joy that encourages students to engage in the learning activity. For example, through VR, students can create and engage in virtual and safe learning environment simulations, where they get to practise their skills (Cloke, 2023).
Develop social spaces: This can be done through the lecturer’s personality, which can result in a strong bond with students, and the development of social spaces where students can interact with their peers. The primary purpose of such social spaces is to reduce the academic distance between lecturer and students and develop a safe space in which the latter can express themselves, develop creativity and take risks when learning.
Conclusion
Embedding fun in learning has grown in a number of adopters, and there are more studies on its positive impact on education. Despite challenges in its implementation, new teaching approaches, such as ludic pedagogy, endeavour to conceptualise it and establish a framework that guides its implementation in higher education. Finally, embedding fun in education can result in a learning environment that suits the new and challenging students learning preferences.
References
Bond, M. et al. (2020) ‘Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map’, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8.
Jones, J.C. and Washko, S. (2022) ‘More than fun in the sun: The pedagogy of field trips improves student learning in higher education’, Journal of Geoscience Education. Routledge, pp. 292–305. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2021.1984176.
Krashen, S.D. (1982) Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Lauricella, S. and Edmunds, K. (2023) Ludic Pedagogy. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Lauricella, S. and Edmunds, T.K. (2021) A Serious Look at Fun in College Classrooms, A Serious Look at Fun in College Classrooms.
Lesser, L.M. et al. (2013) ‘Using fun in the statistics classroom: An exploratory study of college instructors’ hesitations and motivations’, Journal of Statistics Education, 21(1), pp. 1–33. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2013.11889659.
Maier, H.W. (1980) ‘Play in the university classroom’, Social Work With Groups, 3(1), pp. 7–16.
Reeve, J., Cheon, S.H. and Jang, H. (2020) ‘How and why students make academic progress: Reconceptualizing the student engagement construct to increase its explanatory power’, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 62, pp. 1–12. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101899.
Sharma, M.N. (2021) ‘Motivational and Engagement Factors for Students in classrooms in Higher Education Sector’, International Journal of Scientific Development and Research, 6(1), pp. 147–152. Available at: http://www.ijsdr.org.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Dr. Gustavo Espinoza-Ramos is the module leader of Sustainable City Economies and Strategic Perspectives for Marketing modules, and the course leader for the MA Management (online) at the Westminster Business School. He is the CETI – Academic Professional Development Fellow 2023 (@WestminsterCETI – https://twitter.com/WestminsterCETI), a digital champion at the School of Management and Marketing and has an interest in active learning and the use of online tools and simulation games to promote student engagement. He is a senior fellow of the Higher Education Academy (SFHEA). You can see his blogs and video presentations at the following link: https://linktr.ee/gustavoespinozaramos. You can connect with Gustavo on Twitter @tavoer8 (https://twitter.com/tavoer8), by email g.espinozaramos@westminster.ac.uk or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/gustavoespinozaramos/)
This session is being led by members of the Antiracism & Learning Technology Special Interest Group (ARLT SIG). Check out our webspace & blog and sign up to join via JISCMail list: ALT-ARTSIG
In this blog, we take you onto some initial reflections on antiracism in the Higher Education (HE) sector in preparation for some deeper conversations during our #LTHEchat session.
Antiracism a found-and-lost cause
Where do we even start with defining antiracism in the modern world? The more we dig in, the more we seem to notice people having discomfort after discomfort, thus avoiding addressing the cause of this problem.
If it is not the discomfort, we witness the old age scheming of divide and conquer – we get labelled, we get boxed, we get dehumanised! Nowadays, of course, we have the added umbrella of Access, Belonging, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Justice & Respect which has unintentionally (or even intentionally in some cases) diluted the antiracism agenda.
The past colonial history of the UK places British society in the hotspot for the need for change. Of course, with the digital era, we are talking more about it, but justice may never be served whether we look at it from a ‘justice as fairness’ perspective or a ‘meritocratic’ conception of justice!
Antiracism in HE
George Floyd, George Floyd, George Floyd!
By the end of 2020, this name echoed in very much every meeting in the HE sector. Since then, there has been a movement towards the creation of new roles around more diversity. Nonetheless, there are not many stand-alone roles solely dedicated to antiracism. There are of course the likes of the BAME network, which may be supported by a Race Equality Charter (AdvanceHE 2024a) – if you are lucky to have one in your institution (AdvanceHE 2024b); but this network is still largely seen as an optional practice and there is still a lot of argument on the naming of the network itself. It is more comfortable for most of us to prolong any discussion than to take action and create an impact!
If you are brave enough, we invite you to do further reading ahead of the LTHEchat session and to reflect on the discomfort of everyday actions from teams/departments/institutions in the sector:
Equity analysis of 6 job blurbs – a podcast for TalkingHE. (Nadan, 2021).
Race equality in learning technology. (Nadan 2022c).
In this chat, we will take you on a one-hour journey of reflections on what role we are all playing in either perpetuating racism or transcending it. Within the HE sector, we have adapted to the digital era and use various forms of Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) and other tools and platforms to either facilitate education or services needed on the journey. While staff navigate through the plenitude of platforms, there are the odds of creating inequity and letting racism seep into the HE sector. We may have all come across one such example, but what we decide to do about it, is what matters the most. We invite you to check out some of our 2022 & 2023 blogs on what the ARLT SIG community thinks about antiracism in the sector.
Black History Month and What it means for Learning Technologists by Dr Teeroumanee Nadan. (Nadan, 2022d).
Anti-racist Approaches in Technology with Guest Speaker Liza Layne. (Nadan 2022e).
Anti-oppressive Pedagogies in Online Learning with Guest Speaker María Miguéliz Valcarlos. (Nadan, 2023a).
Why antiracism and why not something else? By Dr Teeroumanee Nadan (Nadan 2023c).
It is time to create impact!
It is clear that justice may never be served, neither in the HE sector nor in the society at large, anyway from whom do we get this justice? There is therefore a need to focus on action and impact, and this can only be done when we allow ourselves to feel uncomfortable talking about racism and feel empowered to dismantle it – but most importantly it is when White people allow the non-White staff to feel and be empowered!
This blog would not be complete without reflecting on our own reasons for doing what we do to reduce racism in the sector.
“When I came to the UK, I realised that it was common practice to brush the uncomfortable topics under the carpet. I have observed this in every academic institution that I have worked at. What motivates me the most is treating the cause rather than the symptom!” Dr Teeroumanee Nadan – Read the full blog
“.. technologies are being and will be used by a wide array of learners from different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds all over the world yet there is a noticeable lack of diversity in the world of EdTech and digital education” Amin Neghavati – Read the full blog
“.. as a White woman, it is my responsibility to use my privilege to dismantle racist systems wherever it lives. For me, this work is about equal access to high-quality education and without understanding limitations to that access, we just are not doing our jobs.” Rachel Branham – Read the full blog
“It became apparent, through some of my research projects, that the HE sector has still not fully explored the use of technology in addressing many of the racial inclusion challenges facing the sector. … My motivation is that I can contribute in a small way to centering this issue within the HE sector and Education Technology industry” Dr Olatunde Durowoju – Read the full blog
We hope to see you en masse on 7th Feb to chat about this topic with officers of the ARLT SIG!
Nadan, T. (2023c). Anti-Racism & Learning Technology SIG: Why antiracism and why not something else?. [online] Association for Learning Technology. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXCoTQ1XgMo
Dr Teeroumanee Nadan works mainly around Internationalisation, Inclusive & Digital Ed. She approaches HE challenges based on her own HE scholar experience in different countries and her collaborations with different institutions across the globe.
She is currently the Chair of the ARLT SIG and advocates for digital equity. She will be tweeting from @Tee_Nadan
Amin Neghavati primarily focuses on educational leadership, workplace learning & technology management, driven by a strategic and entrepreneurial mindset. He offers more than 20 years of expertise in the field and is currently the Learning & Development Manager at the University of Bath. Central to his approach is a commitment to social justice and promoting diversity and inclusion.
He is an External Engagement Officer for ARLT SIG.
Rachel Branham is an artist and educator, working as an Academic Developer and Learning Technologist at the University of West London. Her research interests include education for social justice, radical pedagogy, and reflective practice.
She is currently an External Engagement Officer for ARLT SIG. She will be tweeting from @ARLT_SIG
Dr Olatunde Durowoju is a Reader in Education Management and Associate Dean EDI at the Liverpool John Moores University. His research interests are operations & supply chain management, impact assessment & transmission, and inclusive practices in HE.
He is currently the Vice-Chair of the ARLT SIG. He will be tweeting from @OADurowoju
Having started my career in higher education over 30 years ago emulating the old-style lecture model of my own undergraduate studies, I quickly reached a point where I wasn’t enjoying my job and my students couldn’t have been very inspired by my unengaging monologues. This marked the beginning of my personal quest to create positive and impactful learning experiences. My approach shifted to a collaborative model with peer learning implicit in this, while also developing more engaging learning materials and student-led assessments.
Technology has been integral to my ongoing evolution as an educator and therefore the emergence of GenAI into the education narrative was a wonderful moment for me. It presented as an accessible mechanism to enhance learning experiences with opportunities for personalised learning, instant feedback, and so much more. I became an early adopter and dived head-first into establishing an AI-enhanced classroom, which involved exploring the technology for teaching, learning, assessment re-design, marking rubrics, and feedback. Most importantly, I brought the students with me on this journey of discovery in an attempt to establish a culture of academic integrity from the outset. My approach to achieving this was a focus on transparency and collaboration, where we used GenAI together in the classroom and openly discussed both the benefits and challenges. My hope was to encourage responsible-use beyond the classroom, but I openly acknowledge that many of the AI-enabled activities were possible because of the small student numbers implicit in my discipline area.
Drawing on the learning from this GenAI exploration, I shared my experiences and student feedback widely in the higher education arena, and also channeled my knowledge into contributing to the development of guidelines and resources within the university to benefit colleagues and students. However, despite this proactivity and urgency I felt to inform myself and embrace GenAI, it became clear that many colleagues were not engaging for a variety reasons. A glaring gap emerged between the issuing of guidelines and resources, and the adoption of, or engagement with, same. The lack of acknowledgement by some that this disruptive technology is changing the landscape of higher education poses a problem in terms of the student experience, and the preparation of our learners for an AI-enhanced society. This is the quandary I am attempting to tackle this semester.
Biography
Dr Hazel Farrell is programme leader of the BA (Hons) Music at South East Technological University. Coming from a background in analytical musicology, Hazel is actively involved in technology enhanced learning with research focused on student engagement in creative disciplines. Recent explorations involve the use of generative AI to enhance learning experiences. In addition to her work on generative AI, she is also leading a research project on the integration of sustainability into higher education with specific focus on the arts. She is a recipient of the university’s Teaching Excellence Award and is a founder member of the SETU research group CASE (Creative Approaches to Student Engagement).
Led by guest Dr Helen Tidy @ForensicHelenT and Joanne Irving-Walton @Joirv
If you think about your own experiences of learning there are probably moments that stand out, experiences that stay with you and improbable links that helped concepts fall into place. These memorable moments are often surprising, frequently entertaining but always relevant. Behind the scenes creating these hooks is a skill and an art in itself – the ability of a subject specialist to make their subject come to life.
These ‘quirky’ approaches to learning and teaching don’t always fall into a specific area of pedagogical practice – they can be simple or complex, a bit of a twist on a well-known strategy or a completely new take. They can involve applying common approaches in novel ways or being a magpie and shaping ideas gleaned from elsewhere to your own learning environments. Minecraft, origami, window art, mood boards, meme-making, sketchnoting, the application of creative writing, scavenger hunts and newsrooms are just some of the areas that have cropped up in our own teaching.
It’s often through these moments that the thinking, the personality and enthusiasm of the lecturer shines through. Modelling for students not just how to apply knowledge and skills but also how to take pleasure in the process. Quirky approaches can add a degree of levity to the learning environment whilst encouraging students to view the subject at hand from a range of angles. This helps build breadth and understanding, encourages experimentation and independence and creates an enriched student – and staff- experience.
During this #LTHEchat, we’re encouraging you to discuss and explore the quirky teaching approaches that you use to prompt discussion, build relationships, promote reflection, or engage students with content, feedback, and student voice. No idea is too big or too small and we recognise that everyone will have their own concept of what classifies as quirky – it’s all about context. We’ll consider the advantages and the challenges and how to respond when even the best-laid plans don’t quite work out as anticipated.
Biography:
Dr Helen Tidy
Helen is an Associate Professor in Learning and Teaching within the School of Health and Life Sciences at Teesside University. Helen’s research focuses on inclusivity within Learning and Teaching, both from a digital and non-digital perspective. She particularly enjoys practices which have a quirky edge to them carrying out research into the application of meme-making, Minecraft Education and Sketchnoting into teaching practices.
Joanne Irving-Walton
Joanne is a Principal Lecturer in Learning and Teaching within the School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Law at Teesside University and a Principal Fellow of Advance HE. Joanne is a lead on the university PGCLTHE and Academic Professional programmes and works with TNE partners around the provision of a range of education courses. She has a background in Initial Teacher Training and a research interest in the relationship between thinking and feeling in HE learning environments.
Whenever I’m delivering a workshop or giving a talk on Universal Design for Learning (UDL), I always begin by asking the audience three questions;
1) How did you get here today? 2) How long did it take? 3) How far have you travelled?
Predictably, responses are wide and varied, with some attendees walking short distances in just a few minutes, with others travelling hundreds of miles by car, train, or even plane, requiring several hours to reach the venue. The point of the questions? To remind us that learning is a bit like travelling to a common destination. We’re all aiming for the same place, but we will each get there in our own unique ways because as learners we are variable.
Learner variability represents all of those things that make learners different from each other, impacting upon how we approach and engage with learning (Merry, 2023). Sources of variability interact with the learning environment to give rise to barriers (Merry, 2023). For example, being a learner with dyslexia isn’t a barrier, but being required to read an extensive amount of text quickly, and then respond to that text equally quickly, in writing, could be a barrier for a learner with dyslexia, as well as many other learners.
Three sources of variability are particularly important in the effective pursuit of learning goals. The first reflects the ways in which learners become interested in, and motivated for learning, supporting their effort and persistence (Engagement). The second reflects how learners perceive and comprehend information related to learning (Representation), and the third reflects the way in which learners demonstrate their learning (Action & Expression). These are known as the UDL principles (CAST, 2018).
You don’t have to be a member of the “cult of UDL” to recognise that learners will likely vary across the above three areas – you just need a bit of common sense. Since learners are likely to be different in relation to what motivates them and makes them curious, how they perceive and understand information and how they demonstrate their learning, it makes sense to offer options and choices in relation to these things. Options and choices aren’t offered for the sake of it, or to “tick the accessibility box” though. They are offered to legitimately reduce or remove environmental barriers to learning. Sure, offering options and choices requires a bit more thought and a bit more planning and preparation time. But what’s the alternative? Leave the barriers in and make people struggle? Yeah, that’ll work…
Practitioners sometimes get a bit muddled when applying the UDL principles. Fortunately, Meyer et al. (2014) created the Intentional Learning Design Framework (ILDF) to help. ILDF has four constituent parts; 1) Learning Goals; 2) Teaching Methods; 3) Learning Resources; 4) Assessments. The Teaching Methods aspect aligns with the Engagement principle, Learning Resources aligns with the Representation principle and Assessments align with the Action & Expression principle. Hence, offering some variety in relation to teaching approaches, resources and assessment can represent a basic UDL starting point. That’s not much to ask is it?
The #LTHEchat on 10th January 2024 8pm will explore Universal Design for Learning.
References
Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 2.2. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Universal Design for Learning.
Merry, K.L. (2023). Delivering inclusive and impactful instruction: Universal Design for Learning in Higher Education. Wakefield, MA: CAST Professional Publishing.
Meyer, A., Rose, D.H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and Practice. Wakefield, MA: CAST Professional Publishing.
Host’s Biography
Kevin Merry is the lead for academic development at DMU and a DMU Teacher Fellow. An award-winning teacher, Kevin has received accolades for his pioneering approach to online learning via flipped classroom approaches and has become internationally renowned for his work on Universal Design for Learning (UDL). Specifically, Kevin has developed a unique approach to embedding UDL into modules and courses using his own ‘Cheese-Sandwich’ pedagogy which fuses Bloom’s Learning for Mastery approach and Constructive Alignment alongside the principles of UDL. The result is a technology enhanced learning experience within which learners are supported to become purposeful and motivated, knowledgeable, and resourceful and strategic and goal oriented – the true ‘expert learner’.
Welcome back to #LTHEchat and welcome to Sue and Adam who are taking on the challenge of organising the forthcoming chats between now and the end of March 2024. The schedule is looking really healthy, plenty to keep us tweeting right into Spring!
More about Sue
Sue Lee (SFHEA) is a Senior Research Fellow in the Staffordshire Centre of Learning and Pedagogic Practice. Sue’s current research is on innovative pedagogies with a focus on Phenomenon-Based learning. In her previous role, leading a team of learning technologists for 10 years, Sue gained considerable experience running pedagogic and technical workshops including formal accredited courses at postgraduate level. Sue is currently studying for a PHD looking into the intangible assets that influence the student journey. Heavily involved in the Inclusion agenda at the University since 2004, her masters’ research was focused on the impact that technology has for students with disabilities.
Over the years, Sue has joined in many LTHEChats and led 2.
“I have followed many of the leads that this generous group has highlighted taking me to places I may never have found on my own. I am looking forward to helping organise and join in some fantastic discussions.”
and here’s Adam!
Adam Tate (SFHEA) is a Senior Lecturer in Academic Practice. He joined NTU’s Academic Practice team in March 2021 and is Co-Course Leader of the Academic Professional Apprenticeship (APA) and the Postgraduate Certificate of Learning & Teaching in Higher Education (PGCLTHE). He is passionate about effective education, utilising appropriate pedagogies for the educational setting, and removing barriers to participation. Alongside his work at NTU, he is studying for a PhD in Education at Oxford Brookes University; his PhD looks at how full-time undergraduate students’ behaviours are influenced and shaped by universities as an extension of the soft power of the State.
“LTHEChat is a highlight of the week, coming together with other members of the international Learning & Teaching community, it is a catalyst of thought and fertile ground for discussion on established and emerging matters in learning and teaching in higher education. I am delighted to be a member of the LTHEChat Organising Group, to help facilitate timely and important conversations, but importantly to give back to this amazing LTHE community.”
Get ready for the first chat of the season- 10th January 2024 8pm GMT
#LTHEchat 