An interactive, evolving, case- study approach to e-learning A Learning & Sharing Event on e- learning, facilitated by CHAIN Weetwood Hall, Leeds, 22 – 23 March 2005
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher2 What we did Determined “wants” & “needs” Asked students & staff what they wanted Determined solutions Implemented
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher3 The “needs” 76 year 3 pre-registration nursing students 21 week module (must “attend” 538 theory hours) 60 hours face-to-face (approx 3 hours/week - 1 contact day) for delivery 5 teachers (initially) Limited/no experience of online learning Low room availability
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher4 The “wants” Facilitation v face-to-face methods Always-on availability Constructivist (understanding through interaction) Enjoyable (students & teachers) Self-directed & problem-solving
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher5 Some solutions Increase lecture hours – rejected Paper-based directed learning (workbooks etc) – rejected by students Problem based learning (PBL) Use a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) Combine PBL and VLE
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher6 What we did next Determined opportunities for participation “Learned” PBL & Blackboard (BB) Designed teaching & learning system Online materials (www) & supporting structure (BB) “Trained” students to use PBL and BB Implemented (tried & evaluated it)
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher7 Opportunities for participation Discussion group etiquette PBL groups Online feedback form Virtual classroom Discussion groups & PBL logs “Roving” online facilitators Follow-up face-to-face feedback
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher8 VLE-supported PBL
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher9 Student comments on paper- based guided study “a lot of us didn't bother with guided studies before” “many of us have still got incomplete a&p guided studies from 1st year”
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher10 Designing for participation Questions Best-guesses Risk-taking Open & shared process - student & staff partnership Flexibility Action, feedback, modification, evaluation
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher11 Online “chat” about online “chat” “it makes a big change from boring lectures! this is also a better way of feeding back for the people in the group who feel intimidated by speaking in front everyone” “I also agree that this is a good way of feeding back for those who do not often comment in classroom lectures due to fear of embarrassment”
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher12 Online “chat” comments on PBL logs “i prefer the old way, but this makes you actually do the task” “it did make me do it though unlike previous 'guided study' which are still unanswered” “its a good way of keeping students busy on their study days”
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher13 Online comments on team working for PBL “Very poor or non-existent input from too many group members” “I feel our team worked well together. We decided how we were going to do this and all kept to what we had decided we even planned for future sessions i.e.: how we would rotate who collates so we all got some experience” “MUCH improved team participation -at last! Also much better quality of contributions”
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher14 “Midpoint” evaluation 1
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher15 “Midpoint” evaluation 2
March 2005Pete Fothergill & Jane Fisher16 Perhaps the final word? “never thought I’d say this but this blackboard thingy is quite fun!”