The Important Thing About Carrots and Sticks: Fitting Pedagogy and Accessibility into the e-Learning Embedding Process

Back to Notes from the Joint CETIS-TechDis Accessibility SIG and CETIS Pedagogy Forum Meeting..

Click on topic (26 topics) to move to section:

1. A Brief Local History.
2. Perils and Pitfalls.
3. About Learning.
4. Things We Noticed.
5. My View of Learning is Not a New One!
6. A Brief History - Continued.
7. Our 'Integrative Development' Approach.
8. 'Integrative Development' Benefits.
9. P&A - What we do with Academic Teams.
10. P&A - What we Warn About.
11. e-Learning: A Protagonist for Change.
12. Holistic Quality Enhancement.
13. Reinforcing the Message.
14. What We Have in Place So Far.
15. The Policy.
16. Principle 6 (of 10).
17. The "Threshold".
18. "eSuppported".
19. Approval.
20. Validation of "e-Learning".
21. Quality Assurance.
22. e-Learning QA - Example Questions.
23. e-Supported QA - Example Questions.
24. The QA Guide.
25. The Accessibility Guide.
26. Conclusion.

This is the HTML version of the The Important Thing About Carrots and Sticks: Fitting Pedagogy and Accessibility into the e-Learning Embedding Process Presentation (PowerPoint format - 203Kb) given by Professor Mark Stiles, Staffordshire University (with thanks to Sue Lee, Sam Rowley, Ed Clarke, Dr Jenny Yorke and colleagues from SURF Colleges).

1. A Brief Local History.
   
   • 1996 - Learning and Teaching Strategy: Building a Learning Community.
   • 1998 - Lotus LearningSpace & BLC2:
     
     • RBL (Research Based Learning) - focus on content; not on 'real' potential of eLearning. However it did promote renewed interest in L&T (Learning and Teaching) issues;
     • Engagement with learning and teaching;
     • Some problems:
       
       • Isolated projects - We didn't learn well enough from each other. Causes include 'isolated' project approach without enough emphasis on dissemination (done inconsistently and largely within schools if at all);
       • Ambiguous Quality processes - Another possible cause was due to the 'mixed' message associated with quality. e-Learning was treated separately and there was not enough emphasis placed on quality enhancement (continual improvement) and the mechanisms for helping it happen.
         
         • QA (Quality Assurance) checklists speaking of 'working in the spirit of continual improvement' but put no processes in place to enable it. We compounded the problem by using Quality Assurance checklists;
         • Validation guidelines focussing on content.
     • Handbook - The Handbook included:
       
       • Pedagogic approaches;
       • Guidance on text layout, style, language etc;
       • Guidance on use of colour;
       • Guidance on media;
       • Guidance on navigation;
       • Etc.
       • And was far too big, of course.

   Back to Top of Page

2. Perils and Pitfalls.
   

   We got some things right but we also fell into a series of traps:

   • the content trap;
   • the technology trap;
   • the accountability trap;
   • the 'isolated development' trap;
   • accessibility and quality an "add-on".

   Back to Top of Page

3. About Learning.
   

   

   This photo shows a class of college students asleep in their seats. Seem familiar?

   Back to Top of Page

4. Things We Noticed...
   
   • VLE ease of use is not all "sunshine".
   • Where pedagogy WAS addressed, accessibility came a poor second.
   • Generic staff development was problematic.

   Back to Top of Page

5. My View of Learning is Not A New One!
   

   Learning is an Active Process in which "Authentic" but "Appropriate" Learning activities are Shared in a Specific Culture and Environment within which Learners and Experts interact.

   

   This drawing shows a group of hunters with spears approaching a woolly mammoth, which is poised on a cliff edge.

   Back to Top of Page

6. A Brief History - Continued.
   
   • 2000 onwards - catalysts for improvement:
     
     • Distance eLearning;
     • SURF (Staffordshire University Regional Federation);
     • Staff developers development.
      
   • Improvements:
     
     • Planned developments;
     • Quality Enhancement (phase 1);
     • Policy, policies, procedures, roles and responsibilities developments.

   Back to Top of Page

7. Our 'Integrative Development' Approach.
   
   • How it works.
   • A 'project management' approach.
   • In theory!
   • A team of specialists in: Project management, academic curriculum, pedagogy, accessibility, content development, media design, copyright...
   • In partnership with teaching team.
   • Staff Development at point of need.

   Back to Top of Page

8. 'Integrative Development' Benefits.
   
   • Planned - ID (Integrative Development) started as a planned and project managed approach. But it had some important unexpected results. First of all, we found it difficult to implement a rigid project management framework. But with hindsight we see this 'looseness' is an important and probably natural characteristic. We found that the 'team' tended to dissipate as the project progressed, with academic staff working largely independently by the end of the project. This is actually an indication of the success of the staff development.
      
   • Appropriate foci:
     
     • point of need;
     • L&T and course design (NOT content);
     • Appropriate 'pitch'.
     
      
   • Embedded Accessibility.
      
   • Shared Understanding: roles, expertise and boundaries. What is important is that we get each development off to the right start: we involve all the right people at the start, so we can discuss roles and responsibilities (what help is available); we can plan the development to ensure that this is realistic; we can ensure that staff development is given the right focus by looking at learning and teaching design first and foremost and then planning workshops for technical/media development as appropriate - at point of need. We clearly separate the technical workshops from learning and teaching design and theory technical issues do not distract focus. The other unexpected outcome of this 'planned' approach is very important organisationally. We have found that as LDI teams join forces with academic teams we are able to understand different perspectives and are able to communicate more effectively on matters of learning and teaching. We can and do for example, run workshops on 'Using Blackboard for active learning', 'Using Blackboard to foster critical thinking'.
      
   • Iterative - adaptive - agile.
      
   • "Good course design is good course design".

   Back to Top of Page

9. P&A (Pedagogy and Accessibility) - What We Do with Academic Teams.
   
   • Good course design is good course design.
   • Make accessibility inherent in pedagogy.
   • Accessibility is for all.
   • E.g. small chunks.
   • Varied activity within a course.
   • Mix media.
   • Use style sheets.
   • Use straightforward language.
   • Make content adaptable by user.

   Back to Top of Page

10. P&A - What We Warn About.
    
    • Making the accessible inaccessible.
    • One size does NOT fit all.
    • In some cases accessibility is skills related.
    • You can intimate people with language - language needs to be accessible.
    • Complex ideas do not necessarily require complex content or language.
    • Be careful what you point at!

    Back to Top of Page

11. e-Learning: a Protagonist for Change.
    

    Summary so far:

    • e-Learning can help create responsive and agile course development;
    • e-Learning can promote a renewed engagement in course design;
    • e-Learning can promote aware of accessibility issues;
    • Staff developers play a pivotal role in both.
    • But consistent organisational practices are critical...

    Back to Top of Page

12. Holistic Quality Enhancement.
    

    Key issues to resolve:

    • Early planning;
    • Appropriate focus;
    • Improving and assuring the developers.

    Back to Top of Page

13. Reinforcing the Message.
    
    • The place of eLearning Policy.
    • 'Vertical coherence': Policy.
    • 'Horizontal coherence': Policies, Procedures, Roles and Responsibilities.

    Back to Top of Page

14. What We Have in Place so Far.
    
    • eLearning Policy.
    • eLearning Threshold.
    • Intervention from course conception.
    • Better focus at validation.
    • QA for e-Learning AND e-Supported.
    • Start of an enhancement loop.
    • Better guidance.

    Back to Top of Page

15. The Policy.
    

    The University will use e-Learning where appropriate to support the achievement of its goals in providing learner-centred learning experiences that are flexible, responsive and effective and meet the needs of all its learners and partners. e-Learning will be used to innovate both learning and its delivery and will be delivered making effective and efficient use of all resources whilst maintaining the quality standards the University is committed to.

    Policy aspects pertaining to e-Learning will, where relevant, be embedded in all University policies and procedures to ensure a consistent and corporate approach to associated systems, processes and responsibilities.

    Back to Top of Page

16. Principle 6 (of 10):
    

    The University, through its quality processes, will ensure that e-Learning provision meets the standards expected by the University, funding bodies and relevant legislation, and that it is accessible, educationally sound, engaging and appropriate to its target populations, whilst ensuring that course developers and those facilitating learning have the scope to innovate and fully employ their professional skills and judgement.

    Back to Top of Page

17. The "Threshold":
    

    For the purpose of this policy, and the Quality Assurance and other procedures it relates to, an award is considered to involve e-Learning where: A student cannot reasonably be expected, without due provision of individually focused accommodations (to meet the needs of disability, for example), to meet the learning outcomes of the course without accessing and/or engaging with the electronically delivered and/or supported components of the course.

    Back to Top of Page

18. "e-Supported":
    

    Where an offering provides e-Learning components or e-Content on which the achievement of the learning outcomes is NOT dependent, it does not fall within the scope of this policy but nevertheless, such provision is subject to the requirements of the University relating to electronic learning content, including its provenance, quality, and management.

    Back to Top of Page

19. Approval:
    

    When a course proposal is presented to Academic Planning for approval which contains e-Learning permission to proceed is conditional on an appropriate level working with Learning Development & Innovation. (This is checked/confirmed at validation).

    Back to Top of Page

20. Validation of "e-Learning":
    
    • LDI member on panel.
    • One core module as it will be presented plus indicative examplars illustrating educational rationale and implementation for one third of modules. (All QA'd).
    • Explanation of how the intended e-learning approach(es) meet the needs of the target learner population.
    • Action plan for the design and implementation of all elements of the curriculum.

    Back to Top of Page

21. Quality Assurance:
    
    • Done by peer review and signed off to LDI.
    • e-Learning has "new" and "repeat" forms.
    • e-Supported has one form.
    • Covers pedagogy and accessibility.
    • Requires evaluation and feedback.
    • Useful "Small" Handbook for Guidance.

    Back to Top of Page

22. eLearning QA - Example Questions.
    
    • Teaching, learning and assessment strategies explicit?
    • Arrangements for collaborative learning clear?
    • Clear guidance given on accessing eLearning elements?
    • Process for evaluating this module?
    • How will lessons learned from evaluation be fed back?
    • Guidelines in relation to text, media, and colour followed?
    • Clear distinction between activities and learning resources?

    Back to Top of Page

23. e-Supported QA - Example Questions.
    
    • How does resource add value to course?
    • Students have technical skills to access this resource?
    • Introduction outlining the purpose and relevance?
    • Accessibility standards been met?
    • All folders contain information?
    • Met copyright requirements?
    • Method of evaluating this resource?
    • Method for feedback to centre?

    Back to Top of Page

24. The QA Guide...
    
    • How does resource add value to course?
    • Students have technical skills to access this resource?
    • Introduction outlining the purpose and relevance?
    • Accessibility standards been met?
    • All folders contain information?
    • Met copyright requirements?
    • Method of evaluating this resource?
    • Method for feedback to centre?

    Back to Top of Page

25. The Accessibility Guide...
    
    • Relevance and Importance.
    • Legislation and Codes of Practice.
    • Disabilities.
    • Assistive Technology.
    • Text.
    • Layout.
    • Colour.
    • Writing Style.
    • Qualities of content.
    • Navigation.
    • Media.
    • General Issues
    • ...But MUCH shorter!!!

    Back to Top of Page

26. Conclusion:
    

    The message is:
    'good course design is good course design'
    0r
    "good pedagogy is accessible".

    e-Learning is an important 'resource'.

    Policy is an important instrument.

    So the important thing about carrots and sticks is:
    Where you stick the carrot!

    

    Related papers.