New HE Academy report

"Dimensions of Quality
Publication Date: 30-09-2010
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/evidence_informed_practice/Dimensions_of_Quality.pdf
Description
This report has been written to contribute to the current debates about educational quality in undergraduate education in the UK, and about the need to justify increases in resources on the basis of indicators of educational quality. This report will identify a range of dimensions of quality and examine the extent to which each could be considered a valid indicator, with reference to the available research evidence. It attempts to identify which kinds of data we should take seriously and which we should be cautious of placing weight on. Some of these dimensions we might be wise to pay attention to currently lack a solid evidence base, especially in relation to research carried out in the UK context, and so the report also identifies priorities for research and for data collection and analysis."

ALT-C 2010 Keynote Donald Clark

This was quite a controversial presentation at the ALT conference 2010 - lots of people were upset by the style - but an interesting discussion about whether we should continue to give lectures. I don't generally agree but it is a question worth asking - particularly in relation to large lectures.

BBC News - University gives students text books on iPhones

BBC News - University gives students text books on iPhones

Designing Group Projects

Student group work - often a problem

 

 

Sent to you by David Andrew via Google Reader:

 

 

Designing Group Projects

via academhack by dave on 9/17/10

My most recent pedagogical obsession is not, as you might think, social media fasts, but rather working out ways to effectively create group projects. Honestly I consider this one of my serious shortcomings as a professor. I really as of yet have not created a group project with which both the students and I were happy with the results. Something always goes wrong. This is not to say that there haven't been good ones (and some total misfires) but I have yet to really figure out the best way to do it. Part of my problem comes from not having this modeled for me in graduate school (we in the humanities are more accustomed to working solo) coupled with my own few past experiences as a student, in which I greatly dislike working in groups. But beyond that I think it is a substantial problem with both the way institutions are designed and with student expectations. It is hard to evaluate students individually (what the institution requires) yet try to hold the whole group accountable. And I struggle with this, because I want to encourage and evaluate students for who they are, but on the other hand I see as part of my job to teach students how to work in groups. I think most of the kinds of work environments they are likely to end up in will require working in groups, and internet projects do to their complexity require groups.

So here is what I am trying this semester for my EMAC 4325, Privacy, Surveillance, and Control on the Internet . . .

The focus of the class is on semester long research projects where each group has a public website/blog covering one aspect of the class. So for the whole semester groups have to work together to produce their project. The project is designed to require a range of skills, design, writing, coding, image manipulation, video and audio editing etc.

I came up with two basic rules for this project:

1. Everybody in the group gets the same project grade (which is 50% of the final grade).
2. If you are unhappy with a member of your group, i.e. feel that they are not sufficiently contributing, you can fire them from your team.

I put together these two rules from different projects I saw others do, although neither project put them together. On the first day of class I explained these rules and then handed them out the long detailed sheet which contained all the information on the project. Part of the project, indeed the first thing they had to do was come with community rules which described how the group was going to function, what initial responsibilites would be, and finally what the means by which they could dismiss a member of the group would be. In other words they had to write a group constitution of sorts complete with reasons and methods by which they would dismiss someone. (I did explain that in every case a meeting with me would be necessary, but I did this mainly as a way to make sure the group rules were followed, if a group decides to remove someone then I plan to support them.)

If someone is removed from a group then they become a group of one, responsible for their own project (which frankly is quite a bit of work).

Do I think this will solve all of the group assignment problems? No. But I think this probably represents more realistically how groups function outside of academia, they succeed or fail as a group, it doesn't really matter if you work really hard, harder than anyone else around, you still need the group (ask Lebron James about this). By focusing on the group I won't get caught trying to figure out team dynamics and what went wrong, assigning blame (like restaurant wars on Top Chef), instead everyone succeeds, or everyone fails. Simple . . . hopefully.

The next thing I did was get them divided into groups.

This was actually the most difficult part of the class, so far. I wanted students to be able to have a say in what group they joined, so that they were working on a topic that interested them, but I also wanted to avoid people just pairing up with people whom they have worked before and our friends. I also wanted to make sure that each group got a diversity of talent. I contemplated having them pick teams (schoolyard style) but thought that would end up being a bit ridiculous and isolating to the people who were not picked. Instead I had each student write on a one side of a notecard their name, on the other side they wrote the three topics that interested them the most, and then the three skills they would bring to the project, creating anonymous mini-resumes. I then selected one person for each group, and subsequently that person got to pick from the notecards one person for their team. On the whole this worked out, everyone got in a group that interested them, and the talent in every group is pretty diverse, and groups were picked based on talent not prior relationships or popularity.

Overall, three weeks into the semester, I am happy with how the groups are progressing. I have started to give them weekly feedback, always directed at the group rather than individuals. You can see the complete details of the project at the class website, along with links to all the ongoing projects.

I'll write about this again at the end of the semester . . .

 

 

 

Things you can do from here:

• Subscribe to academhack using Google Reader
• Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites

 

 

Fwd: Inclusion Research Syntheses - new resources added

Inclusion Research Syntheses

As part of its EvidenceNet service, the Higher Education Academy has commissioned a series of research syntheses looking at the experience of diverse groups of students in higher education and strategies to promote their success.

All titles seek to: identify the key research extent on their topic; present a summary of each key report; synthesise the findings of these key reports, together with those of the wider literature on the topic in question; and explore the implications of the research for stakeholders.

By pulling together existing literature in this way, it is hoped not only to disseminate it to a wider audience but also to make it more accessible to a wide range of potential users.

Titles published in 2008 include:

·     Student retention and success: a synthesis of research, Dr Robert Jones (April 2008)

·     Mature learners: a synthesis of research, Judith Smith (2008)

·     Vocational learners: a synthesis of research, Dr Robert Jones (2008)

·     New to widening participation? An overview of research, Dr Robert Jones (2008)

Titles published in 2010 include:

·     Inclusive learning and teaching in higher education: a synthesis of research, Professor Christine Hockings (April 2010)

·     Disability equality in higher education: a synthesis of research, Dr Mark Rickinson (April 2010)

·     Social class and higher education: a synthesis of research, Jacqueline Stevenson (Leeds Metropolitan University) and Mel Lang (York St John University) (April 2010)

 

Fwd: UK Centre for Bioscience New Lecturers Folder

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

The popular UK Centre for Bioscience New Lecturers Folder has been updated for 2010/2011 and copies are now available to order from the Centre. The folder brings together advice and resources aimed at new bioscience lecturers and can be added to over time to build a personalised collection of resources and references.

 

Do you know any colleagues new or relatively new to teaching in the biosciences who might benefit from a copy of the folder? Are you running courses for new lecturers who might be interested in receiving a copy?  Please feel free to pass this message on to them.

 

We have limited copies to distribute on a first come, first served basis. In order that we can keep producing the folders, and distributing them free of charge or at limited cost, we need to be able demonstrate they are being used and that this is impacting positively on teaching and learning. To help us achieve this, our preference is to send the folders to named individuals. This will enable us to contact recipients for feedback on the folders, and also to send them updates for the folders (for example new 'Short Guides'). Your assistance in reaching relevant individuals would be greatly appreciated. 

 

Single or multiple copies can be requested by emailing the Centre on heabioscience@leeds.ac.uk  

Further details and an electronic version of the folder are available at http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/resourcepack.aspx

 

Many thanks for your assistance.

 

Dr Katherine Clark

 

UK Centre for Bioscience, Higher Education Academy

Phone: 0113 343 3003

Email: heabioscience@leeds.ac.uk

Web: www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk

Twitter: http://twitter.com/hea_bio

 

 

P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to...