Learner experiences in an open cross-institutional CPD course for teachers in HE APT Conference: Connected Learning in an Open World, University of Greenwich, 8 July 2014

1. “I felt I knew everybody”
Learner experiences
in an open cross-institutional CPD course
for teachers in HE
Chrissi Nerantzi
Academic Developer
Manchester
Metropolitan
University, UK
@chrissinerantzi
APT Conference: Connected Learning in an Open World, University of Greenwich, 8 July 2014
Nerantzi,Uhlin&Kvarnström(2013)

2. Summary
This session will provide insights into the experience of
learners who participated in PBL groups during the second
iteration (FDOL132) of the open course Flexible, Distance,
Online Learning (FDOL).
FDOL132 is a case study, part of a PhD project in open
cross-institutional academic practice for professional
development of teachers in Higher Education (HE).
Ethical approval: Edinburgh Napier University

3. Voices
• ecological university (Barnett, 2011)
• personalisation, collaboration, informalisation (Redecker
et al, 2011)
• blending of formal & informal learning (Conole, 2013)
• call to open-up, join-up (European Commission, 2013)
• the danger of monocultures (Weller, 2014)
• lifewide curriculum (Jackson, 2014)
• recognising the positive impact of human interaction for
learning

4. (about) collaborative learning in
Openland
http://www.dipity.com/chrissinerantzi/collaborative-learning-in-openland/

5. http://globaldimensionsinhe.wordpress.com/
http://fdol.wordpress.com/
2+ cases
Phenomenography
(Marton, 1981)
Main data collection
individual interviews
Complementary data
via survey instruments
(initial and final)
Collective case study
approach (Stake,
1995)
Case study 1: FDOL132
PhD research:
to develop a flexible collaborative learning
framework for open cross-institutional
Academic Development courses

6. • Open cross-disciplinary professional development course for teachers in HE
• Developed and organised by Academic Developers in the UK and Sweden
• Developed using freely available social media
• Offered from September – December 2013
• Pedagogical design: simplified Problem-Based Learning
Numbers
• Registered: 107
• FDOL132 community in G+ until now: 72
• Signed up for PBL groups: 31
• PBL groups: initially 8-9 in each x 4 > then 3 (group 2: 6, / group 3: 5 / group 4: 6)
• PBL facilitators: 4
• Participants in webinars: 10-25
• Participants who completed in groups : 31 (42% of participants learning in groups)
•Countries
• UK - 66
• Sweden – 17
• Canada – 4
• Ireland – 2
• also participants from: Hongkong, Argentina, Greenland, Switzerland,
New Zeeland, Slovenia, Belgium, New Zealand, Norway
FDOL132 info

7. Organisation of FDOL132: multi-mode participation
Nerantzi, Uhlin & Kvarnström (2013)

8. Step 1: Focus
What do we see?
How do we understand what we see?
What do we need to find out more about?
Specify learning issues/intended learning outcomes
Step 2: Investigate
How and where are we/am I going to find answers?
Who will do what and by when?
What main findings and solutions do we/I propose?
Step 3: Share
How are we going to present our findings within the group?
What do we want to share with the FDOL community?
How can we provide feedback to another group?
What reflections do I have about my learning and our group
work?
FISh
a simplified PBL model
Nerantzi & Uhlin (2012)

9. Findings: initial survey
17 completed
Countries: UK 37%, Sweden 37%, other 26%
Age range: 35-54 82%
Gender: 35% male, 65% female
Qualifications: 53% Doctoral
qualification, 35% Postgraduate
qualification, 12% undergraduate
qualification
•All employed ( 88% HE and 12%Public Sector)
•Participated in online courses before 88 %
•Participated in an open online course before
47%
Learning values
to be an open learner
To connect with others
To collaborate
To be supported by a facilitator
Application to practice
Prior experience
Working in groups 77%
Problem-Based Learning 30%
Online collaboration 38%
Social media in a professional capacity
50%

10. Findings: final survey
Final survey: 11 completed
Mode of participation
Group member 91%
Autonomous learner 9%
Study hours per week
55% 3 h, 27% 5h, 18% over 5
Main reason for not participating in a
specific aspect of the course: TIME
Learning values
•Structured course
•Variety of synchronous & asynchronous
engagement opportunities
•Flexibility
•Resources
•Communication
•Feedback from facilitators, peer and
others
•Recognition for study
•Group work > participation was often a
struggle
Personal Learning goals achieved 100%
Learning goals
•Technologies for learning
•Problem-based Learning
•Learning in groups
•Open learning
•Open course design
Facilitation (satisfaction)
Support 100%
Participation in online discussions 100%
Provision of regular feedback 64%

11. Key observations
importance for learning
initial survey final survey
group work 100% 74%
feedback 61% 97%
recognition for study 47% 94%
independent study 100% 100%
facilitator support 100% 100%

12. 45 h
transcribing
292:57 mins
audio
37,274
words
7
interviews
Case 1: FDOL132

13. “Why should cooperative or
collaborative learning be effective
for learners, who are, after all,
exchanging only imperfect
understandings of the content, if the
teacher is not present to advise or
correct them?” (Slavin, 2004, 287)

14. cooperative vs collaborative
cooperative learning collaborative learning
shared product/outcome shared product/outcome
focus on individual goals within group goals focus on group goals
the individual constructs learning learning is co-constructed, challenged, modified,
agreed, shared understanding
product consists of individual contributions product is co-constructed
roles/responsibilities pre-defined/imposed (not
always)
roles/responsibilities negotiated/agreed
process is clean and defined (not always) process is fluid, responsive and adaptive
focus more on individual achievement focus more on collective achievement

15. Group related data
Preliminary thematic analysis
PBL groups
Knowing each other
“It's about being able to read the other
person's body language, and, and things like
that. I don't know. That's what I assume it is.
I just feel that it, it was that that gave it the
personal feel [...]. I felt like I knew
everybody because I knew what they looked
like and, you know. And I think that made a
difference. Then they weren't just, […]. you
know, an icon on a computer screen, that I'd
recognised them as a human being if that
makes sense.” participant F2

16. http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2453/3599597595_4542f11554_o.jpg
Group related data
Preliminary thematic analysis
Motivation
Feeling useful
“It was good to, I think that I felt good of
contributing with my experience to what
they're doing. So when, they ask something,
and I saw that it can work in a certain way
because we have done it here in UK I could tell
them what we have done and then they can
experiment. So from that point of view it felt
good, of sharing[...]” Participant F7

17. http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/099/b/f/crazy_chick_by_billiejett-d4viqcr.jpg
Group related data
Preliminary thematic analysis
Tensions
Lack of choice
“I think there's quite a contradiction in
PBL actually, in terms of that kind of
liberal social constructivist ethos. But at
the same time, it, it can be quite rigid,
and, I'm not convinced that using one
particular, educational approach is
necessarily always the best thing.
Particularly if you're trying to bring
people together in a. OK, structuring, is,
is important , and, putting people in
groups but like the, to kind of feed them
through, a certain educational approach,
I'm not, I'm not all-, I'm not always
convinced by that. “Participant 1

18. Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/Piano-keyboard.jpg
Group related data
Preliminary thematic analysis
Value
Doing stuff
“If you're gonna prepare people
for complexity then prepare
them for complexity and put
them in complex situations.
Don't, don't kind of prescribe
everything and then say ‘well
we, prepared you for the real
world now’ -oops! So if, we can
have some degree of controlled
anarchy and some controlled
chaos which is done in a
reasonably, safe environment, I
think that much better prepares
learners in the twenty first
century than, prescribed
curricula.” Participant F1

19. Open CPD to collaborate and join-up initiatives
1. Could open courses, such as FDOL be
adapted more widely and become part of
wider CPD offers for academics and other
professionals who teach in HE?
2. Are there now opportunities for the co-
creation of curricula among institutions &
industry to create innovative, contextualised
and sustainable solutions that can be scaled
up?

20. Hard fun?
“I enjoyed the process of collaborative working,
work that was struggle, it was fun, it was
interesting to communicate with others,
especially due to the […] multi-national
structure. So I can encounter the […] different,
other […] backgrounds. […] it's, interesting for
me, in contrast to me communicating with our
other, colleagues […] So this was inspiring […] .”
Participant F4

21. FDOL131 > FDOL132> FDOL141
Course FDOL131 FDOL132 FDOL141
Course duration 11Feb – 7 May 13
12 weeks
12 Sep – 5 Dec 13
12 weeks
10 Feb - 23 March 14
6 weeks
Thematic units 6 7 6
Learners 80 107 86
Learners from the UK 42 65 38
Learners from Sweden 21 20 27
Learners from other countries 17 22 21
Groups 8>4 4>3 6>4
Learners in groups/% 64/80% 31/29% 27/32%
Facilitators 4>3 4 14>11 (in pairs/threes)
Learners per facilitator 27 36 7 or 14 (in pairs)
Learners that completed in groups 16 13 17
Completionrate based on the whole
cohort
insufficient information insufficient information insufficient information
Completionrate based on group
participation
25% 43% 63%
(Nerantzi, 2014, 55)

22. • Continue data analysis of case FDOL132 using
NVivo, define categories of description
• Continue literature review (cooperative,
collaborative learning, open learning)
• Finish paper about FDOL132 conceptions of
learning in PBL groups
• …
Next steps

23. Astin, S. (1993) What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Barnett, R (2011) The coming of the ecological university, in: Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 37, Issue 4, 2011, Taylor & Francis, pp. 439-455.
Barrows, H S (2000) Problem-based learning applied to medical education, Southern Illinois School of Medicine: Illinois
Browne Report (2010) Securing a sustainable future for higher education, Department for Employment and Learning, available at http://www.delni.gov.uk/index/publications/pubs-higher-
education/browne-report-student-fees.htm [accessed 1 November 2013]
Conole, G. (2013a) Designing for learning in an Open World, London: Springer.
Dillenbourg, P., & Schneider, D. (1995). Collaborative learning and the internet, available: http://tecfa.unige.ch/tecfa/research/CMC/colla/iccai95_1.html [accessed 12 May 2014].
European Commission (2013) High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education. Report to the European Commission on Improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher
education institutions, European Union, available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/higher-education/doc/modernisation_en.pdf [accessed 20 February 2014]
Gibbs, G. (2013) Reflections on the changing nature of educational development. International Journal for Academic Development, V. 18, Number 1, March 2013, pp. 4-14.
Gibbs, G. (2012) Implications of ‘Dimensions of quality’ in a market environment, York: The Higher Education Academy, available at
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/evidence_informed_practice/HEA_Dimensions_of_Quality_2.pdf
Gibbs, G. (2010) Dimensions of quality, York: The Higher Education Academy, available at http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/evidence_informed_practice/Dimensions_of_Quality.pdf
[accessed 8 November 2013]
Galley, R., Conole, G, Dalziel, J and Ghiglione, E. (2010). Cloudworks as a ‘pedagogical wrapper’ for LAMS sequences: supporting the sharing of ideas across professional boundaries and facilitating
collaborative design, evaluation and critical reflection. LAMS and Learning Design. A. Alexander, J. Dalziel, J. Krajka and R. Kiely. Nicosia, University of Nicosia Press. 2: 37-50.
Jackson, N. J. (2014) Lifewide Learning and Education in Universities & Colleges: Concepts and Conceptual Aids, in N.J. Jackson and J. Willis (Eds) Lifewide Learning and Education in Universities and
Colleges. Chapter A1 Available at: http://www.learninglives.co.uk/e-book.html
Johnson, D, W & Johnson, R (1999) Learning together and alone. Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th edition) Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. & Smith, K. (2007) The State of Cooperative Learning in Postsecondary and Professional Settings, in. Educational Psychology Review, 19: 15-29.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. & Stanne, M. B. (2000) Cooperative Learning Methods: A Meta-Analysis, Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota, available at
http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=Cooperative+learning+methods:+a+meta-analysis&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=uoKJU7TXMMb6PNLIgZAL&ved=0CCsQgQMwAA
[accessed 31 May 2014]
Marton, F. (1994) Phenomenography as a Research Approach, Husen, T. and Postlethwaite, N. (2nd ed) The International Encyclopedia of Education, Vol. 8, Pergamon, pp. 4424-4429, available
athttp://www.ped.gu.se/biorn/phgraph/civil/main/1res.appr.html [accessed 3 Jan 2014].
McKeachie, W., Pintrich, P., Yo-Guang, L. & Smith, D. (1986) Teaching and learning in the college classroom: A review of the research literature. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan.
Nerantzi, C. (2014) A personal journey of discoveries through a DIY open course development for professional development of teachers in Higher Education (invited paper),Journal of Pedagogic
Development, University of Bedfordshire, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp. 42-58 http://www.beds.ac.uk/jpd
Redecker, C., Leis, M., Leendertse, M., Punie, Y., Gijsbers, G., Kirschner, P. Stoyanov, S. and Hoogveld, B. (2011) The Future of Learning: Preparing for Change. European Commission Joint Research Centre
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies EUR 24960 EN Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=4719 [accessed 21 February 2014]
Ryan, A. & Tilbury, D. (2013) Flexible Pedagogies, new pedagogical ideas, York: HEA, available at ttp://www.heacademy.ac.uk/news/detail/2013/new_pedagogical_ideas [accessed 21 November 2013]
Sallivan, W. (2005) Work and integrity: The crisis and promise of professionalism in America (2nd edition), Stanford, CN: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Schwartz, D. (1999) The productive agency that drives collaborative learning. In: Dillenourg, P. (ed.) Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches, New York: Elsevier Science/Permagon.
Stake, R. E. (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
The UK Quality Code for Higher Eduction (2012) Glouchester: Quality Assurance Agency, available at http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Pages/quality-code-brief-guide.aspx
[accessed 5 December 2013]
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Weller, M. (2014) The Battle for Open Webinar, The Ed Techie, 21 March 2014, available at http://nogoodreason.typepad.co.uk/ [accessed 22 July 2014]
Wiley (2006) a shift towards ‘openness’ in academic practice as not only a positive trend, but a necessary one in order to ensure transparency, collaboration and continued innovation
Wiley, D. (2006) Open Source, Openness, and Higher Education, innovate, Oct/Nov, Volumne 3, issue 1, available at
http://www.innovateonline.info/pdf/vol3_issue1/Open_Source,_Openness,_and_Higher_Education.pdf [accessed 20 February 2014]
Wiley, D. and Hilton, J. (2009) Openness, Dynamic Specialization, and the Disaggregated Future of Higher Education, in: International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Volume 10,
Number 5, 2009, pp. 1-16., available at http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/768 [accessed 20 February 2014]
References

24. cross-institutional
#BYOD4L
14 – 18 July
Is your institution
joining us?
Manchester Metropolitan University
Sheffield Hallam University
University of Sussex
University of Ulster
London Metropolitan University

25. “I felt I knew everybody”
Learner experiences
in an open cross-institutional CPD course
for teachers in HE
Chrissi Nerantzi
Academic Developer
Manchester
Metropolitan
University, UK
@chrissinerantzi
APT Conference: Connected Learning in an Open World, University of Greenwich, 8 July 2014
Nerantzi,Uhlin&Kvarnström(2013)