Creating risk-taking cultures in Post Compulsory Education ITE - staff and student stories

1. Creating risk-taking cultures in Post Compulsory Education ITE - staff and student stories Julie Hughes The University of Wolverhampton Head of Department, Post-Compulsory Education HEA National Teaching Fellow 2005 & ESCalateAcademic Consultant j.hughes2@wlv.ac.uk ESCalate event October 17th 2011

2. Starting with the students. The PGCE blog lifeboat – HMS Hardwork. Using the weblog as an online journal became a big part of our growthas reflective writers. Using the blog tool within the e-portfolio we could share thoughts, feelings, fears, anxieties and excitement and because it was a shared space we could see the valuein the perceptions, thoughts and beliefs of othersin the group. It was a space where we could feel safe from ridicule and criticism. We would share war stories from the frontlines of teaching and by discussing and commenting on other’s journeys as teachers we were becomingreflective writers and practitioners without even knowing it! Karim-Akhtaret al. PGCE group 2005/6

3. Rollercoaster – the pedagogical being is fragile...it is brittle, liable to shatter suddenly’ (Barnett, 2007 p.29) – the student and ‘teacher’ being.

4. Listening to staff narratives I think what I’ve noticed most is that they sort of carry on without us moreif you know what I mean – whereas traditional teaching and learning is very much teacher at the centre, all information coming out through me but what often is seen to happen when using PebblePad is that they can talk to each other, they answer each other’s questions, they take threads of each other’s arguments – really oblivious to the fact that I might be there or might not be there. And this for Teacher Education is fantastic because what we see is reflection– it’s reflection in practice, reflection on action in action and it’s going on all the time – it’s crucial. Maggie, Teacher for 23 years, Teacher Educator for 8 years PebblePad user since September 2008

5. Intro to me PebblePad/e-portfolio mentor – supporting individuals and teams at local, regional and national levels - across disciplines. PebblePadteacher and teacher educator – FD, PGCE and M level with teaching mentors - 2004 to now. Started with 15 students (2004) now working across teams, partners, stakeholders and professional bodies. 2010 /11 - 1400 students and 50+staff this year. E-portfolio researcher – using e-portfolio to mentor and data-gather- using e-portfolio as a writing frame with both students and colleagues. INCEPR III – 10 US and Canadian HEIs and 2 UK HEIs PebblePadlearner – used e-p for appraisal and CPD –attained QTLS in 2009 with an e-portfolio application. E-portfolio consultant JISC & ESCalate E-portfolio embedding. Curriculum development – revalidation and pedagogy shift.

6. The model/philosophy Blogging from pre-induction Critical incident sharing Identity work - becoming Community of inquiry/collaboration Multimedia portfolios exported after DTLLS (PGCE/Prof Grad Cert and Certificate in Education) to form the basis of QTLS application

7. I was rather late to teaching and a little out of touch with new technology. PebblePad to me was not about data handling and manipulation; instead it was to become a stage, a window and a security blanket. It gave me a voice, an opportunity to ask questions, share ideas and express my thoughts, feelings and creativity. To say the things I wouldn’t normally say out loud. March saw me once more attending a residential field trip, only this time was different. I had become a story teller and wanted to tell my story to whoever would listen. I began to tell the daily story of the Aran fieldtrip in a way that allowed me to express my feelings, my observations and my excitement. I wanted to express them all and PebblePad allowed me to do just that. Jason PGCE student (2011)

8. Setting the scene – technology in HE Teachers draw on past experience rather than actual empirical evidence and research literature. Despite the benefits and need for more scholarly activities, there is little evidence that this actually occurs. Arguably there is a need to shift to more scholarly approaches if the potential of technologies is to be realised. The vision is one in which educators are co‐innovatorsin understanding the key possibilities in the relationship between technology and pedagogy, leading towards a co‐evolved professional knowledge base that stems from reflective practices that are mediated and shared; a practice that feeds into the development of curricular designs that can actualise educational visions. (Conole & Alevizou2010, p.43)

9. Technology in ITE in the LLS In a survey on the scale and breadth of e-learning in further education in England, undertaken by the National Foundation for Educational Research, Golden, McCrone, Walker and Rudd (2006) found the majority of lecturers used e-learning in their teaching practice. However this was most commonly to research, access and create teaching materials and prepare lesson plans. Technology was used less frequently to communicate with learners, track learners’ progress and provide one-to-one attention. (Attwell & Hughes 2010, p.26) the evidence collected from learners suggested that only a very few teachers are using technology in the most effective way to ‘lift our sights’ (IfL 2010 (d))

10. Setting the scene – the ups and downs There is evidence that e-portfolio implementation can be like a game of snakes and ladders where initial rapid progress can suffer major setbacks due to a poor understanding of the nature of e-portfolios. Joyes, Gray and Hartnell-Young, 2010. For me PebblePad-based teaching and learning is like ….

11. Pedagogicbungee jumping Learning (and teaching – my addition) in higher education calls for a courage on the part of the learner/teacher and a will to leap into a kind of void. There is bound to be uncertainty. A pedagogy of air opens up spaces and calls for a will to learn on the part of the student/teacher; to learn even amid uncertainty. In the process, it is just possible that the student/teacher may come into a new mode of being (Barnett 2007, p.1).

12. Teachers and the taught teach each other. Their roles are interwoven, such that their boundaries become indistinct to some extent (Barnett 2007, p.132). We are witnessing ‘a new model of education’ rather than a new model of learning’ as ‘our understanding of e-learning matures, so our appreciation of the importance of theory deepens…we see how learning can be socially situated in a way never previously possible’. (Mayes and de Freitas 2007, p.13) Pedagogical bungee jumping may be catching (Barnett 2007, p.133).

13. Iterative learning – what does it feel like to be composing a professional self? It’s like emptying a big jigsaw and building it slowly in pieces. Finding pieces of work that fit together and building from there and then maybe trying a different area afterwards. There's no logical, symmetrical or linear route but emphasis upon drawing out the best points and building upon them. Claire, PGCE student A web we weave, spiralling outwards with attachments becoming part of the fabric. Elaine, PGCE student

14. Critical reflexivity Shift happens - critical readers/listeners/audience? As e-portfolio teacher/assessor we need to, ‘change our ways of engaging with text. In a sense we become more than mere graders of the work; we become actual users of a work, a real-life audience interacting with the document’ (Blair & Takayoshi 1997, pp. 364-5).

15. Culture shift? New digital technologies and multimedia are transforming how we teach and learn. They are transforming our classrooms from spaces of delivery to spaces of active inquiry and authorship. New digital media are empowering students to become researchers, oral historians, and cultural theorists in their own right. Whether constructing their own life stories or interpreting the life stories of others, the digital format transforms students’ capacity to synthesize, interpret, theorize, and create new cultural and historical knowledge. In this way, digital formats potentially democratise learning and produce critical subjects and authors (Weis etal. 2002, p.153).

16. In teaching and learning currently, we tend to use technology to support traditional modes of teaching...We scarcely have the infrastructure, the training, the habits, or the access to new technology to be optimising its use just yet. (Laurillard 2007) Are you using technology for telling (information push) or for talking?

17. E-learning theory – nascent discipline in the UK We must acknowledge that pedagogy needs to be ‘re-done’ at the same time as it needs to be ‘re-thought.’ (Beetham and Sharpe, 2007) We need ‘a dialogue between theory and practice, as well as between learning and teaching’ (Beetham & Sharpe 2007, p.3)

18. E-learning is often talked about as a ‘trojan mouse’, which teachers let into their practice without realizing that it will require them to rethink not just how they use the particular hardware or software, but all of what they do. (Sharpe and Oliver 2007) Give pedagogy back to the teachers. (Laurillard 2007)

19. Pedagogy shift - (e)-portfolio ways of being When teachers began developing portfolios over a decade ago, we knew what we were about – with process writingand collaborative pedagogiesand, not least, portfolios – was pretty ambitious; it was, in fact, nothing short of changing the face of American education. (Yancey & Weiser 1997, p.1) Baume (1999, 2003 p.4) conceptualised the developmental portfolio as, “a compost heap…something refined over time, enriched by addition, reduction and turning over.“ Messy, non-linear – getting your hands dirty!

20. Unpredictable rhizomatic growth Rhizome as model/map for unpredictability Lateral, multi-forked root system Connectivity Not Western tree-like (ladder) It’s ok (and sometimes very necessary) to grow and stretch below the surface to establish good roots – your roots. I think what I’ve noticed most is that they sort of carry on without us more if you know what I mean(Maggie)

21. Web 2.0 ways of teaching and learning? (from the 1990s to the mid-2000s) websites tended to be like separate gardens...Web 2.0 describes a particular kind of ethos and approach....like a collective allotment. Instead of individuals tending their own gardens, they come together to work collaboratively in a shared space... Web 2.0 invites users in to play (Gauntlett 2011, p.5-7).

24. Just because a technology was designed for one purpose, it does not mean it won’t be used for another. Once tools get ‘out into the wild’ they are appropriated in multiple and complex ways. Bicycles came to be appropriated in the struggle for women’s emancipation... record players changed from being instruments for dictation for tools for capturing and sharing musical cultures. Technologies are shaped and reshaped by beta testers, by early adopters ... by their users (addition mine). (Facer 2011, pp.6-7).

25. Pedagogic shift and creating a collective Scaling up to the majority will require different approaches, more strategic coordination and staff development and support. To date, on the whole, only a minority of enthusiastic teachers and those with a research interest in the learning sciences, educational technology or new media, have undertaken experimentation with new innovations in pedagogy and exploration of the use of new technologies. Embracing Web 2.0 approaches will require radically different strategies in terms of designing, supporting and assessing learning. Adoption of a more scholarly and reflective approach to teaching practice is clearly a logical strategy to help achieve this shift. (Conole & Alevizou2010, p.21)

26. References Attwell, G. & Hughes, J. (2010) Pedagogic Approaches to Using Technology for Learning. Literature Review . Online: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110414152025/http://www.lluk.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Pedagogical-appraches-for-using-technology-literature-review-january-11-FINAL.pdf. [accessed September 2010]. Barnett, R. (2007) A Will To Learn. Being a Student in an Age of Uncertainty. Berkshire: Open University Press. Baume, D. (1999) H850 Portfolio Guide. Milton Keynes: The Open University. Baume, D. (2003) Supporting Portfolio Development. LTSN Generic Centre. Continuing Professional Development Series no 3. Beetham, H. & Sharpe, R. (2007) (Eds.) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age. Designing and delivering e-learning. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Blair, K.L. & Takayoshi, P. (1997) Reflecting on Reading and Evaluating Electronic Portfolios in Yancey, K.B. and Weiser, I. (1997) (eds.) Situating Portfolios. Four Perspectives. Utah: Utah State University Press. pp. 357-369. Conole, G. & Alevizou, P. (2010) A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. Available: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/EvidenceNet/Conole_Alevizou_2010.pdf. Facer, K. (2011) Learning Futures: Education, Technology and Social Change. London: Routledge Garrison, D.R., and Anderson, T. (2003) E-Learning in the 21st Century: a framework for research and practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Gauntlett, D. (2011) Making is Connecting. Cambridge: Polity Press See also Theory.org

27. References Institute for Learning (IfL), 2010. (d) Brilliant teaching and training in FE and skills: A guide to effective CPD for teachers, trainers and leaders. London: IfL. Joyes, G.,Gray, L. and Hartnell-Young, E. (2010) Effective practice with e-portfolios: How can the UK experience inform implementation? AJET 26(1), pp.15-27. Laurillard, D. (2007) Comment on the text 48b. Conole, G. and Oliver, M. (eds.) (2007) Contemporary Perspectives in E-Learning Research. Themes, Methods and Impact on Practice, London: Routledge. p.48. Mayes, T, & de Freitas, S. (2007) Learning and elearning.The role of theory. In Beetham, H. & Sharpe, R. (2007) (eds.) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age. Designing and delivering elearning. London: Routledge. Sharpe, R. & Oliver, M. (2007) Designing courses for e-learning in Conole, G. & Oliver, M. (2007) Contemporary Perspectives in E- learning Reseach. Themes, methods and impact on practice. (eds.) London: Routledge pp.41-51. Weis, T.M. et al. (2002) Digital technologies and pedagogies. Social Justice, 29(4), pp.153-69. Yancey, K.B. & Weiser, I. (1997) (eds.) Situating Portfolios. Four Perspectives. Utah: Utah State University Press.