making learning happen (phil race) chapter 2: five factors ... · making learning happen (phil...

Making Learning Happen (Phil Race) Chapter 2: Five factors underpinning successful learning _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1

An example of responses to the four questions Before looking at the main factors which can be drawn from people’s responses to these four questions, let me show you one particular example, where I’ve transcribed the responses from some 20 people who participated in a workshop session at the Learning and Skills Development Agency (LSDA) offices in London in 2004. The participants spanned further and higher education, but also commerce and industry. 1: How we became good at things: • Challenging myself. • Experimenting. • Modifying. • Hands-on experimentation. • Hard work and practice. • Mostly getting things wrong. • Practice, taking into account previous

experience. • Practice, feedback, listening, range. • By learning from watching others. • To be able to survive. • Coaching, practice, mistakes, examples, ego. • Watched a good practitioner. • Read, tried it. • Tried and tried again until I got it right – lots of

enjoyment on the way. • By believing in myself. • Practice, experience, reflection, analysis.

2: Positive feelings: based upon: • Feedback from others. • Reactions of others, impact. • Doing it differently and not getting the same

result. • Positive feeling internally. • People have told me this. • Being part of a team. • Feedback. • Tangible results. • Motivation to carry on. • Reaction of others, reputation, what people say.• I get a buzz. • Good memories. • Makes me smile, gives pleasure, feel happy. • Response of others. • Warm glow.

3: Learning that went wrong: why and whose fault?

• Lack of training. • Wrong attitude. • Poor outcome – my fault. • Being told off. • Miscommunication. • Lack of aptitude – no-one to blame. • Church school – too heavy on religion. • It wasn’t made exciting or interesting enough. • Me – it’s my nature. • Lack of confidence, lack of knowledge. • Negative feedback – criticism. • Lack of early age experience. Subsequent fear

of failure. Protective parent. • Lack of self-motivation. • No enthusiasm to practice. • No encouragement from teacher.

4: What kept you going when you didn’t want to learn something (that’s now useful)?

• My own motivation. • Did not fit in socially until I could do it. • Not wanting to give up. • Appreciation of benefits. • Without it I would starve! • I could see the benefits. • Survival, ego, politics. • The need to obtain a qualification. • Fear of failure. • Life-skill, needed to do it. • Determination, challenge of doing something

different. • Fear of failure. • Other people’s opinions. • I needed the qualification. • Health and safety – the need to survive.

Table 2.2: typical responses to the second part of each question in Table 2.1

Problems about giving feedback to learners Most tutors and lecturers already know how important feedback is to their learners. Few, however, feel that they have really got themselves into a position where the feedback is really working. The following table illustrates ‘if only’ responses from a variety of tutors participating in workshops on formative feedback. Giving feedback would be much better for me if only: • Learners read it or listened to it, then did something with it, and followed it up. • I had more time with individual learners at the end of a teaching session. • I had more time during practical sessions to give them feedback. • They were at the top end of the academic spectrum, out of danger of failing. • I could motivate myself to mark written work quickly. I would be more inclined to do this if I could

make feedback more effective. • It took less time! • They had read their notes before they attempted the work, rather than go straight into the assessed

assignment. • I had more time to make detailed comments. • I had the opportunity to discuss the feedback with the learners. • The learners did their own assessments of their work, so I could give them feedback on their self-

assessment and not just on their work. • I had the time to spend with each learner as needed. • I had all the relevant information about the learners. • I didn’t have so many learners. • I could use different fun ways to give feedback. • The learners would turn up to individual tutorials to that a two-way dialogue could take place. • My feedback was not so vague. • They actually looked at it and reflected on it. • The study aims were more clear, and the level at which my learners need to be able to work with the

material was more explicit. • I had more experience about what standards were acceptable. • All learners completed their assignments in the first place. • The marking schemes were clearer and more user-friendly and were followed uniformly by all markers. The principal matters arising from responses such as these are that tutors have problems with getting their learners to take notice of the feedback, and find it difficult to spend sufficient time responding to individual learners and their particular problems. Also, it is clear that many tutors find it less satisfactory putting feedback into writing than when giving feedback in face-to-face contexts. There are further problems experienced by staff in the context of trying to link feedback to the evidence of achievement of intended learning outcomes, and designing assessment tasks to align assessment and feedback appropriately. Another group of workshop participants expressed these problems as follows. Linking learning outcomes to assessment and feedback would be much better for me if only: • I did not feel restricted by having to link learning outcomes to assessment and feedback. • The assessments that are most constructive and valid for the students didn’t require so much time to

mark, and time delay before feedback. • I didn’t find the wording involved in such activities a bit of a turn off. • I could devise my own way of assessing students’ achievement. • I could narrow the focus and articulate assessment in a coherent manner.

• I didn’t feel that students must cover and learn too much. • I could quantify qualitative material. • I understood everyone else’s aims, and how they all add up to the big picture. • I didn’t have to translate qaahili! (i.e. the language which is believed to be required by the Quality

Assurance Agency in the UK). • If we could only agree on a realistic policy. • I felt that the courses were given enough time to cover all the ground I feel necessary for students to

cover. • If I were better versed in the appropriate wording we seem to need to use. • Had more time to discuss students’ work with them individually, rather than express feedback in verbal

report forms. • I could restrain or limit the extent of the feedback I try to give students. • I could exert more control of the amount of the feedback given – I tend to be overly verbose and

expansive. As can be seen, there are some real problems here, not least the task of expressing intended learning outcomes appropriately in the first place.

Making Learning Happen (Phil Race) Chapter 6: Making learning happen in large groups ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

1

Some actions of poor teachers Just to put the list of good teaching actions into perspective, the table below shows the other side of the picture. This list was compiled by asking a hundred or so research students to think back to the worst teacher they had ever had the misfortune to encounter, and to jot down some of the actions which led to them being so regarded. Appeared not to understand the

topic Blagged it Carried on regardless of learners

chattering Condescended Could not understand questions

being posed by learners, and could not answer questions

Delivered too many facts Deviated from the subject Didn’t answer questions Didn’t check or care if we

understood Didn’t control the class Didn’t give criticism when

learners got it wrong – didn’t seem to care

Didn’t hold authority Didn’t prepare the topic Didn’t respect people having their

own opinions Digressed an hour at a time Embarrassed learners Forgot about people

Frightened learners Gave irrelevant examples Had a boring monotone voice Had no regard for safety Insulted learners Just read from the book Lacked patience Moaned a lot Only addressed the responsive

learners Only covered exam material –

nothing else Paid no attention to the male

learners Polarised the class Propagandised Put fear of God into class Read out loud from textbook Seemed confused Shouted Showed bias, had pets Spent 15 minutes reading the

book, then started Spoke about everything but the

topic Used emotional blackmail

Was a bad speaker Was abusive, used ritual

humiliation (french) Was always late Was arrogant Was arrogant Was boring Was brutal Was highly strung Was inarticulate Was inconsistent Was intimidating Was monotonous Was patronising Was prejudiced Was rude Was sarcastic Was short-tempered Was unapproachable Was unavailable Was unconfident Wasn’t interested in the subject Wrote and talked at the same time

Note, however that many of the responses about poor teachers are actually about what they were and not just what they did. We can’t change what we are as easily as we can adjust what we do!

Making Learning Happen (Phil Race) Chapter 7: Making learning happen in small groups ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

1

One-to-one tutorials: a case study from Laban Some disciplines still manage to build one-to-one tutorials into the timetable, however. The following ‘definitions’ of a tutorial were given by workshop participants at Laban, London, in 2005, relating to their tutorial provision on aspects of dance and choreography. Their definitions also make a useful basis for explaining to learners what tutorials are for. A tutorial is intended to be: • An allocation of a valuable time interval in which to create a dialogue wherein students can expose

their thinking, and find out where they’re at, for example regarding progress on assignments, and receive validation, guidance and inspiration. A two-way street.

• An opportunity for a discussion on a one-to-one basis with individual students. • A small group where informal active learning can take place, providing students with the

opportunity to explore the concepts they take away from large-group teaching contexts. • An opportunity to get to know each student as a person. • A time to share your experience with students, and find out more about where they’re at and what

makes them tick. • A situation for the giving and receiving of feedback, and a chance to discuss development and other

issues. • An opportunity for students to ask questions about things they did not understand in class. • A verbal interchange between tutor and learner, which may reflect on a particular aspect of the

student’s work. • A dialogue about the nature of the work, and how to go further with it. • An opportunity to discuss students’ experiences and achievements, and to clarify any

misunderstandings. • An opportunity for both student and tutor to assess where the student ‘is’ and where they might go

next. • A dialogue about work in hand, with the opportunity to discuss questions at greater length and to

give ideas and inspirations for future work. How can we manage behaviours which prevent learning in small groups? In twenty workshops on small group teaching, I asked participants to prioritise the ‘difficult behaviours’ which learners can engage in, and which can undermine or destroy successful small group learning. I have extracted all the ‘difficult behaviours’ into the table below. Some of the actions such as ‘dominating’, ‘being late’ and ‘not participating’ were included in many of the separate lists. However, the list ranges far beyond these. I think it is useful to include the whole list below, for two reasons: • It can be worthwhile sharing the list with learners themselves, so that they are more aware of how

common some of the damaging behaviours are, and more likely to recognise when they engage in some of them;

• It can be useful to run through the list, thinking of what we can do to minimise the effect of each behaviour in turn, and adjust the ways in which we facilitate small group work accordingly.

Arguing, not debating Arriving late Attention seeking behaviour Behaving irresponsibly culturally Being a passenger Being absent Being abusive Being afraid to join in

Being aggressive Being aloof Being antagonistic Being apathetic Being confrontational Being disrespectful Being indifferent Being late

Being lazy Being negative – moaning Being off-task Being over-confident Being overly anxious Being preoccupied Being present in body but not in

spirit

Making Learning Happen (Phil Race) Chapter 7: Making learning happen in small groups ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

2

Being restless Being self-indulgent Being shy Being uncooperative Being unequipped Bullying Challenging the teacher Chit chat Closed minds Coasting Complaining Confronting Controlling Criticising other people’s input Daydreaming Deliberate sabotage Demonstrating prejudice Destroying cumulative work Digressing Displacement activities Disrupting Distracting others Diverting inappropriately Doing other work Dominating Doodling Drawing attention to themselves Drifting away Excluding others Fearing failure Fighting within the group Forming sub-groups Going off task Gossiping Hijacking Imposing own views Inappropriate criticism Inappropriate group rivalry Interrupting Intimidating

Just agreeing Lack of interest Lacking focus Lacking social skills Laughing at others’ opinions Leaving it all to others Manipulating Marginalising Misinterpreting the task Missing deadlines Mobile phoning Mocking Monopolising Negatively criticising Not accepting others’ ideas Not attending Not being ready Not bringing necessary ‘stuff’ Not contributing Not cooperating Not engaging Not focusing on the task Not following instructions Not getting involved Not getting on with each other Not joining in because of fear of

failure Not keeping to task Not listening to each other Not participating Not playing Not respecting each other Not sharing Not taking it seriously Not taking responsibility Not wanting to appear a swot Not working as a group member Not working together Opting out Personality clashes

Plagiarising Poor timekeeping Private conversations Refusing to engage with the task Refusing to feed back to the class Refusing to negotiate Refusing to participate Refusing to work in the group Reluctance to work with assigned

partners Ridiculing Rubbishing each other Sabotaging Scapegoating Showing apathy Showing disrespect Sidetracking Spending too long on one topic Spoiling others’ work Stagnating Starting individual conversations Sulking Swearing Texting Trivialising Trying to take over Undermining other students Unwillingness to participate Using humour inappropriately Using mobile phones Walking out Wanting to be the centre of

attention Wanting to sit with their friends Wearing headphones Withdrawing Working only to strengths Wrecking by playing the fool

The table above may appear to be somewhat daunting, but in a way it sums up so many of the things which can get in the way of making learning happen in post-compulsory education. When we know more about the enemies of successful learning, we are in a better position to counteract them.

Making Learning Happen (Phil Race) Chapter 8: Responding to diversity and widening participation ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

1

Differentiation In the further education sector in the UK, there is now significantly increased emphasis on catering for the greater mix of abilities within any classroom or cohort, and the term ‘differentiation’ is used to describe the process of ensuring that high-fliers are catered for alongside low-fliers. In the quality assurance inspection processes operating in further education, it is now recognised that differentiation is on the agenda, and how staff approach achieving differentiation is being monitored by those observing teaching and learning in action. However, the word ‘differentiation’ continues to mean different things to different practitioners. It is interesting to compare ‘definitions’ of the term, obtained from delegates at a national conference of teacher educators in the UK in 2003, where I asked workshop participants to write down the way they would explain the term to an outsider who was unaware of the terminology or jargon in common use in post-compulsory education. I have included all the responses I obtained from these delegates, so that the overlap between the most frequently occurring definitions can be seen, and also the different thoughts the term invokes in practitioners’ minds. • Providing a range of tasks which engage learners

and enable them to access materials while improving their learning.

• Making sure learning opportunities are appropriate to all learners.

• Teaching and learning strategies to meet the differing needs, interests, learning styles and aspirations of the learners whom we support.

• Using teaching strategies to address the diversity of our learners.

• Managing the learning environment so learners can learn at different rates and using different styles.

• Enabling learning for all individuals within the group and providing appropriate feedback to each.

• Teaching in a way that suits and meets the needs of all the learners in the group.

• Equal opportunities – acknowledging different needs and styles to enable all to succeed.

• Supporting or facilitating the learning of all the individuals in a classroom, workshop or workplace environment.

• Ensuring opportunities for all learners to access the curriculum and achieve their maximum potential.

• Identifying differences in ability and learning styles, and meeting a range of different needs in our delivery and in tasks.

• Enabling students to develop to their full potential in terms of their own learning approaches.

• A learning strategy managed by tutors, which enables all students to maximise their potential.

• The variety of activities, materials and methods within a teaching session which meets the needs of individual learners.

• Allowing the teacher to address and try to meet the needs and learning styles of their individual students.

• Meeting the different learning needs of the individual students in a group, but as part of the group.

• Organising teaching and learning activities in a way that provides maximum opportunities for learning for the widest possible number of learners.

• Using a variety of teaching methods to cater for the different individual learning needs of a group of students.

• Providing a learning environment that caters for the learning needs and preferences of all students, seeking to maximise their engagement with the learning process.

• Planning for achievement (success) for all. • Meeting individual learners’ needs. • Providing a route into the learning which all

learners can access, so that each learner has learnt the basics.

• Making learning varied to fit all styles and needs of learners.

• Meeting the individual needs of all students in a class, taking into account learning styles, ability levels, previous experience, and so on.

• Inclusivity.


2

• Treating students differently to meet their different needs.

• The best fit possible between learning opportunities and learning needs.

• Tailoring learning experiences to meet individual learning needs.

• An attempt to support and facilitate learning in all students in a group, by use of a variety of tasks and activities.

• Making sure that all learners are given opportunities which suit their needs, to make progress with their learning.

• Maximising the learning and achievement of every group member.

• Choice. • Providing learners with work suitable to their

present needs, stretching and developing their abilities.

• Planning learning to meet the individual needs of students, to enable them to plan and achieve their goals.

• A means of enabling teaching and learning strategies to cater for learners having diverse abilities and needs.

• Ensuring you get the best from all your students. • Acceptance in action. • Addressing the individual needs of students in a

group, setting and acknowledging them, and using what they can already do.

• Treating students as individuals rather than as the same.

• Equal access to learning for every learner in the group.

• Stretching students. • Planning to ensure that all learners meet their

personal outcomes. • Meeting the needs of individuals. • Knowing all students well enough to plan to

maximise their achievement. • Engaging all students in meaningful learning. • Devising teaching delivery to respond to a range

of learning styles. • Separating learning and assessment into ‘can-do-

able’ elements, tailored to meet the needs and styles of the students.

• Adaptation of activities to suit the needs and motivations of the learners.

• To meet learners’ individual needs by recognising distinguishing individual learning features.

• Delivery of lessons in a way that meets the needs of all the different learners in the group – able and less-able alike.

• Choosing teaching strategies and learning materials which help individuals to achieve learning goals through their most effective personal learning approaches.


3

It is clear from these descriptions of differentiation that the most widely shared view is responding to the different individual on the basis of their differing ability levels, in ways which maximise achievement for all in a group. That said, how exactly it can be achieved is much harder to pin down, and varies significantly across subject disciplines and levels. Perceived staff needs in the context of widening participation and student diversity At the beginning of staff development workshops on responding to student diversity and the widening participation agenda, I often ask participants to express ‘what you want to take away with you at the end of the workshop’ as a way of fine-tuning the agenda to their needs and expectations. Their wishes are quite wide ranging, as can be seen from the table below gathered from higher education staff, and show that they are sometimes quite threatened by the expectation that they need to become able to broaden their approaches towards inclusive teaching, while not really knowing where to start on this journey. The table also shows that some teachers have quite specific agendas of their own linked to particular aspects of widening participation. ‘What I want to take away from the workshop: • Greater appreciation of issues surrounding student

diversity, particularly disabled students and how we can respond to them.

• To think about and understand the implications of student diversity.

• What can I do to facilitate the learning of non-EU and dyslexic students? (in lectures, assessment, seminars and so on).

• To know more about how to teach disabled students successfully.

• To make myself more aware of the different areas of diversity within the student population, and how to ensure their needs are addressed in my teaching.

• A broader understanding of widening participation issues.

• Better understanding of how to deal with the unexpected with tact – e.g. a blind student coming to a workshop where I didn’t know about this in advance.

• More info on the needs of students with disabilities.

• To gain the feeling that we have really engaged with the issues of diversity, because on one level the campus does feel diverse, yet on another level it does not.

• To be told relevant information quickly, concisely and to the point, and to understand more about different students needs.

• To make sure I am aware of all potential needs of my students, so that I can respond to them sensitively without appearing patronising.

• To learn how to provide equal opportunities for students from different backgrounds.

• Practical tips for teaching and assessment, so that it will all be ‘fair’ for everyone regardless of their special needs.

• Practical hints about how to deal with multiculturality and particular disabilities in classroom and practical sessions.

• Some ideas for dealing with my current class (and future cohorts of the same course) where there is presently a ‘Muslim / non-Muslim’ dimension – a problem throughout the Islamic Studies programme at the School of Continuing Education.

• To understand the scope of diversity and strategies to continually self-learn.

• To acquire some sensitive approach techniques, so that I can be better at finding out the needs of minorities among my students.

• To find out how young Africans are encouraged to participate at this university, and what are the inhibitors to participation for African learners, and how African teachers can be encouraged to work at the university.

• To be better able to cope with cross-cultural issues in the class when teaching, and help students from diverse backgrounds to learn more effectively.

• How best to deal with the increased diversity in previous skills and knowledge in my classes.


4

• How to make lectures more accessible for diverse students.

• To become able to adapt my teaching style and learning resources for adult learners and disabled students in particular.

• How to become more accessible to students , and to improve my understanding of differing student needs and how best to approach addressing them.

Making Learning Happen (Phil Race) Chapter 9: Addressing employability ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

1

Case Study: some skills and attributes linking to employability Asking a large group of workshop participants to prioritise the skills and attributes which contribute to employability yielded the following results, which demonstrate admirably the fact that employability can be regarded not just as an add-on to the curriculum of post-compulsory education, but as an integration of everything that is most important in the curriculum.

1 Ability to work out what’s

really going on. 2 Self-enhancement and

improving others. 3 Intelligence. 4 Reliability. 5 Communication skills. 6 Listening. 7 Interpersonal skills.

8 Ability to work as part of a team.

9 Honesty. 10 Keeping focused. 11 Willingness and ability to

learn. 12 Arguing skills. 13 Flexibility. 14 Generosity. 15 Time management.

16 Not being phased by new knowledge.

17 Creativity. 18 Sense of humour. 19 Common sense. 20 Courage. 21 Self-motivation. 22 Self-awareness. 23 Perception. 24 Positivity.

Linking learning to employability In this document, I have used Knight and Yorke’s table of aspects of employability as a starting point, and attempted to comment on the main links between each of the aspects in turn to the five factors underpinning successful learning in general, as discussed throughout this book. A: Personal Qualities Reflections on connections with the five factors underpinning

successful learning 1 Malleable self-theory: belief

that attributes (e.g. intelligence) are not fixed and can be developed.

Links to being practised in taking ownership of the need to learn – defining and making use of learning outcomes. Also links to developing confidence and attitudes through feedback – from tutors but also from fellow learners.

2 Self-awareness: awareness of own strengths and weaknesses, aims and values.

Connections to wanting to learn, seeing the need to overcome weaknesses, and making sense of one’s own situation. Also links to making good use of learning through feedback.

3 Self-confidence: confidence in dealing with the challenges that employment and life throw up.

Taking ownership of situations, relating to being accustomed to identify and respond to the need to learn, and the development of confidence to experiment, engage in trial and error, and learn from mistakes as well as from successes.

4 Independence: ability to work without supervision.

Relates to learning by doing, practising, willingness to engage in appropriate trial and error.

5 Emotional intelligence: sensitivity to others’ emotions and the effects that they can have.

Linking to being skilled at receiving feedback, and learning from it, and making sense of feedback in terms of how to respond to others.

6 Adaptability: ability to respond positively to changing circumstances and new challenges.

Linking to taking ownership of the need to learn, and designing appropriate learning by doing actions to address needs and situations.


2

7 Stress tolerance: ability to retain effectiveness under pressure.

Linking to the ability to sustain learning by doing under difficult circumstances, spurred on by the want to learn.

8 Initiative: ability to take action unprompted.

Linking to the ability to make sense of situations, take ownership of the need to act, and act accordingly.

9 Willingness to learn: commitment to ongoing learning to meet the needs of employment and life.

Linking strongly to the want to learn, and the recognition of the need to learn, and taking ownership of this need.

10 Reflectiveness: the disposition to reflect evaluatively on the performance of oneself and others.

Linking to making sense of what has been learned, and of situations and actions, and also to learning through feedback about one’s own actions, from other people.

B: Core Skills 11 Reading effectiveness: the

recognition and retention of key points.

Based on sufficient practice and experience of relevant reading tasks, where making sense of what is being read is a major part of learning.

12 Numeracy: ability to use numbers at an appropriate level of accuracy.

Based on sufficient relevant learning by doing, and learning through mistakes, and ability to learn through feedback.

13 Information retrieval: ability to access different sources.

Based on practice at making sense of source materials, and learning through feedback to improve the skills concerned.

14 Language skills: possession of more than one language.

Based on practice, trial and error, and well developed learning through feedback skills.

15 Self-management: ability to work in an efficient and structured manner.

Based on skills in addressing identified needs, taking ownership of them, and engaging in well-focused doing.

16 Critical analysis: ability to ‘deconstruct’ a problem or situation.

Linking strongly to making sense of what has been learned, and analysing problems or situations.

17 Creativity: ability to be original or inventive and to apply lateral thinking.

Linking to learning through trial and error, and willingness to learn from feedback, and to explore different approaches to learning by doing.

18 Listening: focused attention in which key points are recognised.

Linking to being receptive to feedback, particularly orally, and identifying and taking ownership of needs discovered orally.


3

19 Written communication: clear reports, letters, etc., written specifically for the reader.

Linking to practice at making sense of information and communicating the sense in writing, and good levels of ability in learning from feedback from other people about what was written.

20 Oral presentations: clear and confident presentation of information to a group.

Linking strongly to learning by doing, practice, and feedback. Also linking to making sense of subject matter to turn into the content of a presentation, and to be able to answer questions based on the presentation.

21 Explaining: orally and in writing.

Linking strongly to making sense. Learners who are practised at explaining orally and/or in writing often find that these processes are a very productive way of helping them to make sense of what they’re explaining, and if they benefit from feedback on their explanations, the making sense is enhanced further.

22 Global awareness: in terms both of cultures and of economics.

This can be linked to taking ownership of particular learning needs. Such awareness is also developed by learning from feedback, for example in discussions of attitudes, values and ethics relating to cultural and economic (and indeed ecological) contexts.

C: Process Skills 23 Computer literacy: ability to

use a range of software. This is best acquired through learning by doing, and in particular experimenting, trial and error, and repetition. The immediacy of feedback when learning computer-related skills also enhances computer literacy. Learners nowadays also develop their computer literacy very significantly through play rather than just study – for example using computer games, web-based games and chatrooms, and surfing the Internet.

24 Commercial awareness: understanding of business issues and priorities.

This links to making sense of the bigger picture, especially in the context of business issues and priorities. Learners who have developed skills around making sense of their subject matter, in ways which might be described as ‘deep’ learning – seeing the big picture – are best enabled to do similar processing when they enter employment.

25 Political sensitivity: appreciates how organisations work and acts accordingly.

This too can be linked to having developed skills relating to making sense of bigger pictures. For some learners, however, the political dimension may be relatively new to them, depending on their subject discipline, and also depending on the particular learning experience they drew from their programmes of study. Other learners who already become interested (and perhaps active) in the political scene may well find it much easier to transfer their learning and experience into organisational politics.


4

26 Ability to work cross-culturally: both within and beyond the UK.

This depends significantly on the composition of the cohorts learners have been part of, and indeed that of the social dimension of their interaction with other learners and with the community. The cultural mix varies markedly between post-compulsory education institutions in different parts of the UK. Also significant are skills relating to learning through feedback; learners who have developed these well in the context of their studies are much better placed to learn rapidly new skills relating to cross-cultural working when they enter employment.

27 Ethical sensitivity: appreciates ethical aspects of employment and acts accordingly.

This overlaps with 26 above, with learning through feedback being relevant, but also related to the ability to see the big picture, linking to having developed making sense skills well during post-compulsory education. The depth of ethical development encountered in subject disciplines varies widely, and some learners will have already developed their depth of thinking about ethical matters in the context of their post-compulsory education studies.

28 Prioritising: ability to rank tasks according to importance.

This draws on all five factors. Learners need to want to develop their prioritising skills for development to start to occur significantly, and it is also useful if they find that they need to develop the skills, giving them ownership of the task. The skills themselves are developed through doing – especially repetition and practice. The development happens much more readily if learners are good at accepting feedback on their prioritising skills, helping them to make sense of the role of prioritising in their overall studies, and paving the way to them being able to transfer these skills to employment.

29 Planning: setting of achievable goals and structuring action.

This overlaps with ‘28’ above, but the ‘achievable goals’ dimension is particularly linked to learners taking ownership of the need to use goals, and indeed to wanting to become better at planning.

30 Applying subject understanding: use of disciplinary understanding from the higher education programme.

This is closest to making sense of what is being learned, or ‘deep’ learning. Getting one’s head round subject matter is clearly well linked to being able to use disciplinary understanding effectively in employment contexts.

31 Acting morally: has a moral code and acts accordingly.

This is primarily to do with firstly wanting to act morally, but also to accepting ownership of the need to act morally. This is probably best developed in group work contexts in post-compulsory education, as the matter of acting morally is most relevant to working with other people in employment contexts.

32 Coping with ambiguity and complexity: ability to handle ambiguous and complex situations.

This probably links most closely to the making sense dimension of studying in post-compulsory education, but also depends significantly on learning through feedback as a catalyst for developing the ability to handle ambiguous and complex situations.


5

33 Problem-solving: selection and use of appropriate methods to find solutions.

Problem solving is best learned by solving problems, in other words lots of practice, repetition and doing. Learners who adopt cue-seeking approaches are likely to develop their speed most effectively when it comes to solving problems. Cue-oblivious learners, on the other hand, are at risk of spending too much time ‘barking up the wrong trees’.

34 Influencing: convincing others of the validity of one’s point of view.

This is very much to do with learning through feedback, particularly in finding out by practice and trial and error which approaches work best for influencing different people in different contexts.

35 Arguing for and/or justifying a point of view of a course of action.

This links to ‘34’ above and depends significantly on becoming practised at learning from feedback as a means of becoming better at arguing and justifying effectively.

36 Resolving conflict: both intrapersonally and in relationships with others.

This clearly links strongly to learning through feedback and developing appropriate skills to tune in to working with other people quickly and effectively by being open and receptive to feedback from them, and indeed through becoming skilled in giving feedback to other people. It also links to developing the skill to make sense of situations, for example to identify the causes of conflict. Such skills are best developed in group learning contexts.

37 Decision-making: choice of the best option from a range of alternatives.

This links strongly to making sense of situations, and also to cue-seeking and cue-consciousness skills.

38 Negotiating: discussion to achieve mutually satisfactory resolution of contentious issues.

This overlaps with ‘36’ above, and it particularly linked to learning through feedback skills.

39 Teamwork: can work constructively with others on a common task.

This too overlaps with ‘36’ and ‘38’ above, and is best developed through groupwork in post-compulsory education contexts. It also links with making sense of situations, and taking ownership of the need to agree on selected courses of action.

Making Learning Happen (Phil Race) Chapter 10: Putting the learning into e-learning ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

1

When does e-learning presently work well – and badly? Asking learners themselves, and teachers using e-learning in colleges gives answers such as those below: E learning worked for me when: • It consolidated my learning. • Is was useful for revision. • I got audio as well as visual information. • It provided instant feedback on the task

undertaken. • I could choose when to work. • I wanted flexible summaries and introductions to

topics. • It allowed me to work at a time when I could work

at my own pace. • All areas to support it were in place – IT support,

staff development, identification of the learning outcomes, student support.

• I understood what was being taught. • I had short periods of time in which to study, and

was able to sit at my desk between classes or work from home late at night when the family had retired.

• I could do it at a time to suit me and had the chance to go back over bits I needed to revise.

• It was in a large enough font to read, and was interactive with a purpose.

• It was supported by face-to-face learning. • It was interactive, entertaining and provided

positive feedback. • I had time-constraints on the completion of

assignments. • I worked in the field – out of the office. • I could check my answers straightaway.

• It was relevant, non-ambiguous and in tiny little gobbets.

• The technology worked. • I worked collaboratively with other learners, and

delivered blended learning. • It was intuitive to use, and my students could work

independently. • The learning environment was thoughtfully

planned to meet students needs, and was subsequently revised.

• Making good use of conference boards and email discussions.

• It was interactive and I got immediate feedback. • When I got an ‘A’ grade on what I’d learned from

it. • I was sharing experience, knowledge and

discussion within a virtual community, • It demonstrated things to me in a colourful and

interesting way. • We needed to find out information about a

company we were planning to visit on a business studies project.

• I needed to work at my own pace and fit my learning in with other commitments.

• I found out quickly where my strengths and weaknesses were before pressing on.

Responses such as those above illustrate the range of ways in which people approach using e-learning both as learners and teachers. However, asking the same people when e-learning didn’t work well is even more revealing about people’s experience of the things that currently get in the way of successful learning. E-learning didn’t work for me when: • I never had time to implement what I had learned. • I forced students who didn’t like learning that way

to use online materials too often. • It required a lot of reading. • It consisted mainly of information with no

feedback. • Students had to read a lot of information from the

screen. • It was an online book!

• It was just reading stuff on a screen and did not have a clear purpose.

• The font was too small. • The materials were too busy on the pages. • I needed tutor support but didn’t get it. • There was no online support readily available via

‘help’. • The technology failed or was unreliable. • I was overloaded with information.


2

• I had been absent for two weeks from an online discussion and had to catch up, which was difficult due to poor tutor moderation.

• The technology failed and I could not access the materials.

• It didn’t deal with concepts, ambiguities. • It was a tick-box process, not encouraging

thought. • None of the learner instructions matched the actual

technical procedures. • My computer was too modern. • There was too much on the screen in a standard

(boring) font. • The computer misbehaved. • I didn’t have anyone to explain something –

concept or technology. • I wanted to review a chapter. • I wanted to move on to advanced material and

needed my questions answered. • It didn’t assess skills.

• Only a few of the support elements had been thought about.

• Participants in the group left the forum. • Time constraints did not allow me to contact the

group at a given time. • Spam and advertising information interrupted a

website we were using and students became diverted from the task in hand.

• It bored me and was too rigid. • Either it was too flexible or there was not enough

structure – either caused me to lose impetus. • I didn’t put it into use immediately after learning

how to do it. • I was not sure about the reliability or authenticity

of information I was retrieving from the Internet. • I did not have a human being to ask questions. • I was confronted with screen after screen of solid

text. • It was just an online book and I may as well have

used a real book. Some of the instances quoted above have stories behind them, for example ‘my computer was too modern’ was about the software on the computer being a few years ahead of that which had been used to create the learning materials, so that various instructions as written for the original materials had surprising results when used with the modern software. A recurring theme in people’s accounts of e-learning not working is information overload – screen after screen of information. Coupled with this, it is clear that there is too often no opportunity for digesting or making sense of what is on the screen. Helping learners reflect on how e-learning works for them The next part of this Chapter is a reflective checklist, which could be the basis for helping your own e-learners to find out more about what works for them – and what doesn’t – in e-learning contexts. This is quite similar to the extended checklist I introduced in Chapter 3, in that the principal aim is to get learners to increase their consciousness about the processes involved, and also to alert them to things they might not have thought of for themselves about how best to go about e-learning. As it stands, however, the checklist which follows is too long! It would soon bore learners, and turn them towards a surface approach to deciding their responses to it. I suggest in practice that it would be best to use only ten or so questions at a time, and split the use of the questionnaire into several stages, thereby gradually allowing learners to develop their e-learning technique on the basis of the thinking each successive encounter with this kind of reflection produced. Better still, of course, use the questions below just as a starting point for designing your own questions, fine-tuning them to your learners, your e-learning environment, your subject and so on.


3

How e-learning works for me Some questions to help you to reflect on how you go about e-learning, what works for you, how to make it work better for you. Please tick one or more of the columns for each row, as appropriate.

This is very like me.

This is sometimes like me.

This is not at all like me.

I’ll try to

be more like this in future.

I’ll try to

be less like this in future.

1 I resist the temptation to just click the mouse and move on to the next screen when I don’t really know what I’m supposed to so with what I see on the present screen.

2 I tend to sail on quickly through e-learning materials, but don’t actually remember much of what I’ve learned after a day or two.

3 I take a lot of notice of the intended learning outcomes, and use these as a guide to what exactly I’m supposed to be doing with the e-learning materials.

4 I don’t know what the intended learning outcomes are, and don’t know where to find them!

5 My problem with e-learning is that I never know whether I’m really understanding what I’m meant to understand.

6 I get really bored when there’s screen after screen of information, without any guidance about what I’m supposed to be doing with it all.

7 I skip tasks and move on whenever I think I can already do what is involved in the tasks.

8 I do every step of each task, for example multiple choice questions, even when I already know what the right answer is, and what’s wrong with the wrong answers.

9 I’m easily distracted, and go off onto emails or web searches whenever I get bored with the e-learning material.

10 I find it really useful to be able to email a question to a tutor every time I get stuck with something in the materials.

11 I prefer to use e-learning with two or three other people, because we learn a lot by arguing or explaining things to each other.


4

Please tick one or more of the columns for each row, as appropriate.




I’ll try to


I’ll try to


12 I think that e-learning is just a modern fad, and it won’t be long before everyone wants to go back to traditional teaching and learning.

13 I make notes as I’m using the e-learning materials, as I don’t really know whether I’ve learned something until I start putting it into my own words.

14 I find I often have to print things out, as I can only make sense of them when I can see more at a time than is possible to see on a single screen.

15 It works best for me when I have pieces of paper with printed information beside me, to back up what I see on the screen.

16 I find I learn most by doing things, and not just looking at screens full of information.

17 What I like about e-learning is getting instant feedback on-screen every time

18 One thing I really like about e-learning is that there’s never too much information on the screen.

19 Something I really like about e-learning is that I can go at exactly the pace that suits me.

20 I find it really useful when e-learning keeps asking me to make decisions, and keeps me learning-by-doing.

21 I often print things out when I’m using e-learning, but don’t then read them ever again!

22 I love the fact that when I’ve picked an option on screen, and clicked the mouse, I get immediate feedback on whether my choice was right or not.

23 I love picking the right option in multiple-choice questions, then going back and seeing if I knew why the other options were wrong.

24 I like the use of colour on-screen, making e-learning more fun for me than from black-and-white printed materials.


5





I’ll try to


I’ll try to


25 I like to have graphics and cartoons on-screen, which make e-learning more interesting for me.

26 I find it very easy to get started learning with e-learning, and can’t wait to get back to something I’ve already started.

27 A problem I have about e-learning is that I can only get on with my learning when I’m actually at a computer.

28 The trouble with e-learning is that I keep getting interrupted, and don’t ever seem able to spend long enough at it to make real progress.

29 I sometimes get frustrated with e-learning when I find it difficult to get back to a screen I was looking at a few minutes ago.

30 One problem I have with e-learning is that I never quite know where I am in the overall scheme of things.

31 I sometimes find it hard to know when will be a good place to have a break, or stop an e-learning session.

32 I find it quite lonely learning with e-learning, and miss having other people to talk to about what I’m learning.

33 I find I have questions where I really need an expert to answer for me, and e-learning doesn’t give me answers to these.

34 I hate technology, and find myself nervous about e-learning, regarding getting the whole thing going, and worry about breaking it!

35 I used to find learning very boring, and love the way e-learning can make it a lot more fun.

36 One thing I really like about e-learning is that I can get the same things wrong again and again, and the computer doesn’t call me stupid!

37 I find that e-learning lets me learn from my mistakes, without anyone seeing how many mistakes I make.


6





I’ll try to


I’ll try to


38 I like it best when I can load e-learning materials into my own laptop, and carry on learning wherever I am.

39 A problem I have with e-learning is that I miss working with fellow-learners and finding out where I’m at by comparison with them.

40 With e-learning, I find I miss out on the face-to-face aspects, such as body language, facial expression, tone-of-voice and emphasis which I can pick up on in class-based contexts.

41 A problem I have with e-learning is that I find it hard to work out what standard I need to reach when preparing for an exam or test.


7

Yet more questions to interrogate e-learning I’ve now run dozens of workshops on putting the learning into e-learning, often with the title ‘Never mind the technology, feel the learning!’, and shared interrogation questions such as those above with participants, talking them through the links between these questions and wanting to learn, taking ownership of the need to learn, learning by doing, learning from feedback, and (particularly) making sense or ‘digesting’ what is being learned. I’ve then opened up discussion for further (and better) questions. An extended selection of those which have emerged at the workshops is presented below, selected and adapted a little for the purposes of this book. There are of course overlaps between some of the questions, but the overlaps in their own right tend to highlight the important questions we should be asking about e-learning, in our journey towards making it a fit-for-purpose tool in the toolkit needed to make learning happen in post-compulsory education. Are any files too large for downloading on a slow

modem? Are my colleagues happy to run with it? Are participants at a common starting point? Are particular colours/formats used for particular

purposes? Are some subjects intrinsically more suited to online

rather than traditional learning? Are student responses protected and treated

confidentially? Are students able to amend their own work? Are students able to measure success easily? Are students as well as lecturers involved in creating

the material? Are tasks built in to allow ‘break away’ from staring

at a screen? Are the choices challenging? Are the goals measurable? Are the images equal opportunities friendly? Are the materials customisable – colour, font size

etc? Are the materials easily updateable so they don’t get

stale? Are the materials self-contained? Are the materials sensitive to individual needs? Are the outcomes differentiated? Are the questions easy to understand? Are the questions hyperlinked? Are the students comfortable and confident with the

technology? Are the technological bells and whistles used

appropriate to this learning? Are there activities which take students away from

the computer? Are there different levels? Are there different types of question included?

Are there easy links to the background information they need when carrying out tasks?

Are there help options built into tasks? Are there links or springboards to further research? Are there links to a specific syllabus or course? Are there links to other materials? Are there links to other tasks? Are there links to relevant internet sites? Are there opportunities for students to communicate

with each other? Are there opportunities for students to extend their

learning? Are there other resources which can accompany the

package (e.g. physical samples…)? Are there references for future research and

development? Are there strategies in place to prevent plagiarism

and avoid offence? Are video/audio/animations inserted to break up the

flow? Are we asking students to help us develop it? Are we creating a dependence on e-learning at the

expense of other media? Can all students use the technology? Can I communicate with other learners? Can it be adapted and improved? Can it be adapted to students with special needs? Can it be easily technically supported – cost, time,

infrastructure? Can it be used so as to knock out something that

presently takes too much time/energy? Can it build up profiles of students’ achievements

over all the courses they take? Can it make the teacher’s job easier? Can it sustain interest and promote further enquiry? Can it work bilingually?


8

Can learners find their own route through the material?

Can online group work work? Can students choose their own preferred method of

learning? Can students find particular elements easily? Can students interact by changing or updating the

resources themselves? Can students keep track of their success? Can students monitor their own progress? Can students progress through the work? Can students see how much they have done, and what

remains? Can students skip activities where they have prior

learning? Can students tailor the package to their own

requirements? Can the material be customised? Can the material be translated into other languages? Can the materials be available anywhere? Can the package handle someone who just can’t

read? Can the resource provide responses to students’ free

writing? Can the tasks be more visual and more responsive? Can tutors be trained to generate materials using

normal software such as word, PowerPoint, etc? Can we adapt it to our needs? Can we afford it in our context? Can you access it without literacy? Can you come back to it at a later stage? Can you ensure that learning is actually taking place? Could the material be adapted for learners with poor

sight? Did you enjoy learning? Do benefits outweigh costs/time producing it? Do I want to study another module like this? Do learners realise they’ve learned something? Do students expect all resources to be provided? Do students have the appropriate technology? Do students know how to work in this way? Do the activities include e-group communication? Do the computers get in the way? Do the graphics enhance or detract from the learning? Do the hyperlinks work? Do the materials cause students to share ideas with

each other? Do the materials confuse by using too many colours

and effects?

Do the materials differentiate between different levels of ability?

Do the materials encourage students to look beyond? Do the materials encourage students to move beyond

the e-learning environment – into the real world? Do the materials teach as well as test? Do the staff have the skills to deliver it? Do they know how to find more material? Do we know how to use the technology? Do they? Do you need to be the author to make it work? Do you really want to do it as a multi-choice? Why

not ??? Does it accommodate pathways for all ability levels? Does it act as a springboard to other learning? Does it actually fit in to the specific course? Does it add value? Does it add value to learning in general? Does it address a range of learning styles? Does it allow constant evaluation and feedback? Does it allow differentiation? Does it allow discussion? Does it allow face-to-face initial induction? Does it allow for differentiated learning? Does it allow input in its development from current

students? Does it allow students to offer an argument rather

than an answer? Does it allow students to remain anonymous where

appropriate? Does it allow the more-able students to extend the

activity? Does it allow us to find out how they did? Does it avoid having to scroll? Does it comply with the Disability Discrimination

Act? Does it comply with the Special Educational Needs

and Disabilities Act? Does it cover equal opportunities? Does it cross-reference to other materials? Does it differentiate? Allow different routes for

different students? Does it direct to the higher level? Does it direct to what to do if the wrong answer is

chosen? Does it enable widening participation? Does it encourage application rather than rote

learning? Does it encourage group work, peer collaboration…? Does it encourage students to learn from each other?


9

Does it encourage students to study further to a higher level?

Does it engage students? Does it fit in with other modules in the same learning

programme, delivered in different ways? Does it gain students’ confidence, and how? Does it give the student the big picture versus the fine

detail? Does it have a glossary attached? Does it have to be the same test exactly each time? Does it include sound? Does it keep the beancounters happy? Does it lead to outside resources? Does it make consistent use of symbols, headings,

etc, to reinforce learning? Does it make reasonable demands on the total study

time available to students? Does it make understanding and interpreting easier? Does it make use of peer-competition? Does it match the syllabus? Does it meet the real objectives? Does it motivate? Does it offer technical online support? Does it produce positive feedback from students? Does it promote student-student and student-teacher

interaction and communication? Does it raise achievement? Does it require an realistic level of I T skills? Does it tie in with other activities the students will be

doing? Does it use different strategies to ‘get over’ the

material? Does it utilise known learning styles? Does it work with mixed-ability groups? Does the hardware match up to the software? Does the material allow students to go on their own

tangents, and develop their own understandings? Does the material get them to question it? Does the material guide you to help, e.g. a person at

the end of a phone? Does the material indicate how long a task might

take? Does the material keep the audience in mind? Does the material meet a variety of learning styles? Does the package enable skills-based learning or

information-based or knowledge-based learning? Does the package track students’ progress? Does the package use humour/have a human

element?

Does the presentation make students feel sufficiently positive to learn it?

Does the resource encourage play, experimentation, ‘what if…?’ and so on?

Does the teacher feel confident in using the resource? Does the window load quickly? Does this medium achieve significantly more than a

printed handout would? Does this provide integrations and links for different

subject areas and modules? Has it been adequately tested? Has somebody else already done a better job? Has the author been given enough time to do it? Has the level of tutor support been defined from the

outset? Have I used the best method I could to deliver this? Have questions got clearly defined answers? Have students been involved in its design/testing? How accessible is it by the people who are going to

use it? How accessible is it for people with disabilities? How authentic is it? How best can we make it personalised to individual

learners? How can I keep some of this? How can we encompass exam-speak into the

materials – e.g. iteration = loop? How can we make sure they will still come in and

talk to us? How can we monitor and measure progress? How can you make sure it is the students’ work only? How can you monitor that learning is taking place? How clear is progression through the package? How do the students interact with each other and with

their tutor? How do they know how long they’re supposed to

spend on the assessments? How do we change the teaching and learning culture? How do we prevent them getting information

overload and burning out? How do you assess that learning has taken place? How does it develop students abilities to take more

responsibility for their own learning? How does it encourage students to get teacher help

when they really need it? How does the package respond to student moods,

what’s happening around them…? How easily can materials be blended? How easy is it for staff to use?


10

How easy is it for students to use? How easy is it to adapt? How easy will it be for colleagues to use? How far does the VLE help or hinder? How flexible are the materials? How have students been involved in evaluating the

package? How is the tutor involved? How lengthy is the whole package? How long will it take me to decide whether this is

really suitable for e-learning at all? How long will it take the student to do it? How long will this element be taught? How many bugs did/does it have? How much access is there to the real tutor in

comparison to traditional learning? How much time will we need to produce or develop

resources? How much training will the students need to be able

to use the material? How relevant is the activity? How similar are computer-assisted teaching and

distance learning? How suitable is it for student revision? How suitable is the response time of the system? How time consuming is it for students? How could

the designer cut down on time wastage, e.g. by limiting web searches?

How well can the students use the technology? How well do the materials interact with the tutor? How well does it accommodate students with

disabilities? How well does it allow students to design their own

learning? How well does it encourage students to read

background matter independently? How well does it track students’ progress? How well does the student feel in control of learning? How will it be updated? How will it fit in with everything else they’ve got to

learn, and is it clear? How will it improve student achievement? How will it interact with the total learning experience

of the students? If there’s sound, is it human? If you get stuck, where do you go to get help? Is animation clearly used where appropriate? Is collaborative learning encouraged? Is each part engaging enough?

Is good practice shareable? Is help readily available? Is it accessible for students with special needs? Is it challenging enough for the students? Is it competitive, and if so, does it work? Is it cost-effective? Is it customisable (e.g. colours, multi-sensory?) Is it easily adaptable for special needs students? Is it easy to find my way around, and how do I exit? Is it easy to use? Is it economic to produce or purchase? Is it engaging? Is it flexible? Is it fun and cool? Is it integrated into the scheme of work? Is it interesting? Is it intuitive for people who are not IT literate – or

are the instructions clear enough? Is it pitched at the right level? Is it relevant to their real life experiences? Is it reliable? Is it robust? Is it SENDA-compliant? Is it suitable for subject-specific needs? Is it technically correct / current? Is it technically reliable? Is it the right medium for teaching these particular

skills? Is it time effective? Is it time to give up on this approach? Is it two-way or one-way? Is it upgradeable? Is it user-friendly? Is it value for money – and how can it be proved to

be so? Is it varied, and using more than one medium? E.g.

face-to-face and online? Is support available for s and s? Is the actual process of learning fit for purpose? Is the amount of time required indicated up front? Is the assessment accurate, and does it measure

competence? Is the assessment varied sufficiently? Is the author an experienced tutor? Is the content appropriate for the students? Is the e-learning part of a broader package? Is the e-learning simple enough to load on any

computer? Is the language pitched appropriately?


11

Is the learning interactive? Is the learning prescriptive? Is the lesson of a reasonable duration? Is the level of reading suitable for all students? Is the level right? Is the limited range of computer-based assessment

methods adequate for this subject? Is the material adult-based? Is the material delivered in an appropriate way for

people with specific learning difficulties? Is the material designed to be accessible to visually

impaired students? Is the material enjoyable group material? Is the material motivating, visually and verbally? Is the material presented sequentially and logically? Is the most costly material necessarily the best for

student learning? Is the package tested to be glitch-free? Is the resource subject to modification in response to

learner feedback? Is the room well heated? Is the sentence structure as simple as appropriate? Is the student suitable to do computer based learning? Is the style and language appropriate for the

audience? (not racist, sexist, offensive, etc) Is the technology transparent for us? E.g. how can I

include bookmarks? Is the tutor familiar with the software? Is there a backup in case the network goes down? Is there a choice of levels for the more and less

confident students? Is there a clear indication of timescales and info to

help students to meet deadlines? Is there a competitive element (does it challenge?) Is there a consistency of style? Is there a course evaluation form built in? Is there a good answer to ‘why not do it as a handout

then?’ – does it do more – and how and why? Is there a progression route? Is there a sensible balance between text and graphics? Is there a variety of activities? Is there a variety of activities? Is there an incentive to continue? Is there an indication of time allowed for the tasks? Is there an on-board tutorial to using it? Is there an opportunity for small-group learning and

feedback? Is there an opportunity to brainstorm during

activities?

Is there any intelligence or adaptation so that it responds according to students’ input?

Is there any opportunity for creativity? Is there built-in help on every screen? Is there consistent use of signposting / symbols

across courses? Is there enough built-in interaction with the tutor? Is there enough variety of exercises to take into

account more than just the average student? Is there guidance about alternative pathways through

the package? Is there I T support for technical problems? Is there immediate help? Is there institutional support for staff? Is there scope for provision of hard-copy evidence of

work done? Is there some built-in human interaction? Is there sufficient personality to create motivation in

and among the student? Is there support for students with special needs

/additional learning needs? Is there tracking to report results and achievements? Is this the best way to teach this thing? Is this the most appropriate or effective way of

learning the topic? Is this the most appropriate way of teaching this, or

of students learning this? It is appropriate for use at home? To what extent does it promote interaction? To what extent is there open access? What can it do which can’t be done by a book? What do learners do if they don’t “understand”? What fallback have we if we put all our eggs in the e-

learning basket? What happens if it doesn’t work? What happens when the student doesn’t understand

the screen in front of them? What is plan B, for when it doesn’t work? What is the actual measurable impact on learning

with respect to exam results? What is the common starting point required? What level of support can we expect from the

vendor? What percentage of the actual syllabus is covered? What sort of performance indicators are there

between online and traditional…? What takeaways do we provide? Bits of paper, etc?

Generic or specific? What technologies are available?


12

Where can I go for more resources? Where can I go when I finish this module?

(successfully) Where can students be trained in this kind of

learning? Where exactly will it fit into schemes of work? Who can I contact if I’ve got a problem? Who has produced the material – e.g. the tutor

supporting the course? Who will do the necessary updating? Why will it make students learning more effective? Will a lot of staff development time be required? Will it allow students to take risks and play

intellectually? Will it be possible to update it technically? Will it create more lonely people?

Will it generate greater interest in the subject? Will it make the learning experience more effective? Will students gain confidence to tackle more? Will students have ownership by being involved in

content and production? Will the material appeal to all learners, old, young,

visual, auditory, high fliers etc? Will the online material persuade the student to miss

lunch? Will they feel safe in a chatroom? Will this systematically generate evidence for

internal or external sources? Would it be appropriate to have a translation?

Glossary? Deaf signing students? Would you use it again?

I am grateful to hundreds of workshop participants for their work on developing the questions in the table spanning the last few pages, and for their permission to share their thinking in a bid to help us all to accelerate the development of e-learning in directions where it really is a fit-for-purpose tool in the toolkit for making learning happen in post-compulsory education.

Making Learning Happen (Phil Race) Chapter 11: Making workshops work _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1

A pre-workshop questionnaire The example below illustrates a short pre-workshop questionnaire which could be sent out in advance to people attending a one-day workshop on ‘designing and delivering training workshops’, and may help to trigger relevant ideas to use in your own questionnaires for similar purposes. Please email your reply back to me, or pop it in the post. Please jot down quick responses to the following questions, to help me fine-tune the workshop to your own contexts and wishes. 1 Your name and organisation:

2 Typical subject areas of your own workshops:

3 Typical group sizes of your own workshops:

4 Typical durations of your own workshops (e.g. half-day, full-day. two-days, etc.)

5 Typical contexts of your own workshops (e.g. in my own organisation, visiting other organisations, freelance, and so on):

6 What you particularly hope to gain from this workshop:

7 Any other things it would be helpful for me to know about you before the workshop?

8 Questions and issues you would particularly like the workshop to be adjusted to address?

Thanks for your response. I look forward to seeing you on Tuesday 8th November


2

Setting workshop tasks – a planning checklist The table below is intended to be used as a working checklist for planning workshop tasks, and as an action planning tool for developing tasks on the basis of experience during and after a workshop. Facilitator’s Checklist questions Yes Not yet Not

applicable Action planning and reflections

1 Have workshop tasks been mapped so that they cover all the intended workshop outcomes, as far as is reasonably practicable?

2 Is there a suitable variety in workshop tasks, so that participants don’t become bored?

3 Have suitable workshop tasks been devised as individual participant work?

4 Have suitable workshop tasks been devised as work in pairs, trios, or other small group formats?

5 Are the task briefings clear, precise and unambiguous? Has the ‘what it really means is…’ process been applied to clarify and simplify task briefings as far as possible?

6 Will there be printed briefing notes to accompany the workshop tasks? Will it be possible for these to be edited and adjusted as the task briefing becomes clarified during plenary discussion?

7 Have slides or transparencies been prepared with the main task briefings? Will it be possible for these to be edited and adjusted as necessary?

8 Where possible, have tasks been trialled, so that the time needed can be estimated realistically, and the briefings can be further fine-tuned?

9 Have overall tasks been appropriately broken down into clear separate stages, so that timescales can be allocated realistically?

10 Have minimum and maximum timescales been established, both for the overall tasks, and the separate stages for each task?


3

Facilitator’s Checklist questions Yes Not yet Not applicable

Action planning and reflections

11 Has it been planned that workshop tasks will take up at least half of the total time of the workshop?

12 Have ‘spare’ short tasks been devised, in case some of the scheduled tasks are completed faster than was expected?

13 Have contingency plans been made, so that if a principal task is taking significantly longer than expected, it can be shortened or fine-tuned appropriately?

14 Has it been decided how the work done by participants on each task will best be evidenced and shared?

15 Where appropriate, have pro-formas been devised to help participants or groups to record their work on each task, and to prepare evidence to report-back their work in plenary?

16 Has it been decided what role the facilitator should take while each task is in progress, for example timekeeping, helping participants keep to the tasks, clarifying briefings, answering questions?

17 Where participants will be working in groups, has it been planned how group composition will be altered for successive tasks, or successive stages in an ongoing task?

18 Where groups will be reporting back their work on tasks, has it been decided how best to brief the groups to report-back – e.g. by a chairperson, or as a group, or using a poster or overhead?

19 Have alternative tasks been devised, in case it should turn out that a particular task is inappropriate (for example if most people present have already achieved the related outcome already)?

20 Have appropriate resources, for example handout materials, been prepared, for participants or groups to use while working on tasks?


4

Workshop room layout – a checklist The checklist below is intended to help you to make best use of the training rooms and facilities at your disposal. Facilitator’s checklist questions Yes Not

yet No Action planning

comments 1 Is the room somewhere you’ve worked before, so that

you know the strengths and weaknesses of the venue already?

2 Will you be able to get access to the room to set up, for at least an hour before the workshop is due to start?

3 Is there an overhead projector and screen in the room already (if needed)?

4 Is there data projection already installed in the room?

5 Is the room equipped with blinds or curtains, so that the lighting can be dimmed sufficiently for data projection if necessary?

6 Can the room lighting be dimmed in the vicinity of the projection screen, while still allowing participants to see handouts, other paperwork, and each other clearly?

7 If there are external windows in the room, can direct sunlight be prevented from inconveniencing particular participants?

8 Is there already a flipchart in the room?

9 Have you listed all the equipment you may need to take to the room for your workshop?

10 Is the seating in the room moveable?

11 Is the room layout and furniture such that any participant with a mobility limitation will be able to be accommodated easily?

12 Is the room layout such that any participant with an auditory or visual special need can be accommodated appropriately?


5

Facilitator’s checklist questions Yes Not yet

No Action planning comments

13 Will there be sufficient chairs in the room (e.g. a few more than the estimated maximum number of workshop participants)?

14 Will participants need to have a table or other writing surface to work on during plenary sessions of the workshop?

15 Are tables moveable?

16 Will syndicate groups be able to work in parallel in the main room?

17 Will syndicate groups need to spread out into breakout rooms for some workshop tasks?

18 Will syndicate groups need to work round a table for their group tasks?

19 Has the plenary room arrangement been made so as to maximise participants’ eye contact with each other?

20 Has the plenary room arrangement been planned so that all participants have a clear uninterrupted view of the screen?

21 Will you be able to use the overhead projector or data projector without obstructing some participants’ view of the screen?

22 Will you be able to circulate freely to groups of participants working together during the workshop?

23 Will it be possible to lock the room during refreshment breaks (if appropriate) so that participants’ valuables will be secure?


6

Checklist on questionnaire design Having accepted that questionnaires are only one part of the wider evaluation picture, and that in themselves they are essentially feedback instruments (and usually only ‘end of event’ feedback), it is useful to suggest some guidelines for making the most of such questionnaires. The following checklist questions may help you to put questionnaires to best use in the context of training workshops. Facilitator’s Checklist questions Yes Not yet No Not

applicable 1 Is there a suitable balance between structured

questions (e.g. ticking boxes) and open-ended questions (e.g. giving opinions)?

2 Is the questionnaire of a suitable length (e.g. no more than two sides of A4)?

3 Will the questionnaire take no more than five minutes to fill in on average?

4 Are all of the questions useful? In other words, do the questions elicit feedback that is likely to be needed by the facilitator and others involved?

5 Do at least some of the questions allow participants to express views and opinions they want to express, and develop these in detail when they choose to do so?

6 Will participants’ overall response to the questionnaire lend itself to ready analysis, where this is appropriate?

7 Has the questionnaire been trialled with representative participants, primed to think of other questions which could be included to give further useful feedback?

8 Has the questionnaire already been developed on the basis of using it in practice, and deciding which are the most useful elements?

9 Has it been decided who will collect and collate the findings of the questionnaire, and how these findings will be presented to the facilitator?

10 Have the questions been asked as directly as possible? In other words, have all foreseeable ambiguities been ironed out in the wording?


7

Facilitator’s Checklist questions Yes Not yet No Not applicable

11 Will the questionnaire be used in the same form for a series of events, and are there good reasons for doing this?

12 Is the questionnaire specific enough to the particular event for which it has been designed?

13 Has thought been given to getting pairs or small groups of participants to complete the questionnaire, rather than individuals?

14 Is the overall length of the questionnaire proportionate to the duration of the workshop? (For example, one side of A4 for a two-hour event, but no more than two sides of A4 for longer events).

15 Will it be relatively straightforward to use the questionnaire to produce a summary report of the overall workshop feedback?

16 Is it possible to predict which is likely to be the single most important element of this questionnaire?

17 Will it be useful to follow-up this questionnaire by a further one, for example three weeks after the workshop?

18 Will it be useful to make further contact with a random sample of the people who filled in the questionnaire (e.g. by telephone or email), asking them particular clarifying questions, to provide better feedback on the workshop?

19 Will it be useful for the facilitator to fill in a copy of the questionnaire at the end of the workshop, to indicate what he or she expects as views of the average participant?


8

Three extended checklists I am ending this chapter – and the whole book – with three more checklists. These checklists are particularly designed for planning workshop sessions, and then reflecting on them afterwards. However, the same checklists can easily be adapted for use in the context of any teaching-learning session, including lectures, small-group work and so on. I have also used these checklists for another purpose: to alert you to a number of issues that link to making learning happen successfully, whether at workshops or in other contexts. For example, the checklist about using slides and overheads tells its own story in terms of some of the things we should be trying to achieve with visual aids, and some of the things we should be taking care to avoid. As they stand, you may feel that these checklists are much too long! My idea, however, is that the checklists can serve as an overall menu, from which you might like to select only a few items at a time to use in your own planning of particular teaching-learning events, and that you may gradually work out which of the ingredients of the checklists are proving most useful to you and to your own learners. Much depends on the subject discipline, subject level, and the size and nature of the groups of learners you are working with. Furthermore, the questions included in these checklists are meant to get you thinking about better, more relevant questions you can design yourself, to address how best you can make learning happen with your own learners in your own contexts.


9

Checklist for slides and overheads The following checklist should help you to ensure that the visual aids you design and use are fit for purpose and professional. Facilitator’s Checklist statements Yes,

I do this

I will need to consider this, and action planning comments

1 Font sizes of at least 30 point are used.

2 Slides are not over-full – several separate slides are used rather than trying to present too much on any one slide.

3 Slide titles are used systematically, so that it is always clear what a particular slide is about, and where it fits in to the ongoing theme.

4 Sans serif fonts are used (e.g. Arial, Comic Sans MS, MS Sans Serif).

5 UPPER CASE TEXT IS AVOIDED IN SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS (i.e. avoiding the equivalent of ‘shouting’ in email communication).

6 Bold is used for emphasis on slides or overheads, rather than italics or underlined

7 Bullet points or numbers are used, rather than continuous prose.

8 Overhead transparencies are designed to be moved up the screen so that the part being discussed can always be seen in the top half of the projected image.

9 PowerPoint slides make use of the upper part of the screen, so that participants at the back of the room do not have difficulty seeing the lowest text or bullet point.

10 Dark colours for text (black, dark blue, dark green) on a light background (white, yellow) where the ambient lighting level may be relatively high.

11 Light colours for text (white, yellow) are used on a dark background (dark blue, black) where the ambient lighting level may be adjusted to be low.


10

Facilitator’s Checklist statements Yes, I do this

I will need to consider this, and action planning comments

12 Colours and backgrounds which can cause difficulties when viewing from a distance are avoided (e.g. red text on green backgrounds).

13 Animation effects are used with restraint (e.g. text flying in from one side or the other for successive bullet points).

14 Slide transition effects are used with restraint (e.g. slides dissolving into the next one, checkerboarding, and so on).

15 Diagrams, flowcharts and other visuals are big enough and bold enough to be clearly readable from the back of the workshop room.

16 Particular care is taken to make labels or captions on diagrams clearly visible, and in font sizes and colours which are large enough to be read easily at the back of the room.

17 Paper-based copies of the slides are readily available for participants who need them to take them away.

18 Large-print paper-based copies of the slides can be made available to participants with visual special needs.

19 Line spacing is sufficient for text-based slides to be easily read on-screen.

20 Additional line spacing is provided between sentences and bullet points.

21 Where prose is presented, the left-hand side is justified, and a ragged edge is left at the right-hand side (i.e. avoiding two-sided justification which can cause irritating differences in the spacing between words on a slide).


11

Overall planning checklist for a workshop The following checklist is intended to be both a working tool for planning a workshop, (or lecture, or other learning event) and for revisiting after the event as an aid to learning from experience and fine-tuning planning for future events. The questions are intended to be indicative, and you may well decide to adapt ideas from this chapter to make your own working tool for planning your own workshops, then reflecting on them with hindsight after the event. In each case, tick the ‘yes’, ‘not yet’, or ‘n/a’ (not applicable) columns as you plan the event, then return once more to the checklist after the event using the ‘Reflections with hindsight after the event’ column to help you to decide how best to put into practice what you have learned from the planning you have done. Checklist questions Yes Not

yet n/a Reflections with hindsight

after the event Drafting your workshop outline, and publicising the event 1 Has a good title been chosen for the event? Will

this title be ‘lived up to’ by the event in practice? Will it seem relevant to participants, and attract the right participants?

2 Has the ‘Rationale’ been drafted well? Does it clarify well what the title actually means in practice, and why the workshop will be important and useful to participants?

3 Have intended workshop outcomes been formulated carefully? Are these relevant and achievable? Do these enable intended participants to see exactly what the workshop will be about? Will these ensure that there are no unwelcome surprises or disappointments for participants at the workshop?

4 Has an outline programme been worked out? Does this give enough detail of how the workshop will unfold? Is the outline programme still flexible enough to allow the workshop to be fine-tuned at the event itself, to accommodate participants’ wishes, expectations and emergent needs?

5 Have decisions been made about the optimum number of participants, and the minimum and maximum numbers for the event?


12

Checklist questions Yes Not


after the event Choosing the venue, and setting it up 6 Is the training room a ‘known quantity’?

7 Has the room been visited and checked out for size, shape, lighting, equipment, furniture, and so on?

8 Is the seating moveable?

9 Are tables easily moveable?

10 Have decisions been made about the initial room layout, e.g. for plenary introductions?

11 Have decisions been made about the way that small-groups will be accommodated for group work elements of the workshop?

12 Will breakout rooms be available nearby for small-group elements of the workshop?

13 Will it be necessary to allow time before the workshop to set up the room in exactly the required format?

14 Will there be a flipchart in the room?

15 Will there be an overhead projector in the room?

16 Will data projection facilities be needed in the room?

17 Will refreshments be allowed in the room? Or…

18 …is there a suitable area for refreshments outside the room, or nearby?


13

Checklist question Yes Not


after the event Paperwork, briefings, handouts, slides and overheads, and so on 19 Have joining instructions been prepared, if

necessary, to help participants find the venue easily?

20 Have handout materials been prepared and copied?

21 Will handout materials be sent to participants in advance of the event?

22 Will handout materials be issued to participants at the start of the event?

23 Will handout materials be issued incrementally at stages during the event?

24 Will handout materials be issued to participants at the end of the event?

25 Will copies of slides or overheads be made available to participants at the event?

26 Will task briefings be issued separately to participants when each task is started?

27 Has a feedback questionnaire been designed relevant to the particular event?

28 Does the feedback questionnaire include questions which probe into how well participants feel they have achieved the intended learning outcomes?


14



after the event Getting your workshop off to a good start 29 Will participants be welcomed, signed-in, and given

coffee or tea as they arrive?

30 Is there a ‘getting to know each other’ introductory exercise at the beginning of the workshop?

31 Will the intended workshop outcomes be explained clearly near the beginning of the workshop?

32 Will it be possible to fine-tune the intended workshop outcomes in the light of participants’ expectations at the start of the workshop?

33 Have plans been made about how best to accommodate anyone who arrives late and misses the opening stages of the workshop?

Making your workshop an active learning experience 34 Is there an emphasis on participants doing things

rather than simply listening to people talking at them?

35 Is there a suitable variety of tasks, including individual work, small-group work, reporting-back in plenary, question-and-answer sessions, and so on?

36 Have task briefings been thought through carefully so that participants will stay on task?

37 Are the tasks demonstrably linked to the intended workshop outcomes?

38 Have plans been made to allow participants to work in different groupings over the course of the workshop, so that they get to know each other better?

39 Have plans been made to debrief each workshop task, and allow participants to share the results of their work?


15



after the event Bringing your workshop to a good conclusion 40 Have plans been made so that the programme can

be adjusted if necessary so that the event will end on time?

41 Has it been decided what the most appropriate ‘ending’ activity will be for the workshop?

42 Has time been left for participants to complete a short feedback questionnaire before they leave?

After your workshop 43 Has participants’ feedback been collected and

analysed?

44 Have decisions been made about adjustments to make to future workshops in the light of participants’ feedback?

45 Will participants be circulated with details of any particular products (e.g. flipcharts, questions, recommendations) they made at the workshop?

46 Has the facilitator reflected on the successes and trials of the workshop, and made notes to capture these reflections?


16

Reflecting on your workshop It is very valuable to reflect on each workshop you lead, and to learn from things which went well, and of course to think about what could have gone better. The main problem with reflecting is that unless some record of reflection is made at the time, one’s best ideas can just evaporate away again. The following table can be a starting point for reflecting after running a training workshop, and for capturing your reflections so that you can put them to good use when planning and running future workshops. The questions below are just indicative ones; you may wish to use these as a starting point towards developing your own personal reflections checklist to use after each workshop. (Note that the ideas about reflection presented below don’t just apply to training workshops. Similar starter-questions can easily be used for lectures, tutorials, and just about all the other teaching-learning elements we use in post-compulsory education). Facilitator’s reflection checklist questions Your responses and action-planning ideas

1 What particular aspect of this workshop was the

thing that worked best of all? Why did this element work really well? How can I make sure that I capitalise on this in my future training workshops?

2 What else worked really well at this workshop? How best can I build in similar features into my future workshops?

3 What worked least well at this particular workshop? Why was this? What can I do in future workshops to minimise the chance that similar things will happen again?

4 What surprised me most at this particular workshop? Why was this unexpected? What would I now do, with hindsight, to address this, if it were to happen again at a future workshop?

5 How well do I now think that I started this particular workshop? What have I learned about how best to start this particular kind of workshop? How will now I fine-tune the beginning of a future similar workshop?

6 How well did I explain the intended learning outcomes to participants? Which of these outcomes seemed to be most important to them? How best can I with hindsight adjust the intended learning outcomes to be more relevant to future participants at similar events?


17

Facilitator’s reflection checklist questions Your responses and action-planning ideas

7 Was the number of participants too many, too few, or just right for the particular workshop? What can I do to make it more likely that I have an optimum number of participants for this kind of workshop in future?

8 How much did the participants turn out to know already, on average? Was this more than I expected or less than I expected? How would I adjust the content of a future workshop to fine-tune it better to what the participants are likely to know already? How best can I find out from them more about what they already know at the start of a similar workshop in future?

9 What was the best thing about the training room at this particular workshop? Why did this really help the event? What can I do to try to ensure that this kind of venue feature will be put to good use in future events?

10 What was the worst thing about the training room at this particular workshop? What can I do in future to minimise the risk of similar things spoiling a workshop?

11 What was the best thing about the actual participants at this particular workshop? How best can I try to make use of similar strengths among future participants?

12 What behaviours did the most difficult participant show at this particular workshop? What can I do to address such behaviours at future events, if they occur again?

13 What was my own best moment at this particular workshop? Why do I feel good about this particular aspect? What can I do to lead to more such moments at future workshops?

14 What is the single most important thing I wish I hadn’t done at this workshop? Why do I feel badly about this? How best can I avoid doing this in future workshops?


18


15 What was the most important thing I learned about the topic of my workshop on this occasion? How best can I make use of what I learned on future occasions?

16 What, with hindsight, would I now miss out of the workshop? Why would I now choose to miss this out of similar workshop in future?

17 What else, with hindsight, do I wish I had been able to include in this particular workshop? How best can I make time to include something along these lines into future similar workshops?

18 What was the most unexpected happening at this workshop? How well do I now think that I handled this? How would I handle the same sort of thing differently at a future workshop?

19 How well do I think I closed the workshop? Did I end it with a whimper or a bang?! Was I rushed towards the end of the workshop, trying to get through everything on the agenda? What would I do next time round, with hindsight, to make sure that a future similar workshop ended really positively?

20 What do I feel about the feedback I have received from participants at this workshop? What will be the most important thing which I will do differently next time as a result of this feedback? What will be the most important thing I will do in exactly the same way because of this feedback?

21 What was the most hurtful comment or grading in participants’ feedback? Why do I find this hurtful? Was it justified? Is it really important considering the feedback as a whole? Would it be useful for me to do something different next time round to address this particular aspect of critical feedback?


19


22 What was the most pleasing comment or grading I received in participants’ feedback? Why does this please me so much? Will it be possible for me to aim to get further similar feedback in future, and how will I adjust a future workshop to do so?

23 What turned out to be the most revealing question on the feedback questionnaire? Why was this? How could I develop the questionnaire to get better feedback next time round?

24 How well did participants feel that they had achieved the intended learning outcomes at the end of the workshop? Which outcomes had they achieved best? Were any of the intended outcomes less important than others? How would it be useful, with hindsight, to adjust the intended learning outcomes for a similar workshop next time round?

25 What is the most important thing I have learned about facilitating workshops from this event? How will I put this learning to good use at future workshops?

making learning happen (phil race) chapter 2: five factors ... · making learning happen (phil...

Documents