I-HE2020 The European Maturity Model for Blended Education
•
1 j'aime•331 vues
Presentation by Wiebe Dijkstra (TU Delft) and Veerle Van Rompaey (KU Leuven
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à I-HE2020 The European Maturity Model for Blended Education
Similaire à I-HE2020 The European Maturity Model for Blended Education (20)
Plus de EADTU
Plus de EADTU (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
I-HE2020 The European Maturity Model for Blended Education
- 1. Wiebe Dijkstra Veerle Van Rompaey w.p.dijkstra@tudelft.nl veerle.vanrompaey@kuleuven.be @wpdijkstra The European Maturity Model for Blended Education 1
- 2. EMBED as strategic partnership 2CC-BY 4.0 • About introducing innovation in higher education by the implementation of blended learning (b-learning) • We will create a reference model for developing and implementing blended learning, embracing all levels of an institution: the design of the blended course, organisational aspects such as staff support and training, and institutional leadership, developing policies and strategies making the institution continuously innovative. • The partnership consists of frontrunner universities in b-learning European wide.
- 3. 3CC-BY 4.0
- 4. Process Conceptual and descriptive framework MOOC Policy impact initiatives Institutional change trajectories Design of monitoring instruments Maturity model and monitor
- 5. Working towards a maturity model 1. Literature study 2. Repository of BL cases (mainly BL courses), interviews with lecturers, course designers and policy makers 3. Interviews BL experts, outside the EMBED project (Delphi study) o Framing blended learning, teaching and education o Define & refine dimensions and criteria of the MM o Describe maturity levels
- 6. 6CC-BY 4.0 What are we
- 7. 7CC-BY 4.0 CC-BY-NC Jodie Taylor
- 8. 8CC-BY 4.0 ••a way of combining traditional classroom experiences, experiential learning objectives, and digital course delivery that emphasizes using the best option for each learning objective. Hybrid Learning? Defining the blend
- 9. 9CC-BY 4.0
- 10. 10CC-BY 4.0 ••learning as a result of a deliberate, integrated combination of online and face-to-face learning activities. Blended learning ••designing and facilitating blended learning activities. Blended teaching ••the formal context of BL that is determined by policies and conditions with regard to the organization and support of blended learning. Blended education Defining the blend
- 11. Three levels 11CC-BY 4.0 Macro (government & society) Policy Rules & Regulations Meso (institute) Policies Conditions Micro (course/programme) Teaching Learning
- 13. Micro level: BL PRACTICES IN CONTEXT Sample Overview (N=26 cases ) 6 Embed partner universities • Humanities 7 (philosopy, linguistics, cultural studies, psychology) • (Business) Economics & Information Management 6 • Exact Sciences & Research Methods 10 • Medical Sciences 3 Interviews with lecturers and an online survey (frequency of learning activities and tools)
- 15. General Learning activities General Activities N Online Offline Online & Offline Instructor-le d Student-led Lectures/Tutorials 24 19 21 15 23 3 Exercises / Assignments / Problem Solving 21 18 12 10 8 12 Small Group Work 14 10 11 7 1 9 Workshops // Seminars 13 7 9 4 4 6 Student generated content (e.g. Video's, articles, ….) 12 12 2 2 3 6 Student Presentation 11 7 8 4 1 7 Reflective journal 10 10 0 0 1 8 Panel/ Discusion /Debates 10 7 8 5 2 7 Demonstrations 9 6 7 4 6 2 Q&A sessions 8 4 6 2 4 1 Guest Lectures 6 4 3 1 4 0 Polling // Surveys 6 3 3 1 5 0 Project 6 5 2 1 0 4 Brainstorming 5 4 4 3 1 4 Labs/Practicum 5 2 4 1 0 1 MInd--mapping 5 3 4 2 0 4 Role play // Simulation 4 0 5 0 3 3 Excursions 2 0 2 0 0 1
- 16. BL PRACTICES: Drivers & Enablers
- 17. Drivers • Individual drivers: • Enrich the learning experience: • Focus on problem solving • Focus on authentic cases • Supporting engagement and building a community outside of the classroom “For 25 years I have been trying to find ways of helping students with turning theory into conceptual thinking and into problem solving” “To free up class time and try to replace that for conceptual thinking” • More interactive teaching “[until now the normal way of teaching] was the teacher standing up at the blackboard … and the students sitting in the chairs… so we want to change that form of teaching into a …. more interactive form of education.”
- 18. Drivers • Individual drivers: • Skills for the students’ future careers • They should learn to work in a team and collaborate (outside the classroom) • Students need to learn how to use various tools • They need to learn to search for reliable information • They need to learn to apply theories in practice • Flexibility & internationalization • Reaching International students or students living far from the campus • Reaching students with certain disabilities or a different educational context • Personal interests • Experimenting with tools, new ways of teaching • Doing research on teaching methods
- 19. Drivers • Internal institutional drivers : • Improve success rate “So 70% of the influx [should] obtain their bachelor’s degree within four years, that was more or less the main goal” • University-level strategy “There is a strong hint [from our university] that things should be blended, or online” “The one big driver was the university statement, I think 2 years ago, that they would expect all students to have the opportunity to take at least one fully online course.” • External drivers : • Requirements: • Managing assignments for large groups of students , peer reviews, … PANDEMIC?
- 20. Enablers Enablers (THAT WORK) • Support in the development of online materials, e.g. videos • Funding from various sources, e.g. from faculty • Extra staff, e.g. teaching assistants • Follow-up, e.g. sharing experiences with colleagues • Technical, either centralized or faculty-based help desks • Project-oriented approach within a design team (>< ’find your way’) • Time for development • Peer pressure • …
- 21. SOME CHALLENGES & FUTURE TRENDS - Applying learning analytics on a more advanced level - Recommender systems - Predictive next to descriptive analytics - …. - Inserting adaptivity in a BL approach - E.g. “So more basic exercises for the ones who need it. And then more challenging for the ones who can handle that…”. - E.g. “It would be wise [to do it like this:] ‘This is the minimum that you have to do and this is the exam for that. And you get a six or a seven. No more. But if you’re willing to take up a challenge, this is the target exam for an eight. And if you really want to be challenged, there’s a third exam. I think it would help them. ‘ “ - Dealing with very large groups (e.g. + 400 students) - ‘MOOC style’ teaching - COVID19 – Individual drivers?
- 22. Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that if you make the material crisp and clear, as nice as you can, that all your problems are gone. Be very sensitive of whether the material is not too good, so that your students have the impression that they understand that, they did understand the story but they don’t understand the concept. I think it's worthwhile doing so. But they have to be aware that it will cost time. It will not save you time. It will probably increase the efficiency of the course, but it will not save you time as a lecturer. Don’t make everything blended … And so the good things from the past, the good old lectures : keep them ! And next to this, do things with a team ! A team of 2 or 3 is enough. And then you have to go for it, mind the details, the quality of audio and video, appointments with students, a study guide. Choose your pet project and go for quality and detail.
- 25. 25 /
- 26. 26 New education building Pulse http://campusdevelopment.tudelft.nl/project/pulse/ Virtual tour: https://nmc360.tudelft.nl/vt_pulse/
- 27. 27
- 28. 28
- 31. Governmental policy 31CC-BY 4.0 • Teachers get paid based on hours in class • Reducing class time is political sensitive • Some governments are promoting blended learning with grant programme for digital education
- 32. Maturity Model CC-BY 4.0 32
- 34. Maturity ≠ Quality CC-BY 4.0 34
- 35. “Maturity is a measurement of the ability of an organization for continuous improvement in a particular discipline” CC-BY 4.0 35
- 36. 36 Course level 3 levels, 21 dimensions, 63 indicators Programme level Institution level 7 dimensions 3 indicators per dimension (21 in total) 6 dimensions 3 indicators per dimension (18 in total) 8 dimensions 3 indicators per dimension (24 in total)
- 37. 37
- 40. COURSELEVEL 40CC-BY 4.0 Online + F2F activities ECTS
- 41. 41
- 46. PROGRAMMELEVEL 46CC-BY 4.0 Selection courses Mode of delivery Part-time/Full-time Other institutions
- 47. 47
- 48. 48CC-BY 4.0
- 49. 49CC-BY 4.0
- 53. 53
- 54. 54
- 59. MODEL IN PRACTICE 59CC-BY 4.0
- 63. VALIDATION OF THE MODEL 63CC-BY 4.0
- 64. CC-BY 4.0 64Delphi, Greece by tamara Semina, CC BY-SA
- 65. ROUNDS EXPERTS EU COUNTRIES 3 33 8
- 66. CC-BY 4.0
- 67. Consensus: 67 75 % of the experts agreed on a dimension and indicators
- 68. CC-BY 4.0
- 69. Course design process: Selection of blended learning activities and their sequence 0,91 Selection of blended learning tools 0,80 Course flexibility 0,83 Course interaction 0,91 Course experience: Student learning 0,85 Study load 0,86 Inclusiveness 0,81 COURSE LEVEL Programme design process: Programme coherence 0,93 Alignment of blended learning tools 0,90 Programme flexibility 0,80 Programme experience: Student learning 0,84 Study load 0,80 Inclusiveness 0,81 Institutional support 0,85 Institutional strategy 0,87 Sharing and openness 0,81 Professional development 0,85 Quality assurance 0,89 Governance 0,89 Finances 0,83 Facilities 0,97 PROGRAMME LEVEL INSTITUTION LEVEL
- 72. Next Steps 72CC-BY 4.0 • Self Assessment tool ▪ Excel version is ready ▪ Online version will come later • Implementation guidelines • MOOC on FutureLearn (March & September 2020)