Opening-up the HE box through cross-boundary collaborative open learning in cross-institutional academic development

UK and wider context, challenges and opportunities

Competition and financial incentives for HEIs in the UK as a driver to achieve teaching excellence (TEF, 2016a; 2016b)

CPD within institutions, often perceived as top-down approach (Crawford, 2009)

Academics want freedom: to pursue their own interests in L&T, part of networks and communities, often external/disciplinary ones (Crawford, 2009)

Open cross-institutional collaborations increase engagement in CPD and drive innovation in teaching (Pawlyshyn, Braddlee, Casper & Miller, 2013)

An alternative for engaging academics in CPD, raise the quality of teaching & innovate

Competition

Collaboration & Openness

Nerantzi, C. (accepted) Alternative approaches to the TEF: raising the quality of teaching through openness, collaboration and innovation, in: Compass, Greenwich: University of Greenwich

A proposition

Phenomenographic PhD study (Marton, 1981): collaborative open learning experience in academic development Collective case study (Stake, 1995) approach for data collection: FDOL132 & #creativeHE 22 individual semi-structured interviews 2 surveys for background information to construct the case Research questions • RQ1: How are open cross-institutional academic development courses

that have been designed to provide opportunities for collaborative learning experienced by learners?

• RQ2: Which characteristics of open cross-institutional academic development courses most strongly influence learners' experience and how?

• RQ3: Drawing upon research findings from RQ1 and RQ2, what could be the key features of a proposed collaborative open learning framework for open cross-institutional academic development courses?

The study

Case study 2

https://courses.p2pu.org/en/courses/2615/creativity-for-learning-in-higher-education/

Creativity for Learning in HE by Chrissi Nerantzi for CELT, MMU is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Case study 1

https://fdol.wordpress.com/fdol132/

Collective case study approach to collect data

PBL Negotiated

Learning in groups was a choice!

Groups supported by facilitators from collab institutions

Learner needs

Design considerations

Learner engagement

patterns

The dimensions of the cross-boundary collaborative open learning framework

CC BY-NC-SA

• identification, gaining insight into diverse practices

• coordination, connecting diverse viewpoints

• reflection, opportunity for better understanding own and others’ perspectives and

• transformation, leading to collaboration and change in behaviour or practices.

Boundary crossing & opportunities for learning (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011)

• may increase conflict and misinterpretations!

• identifying strategies to overcome these are important

Boundary crossing & challenges (Algers, 2016)

Open learning as course organisation (C1.1)

Open learning as a facilitated ex. (C1.2)

Open learning as an activity-based ex. (C1.3)

Open learning as designed for collaboration (C1.4)

Stru

ctu

ral f

acto

rs (

Are

a A

) Li

ved

exp

erie

nce

(A

rea

B)

contributing factors

Collaboration as engagement in learning (C3.1) Selective

Immersive

Collaboration as relationship building (C3.3)

Group focus

Collaboration as shared product creation (C3.2)

Process-focus High product expectations

Individual focus Process-focus Low product expectations

Phenomenographic outcome space of this study

Cross-boundary learning through modes of partici-pation (C2.1)

Cross-boundary learning through time, places and space (C2.2)

Cross-boundary learning through diverse pro- fessional contexts (C2.4)

Cross-boundary learning through culture and language (C2.3)

Selective collaborator’s patterns Immersive collaborator’s patterns

• Focus on self • “Lives” elsewhere • Low group product expectations • Some small group participation • Might use course to complement

other studies, professional recognition

• Support mainly from elsewhere

• Focus on group • “Lives” in the group • High group product expectations • Might be studying towards credits

on course, or professional recognition

• Support mainly from within the group

The framework: Learner engagement patterns

CC BY-NC-SA

Learner needs

Design considerations

Learner engagement

patterns

Selective collaborator’s needs Immersive collaborator’s needs

Milestone cohort activities + Social relationships, community

Some small group activities + Regular buddy / small group activities

Light touch facilitation + Regular facilitation

Sporadic synchronous + Regular asynchronous and synchronous

Sporadic group purposes + Group purposes and co-creating meaning

Process + Co-created products

The framework: Learner needs

CC BY-NC-SA

Learner needs

Design considerations

Learner engagement

patterns

Collaborating institutions

Organisation, and facilitation team

Learner profiles and cross-boundary considerations

Learning and Teaching approach

Group work and community

Resources, tools and open licensing

Accreditation / Recognition

Online / Offline mode

Course outcomes and activities

Timing and scheduling

The Framework: Design considerations

CC BY-NC-SA

Learner needs

Design considerations

Learner engagement

patterns

Learner engagement patterns

Selective collaborating Immersive collaborating

• Focus on self • “Lives” elsewhere • Low group product expectations • Some small group participation • Might use course to complement other studies, professional

recognition • Support mainly from elsewhere

• Focus on group • “Lives” in the group • High group product expectations • Might be studying towards credits on course, or professional

recognition • Support mainly from within the group

Learner needs

Selective collaborator Immersive collaborator

Milestone cohort activities + Social relationships, community

Some small group activities + Regular buddy / small group activities

Light touch facilitation + Regular facilitation

Sporadic synchronous + Regular asynchronous and synchronous

Sporadic group purposes + Group purposes and co-creating meaning

Process + Co-created products

Design considerations

Collaborating institutions Organisation, and facilitation team

Learner profiles and cross-boundary considerations

Learning and Teaching approach

Group work and community

Resources, tools and open licensing

Accreditation / Recognition Online / Offline mode Course outcomes and activities

Timing and scheduling

The cross-boundary collaborative open learning framework

• Academic developers: to create new type of CPD (cross-institutional, co-development, co-facilitation)

• Academic staff: to experience new type of learning, considering for own practice

• Students in HE: to learn with academic staff and the public, widen horizons, build confidence

• Professionals from other sectors: to connect with HE professionals and students, cross-fertilisation of ideas

• The public: to connect with higher education, open communities of collaboration, co-creation

• Higher education: to become part of life and society, based on democratic values and the ethos of openness and collaboration

Potential usefulness of the framework for…

New horizons?

6. 1 RQ 1: How are open cross-institutional academic development courses experienced that have been designed to provide opportunities for collaborative learning?

6.2 RQ2: Which characteristics of open cross-institutional academic development courses influence learners’ experience and how?

6.1.1 Anyone (academic staff, students and the public) The courses’ cross-boundary nature brought academic staff, students, public together to learn together. Participants were formal and informal learners from different cultures. This diversity enriched their collaborative open learning experience and made learning more interesting to them.

6.2.1 Anyhelp (facilitator and peer support) The facilitator support was vital for collaborative open learning, to help build group relationships and resolve technological and course issues and build peer-support capacity. The non-directive facilitator and the facilitator as co-learner was most welcome by participants.

6.1.2 Anywhere (online, offline and mobile) Participants engaged online and offline in collaborative open learning activities and the course. They also used their mobile devices to connect with course activities. The offline dimension of engagement was especially relevant for ‘selective’ collaborators and provides insights that open learning does not exclusive happen online.

6.2.2 Anyhow (elasticity of the design) The flexibility of the collaborative open learning design, using inquiry-based activities worked for ‘selective’ and ‘immersive’ collaborators, when this was agreed with participants and especially when the focus of collaboration was the process.

6.1.3 Learners as community Especially ‘immersive ‘ collaborators were seeking to be part of a community. They cultivated social relationships. Synchronous social media video technologies helped them in this process. The cross-boundary nature of the groups was especially attractive to participants and generated increased interest for each other.

6.2.3 Course as community Participants saw the course as a community that continued beyond the pre-defined timeframe. The cross-institutional and cross-boundary dimensions of the courses, that also brought together formal and informal learning using social media, presents a new academic development approach that is a continuum.

The Framework: Design considerations

Towards a new model to practise academic development… and HE?

cross-boundary community

Qualifications (PgCert, MA)

Professional recognition

Informal CPD (workshops, conferences, webinars, tweetchats etc.)

scaffold provided by a cross-boundary collaborative open learning framework

References Akkerman, S. F. & Bakker, A., 2011. Boundary Crossing and Boundary Objects. Review of Educational Research. June 2011, 81 (2). pp. 132–169.

Algers, A., 2016. OEP as boundary practices – how academy and society can inform each other. ExplOER project webinar. Accessed from https://connect.sunet.se/p4gxj96aglg/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal

BIS, 2016a. Success as a knowledge economy: Teaching excellence, social mobility & student choice, Department for business, innovation & skills. London: BIS. Accessed from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/523396/bis-16-265-success-as-a-knowledge-economy.pdf

BIS, 2016b. Teaching excellence framework: Year two specification. Department for business, innovation & skills. London: BOS. Accessed from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/556355/TEF_Year_2_specification.pdf

Conole, G., 2012. E-learning in higher education, new technologies and education for multilingualism, second rectors’ conference, European parliament, Brussels, 18-19 October 2012. [keynote]. Accessed from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/interp/rectorsconference2012/docs/pdf/conole_presentation.pdf on 28th May 2016.

Crawford, K., 2009. Continuing professional development in higher education: Voices from below. University of Lincoln. [EdD thesis]. Accessed from http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/2146/1/Crawford-Ed%28D%29Thesis-CPDinHE-FINAL%28Sept09%29.pdf

Inamorato dos Santos, A., Punie, Y. & Castaño-Muñoz, J., 2016. Opening up Education: A support framework for higher education institutions. JRC Science for Policy Report, EUR 27938 EN: doi: 10.2791/293408. Assessed from http://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-scientific-and-technical-research-reports/opening-education-support-framework-higher-education-institutions

Pawlyshyn, N., Braddlee, G., Casper, L. & Miller, H., 2013. Adopting OER: A case study of cross-institutional collaboration and innovation, educause review, Why IT matters to HE. Updated 04/11/2013. Accessed from http://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/11/adopting-oer-a-case-study-of-crossinstitutional-collaboration-and-innovation on 20th September 2015.

Weller, M. 2016c. Emerging OER discipline, 7 September 2016. Accessed from http://www.slideshare.net/mweller/emerging-oer-discipline

Opening-up the HE box through cross-boundary collaborative open learning in cross-institutional academic development