The role of an embedded learning development centre in enhancing the curriculum

1. The role of an embedded learning development centre in enhancing the curriculum Dr Stephanie Mckendry, Dr Jane McKay, Deborah O’Neill

2. The workshop • Overview of the Learning Development Centre (LDC) • Case studies • Our activities

3. Learning development as an integral element of teaching practice • Many educators, particularly in HE, have assumed their students will arrive with the necessary academic skills already in place. • It is also common to separate writing/study skills from mainstream course content and diagnose certain students as problematic if they fail to pass assessments. However: • Research suggests this is inappropriate and ineffective. • The increasingly diverse student body (in HE, FE…) means it is no longer possible to assume the level and prior experience of learning of incoming students (Haggis, 2006). • It is unlikely there ever was a ‘golden age’ of a relatively homogenous student body entering with well developed study skills (Gourlay, 2009). • Learning to learn is necessary in each new context (Ramsden, 1992). • Independent/autonomous learning needs to be explicitly developed amongst students if it is desired by educators (Broad, 2006; Hewitt-Taylor, 2002).

4. Learning to learn Our pedagogical philosophy: • It may be best to explicitly recognise and discuss the role of emotions in learning and the feelings/insecurities of new learners. Learning is an inherently emotional process (Christie et al., 2008; Beard, 2007). • An academic literacies approach neither expects an unproblematic acculturalisation nor pathologises those who may initially struggle (Gourlay, 2009; Lea, 2004). • Academic skills are sometimes discipline-specific rather than generic and thus are context dependent. • Academic support is best built into any course and taught alongside the subject content. Embedded, processual complexities of thinking, understanding, and acting in specific disciplinary contexts need to be explored as an integral part of academic content teaching within the disciplines themselves. Haggis, 2006

5. Why embed learning development? • Students increasingly entering study through ‘non-traditional’ routes (Leathwood and O’Connell 2003), with a diversity of qualifications, personal circumstances and expectations. Particularly true of GCU. • Role of clear and realistic expectations is vital in ensuring students engage with programme and integrate into academic life (Lowe and Cook 2003, Fitzgibbon and Prior 2006, Ramsden 2008). • Widening participation activities have been traditionally outreach based (college liaison, pre-entry support, etc). Focus has more recently shifted to inward-facing developments, such as embedded academic support (Bishop 2009).

6. Why embed learning development? Different models and modes of delivery exist, and differ from institution to institution Central service Learning development centres working across institutions Devolved provision School/faculty/ department based staff v Bolt-on Dedicated academic development activities which take place outwith an academic programme (Bennet et al, 2001). Built-in Learning development planned as part of the curriculum (Bennet et al, 2001). v Literature increasingly suggests that the latter of these two approaches is preferable (Mitchell ,2000; Wingate, 2006; Cassidy & Eachus, 2000), as integration of all learning (generic as well as subject-specific) is highly desirable.

7. Why embed learning development? Some of the strengths of delivering embedded support instead of additional are summarised below: • Built-in/embedded • Holistic • Linked to curriculum • Subject-specific • Relevant • Longitudinal • Collaborative • Inclusive • Bolt-on/additional • Remedial • Reactive • Stand-alone • Short-term • Opt-in • Limited integration

8. Why devolve learning development? • It is entirely possible for central provision to be embedded, enhancement-based, tailored and longitudinal. Equally, devolved models can be remedial, reactive and generic. • But, we believe the opportunity to nurture the advantages of embedding and avoid the drawbacks of ‘bolt-on’ are greatest with a School-based approach. • Proximity to staff, students and teaching areas • Closer relationships with staff • More detailed knowledge of curriculum and cohorts

9. Glasgow Caledonian University • Formed in 1993 with merger of Glasgow Polytechnic and Queen’s College, Glasgow. • 5th largest in Scotland in terms of student recruitment. • Student population of over 17,000. • 3 Schools. • Student Demographics (f/t, u/grad entrants in 2010/2011): • 62% female (82% within School of Health and Life Sciences) • 35% 21 or over (45% within School of Health and Life Sciences) • 37% live in areas classified in bottom 2 quintiles of the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD)

10. First point of student contact • Booking • Tracking • Evaluating • First point of student contact • Booking • Tracking • Evaluating • Psychology • Biological Sciences • Psychology • Biological Sciences • ICT Skills Learning and Teaching • Website and VLE • ICT Skills Learning and Teaching • Website and VLE • Allied Health Professions • Social Work • Allied Health Professions • Social Work • Psychology • Vision Sciences • Psychology • Vision Sciences • English for Academic Purposes • English for Academic Purposes • Nursing • Midwifery • Nursing • Midwifery The LDC and the Institution LDC Director LDC Director Academic Development Tutors Academic Development Tutors ICT Skills Tutor ICT Skills Tutor Admin Admin ADT lead in each of the following: International students, Articulating students, Disabled students, Pre-entry and transition support, Research and scholarly activities ADT lead in each of the following: International students, Articulating students, Disabled students, Pre-entry and transition support, Research and scholarly activities Learning Development Centre Learning Development Centre

11. The LDC in the School of Health & Life Sciences LDC Director Admin Academic Development Tutors (ADTs) ICT Skills Tutor • First point of student contact • Booking • Tracking • Evaluating • English for Academic Purposes • Allied Health Professions • Social Work • Psychology • Vision Sciences • ICT Skills Learning and Teaching • Website and VLE • Psychology • Biological Sciences • Nursing • Midwifery • ADT lead in each of the following: International students, articulating students, disabled students, pre-entry and transition support, research and scholarly activities • ADTs have roles on programme, curriculum development, learning & teaching boards/committees

12. Activity: case studies Consider the following case studies • How can the LDC best support this student? • What kinds of activities would help this student adapt to the university environment and succeed through the years of their course? • How can the LDC influence the curriculum in order to ensure support for this student?

13. What we do • Multiple strategies are employed to ensure that different learning needs are met. These include: • Embedded, in-module sessions • School wide workshops • One-to-one support • Pre-entry support • A range of collaborative research projects are undertaken to inform provision

14. Embedded activities • Designed in collaboration with module leaders • Cohort-specific needs are identified and tailored sessions developed • Success of these sessions depends on: • Extent to which module staff and ADT work together • Timing of delivery

15. School-wide workshops • Open to all students in School, although targeted at levels 1 and 2 • Separate programme for post-graduates • Cover generic topics but contextualised to heath and life sciences programmes • Demand is often high and attendance good

16. One-to-one appointments • Two-hour appointment slots are offered Mon-Thurs (each appointment max 45mins) • Students are encouraged to attend workshops before seeking individualised support • Support is provided in a developmental and transferrable way

17. Examples of projects and initiatives • Pre-entry programmes • Scheme to support academic/social integration among international students • Blog to support nursing students on placement • Research into how students take notes • Development of online transition support for FE students

18. Whole group discussion Please spend 5 minutes in your small groups reflecting on our activities and how they relate to the case studies. • Do you agree with our approach? • Does this change any of your earlier discussions/decisions? Please be prepared to report back to the whole group.

19. Final thoughts: • How effective is LDC-based learning development support in developing the curriculum and supporting students and can the model be applied to delegates’ own circumstances? • What influence can LDC staff have on curriculum design and how can they best deliver embedded, assessment specific teaching and learning where input is minimal? • How can staff and student expectations be managed with the change to this new model?

20. Contact details Dr Jane McKay Jane.mckay@gcu.ac.uk, 0141 331 8067 Dr Stephanie McKendry Stephanie.mckendry@gcu.ac.uk, 0141 331 3450 Deborah O’Neill Deborah.oneill@gcu.ac.uk, 0141 331 8611 The School of Health Learning Development Centre HLS_LDC@gcu.ac.uk 0141 331 3456

21. References • Fitzgibbon K, & Prior, J. (2006) ‘Students’ Early Experiences and University Interventions – a Timeline to Aid Undergraduate Student Retention’, Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning, Vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 17-27 • Gourlay, L. (2009) ‘Threshold Practices: becoming a student through academic literacies’, London Review of Education, Vol. 7, no. 2, PP. 181-192. • Beard, C., Clegg, S. & Smith, K. (2007) ‘Acknowledging the affective in higher education’, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 235-252. • Bishop, C., Bowmaker, C. and Finnigan, T. (2009) ‘Mrs Mop, Mechanic and /or Miracle Worker : Metaphors of Study Support’, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education • Broad, J. (2006) ‘Interpretations of independent learning in further education’, Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 119-143. • Cassidy, S. and Eachus, P. (2000)’ Learning Style, Academic Belief Systems,Self-report Student Proficiency and Academic Achievement in Higher Education’, Educational Psychology, Vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 307-322 • Christie, H., Tett, L. Cree, V., Hounsell, J. & McCune, V. (2008) ‘‘A real rollercoaster of confidence and emotions’: learning to be a university student’, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 567-581. • Haggis, T. (2006) ‘Pedagogies for diversity: retaining critical challenge amidst fears of ‘dumbing down’’, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 521-535. • Hewitt-Taylor, J. (2002) ‘Teachers’ and students’ views on self-directed learning’, Nursing Standard, Vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 33-38.

22. References • Lea, M. (2004) ‘Academic literacies: a pedagogy for course design’, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 739-756. • Leathwood, C. and O’Connell, P. (2003) ‘It’s a struggle’ the construction of the ‘new student’ in higher education, Journal of Educational Policy, Vol. 18, no 6, pp. 597-615 • Lowe, H. & Cook, A. (2003) ‘Mind the Gap: are students prepared for higher education?’, Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 53-76 • Mitchell, S. (2000) ‘Making dances, making essays : academic writing in the study of dance’, in Lea, M and Stierer, B (Eds) Student writing in higher education: new contexts, Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press • Ramsden, P. (1992) Learning to teach in higher education, London: Routledge • Wingate, U. (2006) 'Doing away with 'study skills'', Teaching in Higher Education, Vol.11, no. 4, pp. 457— 469