ALT-C 2009 Technology enhanced feed-forward

Technology enhanced feed-forward
1 research paper(s)
207 Technology enhanced feed-forward for learning
Sue Rodway-Dyer, Matthew Newcombe, Liz Dunne
(same room as the last session so no frantic running around)
Research paper. Not technology oriented, but teaching and learning.
Video of teacher circulating in a lab talking to students, checking their work, answering questions, asking them questions, praising, and explaining.
Feedback is a misnower, more interested in ‘feedforward’. Needs to be usable for staff and students. Example video is now used as part of training for new staff as well as for ‘feedforward’ to students.
Students don’t pay attention to extensive verbal feedback in labs, and don’t value it as such. Watching video after the fact is very helpful.
Stimulated recall: when you play the audio/video back to lecturer afterwards, then interview them afterwards about what they think the quality of their feedback was.
39% of students felt they got no feedback ever. They weren’t able to recognise the feedback that took part in the lab that the video caught actually happening.
capturing live video feedback time consuming (post processing etc)
audio feedback expected to be better than written – with tone of voice brining the feedback to life over written text, is it?

  • 80% of students wanted audio and written feedback
  • 20% thought written feedback was illegible
  • 10% thought feedback written and audio would have no impact on future performance
  • 76% wanted face-to-face feedback
  • advantage of audio feedback is greater depth and clarity
  • negative experience: did not like tone of voice, especially with critical comments
  • some could not listen to the audio feedback all the way through

Stimulated Recall:

  • balance between criticism and praise might need to be altered to be more positive to make audio feedback easier to hear for students
  • inappropriate language and terminology easy to slip into audio feedback than written
  • may come acorss more negatively than intended
  • pace of questions to class too fast
  • lab environment made learning difficult – noise levels

Feedback on stimulated recall: gives time for informed reflection which isn’t part of routine performance
Thought processes of audio feedback very different to written, the teachers need to learn the new skill. Almost like counselling – needing to be positive as solely-negative audio feedback seems to be emotionally/intellectually damaging.

ALT-C 2009 Infrastructure Innovation

3 short paper(s)
237 Dream on: Slow progress in developing digital media infrastructures
Susannah Diamond, Andrew Middleton
Where are we?
We know we want to be learnered centric, but the physical environment determines soething else. The technology around us has changes significant.y, it is now affordable, and simple to use. We don’t need production teams, central provision. Awareness of this new age. But where is the ‘glue’ or infroastructure that ties the pedagogy with the technology?
‘We believe the institutional infrastructure should allow staff and st to easily…u
User-generated digital media learning landscape. A user is anyone who ‘needs to say something’. Screencasts, podcasts, audio notes.
Motivation through student publishing. Real user generated channels.
Reality, example: getting media onto uni streaming server, via X, Y, and Z, getting the run-around being directed to different people.
What infrastructure for digital media production?

  • student support
  • ict literacy
  • educational development
  • access to kit
  • robust networks
  • storage
  • institutional drivers
  • academic support
  • production team
  • drop-in help
  • co-ordination

Do all these different people have the same perception of digital media? All alligned to the same plan?
Small national study – 10 UK universities, what they to to enable digital media.
Summary:

  • lack of cohesion and strategic investment
  • legacy systems
  • piecemeal availability of equipment
  • ad hoc support
  • fragmentation and gatekeepers
  • user-generated content is considered exceptional, not main-stream
  • lack of infrastructural co-ordination

spectrum of institutional responsibility and individual responsibility??
we have

  • the ideas
  • the technology
  • a growing awareness amongst staff/students.
  • we are developing critial digital fluency

but we don’t have the glue to transform to mainstream
—–
126 Socialising learners through on-line induction: Reflections on the transition to higher education
Richard Walker, Wayne Britcliffe

  • engaging a new generation of students with preferences for interactive & exploratory learning
  • famliarity with popular social technologiies
    • facilitating students to acquire good scholarship/information literacy skills
    • discipline and course level best practices
  • techniques to cope with information overload
  • socialising students into institutional discipline and peer group communities

Goals:

  • provide incoming students with information about the uni/dept
  • provide academic support materials
  • facilitate interation with peers and between new students and the department
  • support thhe online registration pprocess

Implementation:

  • induction site set up over summer
  • runs september to end of autumn term
  • publicised through welcome pack
  • accessible only to registered students
  • vle access optional

Content:

  • Online tasks prior to arrival on campus
  • reading lists, timetables, catch-up material (catchup on a level materials form maths, chemistry, biology)
  • links to society (dept) page and student union
  • video clips

Evaluation:

  • log-in peaked mid-september
  • limited access once term began
  • catch-up materials most popular
  • facebook preferred for social chat over the vle blog
  • questions focused on general information rather than subject/dept specific

Refinements:

  • Improve student voice within the module
  • students weren’t as aware of support services as they could have been – needed to be made clearer
  • more info on tutorials and practicals wanted
  • get 2nd/3rd yr students to post helpful info for 1st yrs

—–
234 Appropriate and Practical Technologies for Students, Teachers, Administrators and Researchers
Sarah Sherman, Caroline Bell
Lovely photo of bloomsbury ( ahh nostalgia from having studied/worked there)
survey:

  • 90% comfortable using desktop tools
  • only 6/7% comfortable with online editing tools
  • 1 person hadn’t heard of e-mail

Created some Bloomsbury Personas, a generic student, generic teacher, generic administrator.
Stick-figure picture. APT model.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YJ9YDNk7YgU/SeYEmoWAjqI/AAAAAAAAAAM/N7vA743Je4k/s1600-h/Cartoon2.jpg
http://twitpic.com/gyf51
google docs bridging a gap
STAIRS – getting people to take incremental steps
using google docs for collaborative editing with immediate access of data to others then-and-there in class, eeepcs used to ‘network’ an otherwise computer-less room/lab.
plans: applying APT techniques in africa