University Teaching and Learning [1 ed.] 9788759322529, 9788759319604

Citation preview

EDITED BY Lotte Rienecker Peter Stray Jørgensen Jens Dolin Gitte Holten Ingerslev

UNIVERSITY TEACHING AND LEARNING University Teaching and Learning

KAPITEL 7.5.

Underviserrollen

University Teaching and Learning

Edited by Lotte Rienecker, Peter Stray Jørgensen, Jens Dolin and Gitte Holten Ingerslev

Samfundslitteratur

Lotte Rienecker, Peter Stray Jørgensen, Jens Dolin and Gitte Holten Ingerslev (eds.) University Teaching and Learning 1. edition 2015 © Samfundslitteratur 2015 Original edition in Danish with the title Universitetspædagogik published by Samfundslitteratur 2013. The translation of this work was made possible by a grant from Lundbeck Foundation Translation: Elisabeth Li Translation revised by: Nicolai Paulsen Cover: Imperiet Cover illustration: Gitte Holten Ingerslev Typeset: SL grafik (slgrafik.dk) Print: Specialtrykkeriet Viborg A/S ISBN: 978-87-593-1960-4 E-book ISBN: 978-87-593-2252-9 Resources at: samfundslitteratur.dk/utl

Samfundslitteratur Rosenørns Allé 9 DK-1970 Frederiksberg C [email protected] samfundslitteratur.dk All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means – graphic, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording, taping or information storage or retrieval systems – without permission in writing from Samfundslitteratur.

Table of Contents Foreword to the English edition · 15 1.1 Trends in the development of the Danish universities · 17 FREDERIK VOETMANN CHRISTIANSEN, THOMAS HARBOE, SEBASTIAN HORST, LONE KROGH AND LAURA LOUISE SARAUW Humboldt and the research-based university · 17 From elite university to mass university · 20 New governance structures and management styles · 23 Learning outcome and competence-oriented university education · 33 Concluding remarks · 37 Resources · 38 Literature · 40

1.2 Research-based teaching · 43 NINA BONDERUP DOHN AND JENS DOLIN Research-teaching nexus · 44 Different approaches to research-based teaching · 47 Different disciplines’ different approaches to research-based teaching · 51 Examples of research-based teaching · 54 Literature · 62

2.1 Teaching for learning · 65 JENS DOLIN Explicit, implicit and behaviourist learning · 65 Three approaches to teaching · 68 Constructivism · 70 Situated learning, apprenticeship, practice communities · 78 Psychodynamic learning approaches · 82 Progression · 83 Is there a “best practice”? (Or: Can you base teaching on evidence?) · 85 Ideas and practice · 87 Literature · 91

2.2 University teaching and learning – models and concepts · 93 ANNE METTE MØRCKE AND CAMILLA ØSTERBERG RUMP Instructions and options · 93 Models and principles of university teaching and learning · 94 Taxonomies · 100 Resources · 103 Literature · 104

2.3 Teaching environment · 105 SEBASTIAN HORST AND GITTE HOLTEN INGERSLEV What can the teacher do to create a good teaching environment? · 106 Research-based starting points for planning teaching · 110 Research-based education requires integration with research facilities · 111 Resources · 112 Literature · 113

3.1 Who are the students? · 115 BJØRN FRIIS JOHANNSEN, LARS ULRIKSEN AND HENRIETTE TOLSTRUP HOLMEGAARD Challenges to teaching: Who are the students? · 118 Options · 124 Conclusion · 132 Resources · 132 Literature · 133

3.2 Course descriptions · 135 FREDERIK VOETMANN CHRISTIANSEN, SEBASTIAN HORST AND CAMILLA ØSTERBERG RUMP Course descriptions are part of the regulations · 135 What should a course description include? · 136 Goal descriptions and the Danish Qualifications Framework · 137 How do competences, skills and knowledge differ from one another? · 139 Conclusion · 146 Resources · 147 Literature · 147

3.3 Session planning · 149 PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN The teacher’s challenges · 149 The teacher’s planning · 150 Handouts as learning tools · 159 Reasons · 161 Resources · 162 Literature · 162

3.4 Course planning · 165 PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN Challenges · 165 The course planner’s options · 167 A course’s content · 167 The course’s framework · 169 Rationales · 172 Resources · 173 Literature · 174

3.5 Instructing written assignments · 175 PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN Instructions, options · 175 Rationales · 177 Resources · 177 Literature · 177

4.1 Lecturing · 179 BETTINA DAHL AND RIE TROELSEN Introduction · 179 Pedagogical challenges · 179 Considerations before a lecture · 181 Activities while you lecture · 184 Rationales · 186 The lecturer as a performer · 187 Resources · 188 Literature · 188

4.2 Group work · 189 GERD CHRISTENSEN Definition and history · 189 Pedagogical challenges in connection with group work · 190 Different forms of group work · 191 Suggestions for practice/action · 192 Structure of the collaboration · 195 Rationales and substantiation from research · 197 Resources · 198 Literature · 199

4.3 Case-based learning · 201 LONE KROGH, DIANA STENTOFT, JEPPE EMMERSEN AND PETER MUSAEUS The case method and its background · 201 Challenges when working with cases · 204 Pedagogical possibilities · 207 Rationales and theoretical foundation for the use of cases in teaching and learning · 211 Resources · 213 Literature · 214

4.4 Problem-based and project-organised teaching · 215 LONE KROGH AND MERETE WIBERG Introduction · 215 Central elements in problem-based project work · 217 Group work, project organisation and student direction? · 218 Problem-based learning, connecting theory and practice, interdisciplinarity · 220 The principle of exemplarity · 223 Rationales – theoretical foundation for problem-based project work · 225 Literature · 226

4.5.1 Activities in and between teaching sessions · 229 LOTTE RIENECKER, RIKKE VON MÜLLEN, PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN AND GITTE HOLTEN INGERSLEV Pedagogical challenges · 230 Activities in teaching · 231 Activities between sessions · 239 Choice and planning of activities · 240 Rationales · 245 Resources · 248 Literature · 248

4.5.2 Disciplinary activities · 251 LOTTE RIENECKER, RIKKE VON MÜLLEN, JENS DOLIN, PETER MUSAEUS AND ANNE METTE MØRCKE Teaching activities in the Humanities · 251 Teaching activities in the Social Sciences · 253 Teaching activities in the Natural Sciences · 254 Teaching activities in the Medical Sciences · 255 Literature · 257

4.6.1 Feedback · 259 LOTTE RIENECKER AND JESPER BRUUN What is feedback? · 259 Pedagogical challenges · 260 Pedagogical recommendations · 263 Feedback on written and oral student performances · 264 Automated feedback in an online environment – quizzes and academic games · 269 Experiment with feedback · 272 Peer-feedback research · 275 Online feedback research · 277 Resources · 278 Literature · 279

4.6.2 Clickers · 281 HELLE MATHIASEN What is a clicker? · 281 Clickers in teaching · 282 Studies of clickers in teaching · 285 Resources · 286 Literature · 287

4.7 Discussions and argumentation in teaching · 289 MADS THORKILD HAUGSTED AND GITTE HOLTEN INGERSLEV Intro · 289 Challenges · 289 Instructions/options · 289 Rationales · 295 Resources · 296 Literature · 296

4.8 E-learning · 299 NINA BONDERUP DOHN, MARIANNE THORSEN AND SØREN LARSEN Intro: What is e-learning? · 299 Pedagogical challenges · 300 Options · 302 Example: Qualification of preparation for practical exercises through online learning resources · 304 Some advice and suggestions · 308 Example: Creating coherence between students’ learning contexts through the use of blogs and wikis · 310 Some advice and suggestions · 315 Example: Learning through social construction of knowledge. Use of discussion forums in fully online teaching · 317 Some advice and suggestions · 323 Research-based evidence · 324 Resources · 325 Literature · 326

5.1 Supervision: Process management and communication · 327 GITTE WICHMANN-HANSEN AND TINE WIRENFELDT JENSEN Common challenges for supervision · 327 Which strategies for action do supervisors have? · 328 The importance of good cooperative relationships and negotiation of expectations · 329 Teaching model, apprenticeship model or partnership model? · 334 The partnership model – why and how? · 335 Meta-communication · 336 Framing the student’s responsibility · 337 Dialogue-based supervision · 338 The conversation model used in supervision – a case · 341 The personal dimension and the difficult conversation · 346 Creating a learning space in supervision · 347 Resources · 348 Literature · 348

5.2 Text in supervision – supervising on texts · 351 PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN AND LOTTE RIENECKER The supervisor’s challenges · 351 The supervisor’s options · 354 Rationales · 365 Resources · 366 Literature · 367

6.1 Assessment and exams · 369 HANNE LETH ANDERSEN, BETTINA DAHL AND JENS TOFTESKOV Examining and assessing: Focus on the students’ performance · 370 TYPES OF EXAMS  · 371 Challenge: Insight into chosen types of exams · 371 Oral exams · 373 Suggestions · 374 Written on-campus exam · 380 Suggestions · 381 Written take-home exams · 385 Suggestions · 385

ASSESSMENT AND MARKING · 393 Qualification frameworks and level descriptions · 398 EXAM CONDITIONS AND CRITERIA · 400 Cheating and plagiarism · 400 Options · 401 Validity and reliability: Criteria for choosing exam types · 403 Resources · 406 Literature · 407

6.2 Teaching evaluation · 409 SEBASTIAN HORST, BJØRN FRIIS JOHANNSEN, JAN ALEXIS NIELSEN AND CAMILLA ØSTERBERG RUMP Pedagogical challenges · 409 Options · 412 Rationales · 420 Conclusion · 420 Resources · 421 Literature · 421

7.1 Developing your own teaching · 423 JAN SØLBERG The reflective teacher · 423 Which factors are interesting for developing your teaching? · 423 How can you develop your own teaching? · 426 Development as research into teaching · 429 Resources · 430 Literature · 431

7.2 Collegial supervision · 433 HANNE LETH ANDERSEN AND LENE TORTZEN BAGER Introduction: Pedagogical development of own and shared premises? · 433 Instructions: Frameworks, roles, inquisitive approach · 434 Rationales and evidence · 439 Evaluation and outcome · 443 Resources · 443 Literature · 444

7.3 Teaching portfolios · 445 BETTINA DAHL AND LONE KROGH The definition of a teaching portfolio · 445 Pedagogical challenges of the teaching portfolio · 446 Instructions for making a teaching portfolio · 449 Rationales for a teaching portfolio · 451 Resources · 453 Literature · 454

7.4 Information search about university teaching and learning · 455 LOTTE RIENECKER Challenge: Bringing new and relevant research on university teaching and learning into play · 455 Instructions and options · 456 Rationales · 462 Resources · 464

7.5 The role of the university teacher · 465 RIE TROELSEN AND JENS TOFTESKOV Do what you can – not what your course leader tells you to… · 466 The role of the professional university teacher · 470 The reflecting teacher · 473 Teaching is both a fun and risky business · 477 Resources · 478 Literature · 479

Author Profiles · 481 Index · 489

Foreword to the English edition University Teaching and Learning is the first comprehensive Danish textbook about university teaching. This textbook is intended for teaching and learning in higher education programmes and other introductory courses for university teaching and learning. The book is for both new teachers and teachers looking for inspiration for their own, their team’s, or their institution’s teaching. This translation of the Danish edition meets an expressed need from those teaching university pedagogy to International faculty teaching in Denmark. The questions of what constitutes good university teaching, which principles are involved, which models are used are under constant debate. In this book, the quality of teaching is not a question of quantity, of how many students complete the programme, of how quickly they do so and with how many contact hours, but rather a matter of content, form and learning for both students and teachers. The fundamental idea is that good university teaching is learning- and student-oriented. Learning activities in teaching and between sessions therefore play an important role in this book. The book is intended to assist teachers in their work, and therefore contains many specific suggestions for practice. The book’s 32 authors are practitioners, developers and researchers, most of them are educational developers at the different universities and research centres in Denmark. Most Danish universities and faculties are represented here, and many of the book’s chapters are written in collaboration by authors from different faculties. The book is not heavy on theory, but is theory- and research-based. We have aimed for an identical structure in all the book’s sections: Each chapter opens with a presentation of the pedagogical themes and the teacher’s challenges, followed by a presentation of various options for the teacher. To argue for and substantiate these options, we also present the rationales behind our suggestions. Finally we recommend resources and literature for further reading. The Danish edition, Universitetspædagogik, has been translated into University Teaching and Learning by Elizabeth Li and revised by Nicolai Paulsen.

15

Comments and suggestions for later editions are welcomed. You can email the editor Henrik Schjerning, [email protected]. Further and updated resources at samfundslitteratur.dk/utl. The authors wish to thank Lundbeck Foundation for a grant that made this translation possible. Copenhagen, September 2014 Lotte Rienecker, Peter Stray Jørgensen, Jens Dolin and Gitte Holten Ingerslev

16

1.1 Trends in the development of the Danish universities FREDERIK VOETMANN CHRISTIANSEN, THOMAS HARBOE, SEBASTIAN HORST, LONE KROGH AND LAURA LOUISE SARAUW

This chapter outlines some important development trends in the way universities, globally as well as nationally, operate in terms of organisation, research, education and teaching. The chapter has four parts, each revolving around a historical event or period. The first presents the philosophy of the Humboldt University in the 1800’s, where notions of self-governance at universities and research-based teaching emerged. The second concerns the 1960’s and 1970’s, where the development from elite universities to mass universities took speed, and where new forms of universities and new pedagogical approaches emerged. The third highlights how different models of governance have affected Danish universities since the 1970’s. Finally, the fourth concerns the globalisation of university education in recent years. This development is exemplified by the Bologna Process and competence-based qualification frameworks, and the section includes a discussion of the impact these frameworks have had on teaching. We will show how the teacher’s framework conditions have evolved to shape the present, conditions which everyone involved in higher education must know and heed.

Humboldt and the research-based university The first universities in Europe were founded in the 1100’s. In Denmark, the University of Copenhagen dates back to 1479. Universities, in other words, have a very long history, and deserve, perhaps, to be called conservative. Although conservatism can at times be a burden for a teacher, 17

who wants to break new ground, the universities’ conservatism has helped preserve the university’s status as a central institution in society since the Middle Ages. However, universities today are obviously very different from the universities of the past. This is certainly the case for the “unity of research and teaching”-model, which was developed by Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835) in connection with a reform of the German university in 1809, and which is thus a relatively new phenomenon in university history. Humboldt believed that university education ought to contribute to “cultivation through science” (German: Bildung durch Wissenschaft), and that the “seminar”, in which both teachers and students could explore research questions in collaboration, was the ideal way of teaching. Humboldt’s aim was to educate independent, critical, autonomous individuals, who were capable of innovative thinking. The function of teaching was therefore not simply to disseminate information to students. The teacher and students were meant to collaborate in the service of science: Institutions of higher education are special in that they never treat science as a finished problem and therefore continue researching, whereas schools only devote their time and teaching on completed and delimited knowledge. The relationship between teacher and student is thus changing. The first is not there for the latter, but both are there for science. The teacher’s task depends on the presence of the students and would not be successful without them. (Humboldt 1809: 89 – our translation)

Humboldt’s ideas are strongly anti-authoritarian, not only in relation to teaching, but also to the university’s relationship to the state. Humboldt argued in favour of an arm’s length principle, calling for a minimisation of the state’s governance of university research and teaching. Similar to the way the teacher cannot (through authoritative lecturing) control the student without corrupting him, the state cannot control the university without ruining it. Although nearly 200 years have passed, Humboldt’s ideas are still felt in both teaching and education, particularly the notion of the research-based, self-governing university, which is what we mean when we talk about the “humboldtian tradition”. The Danish University Act states that: “The university is to conduct research and offer research-based education at the highest international levels within its academic fields.” (The

18

University Act, 17 June 2010, § 1). Furthermore, it is specified that “The University has academic freedom”.

Highlighting research in your teaching The spirit from Humboldt reverberates through university teaching even today, and contemporary universities differ from other educational institutions precisely because of the research-based teaching. As a faculty member, you face a number of requirements to your research and your teaching. There is no single answer to how you, as a newly employed teacher, should balance research and teaching. Many lecturers consider themselves “researchers who teach” rather than “teachers who research”, and this in spite of the fact that much permanent staff spend more than half of their time teaching. If you want a coherent and pleasant working life at the university, you should also try to make your research and teaching to cross-fertilise rather than “steal time” from each other. We recommend that you carefully consider how your teaching and supervision embodies the notion of research-based teaching (see chapter 1.2). This can include everything from the idea that “my teaching is research-based, because I teach on the basis of my own research” to “my teaching is research-based, because I attempt to teach my students to think and work like researchers (e.g., when they write projects)” or to “my teaching is research-based because students are invited into the lab”. As a teacher, you must determine how you fit into these or other notions of research-based teaching, and whether you might want to change your teaching practice to emphasise the connection to research.

Another offshoot of humboldtian thinking is the notion that the university must be funded by the government, i.e. an unspecified funding for both teaching and research which the universities then manage themselves in accordance with their main tasks. Historically, government funding has been the solid foundation of universities’ economy. Obviously, this financial model requires that politicians trust the university, and there are many examples of this being something of an issue. We shall return to this discussion of government funding at the end of the next section.

19

From elite university to mass university Within the past 60 years, the number of students who complete a degree in higher education has multiplied several times. From 1957 to 1977, the number of students attending Danish universities and other institutions of higher education increased from 13,861 to 75,910 (Graversen 2009: 205). In comparison, 2010 saw an increase to about 119,000 students divided among Denmark’s eight universities, according to the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Higher Education. The development from elite universities to mass universities has had major consequences for universities. As early as the 1950’s and 1960’s, the need for a comprehensive reform of the Danish university sector was obvious. One upshot of this development was the student protests and the establishment of new universities in Odense, Roskilde and Aalborg. In the late 1960’s, several Western cities – most noticeably Paris and Berlin – were marked by violent riots that originated in the universities. In Denmark, students demonstrated for increased participation in decision-making processes and against the so-called “professor-regime”. In many ways, one particular event at the University of Copenhagen’s annual celebration in November 1968, where then psychology student Finn Ejnar Madsen took over the pulpit from then rector Mogens Fog, came to represent the essence of this period. The student rebellion took place at this exact time for a number of reasons, some of which can be found outside the universities, including a call for a better and better educated labour force in society in general. However, the situation in universities had changed dramatically as well. Increasing numbers of associate professors, lecturers, and teaching assistants attended to more and more of the teaching, and naturally expected to be involved in the universities’ decision-making processes. The same period saw an increasing demand for innovation of teaching methods. The student rebellion was thus the culmination of the reform tendency of this period. Within the state apparatus, the challenges connected to the growth of the universities were acknowledged, and throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s, a number of measures were introduced to address the issues. In the 1970’s, this led to the University Act, which comprised a comprehensive democratisation and de-centralisation of the universities’ form of governance. The University Act abolished the “professor-regime” of the past, and placed authority in the hands of a number of decentralised 20

governing committees and organs. Study boards with a 50 % student representation were also implemented at this time.

Figure 1. Psychology student Finn Ejnar Madsen and rector Mogens Fog at Copenhagen University’s annual celebration in 1968. Photo: Erik Gleie/POLFOTO.

At the same time, universities were required to adopt a uniform organisational three-tiered structure – university, faculty and department – with the rector and governing body at the top of the governing hierarchy; deans and faculty boards at the faculty level and head of departments and departmental boards at the bottom of the governing hierarchy. The buildings themselves were also transformed in this period. The College of Advanced Technology (which eventually became the Technical University of Denmark) had begun its move from Copenhagen to Lyngby (1962-74), and a new university had been built in Odense (1966). Furthermore, the University of Copenhagen was expanded with the erection of the Panum Institute and a new campus at Amager, and new university centres were established in Roskilde and Aalborg. Project work was, and still is, the predominant teaching form at Roskilde University and Aalborg University. The concept of interdisciplinarity also came to the forefront. Interestingly, this development was driven by both students and bureaucrats in the ministries, but for very different reasons. The technocrats saw project work and interdisciplinarity as means to greater flexibility and efficiency in university programmes, e.g., in al21

lowing students to postpone their choice of study programme, easing the process of changing programmes, increased mobility etc. Students, however, viewed these concepts as a criticism of “the scientific ivory tower”, where the division of disciplines contributed to making teaching irrelevant and repetitive. In 1971, Professor Henning Salling Olesen – who was then an active member of the National Union of Students in Denmark – emphasised the political aspect of interdisciplinary project work: In the design of basic study programmes, the aim to correlate academic activity to specific societal conditions is supported by applying a problem-oriented control with the activities. This approach prevents […] teaching from simply reproducing established academic knowledge without relating this to reality […] – in other words: Any choice must be substantiated and argued for – and since you cannot refer to any authority, these considerations become political in nature, you focus on the topics that seem most relevant. Teaching becomes independent work, and it will be irrelevant to distinguish between teaching and research – we are, rather, dealing with research of different degrees of organisation and with different degrees of theoretical implications. (Salling Olesen 1971 – cited in: Hansen 1997: 44).

The humboldtian mindset is evident, not least in regards to the relationship between research and teaching. The argument is that if students are to become critical thinkers, they cannot rely on authorities, but have to form their own opinions. The difference between Salling Olesen’s account and Humboldt’s views is that the critical perspective insists that researched problems must have a relation to “reality”. Furthermore, we see a radicalisation of students’ freedom of choice of topic. According to Salling Olesen’s view, the students’ participation in the decision-making process should not simply consist of a formal representation in governing organs, but also involve genuine influence on the contents of the teaching.

Involving students in teaching and research Mass education has greatly impacted universities today. It has been decided politically that more and more people must complete a university education in Denmark, and academic staff must adhere to that basic condition. In the spring of 2012, all parties in parliament – excluding Liberal

22

Alliance – agreed that, by 2020, 25 % of each cohort must have completed a degree in higher education (The Government, 2011). The consequence is that many programmes now have a large number of students, and – perhaps more importantly – a less homogeneous body of students, who come to the university with vastly different expectations and competences. At the same time, the requirement of research-based teaching is insisted on, even though this can be hard to reconcile with the new, larger classes of students. Naturally, this has implications for planning and carrying out teaching, but there are no straightforward practical guidelines to aid the teacher in dealing with the huge number of increasingly diverse students. It is, for example, difficult to avoid that some students feel neglected or excluded in some way. One recommendation for dealing with this could be to take special care to invite students to participate in evaluation and the development of teaching – both your own teaching and more generally in study boards, committees etc. (see chapter 6.2). We also recommend including students as co-researchers in your own research whenever possible. This requires that students are given space to continuous independent problem-solving and procedural and content-based feedback instead of focusing purely on exams and general evaluations.

New governance structures and management styles Thus, a number of educational political and pedagogical initiatives were adopted when the mass university came to Denmark. Changing political majorities in parliament have, repeatedly, attempted to define suitable governance structures and management styles for the Danish universities (see the ‘Key events’ below). Interestingly, decision-making competences, employee involvement and flexibility crop up again and again in the debates about how universities ought to be run. The debates reveal that many politicians and public servants view universities as difficult to manage and marred by a considerable degree of managerial chaos. In addition to this, universities have gradually – and particularly in the past five years – been central in the socio-political discussion about the future livelihood for Denmark as a nation. Politicians often argue that the universities are to play a more central role to provide the best possible work force with highly educated, innovative and competent employees. 23

The political aim that 25 % of a cohort complete higher education is a clear indication of this, since the reason for having such a large group to attend university is not for the sake of research (The Government 2011). The universities are seen as engines of economical growth – perhaps just as much as they are considered “knowledge-generators”. Whatever one might think about this development, university education is now a part of the economical underpinning of society, and is therefore subject to the same marketisation that permeates the rest of society.

Key events in recent Danish university history (1965-2012) 1965 Copenhagen Business School is formally elevated to a university, and the MSc in Economics and Business Administration is established. 1966 Odense University (OU) is established. 1968 The student rebellion. 1970 The University Act: The professor regime is abolished in favour of a collegial democratic governance. Uniform models of organisation across faculties and departments are introduced. Study boards with parity between students and academic staff are established. 1972 Roskilde University Centre (RUC) is established. 1973 The University Act is revised, and technical-adminstrative staff at universities gain representation in departmental committees and governing bodies. 1974 Aalborg University Centre (AUC) is established. 1974 The College of Advanced Technology (since 1994: the Technical University of Denmark) completed the transition from central Copenhagen to Lyngby just North of Copenhagen. 1977 Admission requirements are introduced. 1980 Budget reform: Financial resources are distributed according to a new model with (among other things) activity prognoses and target figures for the student/teacher ratio. 1993 The University Act: The collegial committees lose power. New management position, ‘Head of studies’, is introduced. 1993 Teacher training denoted “Teaching and learning in higher education programmes” become a formal requirement for all university researchers. 1994 The 3+2+3-model for Danish Higher Education is introduced: 3 years of undergraduate studies + two years of graduate studies + 3 year PhD.

24

1994 The Danish Network for Educational Development in Higher Education (DUN) is established. 1994 The introduction of the taximeter system, where part of the financial means are distributed according to production of student work years. 1997 The Lisbon convention, meant to ease the mutual recognition of qualifying exams, term time/study periods and degrees/certificates within Higher Education, is passed. 1998 University of Southern Denmark (SDU) is established by the merger of Odense University, Southern Denmark School of Business and Engineering and the South Jutland University Centre. 1999 The Bologna Declaration is passed. 2000 The Lisbon Strategy to make EU “the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy” is passed. Has since been replaced by the Europe 2020-Strategy. 2003 New University Act: The democratic consistory is abolished and replaced by a board with a majority of external members and a modest representation of university employees and students. Furthermore, management is comprehensively professionalised, and must now be hired rather than elected. However, heads of studies and study boards continue unchanged. 2003 The Ministry of Education publishes the first qualification key for higher education requiring competence-based curricula. 2005 The international Bologna qualifications framework is passed. 2006 The government publishes its globalisation strategy, which, among other things, levels strong criticism at extended study time and the high rate of drop-out at universities. 2006 A completion bonus is introduced as a new principle for distributing basic resources (supplement to the taximeter system). 2007 University mergers: Twelve universities and engineering-/business colleges become eight. Furthermore, a number of governmental research institutions are merged into the new universities. 2007 The Danish Accreditation Institution – ACE Denmark – is introduced and takes over responsibility for universities from the Evaluation Institute. 2007 Deadlines for Bachelor- and Master’s theses become a formal requirement. 2007 Group exams are prohibited by law on the grounds that this exam type does not provide a sufficiently exact picture of the individual students’ performance.

25

2007 New qualification framework for higher education in Denmark. 2011 Revision of the University Act: The universities gain some leeway in how they are organised. The requirements for the organisation of study boards, for example, are loosened. 2012 New government re-instate the group exam. 2012 The government’s 2020-plan is passed. The plan paves the way for more students in higher education.

The University Act 1993

The frustration felt by legislators and ministry staff with the apparently ungovernable universities increased throughout the 1980’s and the early 1990’s, and obviously had direct consequences for the formulation of the University Act in 1993. Increased collaboration between the outside world and the universities was called for, while the notion of relative autonomy was preserved. The means of doing so was to make university governance more well-defined, and to improve its decision-making competence, while reducing the democratic organs’ authority. This was to be done through a change in governance, in which personal responsibility for making decisions (at all levels) was assigned more import. Furthermore, the University Act of 1993 introduced external representation in both governing body and departmental committees. Only the study board’s competences and composition remained relatively unchanged. One significant change, however, was that the chairman of the study board was appointed as head of studies. The term head of studies – both the title and the role – first appears in the University Act of 1993. Very little is written about the head of studies’ function and role in the act, but a number of the head of studies’ tasks are outlined in the remarks to the bill. It is evident that the head of studies is someone students can approach if there are any problems with the teaching: The newly instituted head of studies is directly responsible for any teaching that fails to live up to the requirements. If teachers cannot meet the requirements, students can now turn to the head of studies, who is personally responsible. (Bill 1992/1 LSF 75, explanatory memorandum)

26

The organisational model in the University Act of 1993 was characterised by a so-called two-pronged management, where research and education were divided between departments and study boards. In this two-pronged structure, the heads of studies had, in principle, the same status as, and were to a certain degree independent of, the heads of departments. Both heads were elected through democratic elections among the students and academic staff. In 1994, in the wake of the governance reform, parliament passed a new finance model in the shape of the taximeter system, in which the production of student work years (STÅ) becomes the basis for distribution of funds. This budget models still exists today. The taximeter system was from the outset intended as an incentive to support the universities’ educational role.

The philosophy of university governance now The public sector reforms of the past 20-30 years share a number of features. We are dealing with a well-documented and global reform trend within the public sector, referred to as either neo-liberal and/or New Public Management (NPM). NPM originated from criticism of the public sector which was deemed inefficient. The public sector was portrayed as a bureaucracy that had grown too big and had lost contact and touch with its users. According to NPM, the public sector ought to learn from the private sector, which is assumed to utilise resources better and be managed more efficiently. The notion of competition is adopted from the private sector, and is implemented in various ways; through privatisation, outsourcing and contract management, free consumer choice, user charges, commercial activities, selective salary incentives etc. The assumption is that competition fosters both financial efficiency and improved quality. At the same time, the government tries to control the public sector through so-called output management, i.e., the government defines the objectives, but the specific problem-solving is left to local actors. This is a step towards decentralisation, where legislators attempt to force responsibility on organisations by transferring authority from the central administration to the organisations. The institutions are given more leeway to design their own terms and conditions, while the central administration’s control is reduced to development contracts and output management. Specific examples of this marketisation and decentralisation at Dan-

27

ish universities include the introduction of the taximeter principle, public evaluations, tuition fees for master programmes, easier transfer between study programmes and credit transfer. By various means, including monetary bonus schemes for speedy completion and low drop-out – rates, the government attempts to motivate local managers to control costs and improve quality. Another characteristic of NPM is the assumption that good management is crucial for implementation of reforms, and there is currently much debate about management and the need for new types of managers. Again, it is evident that inspiration is drawn from the private sector, and there is increasing talk of a top-down dominated corporate management culture in connection with the universities new management styles – in contrast to the bottom-up “professional” management styles that previously dominated at universities (Klausen 2001, Kristensen et al. 2011).

The University Act of 2003

The most significant change in the 2003-revision of the University Act was that university heads no longer had to be elected from among faculty and students. From then on, the rector, deans and heads of departments have to be employed according to regular procedures, using job advertisements and appointment committees. Only the heads of studies were not affected by this managerial reform, but are still appointed by study boards. Thus, this is the only university position that still includes an element of the collegial and democratic form of government. Furthermore, the 2003-reform tightened the requirement that people from “outside” must be included in the governing of universities through the requirement of compulsory recruitment panels and external representative majorities in the universities’ highest decision-making organ: the board of directors. The explanatory memorandums to the University Act of 2003 reveal the then government’s objectives. Among other things, it is strongly emphasised that the universities’ management are responsible for the sustained and systematic quality development of education, teaching and study environment, and that it is the universities’ duty to involve students in this work. It also specifies that deans and, especially, department heads are responsible for systematic follow-ups of evaluation of education and teaching. The study board and heads of studies must also be involved in 28

this evaluation work and contribute to systematic follow-ups on evaluations. Furthermore, evaluation reports and plans for follow-ups on education and internship evaluations must be available to the public. Although specific individuals are thus held responsible, it can still prove difficult to determine who is in charge of what locally. We therefore encourage new teachers to find out who is in charge of involving students in quality development, what the evaluation procedures are, and how the study board and departmental management conduct systematic follow-ups on these things in practice. University reforms after 2003

A number of administrative reforms followed the University Act of 2003. Among other things, the requirement for publicly available evaluations is remarkable and a marked example of the increasing marketisation of education. Education is seen as a “commodity” with students and workplaces and purveyors of specific research as “customers” who have a right to inquire into the quality and expected learning outcome before they “buy”. In the government’s globalisation strategy from 2006, a new principle for distributing funds was introduced as a supplement to the taximeter system. This principle was the result-based distribution of government funding or the so-called bonus scheme (The Government 2006). In education, this means that universities’ government funding is now also distributed on the basis of the number of students who complete their degree within the allotted time. In 2007, Bachelor and Master’s theses became subject to mandatory submission deadlines, and it was decided that each thesis’ research question must first be approved by the head of studies (Act no. 570 of 6 June 2007). Although the revision of this act may seem insignificant, it has had a large local effect on individual institutions. In the Department of Political Science (UoC) for example, the so-called “dissertation-swamp”, in which students could keep working on their dissertations for years, was “drained” as a direct consequence of this amendment. In a mere 5 years, from 2003/04 to 2009, the percentage of students who finished their dissertation in 12 months or less increased from 38 % to 94 %. Simultaneously, a relatively large group (5-10 %), who spent more than 2 years on their dissertations, has been reduced to zero, because these students are now administratively discharged from university (Jensen & Nexø Jensen 2011). 29

However, the greatest amendment to the universities’ legal framework since 2003 is found in the 2011-revision of the University Act. The Ministry of Science describes this amendment as a change that provides the universities with “an extensive degree of self-governance”, including “an elimination of a number of the universities’ organisational requirements”. Now universities no longer need to be structured with faculties and departments nor hire deans and department heads. In fact internal organisation will no longer be laid out by law, but will be established by each university in its individual regulations. In other words, we may see some radical changes. The only obvious consequence seems, at the time of this writing, to be departments growing in size. However, it is still far too early to speculate about what impact the reform will have. Changes in the funding structure

As mentioned previously, government funding, supplemented by incentive schemes such as the taximeter system, bonus schemes and the like, has been the basis of the universities’ economy. In addition to this, there have been other, smaller, sources of funding, e.g., the different research councils that provide funds subject to competition among researchers. In recent years, a political change has occurred in the relationship between government funding and funding subject to competition. From 2006 to the change of government in 2011, the then government was intent on changing the balance between basic government funding and funding subject to competition to increase the competition for research funding (The Government 2006). Many of the additional resources the universities received in this period (the “globalisation funds” were therefore granted based on calls for research proposals. These changes have greatly impacted the hiring policy and mentality at the universities. The most remarkable consequence is the fact that the number of post-docs has increased exponentially, while traditional academic positions with substantial teaching responsibilities (lecturers, associate professors) have come under pressure. From 2007 to 2009, Danish universities saw a 41 % increase in the total number of post docs (Ståhle 2011). At the University of Copenhagen’s Faculty of Science, the number of assistant professors fell by some 80 % from 2005-2010, and there are only very few left now. Conversely, the number of post docs has more than quadrupled from 51 in 2005 to 234 in 2010. The number of associate professors dropped 16 % in the same period. The total academic staff 30

increased by 36 % in the period. The School of Pharmaceutical Sciences saw a similar development in the same period: The number of assistant professors dropped by 70 %, while the number of post docs increased from 5 in 2005 to 53 in 2010. The number of associate professors remained constant. Both these places show a decrease in employees with substantial teaching responsibilities in place of more loosely affiliated researchers with limited or no teaching responsibilities. However, it must be emphasised that this picture is very different in the Humanities and the Social Sciences. The number of post docs has increased a lot, but the two fields have not seen the same decline in the number of lecturers and associate professors. This is no doubt partly due to the fact that there are far fewer competition-based funds to fight for in these fields. However, even within these fields the change is evident in a relative decrease in governmental funds per student and an increased pressure to attract more and more external funds. Regardless of affiliation, the majority of both permanent and shortterm or temporary faculty spend a significant amount of their time applying for external funding (estimated 10 % of their total hours, a number which is steadily increasing). The humboldtian ideal of a close connection between research and teaching through government funding has thus also come under pressure due to the amended financial mechanisms and the hiring policies universities have adopted on the basis of these mechanisms (Christiansen 2010).

Engaging in development of teaching University heads are no longer elected by colleagues and students and expected to return to research after a brief stint in a managerial position. They have actively chosen to become leaders and are in it for the long term. This is a new type of leader, who is increasingly being held accountable – through development contracts and accreditation et al. – by rectorates and ministries. This also means that university management today is naturally inclined to be oriented more “upwards” than “downwards”. The new forms of management have had one predictable consequence for the organisation culture and the work environment at Danish universities: Many academics report that they feel squeezed by the new demands, and it is a fact that universities today are marked by a conflict between new and commercially oriented forms of management on the one hand and on the other the idea of self-governance and “an unfettered existence in pur-

31

suit of knowledge”, which used to be the key reason to choose the life of a researcher (Dahler-Larsen & Gleerup, 2001). However, no leader can lead without the support and understanding of employees. One prerequisite for managing an organisation in which the employees may know more than the manager is to avoid isolation and establish healthy alliances with the people who will supply results – both employees and students. Our first recommendation to teachers who want to contribute to educational development is to collaborate constructively with their heads of departments and other parts of management. As a teacher, you may find that a particular area deserves special attention, be it first-year teaching, practice of teaching, dissertation supervision, or lab teaching. The heads of departments typically focus on strategic and long-term objectives such as keeping students in their programmes, a faster completion rate, ‘leaning’ procedures, or branding of the department. At the same time, they will also be intent on attracting and keeping qualified researchers and teachers, and there is often a convergence of these interests. When teachers, department heads and students agree on developing education in a certain direction, it is much more likely that a desirable development will occur than if the decision is made just by, say, a small group of teachers. Our second recommendation is that teaching-related activities should be prioritised as much as research-related activities. That is, along with your colleagues, you should actively work to contribute to create a good research culture as well as a good teaching culture, where you learn from each other, share experiences and generally consider the provision and development of quality teaching a shared responsibility. Among other things, this implies bringing teaching to the table in general discussions. You can do so, for instance, by observing each other’s teaching (collegial supervision, see chapter 7.2). Another option is teaching seminars where you share experiences and perhaps draw inspiration from external sources. You could also try to ensure that both teaching committees, study boards and similar forums do not just discuss the practical aspects of teaching, but also development of the teaching. You may even suggest that teaching experience is prioritised when your department hires, and you can discuss teaching and educational planning more systematically at the annual performance and development review. Hopefully, increased focus on these issues will improve the experience of teaching, as teaching is often improved by being highlighted and being discussed and acknowledged by peers. Finally it is worth considering how you want to get involved in the

32

fundamental discussions about the future of universities and education. The public debates are often characterized by the absence of experienced teachers, which is a shame. Danish universities are public institutions, and it is therefore good for society when universities become the object of a lively public debate.

Learning outcome and competence-oriented university education From around the year 2000 to today, a significant change has taken place in the way we describe university education and the Danish educational system. Prior to 2003, educations and the individual courses were typically described with reference to the syllabus and the concepts and theories students were meant to learn. Now, however, education is described in terms of students’ learning outcome or so-called learning- and competence objectives. Thus, focus has changed from purely content-based teaching to the disciplinary and general competences the students are expected to master in the course of their education. One might call this a move towards “competence-oriented university education”. This development towards increased focus on students’ competences has occurred more or less simultaneously throughout Europe and the rest of the world (“outcome based education”, “capabilities driven curriculum” etc.). Denmark’s participation in a number of international reforms from the late 1990’s until today has been a contributing factor in this transition. This applies, for example, to the European Bologna Process (see the text box below), which has formed the basis for two Danish qualification frameworks from respectively 2003 and 2007. These are described in depth in chapter 3.2. Competence is not a new concept in education. It has been – and is still – applied in a number of different ways. When teaching in the university today, the competence concept cannot be avoided. It is part of the legal basis for education in Denmark, as is commonly referred to an discussed in development work and in Postgraduate Education in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. In a Danish context, the competence concept was originally developed as a critique of the concept of qualifications, which was considered too narrow and too closely connected to disciplinary knowledge rather than 33

the human resources that spark innovation, flexibility, collaboration skills etc. (Hermann 2003). However, we can identify at least three different arguments for the use of the competence concept just within the past decade: The first is the flexibility agenda, which encompass the Bologna Process (see the text box below). This first agenda primarily involves using the competence concept as a “common language” for communication about educational objectives across education levels and countries. The second is known in some places as the new disciplinarity agenda (Danish: Ny faglighed). This agenda is based on criticism of exaggerated “curriculum focus” in the education system, and the concept of competences is used to maintain focus on the students’ outcome rather than the content taught. The concept of competences is primarily considered a tool to describe subject knowledge, and “competence” is defined as “a knowledge-based readiness to act appropriately in situations that involve certain kinds of academic challenges” (Busch et al. 2004: 19). Competence descriptions must thus be based in the discipline and are not general for all fields. This means that competences in different fields may overlap, but this cannot be determined until each field describes their competences. The new disciplinarity-agenda has thus been oriented towards disciplinary didactics (Danish: Fagdidaktik), and has been very influential in certain fields, including Maths, the Natural Sciences and, to some degree, Danish. Primary school and upper secondary education have been particularly influenced by this agenda. The third argument may be called the ‘vocationally oriented agenda’. This agenda has emerged and gained force over the past 10 years. The competence concept is used here to “translate” from a traditional content-based understanding of education to what the educated person can actually do when he or she enters the labour market. This agenda views university education in relation to its usefulness on the labour market. The effect of this agenda is evident from the facts that all educations today have recruitment panels, and that labour market relevance is a central criterion for accreditation of new educational programmes and that the labour market relevance holds a prominent position in the two Danish qualification frameworks from 2003 and 2007, which have formed the basis for education development in the past decade. The three agendas all point in the same direction with regards to implementing competence-based education. However, they are often in conflict with one another. Whereas the flexibility agenda calls for “uniform” 34

goal descriptions, it is crucial for the new disciplinarity agenda that teachers enjoy a shared ownership of the developed subject-based competence descriptions These two ambitions do not always support each other.

The Bologna Process The Bologna Process is the name of a collaboration initiated by a number of European ministers of education on the basis of the so-called Bologna Declaration from 1999. The Bologna Process is not part of any EU directive. Rather, it is a voluntary collaboration, which at the time of writing includes a total of 47 European countries from both in- and outside the EU. The original objective was to develop a common European Higher Education Area (AHEA), where researchers and students could move freely across borders. One central aim was to establish comparability between the different educational systems by changing and/or supplementing the former, content-based study programmes with competence descriptions that describe the students’ learning outcome in application-oriented terms. In the original Bologna Declaration, the goal was to improve the cultural exchange between the different participating countries. This part of the process has subsequently been expanded to also include improving European education’s competitiveness on a global scale. This is, for example, evident in the way that competence-based study programmes have increasingly come to be considered a tool for improving the labour market relevance of educations and for attracting students from other parts of the world. The Bologna Process is continuously developed; primarily via a number of official meetings, where the minsters of education take stock and set new objectives, which are subsequently presented in a so-called communiqué. Together the different communiqués cover the following objectives: • Establish a system of legible and comparable degrees (e.g., through Diploma Supplement). • Establish a degree system comprising three levels (3+2+3). • Establish a system of credits based on the European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) to promote student mobility. 30 ECTS corresponds to one full semester’s work load. • Remove obstacles to mobility for both students and teachers. • Cooperate on the development of quality assurance. • Strengthen a European dimension in higher education.

35

Initially, the plan was that the Bologna Process would run until 2010, and end with the realisation of the shared European Higher Education Area, where participating countries’ educational systems should, according to the plan, be fully compatible with the collective Bologna qualification framework from 2005. However, in 2009, the participating countries decided to continue the Bologna Process until 2020. The objectives remained the same, and since the so-called Leuven communiqué from 2009, the aim of improving education’s relevance for the labour market has become increasingly important role as a common path out of the financial crisis (EC 2009). At the same time, new focus areas have arisen, e.g., that before 2020, 20 % of all graduating students must have studied abroad.

In the above, we have described three different agendas for competence description, agendas that have all contributed to the massive influence on the educational development at Danish universities. In that connection, we emphasised the Bologna Process as representing the flexibility agenda. Interestingly, the Danish qualification framework, which is the national implementation of the European framework, can be seen as representing the vocationally oriented agenda. The individual participating countries have interpreted the requirement for competence descriptions differently, and in Denmark, the requirement for application-orientation was interpreted quite literally by the Ministry of Science. The first qualification framework from 2003 encouraged the removal of educational elements that were not directly translatable into specific functions on the labour market (such as “academic reflection” and “democratic views”) from the new study programmes. This view is also reflected in the Danish Accreditation process. As the only country in Europe, Denmark lists labour market relevance as the primary criterion for approval for accreditation of education (Sarauw 2011). In comparison, the international Bologna qualification framework from 2005 has a much broader view of which competences university students should acquire from their education. In addition to preparation for the labour market, it is made explicit that students should continue to have a broad, advanced knowledge base, a democratic disposition and undergo a personal process of development (EHEA 2005: 35). A number of the classic epistemological and process-oriented educational aims, not easily translated into vocationally relevant competences, 36

have disappeared from the curricula of programs established after the first qualification framework was introduced in 2003 (Sarauw 2011). One example of this is Danish at the University of Copenhagen, where the 1998-curriculum’s ideals of “critical confrontation of knowledge with knowledge and theory with theory” and “immersion in the subject’s individual areas” (Danish, UoC 1998) have been cut in favour of a new competence profile that refers to specific “vocations”, where “the special competences” of students holding degrees in Danish are “in demand” (Danish/UoC 2008). Basing education on competences can thus give rise to an unholy alliance between the flexibility agenda and the vocationally oriented agenda, which may make application-orientation and adaptation to the corporate world the predominant objective of education. In its extreme form, this alliance will lead to the removal of anything not directly relevant to a vocational function from the curricula.

Concluding remarks The university is in a bit of an identity crisis: Slightly groggy from its own success, it attempts to define its new identity, while being tugged and pulled from all sides. How to enact concepts such as research-based teaching and other humboldtian ideals, which made the university the central social institution it is today, in a meaningful way, when not 1 %, but 25 % of a cohort need a university education? What to keep and what to get rid of? How should an institution, whose fundamental principle has been the division of education into separate disciplines, respond when the disciplines are breaking up and rapidly changing? Project work and interdisciplinarity were constructive suggestions that emerged when the new universities were formed in the 1970’s, and today competence-orientation is a central suggestion for a new orientation. However, the questions are far from settled and the new suggestions for answers are not without problems. In this chapter, we have provided a number of examples of the way in which university education, both historically and today, is closely connected to a number of agents inside and outside the university. One key point is that university education is not just a matter of concern to teachers and students. University education and good teaching are complex entities that are developed in an interplay between many different agents: 37

students, teachers, student union representatives, university managers, administrative staff, labour market actors, unions and various academic and professional organisations, politicians, public servants, companies etc. On top of all that, there are international agents such as the European Commission, OECD and the dual tracks in the Bologna Process. Often, these agents use the same concepts, but with different interpretations. As university teachers, we must therefore accept that many take an interest in – and have an opinion about – our work. In spite of its long history, the university is not static, but a battleground or developmental zone for value-based and political discussions about how society and its organisations should be organised. The ways in which we each fill our role as university teachers thus also embodies our political views of the role the university in future society, and what we are to educate students for. How we, as university teachers, weigh and prioritise the university’s two main tasks – education and research – in relation to each other is an essential part of continually taking a stand. Naturally, the position you hold plays a role here (a post doc typically has very little teaching to do, while an assistant professor has more). However, there is usually a chance of influencing the situation and, for example, asking for more teaching if you do not have enough, or being relieved if you are teaching so much that your research suffers. Many places still prioritise research when they hire faculty, but focus is slowly changing to teaching qualifications, and teaching certainly constitutes a crucial part of the work of permanent academic staff. If teaching and research are the two legs on which the university stands, you will find yourself in the best situation if you make sure to exercise both legs before signing up for the race.

Resources Humboldt and the research-based university

Kristensen, J.E., K. Elstrøm, J.V. Nielsen, M. Pedersen, B.V. Sørensen & H. Sørensen (2007). Ideer om et universitet. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag. – In this book, key texts about the foundation and ideas of the university are presented in a Danish translation including both classic and modern texts. Texts written by e.g., Immanuel Kant, Wilhelm von Humboldt, Thomas Huxley, Jürgen Habermas and Michael Gibbons.

38

From elite university to mass university

Hansen, E. (1997). En koral i tidens strøm: RUC 1972-1997. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag. Nielsen, J.C., N. Jensenius & H.S. Olesen (1997). Utopien der slog rod. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag. – Two books about RUC’s formation and history that each provide an interesting insight into the interplay between student movements and government in rethinking the university from the end of the 1960’s until today. New governance structures and management styles

Graversen, E. (ed.) (2009). Universitetsledelse. Copenhagen: DJØF Forlag – Anthology about university governance in Denmark, historically and today, with contributions from a number of former rectors and deans etc. Kristensen, J.E., H. Nørreklit & M. Raffensøe-Møller (eds.) (2001). University Performance Management – A Silent Managerial Revolution of Danish Universities. Copenhagen: DJØF Publishing. – Anthology that illuminates the advent of New Public Management in the Danish universities. Competence-based university education

The reference group (2007). Ny dansk kvalifikationsramme for videregående uddannelse. Copenhagen: Referencegruppen om en ny dansk kvalifikationsramme for videregående uddannelser, [Lit: The Reference Group on a new Danish qualification framework for higher education] May 2007. Niss, M. & T.H. Jensen (2002). Kompetencer og matematiklæring – Ideer og inspiration til udvikling af matematikundervisning i Danmark. Copenhagen: Ministry of Education. – These two texts are significant contributions to the development of competence-orientation of Danish university educations, but with completely different agendas.

39

Literature Bill 1992/1 LSF 75. Busch, H., N.F. Elf & S. Horst (2004). Fremtidens uddannelser. Den ny faglighed og dens forudsætninger. The Ministry of Education. Available via www. nyfaglighed.emu.dk. Christiansen, F.V. (2010). Er forskningsfinansieringen blevet uddannelsernes værste fjende? MONA, 2-2010. Dahler-Larsen, P. & J. Gleerup (2001). Mellem strategier og videnstrømme. Rapport fra projektet “Vurdering af personalepolitiske instrumenter til omstilling og kvalitetsudvikling på universitets-undervisningsområdet”. Omstillingsfonden, SCCK-rapport. Danish, UoC, Study board for Department of Nordic Studies and Linguistics Copenhagen University (1998). Curriculum for Danish 1998. Danish, UoC, Study bord for Department of Nordic Studies and Linguistics Copenhagen University (2008). Curriculum for Danish 2008 EC (2005). A framework for Qualifications in the Higher Education Area. Copenhagen: Ministry for Higher Education and Science EC (2009). The Bologna Process 2020 – The European Higher Education Area in the New Decade. Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education. Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve, 28-29 April 2009. Graversen, E. (ed.) (2009). Universitetsledelse. Copenhagen: DJØF Forlag. Hansen, E. (1997). En koral i tidens strøm: RUC 1972-1997. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag. Hermann, S. (2003). Fra styring til ledelse – om kompetencebegrebets udvikling. Uddannelse, 1/2003. Humboldt, W. v. (1809). Om den indre og ydre organisation af de højere videnskabelige læreanstalter i Berlin. In: J.E. Kristensen m.fl. (2007), Ideer om et universitet. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag: 89-96. Jensen, H. & H. Nexø Jensen (2011). Specialeskrivning på seks måneder. De nye specialeregler belyst ved erfaringer fra Institut på Statskundskab, Københavns Universitet. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 10. Klausen, K.K. (2001). Skulle det være noget særligt? Organisation og ledelse i det offentlige. Copenhagen: Børsen. Kristensen, J.E., H. Nørreklit & M. Raffensøe-Møller (eds.) (2011). University Performance Management – A Silent Managerial Revolution of Danish Universities. DJØF Publishing. Lov om universiteter (The University Act). LAW no. 403, 28/05/2003. Lov om universiteter m.fl. (The University Act). LAW no. 1089, 23/12/1992. Lov nr. 570 af den 6. juni 2007.

40

Referencegruppen (2007). Ny dansk kvalifikationsramme for videregående uddannelse. The Reference Group on a new Danish qualification framework, May 2007. Sarauw, L.L. (2011). Kompetencebegrebet og andre stileøvelser. Fortællinger om uddannelsesudviklingen på de danske universiteter efter universitetsloven 2003. PhD thesis at Copenhagen University. Ståhle, B. (2011). En forskerstab i vækst. Forskerpersonale og forskerrekruttering på danske universiteter 2007-2009. Copenhagen: UNI-C. Statistik og Analyse. The Government (2006). Fremgang, fornyelse og tryghed – Strategi for Danmark i den globale økonomi, april 2006. The Government (2011). Et Danmark der står sammen – Regeringsgrundlag, oktober 2011. Universiteternes styrelseslov (Law no. 271, 4 June 1971). Commented by Knut Espen Hansen (1971). Copenhagen: G.E.C. Gads Forlag.

41

42

1.2 Research-based teaching NINA BONDERUP DOHN AND JENS DOLIN

Research-based teaching is a defining feature and hallmark of universities, and can be traced back to Wilhelm von Humboldt’s (and others’) reinvention of the university in Berlin at the beginning of the 1800s. Their notion of a university as a place of research, where students learn from being part of this environment, is tied to the ideal of academic freedom and independence and the education of autonomous and critical citizens. Education is also Bildung. Science – i.e., the construction of knowledge – forms the foundation. Students must learn to take part in the scientific processes, not just be taught. This ideal has endured until today, where research-based teaching (and freedom of research) is mentioned in the Danish University Act of 2011: § 2: The university is to conduct research and offer research-based education at the highest international level within its academic fields. The university must ensure equal interaction between research and education, perform ongoing strategic selection, prioritisation and development of its academic research and educational fields and disseminate knowledge of the methods and results of science. Sub-clause 2: The university has academic freedom. The university must safeguard the academic freedom of the university and the individual and the ethics of science.

However, the ideal of research-based education has been challenged because universities have turned into mass universities, and marketisation has set in. More and more students study for a tertiary degree – in 2012, the government’s goal was for 25 % of a cohort to complete a degree in higher education – and one may question whether that many people actually need research competences. We may rather be in need of specialised and complex knowledge, which can only be found at university level. Furthermore, education has become a parameter of competition in the global competition, and knowledge has become a commodity, which has changed 43

the terms and conditions for universities. With a relative decrease in the taximeter rates and increased requirements for research “production”, many departments give in to the temptation to let (low-wage) teaching assistants teach undergraduate courses and let (higher-paid) researchers spend their time applying for research grants. This trend is reinforced by the fact that teaching does not confer the same status as research, which means many researchers prioritise research over teaching. At the same time, some people believe that a close relationship between research and teaching weaken both: In all but the most elite academic environments, when you co-locate teaching and research you reduce your efficiency in producing both. (Lloyd 2009)

Research-teaching nexus The notion of research-based teaching is tied to a perception of the interaction between research and teaching, the so-called “research-teaching nexus”, as a positive relationship. The idea that good research results in good teaching has taken root in the academic world, however, often without explications of how this relationship is to be understood, where the causality stems from – and whether it even exists. The core idea is that high research productivity and quality also results in high teaching quality. The rationale behind this view is that research forms the basis for the content taught. Teachers, who are also active researchers, will therefore be more in touch with the cutting edge of research, and are therefore better able to present the most recent findings in their teaching, add the most relevant examples, and put the content into proper perspective. Studies indicate that students generally appreciate interaction between research and teaching: […] there is clear evidence from a range of studies in different types of institutions of students valuing learning in a research-based environment. (Jenkins 2004: 29)

However, not all students benefit from research-based teaching. A study at the University of Oxford indicated that one in three students with a deep approach to learning felt they benefited from contact with an active

44

researcher, while one in five students with a surface approach to learning felt it was a disadvantage. The other side of this equation – that teaching can contribute to research – is often overlooked. However, it can be fruitful to present research to students. Students can often identify weaknesses, and students’ comments and ideas can lead to new research questions and fuel new directions in research. A recent research project has shown that graduates, who both teach and research, acquire better research competences than students who merely research. This project thus indicates that teaching contributes to research (Feldon et al. 2011). Literature about the research-teaching nexus is now extensive. The first meta-study about this, “The Relationship between Research and Teaching: A Meta-Analysis” (Hattie & Marsh 1996), found that the relationship between research quality and teaching quality at most could be found to be “slightly positive” (p. 525), and thus concluded that “the common belief that research and teaching are inextricably entwined is an enduring myth” (p. 529). The study caused something of a commotion, and its methodological approach has been criticised. In a follow-up study, “The Relation between Research Productivity and Teaching Effectiveness: Complementary, Antagonistic, or Independent Constructs?” (Marsh & Hattie 2002), Marsh and Hattie expand on the underlying model, and they conclude that the study: […] clearly indicate[s] that teaching effectiveness and research productivity are nearly uncorrelated, thus supporting the hypothesis that they are independent constructs. (p. 635)

However, there is reason to be critical of studies comparing entities as complex as the quality of research and the quality of teaching, where it can be hard to find valid and common measures. To show how uncertain conclusions such as Marsh and Hattie’s are, Verburgh et al. (2007) examined 116 studies of the relationship between research and teaching. They discovered that the variables (who was included in the study, whether they were analysed as individuals, as a faculty or department) and the variables’ operationalization (measures of teaching quality and research quality) varied a great deal. None of the studies, however, included students’ learning, or considered the specific ways in which research and teaching are interconnected. 45

The fact that good research does not correlate with good teaching is therefore not a sufficient argument for separating research and teaching. The lacking correlation merely indicates that, among good researchers, there are both good and bad teachers – and vice versa. All universities should therefore strive for a positive correlation between research and teaching and simultaneously ensure that research actually benefits student learning. As a concrete example, the box below shows how researchers at the University of Oxford view the mutually beneficial relationship between research and teaching as well as the limitations of this relationship.

The research-teaching nexus at Oxford Based on interviews with staff, questionnaires, and analyses of documents, a report concludes: Research benefits teaching and learning in five ways: • By encouraging enthusiasm and motivation on the part of both students and staff. • By providing better resources for students. • By access to research networks. • By induction of students into the scholarly community. • By providing the context for conveying ideas about knowledge construction within the discipline. Teaching benefits to research in three ways: • By ensuring that researchers retain a broad view of the subject by providing better resources for students. • By offering the opportunity for researchers to get additional feedback on their work. • By generating useful research questions and data. Limits to teaching – research nexus. • The complexity of research in some disciplines. • The way in which disciplinary knowledge is constructed. • Circumscribed conceptions of research. • Pressure to do research. • Summative assessment of students as individuals. (Stocks 2008)

46

It is important to note that a positive research-teaching nexus does not simply emerge of its own accord in a university. You have to act strategically and set up the right conditions and facilitate activities that encourage a mutually beneficial connection between research and teaching.

Different approaches to research-based teaching Different stakeholders in university education – students, teachers, people responsible for education, the corporate employers, politicians etc. – hold many different views of what is or should be involved in “research-based teaching” (RT). These views range from the requirement that students be taught research results to the expectation that they will collaborate with active researchers on projects producing new knowledge. The different views of what RT is reveal certain focal points, which are implicitly or explicitly assumed to decide whether teaching is research-based or not. In the accreditation criteria for new and existing university educational programmes, the overriding criterion concerned with the knowledge base of the educational programme reads:1 “The programme builds on the type of knowledge base required by the ministerial rules for the specific type of programme”. The criterion is elaborated on as follows: •

The programme is attached to a relevant academic/professional environment, where teachers generally live up to the qualification and competence requirements for the programme,

•

The programme is based on the newest knowledge and is organised by teachers who take part in or have active contact with relevant research or development environments,

•

Students are exposed to the relevant knowledge base, e.g. through inclusion in activities related to it.

(ACE Denmark, Guide to programme accreditation – New programmes and local provision of programmes 2013: 11)

The first two sub-criteria concern the content, the qualifications of the people who organise and teach the given programme, and the organisation of the programme in relation to a research environment. These are 1 This paragraph and the following ones differ somewhat from the Danish original in order to reflect the changes in the accreditation criteria that went into effect on 1 July 2013.

47

all relevant parameters: Teaching cannot be research-based if the content is not founded upon research. Active researchers know their own and adjacent fields better than non-researchers. Affiliation to a research environment of a high standard provides outstanding opportunities for teaching, from specific examples to participation in research projects. The last sub-criterion concerns how students are brought into contact with the knowledge base. The addition of this focus area constitutes an improvement as compared to the previous formulation of accreditation criteria (from 2012) which were not concerned at all with what students and teachers should actually do. However, the criterion is vaguely and not very ambitiously formulated: lecturing to students on a textbook will also count as ‘including them in an activity’ which ‘exposes them to the relevant knowledge base’. In effect, though the focus area has been added, the new formulation is no more specific about what students and teachers should do than the old ones were. Furthermore, it is striking that none of the Act’s sub-criteria connect research-based teaching with research methods or demand that students learn to apply and assess such methods. These omissions put the Act’s focus in stark contrast to the university education researcher Mick Healey’s approach to research-based teaching. Mick Healey has studied “research-based teaching” and different methods of implementation intensively. He studies what students and teachers actually do in different types of teaching and learning activities. Furthermore, Mick Healey has studied whether and how much the students’ activities are aimed towards research content (in the sense of new knowledge) or work that involves research problems and research methods. Based on this analysis of student activity, Healey presents the following diagram with two dimensions: 1) The role of the students, as either participants or audience, and 2) the weighting of research content in relation to research problems and methods. This results in the four quadrants shown in figure 1. Some examples of activities in each quadrant are:

• Research-led teaching (lower left quadrant), where the teacher lectures based on recent research content. • Research-oriented teaching (lower right quadrant), where the teacher formulates research problems and demonstrates methods to address them. The teacher can do so by demonstrating the methods in a lab or by students observing a scientific debate between two researchers.

48

• Research-tutored teaching is found in e.g. seminars, where students actively participate in the discussion of research articles. • Research-based teaching means that students formulate research questions themselves and apply scientific methods to solve them, e.g., through problem-oriented project work. We use Mick Healey’s term for the last form, although “research-based teaching” in this chapter refers to all possible ways of connecting research and teaching. STUDENTS ARE PARTICIPANTS

EMPHASIS ON RESEARCH CONTENT

Research-tutored

Research-based

Engaging in research discussions

Undertaking research and inquiry

Research-led

Research-oriented

Learning about current research in the discipline

Developing research and inquiry skills and techniques

EMPHASIS ON RESEARCH PROCESSES AND PROBLEMS

STUDENTS ARE FREQUENTLY AN AUDIENCE

Figure 1. Different ways of connecting research and teaching (Healey 2005: 69).

A third way to approach the question of research-based teaching is by means of the didactic triangle (see chapter 2.2) as presented by Tina Bering Keiding (2010). The didactic triangle illustrates the relationships between, respectively, teacher and content, student and content, and student and teacher. RT changes meaning depending on which of these relationships you select as your starting point. Examples of “research-based teaching” on each side of the triangle include: • Lectures based on research content (teacher and content side). • Students doing project work, possibly without much supervision from the teacher (student and content side). • Students performing and analysing tests for the teacher as part of the teacher’s research project, possibly without students knowing what the project is about (teacher and student side).

49

As these examples show, each form of teaching carries an inherent risk of disconnecting (at least) one of the three didactic categories. RT viewed purely as the presentation of research may disconnect the students; RT understood as organisation of research may disconnect the teacher; and RT understood as a research collaboration between teacher and students may disconnect the content (or at least the students’ understanding of it).

Contents

Teaching as presentation of research

Teaching as organisation of research

Teacher

Students Teaching as research collaboration

Figure 2. The didactic triangle.

Combining Mick Healey’s and Tina Keiding’s approaches with the points discussed in relation to the Act’s requirements and in the chapter’s first section, we find the following focus points for research-based teaching: • The content and form of teaching: -- Teaching is largely focused on fields that are currently the objects of research. -- Teaching exemplifies the application of research methods in practice. -- Teaching is based on research project(s) (preferably beyond a single course session). • The teacher’s activities and qualifications: -- The teacher is an active researcher in the field. -- The teacher includes his or her research in teaching. -- The teacher involves students in his or her research. 50

• The students’ activity: -- Students participate in the discussion of research problems and results. -- Students actively apply the field’s theory and research methods (preferably beyond a single session) to known problems. -- Students apply the field’s theory and research methods (preferably beyond a single session) to new problems and/or to construct new knowledge. -- Students actively participate in a research project. • The organisation of education: -- The educational programme is connected to an active research environment. The list highlights the conditions which arguably make teaching research-based. You will therefore not find a bullet stating “students are an audience to which research content is communicated”. What makes such an activity research-based is the content taught, and this point has its own bullet. On the other hand it has to be pointed out that the same activity may be research-based on the basis of more than one focus point. When students construct new knowledge using research methods as part of their participation in a research project, teaching qualifies as “research-based” on (at least) four of the focus points under the overall headings the content and form of teaching and the students’ activity. Furthermore, some of the focus points will overlap in specific activities. Finally, it should be noted that the list is not prioritised, and different elements will be prioritised differently by different people, depending on what they generally consider to be the purpose of research-based teaching, as well as which types of knowledge, skills, competences, approaches to learning and education they specifically wish to support.

Different disciplines’ different approaches to researchbased teaching Research-based teaching is so disputed, not to mention difficult to find a common denominator for, because both “research” and “teaching” are concepts with countless interpretations, which even vary from one discipline to the next. In some disciplines, research generally consists of clearly defined empirical studies, perhaps based on a large amount of quantita51

tive data, while other disciplines base research on comparative theoretical studies and a small amount of qualitative material. Classical lectures are a tradition of some disciplines while others emphasise practical work. It is probably impossible to systematise the disciplines’ different views and traditions exhaustively. Many people distinguish between empirical sciences (typically the natural sciences), interpretative sciences (typically the humanities) and applied sciences (such as engineering, medicine). This distinction is primarily based on the sciences’ epistemological differences, which provide different options for research-based teaching, just as they have developed different teaching traditions. A compilation of accreditation reports from a number of Danish educational programmes in 2010/2011 shows that the majority of accredited educations met the requirements in terms of being research-based, according to the criteria then in force (ACE Denmark 2012). 166 out of 198 programmes provided the required research-based teaching. Educational programmes within the humanities constitute the majority of the educations that failed in these requirements (11) or partially failed (16). This can be partly explained by the lack of connection between research areas tied to the programmes and the programmes’ subject elements, as well as students not being taught by tenured faculty. This last aspect is due to the poor financial situation of smaller programmes, which prevents the permanent employment of relevant researchers. The report shows that the way research is integrated into e.g. teaching depends very much on the context, i.e., the research environment, the study environment, the sizes of the environments, the number of part-time lecturers, geographic spread etc. all play a role. However, there are general differences between the ways that Bachelor- and Master’s programmes are “research-based”. Bachelor programmes’ emphasis on establishing fundamental skills means that students are taught more about research methods than about the latest research. Often they are taught by teacher assistants or older students. Some researchers also prefer teaching on Master’s programmes. Finally, it is relevant to mention the argument put forward by some students, namely that the connection with research should not come at the expense of pedagogical skills. Interviewed students responded that “[…] the ability to communicate research from their perspective is crucial to the value of basing the teaching on research” (ACE Denmark 2012: 14). Rather than quantitative studies of correlations between research and teaching, or a general analysis of how different fields can connect research and teaching, it is useful to conduct qualitative studies of teaching 52

within a clearly defined field. Such studies can provide specific examples of the research-teaching nexus and be used for inspiration. Lene Møller Madsen and Carl Winsløw (2009), for example, show how the interplay between research and teaching depends on what is being researched and taught and how both are carried out. Through interviews with professors in Physical Geography and Mathematics at the University of Copenhagen, they uncover the teaching and research practice of these two fields and thereby their different conditions for research-based teaching. Mathematics is characterised as a “vertical” field, in that the modules are hierarchically structured so that undergraduates rarely work within the researcher’s research areas. On the other hand, the geographers described their research area as more parallel or “horizontal”, so that students relatively early on, even as undergraduates, get to work with themes that are relevant to the researchers’ own research. Furthermore, in mathematics, researchers work in small, horizontal research groups of peers on equal footing and with the same knowledge of the research field. Typically, students are not in command of the theories and techniques involved in the group’s work and can therefore not be included. Research-based teaching then consists in, for example, setting “research-like” tasks. Geographers, on the other hand, typically carry out their research in vertical organisations, where a professor leads a large group of colleagues and assistants, who perform different tasks in the common project in accordance with their individual competences. Even undergraduates can therefore assist in research projects. As a result, several geographers have reported that the line between research and teaching is blurred. Whether such disciplinary structures are an expression of an almost ontological reality, or merely the result of a tradition developed over a long period of time, is difficult to say. Most disciplines are structured in the same way at most universities. However, there are also universities whose approaches to research and teaching differ from the majority. In Healey’s view, research-based teaching means that the student participates in research-like processes, which often entail some form of inquiry-based education or problem-based teaching. Being able to ask questions is a central element of research, and the ability to ask questions is an expression of competence within the field of research, just as the evolvement of the research process’ is determined by the question. The concept “inquiry-based learning” refers to a number of different approaches that stimulate learning by allowing students to ask and research questions. The American National Research Council defines an inquiry-based approach as including the following elements (NRC 2000: 25): 53

•

Learners are engaged by scientifically oriented questions.

•

Learners give priority to evidence, which allows them to develop and evaluate explanations that address scientifically oriented questions.

•

Learners formulate explanations from evidence to address scientifically oriented questions.

•

Learners evaluate their explanations in light of alternative explanations, particularly those reflecting scientific understanding.

•

Learners communicate and justify their proposed explanations.

This is a method of teaching with a high level of self-regulated learning and student autonomy. It often emphasises argumentation and processes. There is solid research-based evidence that this method of teaching increases students’ motivation, and much research furthermore indicates positive learning benefits: Enquiry-based learning may improve the quality of teaching and learning in higher education, but careful consideration should be given to the dynamics of the specific context in which it is introduced. (Deignan 2009: 13)

Advice and suggestions

• Consider which kinds of knowledge production characterises your field and how your own research relates to it. • Consider which focus points in research-based teaching best suit your research field and style of teaching, and introduce at least one of them in your next lesson. • Consider how your teaching can contribute to your research.

Examples of research-based teaching Research-based teaching is a complex concept, and can be realised in as many ways as there are teachers and students. Many teachers save research-based teaching for graduate students, and believe it is difficult and of minor importance to include research at the undergraduate level. However, this is mainly a question of how to base your teaching on research. Mick Healey and Alan Jenkins (2009) have collected an impressive amount of examples of research-based teaching of undergraduates. Their argument is that “[…] all undergraduate students in all higher education 54

institutions should experience learning through, and about, research and inquiry. In undergraduate research, students learn and are assessed in ways that come as close as possible to the experience of academic staff carrying out their disciplinary research” (ibid. 3). The report provides examples from many different fields to show how the individual teacher can reflect his or her research in the teaching. However, the report also shows that there is great potential in developing team strategies and departmental strategies and actual institutional practices and strategies for research-based teaching. Finally, the report documents, through many concrete examples, that national politics and strategies can play a key role by supporting the institution’s inclusion of undergraduate students in research processes. In a Danish context, proceedings from a conference about research-based teaching in the natural science disciplines were published with many field- and education-specific examples (Christiansen et al. 2011). The Faculty Metro at au.dk and “Education at its Best” at ku.dk both include a wealth of inspirational material. Below, we provide some detailed examples and provide some advice and suggestions for each one. Example 1: Class teaching with students who collect empirical data from their own lives

This example relates research-based teaching assessed to the key points content and form of teaching and students’ activity, in casu the students’ application of research methods to construct new knowledge. In Healey’s matrix (p. 49), this falls in the top right quadrant; in Keiding’s didactic analytics (p. 50), it is located on the “Teaching as organisation of research”-axis. The essence of this example is that the students are involved in the study of a research problem tied to the discipline through the collection of empirical data, to which they have privileged access either in or outside of their studies. The empirical data is saved in a shared database, from which wider and more sophisticated data than the data the students have access to individually can be extracted. The database can be expanded over several years and can potentially also contribute to the teacher’s research. This form of RT can be used in a number of disciplines and educational programmes in the humanities, the social sciences and in health sciences. RT is relevant for fields that work with problems of a kind that 55

students may encounter on their own or through their network. Healey and Jenkins (2009) describe a course for first-year psychology students at York St. John University in the UK, where students collected data about students’ quality of life, and based their questions on a manual provided by the teacher. Each student collected data from their own life and from three other students. This data was put in a database over several years. After collecting their own data, students wrote papers about students’ quality of life, and based their analyses on the wider data available in the database. Inspired by this course, a similar activity was implemented in the course Web-mediated Communication and Interaction in the 2nd semester of the MSc in Web communication, at the University of Southern Denmark. The students were asked to conduct research interviews in pairs with people in their network who worked with web-mediated communication. The interviews were meant to shed light on the opportunities and problems which the interviewees experienced in web communication and interaction. The students reported their interviews in case descriptions, partly orally in class, and partly in writing on an e-learning platform. Furthermore, the students reflected on their methodological choices in a portfolio assignment. In a discipline such as this, where development occurs rapidly, it is a challenge to ensure that case-material is up to date. The written case descriptions were intended to eventually comprise a pool of up-to-date case descriptions for use in future teaching and research. A similar activity has been implemented in Study of Religion at Aarhus University; not, however, as part of regular teaching, but as an additional offer to students. Subsequently, students could choose to follow an optional course to learn to process, analyse and present their data.2 Advice and suggestions

• Consider how well-defined and teacher-governed the students’ research projects should be. Should they collect data on the basis of the same questionnaire, and should this be formulated by the teacher alone or together with students? Or is the formulation of question guides part of the students’ research projects? Discuss the methodological advantages and disadvantages of both with the students. • Show the students examples of what they are expected to produce in their research project. 2 The example is described at the Faculty Metro website.

56

• Set aside time to discuss methodological questions with students, even if the method is not part of the learning objectives of the particular course in which the activity is carried out. If you do not do this, students’ learning outcome may not be as great as expected as regards research methods. • Keep in mind also that students can feel frustrated if “time is wasted on method”, because that will leave less time for the course’s thematic content. Explain why a discussion is necessary by referring to other fields (including the Bachelor project or the Master’s theses) and the educational programme as a whole. • Help the students connect the data to the field’s theories through learning activities in class and/or on an e-learning platform. Example 2: Class teaching based on discussion of research articles found by the students

This is an example of research-based teaching assessed in relation to the focus points the content and form of teaching and the student’s activity, specifically their participation in discussing research problems and results. In Healey’s matrix, this falls in the top left quadrant, but close to the right quadrant; in Keiding’s didactic analytics, it is placed roughly in the centre of the triangle. Key to this example is that students are asked to study relevant research literature to cover certain areas of the curriculum or semester plan, and that the chosen research literature is subsequently discussed in class, both in terms of its disciplinary content and in terms of what it reveals about research practice and research argumentation. Through this last aspect, you can help students understand both the characteristics of the research process, the criteria for research “value”, and how to search for and evaluate information in a reflected and critical way. This type of activity can in principle be used in all educational programmes, at least at the graduate level. In the humanities, where undergraduates often study research literature, it can be used in earlier semesters. The earlier this activity is offered in a programme, the more the literature search must be supported. This can be done as an integrated part of teaching in collaboration with the university library or an academic writing centre (if your university has one), or by hiring instructors from among elder students. The activity can be scaled up or down, i.e., be ascribed a greater or smaller role in a semester plan, depending on subject and level. 57

Advice and suggestions

• You should decide in advance how much and at what point you want to get involved in the students’ literature searches. Do you, for example, want to help them choose specific search terms, help them sort through abstracts, help them assess research value, before choosing a text, or discuss research value in class once the texts have been chosen? • Before the semester begins, you should consider whether you can and will include others (instructors, librarians, writing centres) in the activity. In this way the students can be supported by different professionals at different times in the process – and inform the students where the relevant experts can be found. • In any case, ensure that students are aware of the journal databases relevant to your field. This is particularly important if the activity is carried out with freshmen or sophomores. Many students only use Google. • Explicate the criteria for research value within your field. You can do so as part of the activity so students are involved in formulating the criteria before, during and/or after the literature search. • Discuss with students how and which of the texts found exemplify the criteria and which texts that perhaps do not. • Keep in mind that students sometimes find thematically irrelevant texts and/or texts that do not live up to the research standards. If you have set aside course sessions to discuss the content of the texts students have found, you must make up your mind on beforehand how you will assess such texts. One option is to provide a substantiated rejection of the text in question and tell the students to find a new one that meets the criteria for relevance and quality. This requires that students have found texts well in advance of the session in which it will be used. Another option is to use the lesson to discuss why the text was not good enough, and perhaps what is needed to make it so. A third option is to let students criticise the text in groups using theories/disciplinary perspectives discussed earlier in the course. Example 3: Class teaching based on simulation projects as practice for participating in research projects

This example of research-based teaching was used on the 9-week course Neutron Diffusion in theory, simulation and experiment, which has been held 58

annually since 2005 at the Niels Bohr Institute at Copenhagen University. The course is primarily attended by students in their 4th year with a background in Natural Sciences, and the course offers 7.5 ECTS points to students who pass, which they do (or don’t) on the basis of four reports. The learning objectives of this course include that students should understand and be able to perform experimental research techniques (viz., neutron diffusion), and to complete all the steps required in a concrete research project in neutron diffusion including mastery of the application for measuring time, planning, optimisation, data collection, data analysis and reporting. In practice, the course consists of teaching that varies on a daily basis between lectures by researchers, calculation assignments and computer simulation projects conducted by students in teams. In the course, students acquire knowledge about neutron diffusion as a research technique and about the instruments used to carry out neutron diffusion by constructing virtual copies of the actual tools in team-based computer simulation projects. Once the virtual tools are constructed, they are used to conduct virtual experiments that produce artificial data. Students can then treat these data in the analytical programmes that they will use later in the course to analyse genuine data from the research project(s) they will be part of. The course makes extensive use of web-based teaching as a supplement to classroom teaching (Udby et al. 2013). Teaching is considered to be research-based, since, by the end of the course, students participate on an equal footing with researchers in one or more actual research projects in a major international setting. In Healey’s matrix, the course describes a progressive movement from the lower left quadrant through the lower right quadrant, and on to the upper right quadrant, “research-based teaching”. Throughout this exemplary course, there are daily changes between the left and right side of Keiding’s didactic triangle (between Teaching as presentation of research and Teaching as organisation of research) ending at the bottom (Teaching as research collaboration), where the students take part in a genuine international research project. A large-scale evaluation, partly based on data mining of the student’s use of online tools and papers (Bruun et al. 2012), concludes that students from the course were able both to participate actively and to understand the experiments in connection with the final research projects much better than other students on similar courses. This form of RT is especially suitable for disciplines where the connection between theory and experiment is important, and where students 59

have widely different academic backgrounds, but where all must learn certain techniques to carry out a certain type of research experiment. Furthermore it is a particular advantage in experimental disciplines where access to research equipment is limited. Advice and suggestions

• Try to identify the academic backgrounds of students and encourage them to form groups so that the members represent a range of different competences. • Inform the students of the simulations’ purpose, and that team-work is a core competence. • Consider well in advance which research projects students should participate in, and prioritise concrete disciplinary content and guest speakers accordingly. • Inform students about good reporting practice. • Try and match students with research projects within their general area of interest and with a possibility of continuing the work in a Master’s thesis or a PhD. Additional examples

To conclude, we will briefly mention some additional examples of research-based teaching. Firstly there is problem-oriented project work as practiced at Roskilde University and Aalborg University – and increasingly at other universities as well. This organisation of work and learning exemplify the research-based teaching focus points content and form of teaching and students’ activity, more specifically their application of the field’s theory and research methods to a disciplinary problem. Depending on the novelty of the disciplinary problem, it may constitute research-based teaching in the sense that new knowledge is produced. Secondly, it is possible to conduct analytical sessions in some disciplines, in which students are involved in the analysis and interpretation of research data collected by others. This is research-based teaching in relation to the focus points content and form of teaching, the teacher’s activities and qualifications (both sub-points including research in teaching and including students in research) and the students’ activity, more specifically their participation in the discussion of research results. Naturally, this activity presupposes that empirical data is treated in that particular discipline. In some fields it may be a prerequisite that students have knowledge of the 60

basic theory and methods. In other fields, this activity can be a way of introducing students to analytical theory and method. Depending on the field, the activity can therefore both be part of earlier or later semesters of programmes in all faculties. A third option is that the teacher includes students in his or her own research projects, so that students complete well-defined sub-tasks. In the humanities or the social sciences, sub-tasks could involve textual analysis, conducting interviews with informants selected by the teacher, transcribing interviews conducted by the teacher, handing out and processing questionnaires etc. In parts of the health sciences, such sub-tasks could also prove relevant. Similarly, within both the natural and health sciences sub-tasks might concern conducting and analysing genuine lab tests. This method of teaching is research-based in terms of the content and form of teaching, the teacher’s activities and qualifications (including students in research) and the students’ activities, more specifically their participation in a research project. Advice and suggestions

• Explicate the objectives of research-based teaching to the students – and do so frequently. As we briefly touched upon at the beginning of the chapter, there are different aims – and different views of these aims – at play in university teaching today, and these different views will be represented among the students too. Some students do not understand the purpose of being involved in research activities right away. • Keep in mind that some forms of research-based teaching entail ways of learning that may be very different from what students have encountered before. This can cause uncertainty and represent obstacles for the students, even if they agree with the purpose of research-based teaching. You should discuss this uncertainty and the obstacles with students whenever they occur. • Make sure your own research objectives do not overshadow the students’ learning objectives. Be very careful that you do not exploit students as cheap labour. • Consider in advance how you will handle research tasks carried out by students that potentially do not live up to the quality criteria. Will you qualify them yourself, remove them from the collected material or something else? Also consider how your decision may affect the motivation of future students completing the same course. 61

Literature ACE Denmark (June 2012). Forskningsbasering i universitetsuddannelser – En tværgående opsamling af uddannelsesakkrediteringer fra 2010 til 2011. Copenhagen: ACE Denmark. Bruun, J., L. Udby et al. (2012). Student use of hints and solution in an online learning environment (to be published). Christiansen, F.V., S. Horst, C. Holm & K.B. Laursen (eds.) (2011). Forskningsbaseret undervisning – realiteter og potentialer. INDs Skriftserie 21/2011. Department for Science Education, University of Copenhagen. www.ind.ku.dk/ skriftserie. Deignan, T. (2009). Enquiry-Based Learning: perspectives on practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(1): 13-28. Feldon, D. F., J. Peugh, B.E. Timmerman, M.A. Maher, M. Hurst, D. Strickland, J.A. Gilmore & C. Stiegelmeyer (2011). Graduate Students’ Teaching Experiences Improve Their Methodological Research Skills. Science, 333: 1037-1039. Hattie, J. & H.W. Marsh (1996). The relationship between research and teaching: a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4): 507-542. Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching: Exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning. In: R. Barnett (ed.), Reshaping the university. New relations between research, scholarship and teaching. Berkshire: Open University Press: 67-78. Healey, M. & A. Jenkins (2009). Linking Discipline-based Research and Teaching Through Mainstreaming Undergraduate Research and Inquiry. http:// resources.glos.ac.uk/shareddata/dms/7A6736F0BCD42A039D9A5CC4ACC 7C16B.pdf (downloaded 24.8.12). Keiding, T.B. (2010, unpublished). Forskningsbaseret undervisning – undervisningsbaseret forskning. Presentation at a project day at University of Southern Denmark, 26 April 2010. Linn, M.C., E.A. Davis & P. Bell (2004). Internet environments for science education. Mahwah: Erlbaum. Lloyd, D. (2009). Blind faith in teaching-research nexus. The Australian, February 25. Madsen, L.M. & C. Winsløw (2009). Relations Between Teaching and Research in Physical Geography and Mathematics at Research-Intensive Universities. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7: 741-763. Marsh, H.W. & J. Hattie (2002). The Relation Between Research Productivity and Teaching Effectiveness: Complementary, Antagonistic, or Independent Constructs? The Journal of Higher Education, 73(5): 603-641. National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

62

Stocks, C. (2008). The Research-Teaching Nexus at Oxford. Report by The Oxford Learning Institute, Trinity Term. Udby, L., K. Lefmann, J. Bruun et al. (2013). E-learning neutron scattering. Neutron News, 24(1): 18-23. Verburgh, A., J. Elen & S. Lindblom-Ylänne (2007). Relationship between teaching and research in higher education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 26: 449-465.

63

64

2.1 Teaching for learning JENS DOLIN

Teaching is a goal-oriented process planned by the teacher with the aim that the student should acquire knowledge, skills, and competences, in short: should learn something. Teaching is a matter of the teacher furthering the student’s learning through pedagogical and didactical planning. This chapter will describe what is meant by learning, and provide examples of learning theories that explain the learning process in specific situations, and thus provide a backdrop for developing teaching in a way that increases the students’ learning. It should be noted that there is no “correct” learning theory that explains the learning of everything in all situations. The different learning theories were each developed on the basis of certain prerequisites, and often to explain different aspects of learning – after which they have been applied to a broader context. These can thus profitably be viewed as different depictions of the students’ appropriation of what needs to be learned, and several models may prove necessary in order to obtain a comprehensive picture of the specific situation you want illuminated.

Explicit, implicit and behaviourist learning This chapter will examine the learning that occurs through consciously planned courses, i.e., explicit learning. But much learning happens unconsciously, as implicit learning, or in the shape of more or less deliberate behavioural regulation. Therefore, we will begin by examining implicit learning and cover the mother of all learning theories, behaviourism, which is also the most widely criticised form of learning. Implicit learning occurs automatically, and without conscious control. This learning occurs behind our backs. You can learn a new language without knowing its grammar, and you can learn to ride a bicycle without consciously knowing how it works. Implicit learning happens constantly and brings about implicit knowledge, also called tacit knowledge, i.e., knowledge we use in everyday life, but which we cannot always describe 65

(or which we rarely reflect on) and which we have no conscious relationship to. In school, the so-called hidden curriculum, that teaches students to be quiet when the teacher is speaking, to put their hands in the air and behave etc., is an example of learning tacit knowledge. However, hidden learning also occurs in the university. The way teaching is carried out conveys a certain view of learning, and the view of the field passed on by the teachers will be taken to heart by the students through adapting to and meeting the requirements of the course. A socialising process takes place, through which students establish a view of the field and different working methods that define their motivation for learning and working in the field. Behaviourism must be mentioned, because many learning theories are essentially (at least in part) a critique of behaviourism, and because behaviourism is still valid as a theory that can describe certain forms of teaching practices and the learning that arises from these practices. Finally, it still has a certain prescribing function. In some cases, we can reduce the cost of teaching by combining normal, in-depth learning-based teaching with teaching elements based on simple stimulus-response patterns. However, you must be aware that the behaviouristic elements do not ensure that students have understood what is being taught, but they can still be applied if these are embedded in other effective methods of teaching. Behaviouristic theorists simply define learning as changed behaviour. One of the first theorists of behaviourism, John B. Watson (1878-1958), rejected concepts such as consciousness and insight. In his view, psychology was to work on the basis of a natural scientific ideal, which only considers the objective observable aspects. Rather than deal with mental activities, you should describe the regularities between the stimuli the student receives and the response the student displays. Learning, therefore, takes place through behavioural conditioning, of which there are two kinds: Classic conditioning occurs when a stimulus triggers a natural reflex. Ivan Pavlov’s (1949-1936) experiment with conditioned reflexes in dogs is familiar to most. By connecting the sight and smell of food with a bell, eventually the bell alone could make the dog drool. Operant conditioning takes place when the response to the stimulus is strengthened. We are dealing with a feedback mechanism, where the response to a stimulus is followed by a reward or a punishment, which will strengthen or weaken the response in the future. Thus the consequence of a behaviour is what makes humans (and animals) act the way they do. The most famous behaviourist, the American B.F. Skinner (190466

1990), managed to make pigeons dance via positive feedback. Behaviourism deals with the interplay between human behaviour and factors in the surroundings. This often occurs through observation in contexts that are as measurable and reproducible as possible with the aim of establishing natural scientific regularities. Behaviouristic pedagogy is a question of influencing behaviour through rewards and punishment. This can promote an instrumental rather than intentional view of what needs to be learned. Students read and listen to the teacher to avoid trouble and/or to get good grades. Their work is not necessarily based on being personally engaged in the subject. The exam and grading system is perhaps the most marked expression of a behaviouristic mechanism in the educational system, along with mandatory assignments and established requirements for taking exams. However, behaviourism is highly relevant to our understanding of learning. When we get through everyday life and our time at university, it is partly because we construct knowledge through classical and operant conditioning: Learning occurs spontaneously and without reflection. However, the learning can still be meaningful, if the context in which the learning occurs is important to the student. Furthermore, operant conditioning, which furthers an external and instrumental approach to a topic or problem, can activate a deeper, intentional interest. Behaviouristic aspects can aid students in learning those parts of the content that are not a natural part of a more meaningful course of teaching, especially in higher education, where students should at least have a basic interest in their field of study. The challenge of a behaviourally-oriented learning situation is to explicate the norms and values of the system and be ready to challenge these norms. This can, for example, be done by allowing for non-planned and non-core disciplinary activities, that enable the development of individual interests that do not necessarily correspond to the desired behavioural regulation.

Behaviouristic elements in teaching (which to a certain degree promote surface learning) • Use of incentives, rewards and punishment. • Tightly structured course with well-defined content and detailed plans for all course elements.

67

• The formulation of precise and operational objectives for teaching. • Emphasis on fundamental knowledge elements and routine procedures. Behaviouristic elements can be balanced with: • Explication of and putting the formal requirements into perspective, e.g. through argumentation for the validity of the requirements. • Allowing for independently selected courses or study elements.

Three approaches to teaching In the following very simplified rendition, teaching can be viewed as the interplay between students, teacher and what needs to be learned. This didactic triangle defines three approaches to teaching:

CONSTRUCTIVIST LEARNING THEORIES

PRACTICE LEARNING Content

Student-centered/ Learning-oriented position

Teacher-centered/ Content-oriented position Approach to teaching

Students

The teacher

Teacher/student interaction position PSYCHODYNAMIC LEARNING THEORIES

Figure 1. Three approaches to teaching.

Each of these approaches can in this rendition represent a particular view of teaching, based on three groups of learning theories: Cognitive learning theories, psychodynamic learning theories and practice learning. Taking the didactic triangle from figure 1 as starting point, a teacher with a constructivist approach to learning in his or her teaching will ensure that students work actively with the material they need to learn, in order to allow students, on their own or in groups, to construct their own under68

standing of the subject. The students and content is at the centre, and the teacher has a facilitating role. A teacher, who teaches on the basis of practice learning, will show how the content must be treated, e.g., through lecturing and demonstrations, and will correct students according to the teacher’s understanding. Alongside that which needs to be learned, the teacher is at the centre, and the student is given an peripheral role. In psychodynamically oriented teaching, the interplay between teacher and student is central; it is all about establishing a good learning environment with good relationships, while the content is given an peripheral role. Those are three groups of learning theories that mutually overlap. In the literature, different terms are used for these theories, and they are divided in ways that emphasise different aspects, so the distinction between them is more than anything for analytical purposes. All three approaches to teaching will, for example, require that students go through constructivist processes, and they will all include inter-human relations, but the starting point and the emphasis of aspects will be different. Another, frequently used distinction in the field of learning is the distinction between learning as acquisition vs. learning as participation (Sfard 1998). Understanding learning as acquisition means that learning is something you have obtained or accumulated; something, which was objectively given, such as knowledge or skills, through development or construction. Acquisition can take place as either the passive reception or the active construction of knowledge, and can be considered to occur through individual or socially bound processes. The central aspect of this metaphor of learning is its focus on development or acquisition of a certain knowledge or skill as the desired end goal/objective. As a premise, there are some given units of knowledge, independent of the students, which the students must appropriate. In a participation metaphor, the student is seen as a person who must participate in the given culture’s activities rather than someone who must accumulate certain forms of knowledge. The analytical focus here is on the process of becoming a full-fledged member of a given community, and the discussion of the culture’s norms and values is part of this process. Figure 2 presents a schematic distinction between the two metaphors: Acquisition metaphor

Participation metaphor

Learning objective

Individual enrichment

Community building

Learning

Acquisition of something

Becoming a participant

69

Student

Recipient (consumer), (re)-constructor

Peripheral participant, apprentice

Teacher

Provider, facilitator, mediator

Expert participant, preserver of practice/discourse

Knowledge, concept

Property, possession, commodity (individual, public)

Aspect of practice/discourse/ activity

Knowing

Having, possessing

Belonging, participating, communicating

Figure 2. Two metaphors for learning (Sfard 1998: 7).

The two ways of distinguishing between learning theories are not mutually exclusive, but offer different insights. The division based on the didactic triangle focuses on teaching situations, and emphasises how learning can take place, and is thus aimed towards teaching practice. The understanding of learning as acquisition or participation is of a more ontological nature and can, therefore, give rise to reflections about which type of learning you wish to promote in a given teaching situation. It is, for example, most obvious to work with a student-oriented approach to learning if you want to promote research-based teaching as discussed in chapter 1.2 Furthermore, it is important to emphasise that a learning process ideally must include many approaches to learning, and the majority of teachers will draw on many different approaches in different situations in their teaching. The students both need to work with the content on their own and with others. He or she will often need demonstrations and to acquire content before being able to participate in a community, and the emotional relations are important in all learning processes. In the following, we will take as our starting point the three approaches to learning presented in the didactic triangle and suggest how these can be realised in practice. The aspects of practice learning that focus on practice communities place particular emphasis on the participant metaphor for learning.

Constructivism The key to constructivism as a learning theory is that each individual person constructs his or her knowledge through interaction with his or her surroundings. In its “Piagetian” variant, which is discussed in more detail 70

below, the starting point for all new knowledge is the individual person with his or her existing knowledge, views etc. on one hand, and the world the individual is a part of, on the other. The student will, with his or her knowledge and views, interpret the occurrences and views that he or she is subjected to, while these occurrences and views may also modify the students’ views, so future interpretations will have a different starting point. In this way, new knowledge can arise from this interaction. In a constructivist perspective, learning therefore refers to the construction of learning as a continuous interaction between between the personal (possibly social) interpretation and the surroundings’ established (possibly scientific) understanding. This view of how people learn is different from the view many hold: That knowledge is transferred from one person to another, for example by giving the right answers to others to ensure that they understand. Proponents of constructivism say – almost like a mantra – that you cannot teach others anything, that only the learner can teach himself something new. This does not mean that you cannot help others acquire knowledge, e.g., by telling them something. However, if they do not actively process what needs to be learned, it will not result in learning. One important point of constructivism is that the student’s new knowledge is based on the student’s existing knowledge. People are not empty vessels to be filled, nor are they a blank slate that can simply be inscribed. The new must fit into the existing shape; new sentences must be written and added to already existing sentences, so to speak. And if the new does not fit with the existing knowledge, problems will arise. Especially if the existing understanding contradicts established science, i.e. if the student’s conceptions are mistaken. The student can either reject the new, learn the new alongside the old (so-called parallelism), or change his or her view by adapting to the new, e.g., by erasing what is already on the slate, changing old words to fit with the new, or construct transitions between old and new sentences. The last process is called adaptation and is a central learning process in cognitive constructivism. Cognitive constructivism

Cognitive psychology focuses on how the brain works when people learn. Jean Piaget’s (1896-1980) entire epistemology, which laid the groundwork for newer constructivism, has a strong cognitive focus. Piaget underlined the active consciousness’ organisation of impressions as necessary for 71

forming sensory perceptions. Piaget viewed sensory perception as a result of the individual’s subjective actions and mental operations, where human beings form and adapt their experiences to their (own) structured world view. The key concepts in Piaget’s knowledge-formation are adaptation via assimilation and accommodation and via the concepts of schema and equilibrium. Assimilation is often described as the process in which objects of the surroundings are fitted into the subject’s structure. However, it would be more precise to say that you simply see nothing but what your existing personal schemas allow you to see. You can only perceive that which you are equipped to perceive. Thus, it is not like the organism, by learning, receives anything from the surroundings that exists independently of the organism. You interpret the new and construct your knowledge on the basis of what you already know. When assimilation thus reduces new experiences to a confirmation of pre-existing structures, the question inevitably arises: how can new knowledge emerge? This can be explained with the schema. A schema consists of three parts: • A perceived or recognised situation. • A physical or mental action connected to the situation. • An expectation to the result of the activity. The new experience begins by the person assimilating a situation, i.e. tries to fit an existing schema into his or her existing views. This brings about an activity which the person expects to have a particular result – i.e., what usually happens based on the perceived experiences. If the result does not correspond to the expectations, disequilibrium occurs. The person may disregard this disequilibrium, and thus not learn anything new. However, the most likely outcome is that you will try to trigger the same situation to see what went wrong in the first assimilation, because people always attempt to maintain or re-establish equilibrium, i.e., correspondence between the perceived situation and the pre-existing view. The second time the situation occurs, the person will be aware of the characteristics that he or she overlooked the first time, and these characteristics will then be added to that person’s schema for the phenomenon in question, so that a new schema is formed if the expected results fit the experienced situation better. This is called accommodation, and denotes unmet expectations that cause a change in an existing schema. This is why we can say that it is im-

72

possible to transfer knowledge from one person to another. The receiver will always compare the received with his or her own schemas (expectations) and either adapt the received into the existing structure (assimilate) or change his or her structure (accommodate). In a simultaneous assimilation- and accommodation process, the receiver will construct his or her own understanding of the situation. According to the traditional Piagetian view, learning takes place when a schema leads to a disruption of the cognitive equilibrium, instead of the expected result of an (attempted) assimilation, and the equilibrium is re-established through accommodation. It is important to note that this process is connected to activity. You only learn through activity. As previously mentioned, activity must be understood broadly as relating consciously to something outside oneself, e.g., reflecting on how new views and interpretations correspond with one’s own. You can therefore learn through a seemingly passive situation, such as a lecture, as longs as you listen actively, i.e., constantly consider and relate what is said to your own views.

Consequences of cognitive constructivist theories in practice • Activate the students’ knowledge and preconceptions of the topic being taught. • When dealing with actual misconceptions: Put students in situations that show the conflicts between their view and the canonical knowledge of science. • Establish relationships between earlier knowledge and the new knowledge being taught, e.g. through discussions in pairs or support questions. • Discover, or let the students discover, what he or she knows about a topic e.g., via tests and assignments. • Make room and time for the students’ own construction of knowledge, perhaps via the reconstruction of earlier views. Use buzz groups frequently to let students formulate their views. The students must be given the opportunity to ascribe their own opinion to the new knowledge. • Consolidate new knowledge through practical and theoretical anchoring in new situations.

73

The brain’s capabilities and limitations

Piaget’s extensive authorship from seven decades of active research has given rise to both interpretation and criticism, and has been further developed by a number of researchers. New knowledge of the brain’s structure and function, in particular, has added new dimensions in recent decades, and results from broad interdisciplinary areas such as “cognitive research” and “neuroscience” have recently segued into learning theory. The classical modular model of the brain was formed in 1968 and looks like this: Sensory registers

Short-term memory

Long-term memory

Control processes: Visual Input

Auditive

• reception • coding • decisions • recollection strategies

Declarative memory

Procedural memory

Figure 3. The classical modular model of the brain (adapted from Gade 2003).

This model has subsequently been revised, but it is simple and easy to remember, which is why it is still used. Memory seems to function as a storeroom where information is unloaded, stored and retrieved when needed. The sensory registers receive impressions, which the visual register, for example, can maintain for about a second. The biological function is assumed to be a kind of buffer to compensate for the eye’s blinking, to create coherent auditive input etc. Short-term memory can store some six or seven independent units, such as words or numbers, for seconds or a few minutes. If the units are lumped together, you can remember more. In fact, a phone number of 8 digits surpasses the short term memories’ abilities, but by dividing it into two or four parts, most people can remember their phone number. Connecting single units into larger, logically connected units, such as sentences, improves memory capacity. This is because units are easier to remember when they are ascribed meaning, i.e., when the units represent a higher degree of understanding. This means you draw on the content in your long-term memory to expand your shortterm memory. If you make no conscious effort, the contents of your short-term mem74

ory will quickly dissipate or be replaced by new information. The control processes mentioned above help consolidate the information, i.e,. transfer the impressions to long-term memory. Therefore, short-term memory is also called working memory, because it requires active work to transfer information to the long term memory. At the same time, this conscious (subjectively governed) transfer means that the information is personalised and thus becomes knowledge. What is stored in the long-term memory is weakened over time, unless it is refreshed regularly. However, unlike the short term memory, new knowledge does not push old knowledge out of the long term memory – on the contrary! While existing knowledge enables us to ascribe meaningful connections to new information, the old knowledge is recalled and thus consolidated. The old knowledge may change, details disappear or nuances distorted, but that is the price for continually increasing knowledge and a continued ability to learn. Different aspects of a given knowledge are stored in different places in the long-term memory. Therefore, when we recall our knowledge, we do not generate a complete, coherent mental image. What we get is a reconstruction based on the activation of different tracks in our brain. The central execution unit draws on several so-called “slave systems”, first and foremost a phonological loop and a visual sketchpad that treats auditive and visual input respectively, and the movements between the different units are marked by the fact that there is a choice between alternative tracks, that connections to many different parts of the brain can be established and that recursive loop manoeuvres can be executed. This is why we never remember the same thing twice in a row, and never remember the same as other people.

Consequence of cognition research in practice • Avoid cognitive overload. Large amounts of knowledge can be divided into smaller sections through suitable sequencing. Time should be set aside for students to digest the individual parts, e.g., through discussions, small tasks etc. • Externalise extensive knowledge and complex connections by e.g., making lists, making up mnemonic rules and drawing concept maps. • Use many different working methods and ways of representing the same knowledge (feelings, illustrations, videos, metaphors, different texts etc.).

75

• Secure the learned knowledge in long term memory by continually referring to previously acquired knowledge throughout the course.

Social constructivism

Different schools of constructivism are distinguished by viewing knowledge and the acquisition of knowledge as either an individual or as a social/cultural occurrence. A number of researchers disagree with Piaget on this issue, with Lev Vygotsky as the most important one. Vygotsky did not emphasise the consciousness’ ability to formal and logical thinking, but rather viewed mental development as an improving ability to master cultural symbols and structures. Learning is an internalisation of culture, from which knowledge moves from the interpersonal to the individual. The internalisation process takes place through mediation, i.e., communication and intervention, by means of a so-called artefact, which can be a tool in the shape of a concrete object or a mental tool, such as concepts and theories. The point is that these artefacts are not neutral tools, but that they affect our adaptation to the world and make us think in certain ways. All tools carry with them a culture and a history, which the user subjects him or herself to and absorbs. Whereas Piaget’s problem was how the individual develops more and more advanced logical skills, Vygotsky’s problem is how we acquire our culture and its different degrees of symbolism. Where Piaget sees general abstract regularities, which can be learned through formal logic, Vygotsky sees cultural tools which must be acquired through dialogue with the culture in which they arose. Vygotsky considered language to be the most important mediating artefact, and thus one important way to acquire knowledge is through communication and verbalisation, where the student’s everyday concepts are brought into dialogue with socially established, scientific concepts. An extensive conceptual framework about learning through conversation has been established, in which dialogue between different understandings, as they are formulated linguistically, form the path to learning. Much of this research is based on the Russian literary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin’s theories of how understanding can arise through the exchange of opinions. According to Bakhtin, understanding is never the transferral of meaning from sender to recipient. Understanding depends on the re-

76

cipient actively meeting “the message” with a reaction, and understanding arises in this meeting of opinions. The Norwegian learning theorist, Olga Dysthe (1997) speaks of an “ideological bridge” between dialogue partners, established through the exchange of interrelated utterances. Understanding can be considered the mutual construction of meaning. However, it is the undetermined parts, the doubts, the uncertainties, the opportunities, that trigger the engagement of the involved parties and thus their attempt at ascribing meaning. To better illustrate this, Bakhtin distinguishes between two essentially different forms of dialogue: the authoritative and the internally persuasive dialogue. The authoritative word is uttered by an authority (priest, professor, professional et al.), and is uttered as an indisputable truth, which, due to the speaker’s authority, leaves no room for doubt or different opinions. Therefore it does not encourage engagement or investment in the dialogue, and thus the student’s negotiation of meaning as a way to understanding is blocked. An external, authoritative discourse arises by pontificating finished formulations that must be reproduced without change. In contrast to the authoritative word, the internal persuasive word gains power in dialogue through the words’ own argument. This is activated when utterances (e.g., the teacher’s) give rise to uncertainties, vagueness, open problems that require the student to formulate his own opinion on the topic. The student is invited to partake in the dialogue, and room is made for the community’s and the individual’s opinions. The transmitting meets the interpretative. The problem is that teachers, by virtue of their role, are an authority and therefore speak with an authoritative voice, and there is the fact that teachers, at least usually, know more than the students. It can therefore be difficult, and seem insincere, if teachers wish to promote an internal persuasive dialogue. But doing so can help engage students in the exchange of opinions and thus learning. There is a big difference between asking about factual content and asking students how they understand these facts. According to Vygotsky, the path to individual (psychological) acquisition is thus through social acts. On one hand, an individual can be considered an object of the historical and cultural conditions (s)he is born into, and on the other the person is a subject, who also shapes that same culture. This acquisition of culture, and thus of knowledge, can be aided

77

through scaffolding, i.e., support suited to the individual through which the teacher can lead the student into his or her zone of proximal development: […] the distance between the actual development level as determined by independent problem-solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem-solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers. (Vygotsky 1978: 86)

Consequences of applied social constructivism for practice • Arrange social situations where the student can apply and reflect on the application of the culture’s artefacts. • Support the student as much as necessary, and allow the student to take over and control the learning process at the pace he or she can manage. • Establish dialogical situations where students are able to exchange views and understandings on an equal footing. As a teacher, make room for the student’s opinions and formulations, and clarify and appreciate the different views and add new information. • Work with authentic problems, which give room for students’ own opinions.

Situated learning, apprenticeship, practice communities All learning, whether viewed from a cognitive perspective or a socio-cultural perspective, takes place in a context which does not just affect thinking and learning, but which in some sense carries what is learnt. The theory of situated learning was (further) developed by Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger (2003). Through analyses of a number of specific learning situations in different every-day contexts (from tailors in Liberia to housewives in USA), Lave and Wenger showed how our cognitive abilities are stored contextually. When normal people, for example, go shopping in a supermarket and need to find the best offers among a wide selection of different prices and quantity, most people succeed in doing so. However, when faced with the same problem formulated as a traditional, abstract mathematical problem, the same people struggle to find the correct answer. This is why learning is about: 78

[…] the relational character of knowledge and learning, about the negotiated character of meaning, and about the concerned (engaged, dilemma-driven) nature of learning activity for people involved. That perspective meant that there is no activity that is not situated. (Lave and Wenger 2003: 33)

Situated learning led to a change in the view of learning processes: The notion of situated learning now appears to be a transitory concept, a bridge, between a view according to which cognitive processes (and thus learning) are primary, and a view according to which social practice is the primary, generative phenomenon, and learning is one of its characteristics. (Ibid.: 34)

The university’s formalised learning contexts may seem far removed from normal everyday contexts. However, learning is also situated here, and the consequences are the same. What students learn in one course cannot necessarily be used in a different course or later in the same course. Lars B. Krogh and Jens Dolin (2011) have shown the same in regards to 15-year-old pupils’ knowledge, measured as a score in OECD’s PISA-surveys, and their ability to converse about the same tasks – the results are very different, because the situations call for very different resources. Competence is not an abstract, constant ability, it depends on which situation it must be used in: From the viewpoint of situated cognition, competent action is not grounded in individual accumulations of knowledge, but is, instead, generated in the web of social relations and human artefacts that define the context of our action. (St. Julien 1997: 261)

Situated learning is connected to the concept of transfer. When we learn something in a specific context, it is difficult to activate that insight in a different context – there is only little transfer between the two situations. This is a fundamental problem in teaching contexts (e.g., the application of knowledge between disciplines) and in education-life contexts (where the knowledge learnt in education cannot always be applied outside of education). This is also one of the reasons why it is hard to realise actual interdisciplinary educations. If teaching, which explicitly works towards creating coherence for the students, is not developed didactically, the

79

students will not fully benefit from the interdisciplinary programme, but learn elements as a individual parts. Increasing the degree of transfer should thus be of the highest priority in an education system. Many talk about practice-related competence development as a factor in promoting students’ transformation of what is learned into new practice. They key is meaningfulness for the student, reflection on the learning process and connecting learning to situations in the world outside the university. These complex learning situations provide more connections to many different situations and thus to increased transfer. Apprenticeship and communities of practice

In connection with the theory of situated learning, Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger also developed a learning theory based on apprenticeship and learning in practice communities. At first, learning occurs through peripheral participation in a practice community, for example by performing less important tasks, and gradually learning occurs through increased engagement in and complexity of these tasks, while the student simultaneously improves his or her status because of improved knowledge of the community’s requirements. Formal teaching isn’t even required. The apprentice learns through observation and imitation of the work executed by the master, assistants and other apprentices. In universities, students not only form part of a formal education, but also of different communities, their cohort, their course, the lab team, project group etc., and in order to learn in these contexts, the students must become full-fledged members of the communities by learning their rules and adopting their disciplinary identity. Much traditional teaching can be considered apprenticeship. The math teacher demonstrates how a certain assignment must be solved on the blackboard (like the master). Then the students try for themselves (like the apprentices), while “the master” walks around and supervises and corrects. In some lab courses, fixed guidelines are followed, and the students are guided through the exercise and thus gradually establish their lab competences. Such communities of practice consist of: 1. Mutual engagement (mutual relationships, maintenance of the community, social complexity).

80

2. Mutual enterprise (collective negotiation, self-formed practice/interpretation, mutual responsibility) 3. Shared repertoire (interpretations, artifacts and actions, metaphors). You become a member of a community of practice when you are engaged in it, are responsible for it, and participate in the negotiation of its repertoire. At the same time, the ability to do this reflects your competence in relation to the practice community, which thereby functions as a locally negotiated competence system. Being critical and reflective is likely not considered optimal in a practice context, which can often have a conserving effect, and impose a tendency to romanticise and limit critical analysis. However, the apprenticeship theory can perhaps provide a welcome inspiration for innovation: Increased attention on the wealth of learning resources in natural environments can counteract the institutionalisation of learning on which the modern education system rests. (Nielsen & Kvale 1999: 256)

In recent decades, politicians have demanded an increased commercial focus in higher education, e.g., via accreditation regulations and recruitment panels, and much has been done to adapt education to the labour market. In a competence perspective, where learning must promote the ability to use knowledge in concrete practice contexts, the principles of communities of practice could provide useful ideas for the planning of a teaching that will promote an application-oriented and increased readiness to enter the labour market.

Consequences of situated learning and communities of practice • As a teacher, make sure to involve previous content in the work and to point out how the current content is connected with and can be applied in other contexts. • Include the world outside the university in the course and as teaching material. • Establish communities in teaching through rituals and shared rules which are explicated. • Use shared knowledge tools such as wikis, blogs and learning platforms.

81

• Be aware that as a teacher, and thus a “master”, you are also a role model.

Psychodynamic learning approaches The approach to knowledge and learning that focuses on cognitive or intelligence development is one of two traditional main areas in modern psychology, the other being social or personal development. Cognitive developmental psychology deals with the development of knowledge, learning, thinking, problem-solving, language, etc., while social psychology focuses on the development of feelings, social behaviour, identity and the like. In higher education contexts, we work with and demand intellectual development. Therefore, the problems you face as a teacher are often intellectual, at least the first time round – even though treating these problems often requires involving emotional factors. However, it is problematic to purely focus on the cognitive processes. Learning occurs in the interplay between cognitive activities and emotional impulses. It is important to be challenged and to work intellectually. However, the processes are driven by the feelings and opinions you attach to the task. There are a number of conditions that affect the balance between the emotive and cognitive factors: • The nature of the work (amount of work, it’s level of difficulty, its experienced relevance). • The nature of the activities (variation, possibility for active involvement). • The context (personal relationships and physical setting). Furthermore, a number of learning theories, the so-called psychodynamic learning theories, have been developed to explain learning as being propelled by the emotive aspects and the relationship between the teacher and the student. A charismatic teacher can spellbind students and thereby be the exception to the rule that monologues are not an efficient method of teaching. The emotive conditions under which teaching takes place are connected to the concept self-efficacy. Self-efficacy expresses students’ faith in their own abilities and their capability for solving assignments (Bandura 82

1997), and there is strong evidence of a positive correlation between a student’s self-efficacy and the person’s motivation and academic outcome from teaching. Faith in your own ability affects what you dare tackle and how you do so.

The consequences of psychodynamic and emotive factors in practice • Make sure that the required workload is doable for the average student. • Ensure a good study environment for both the education in general and each course session. Coffee and cake can work miracles. A worn-down interior is not conducive to concentrated work. • Always give students positive feedback, support and encouragement to do their best.

Progression Progression means moving forwards, and describes the degree of difficulty of what needs to be learned. It is necessary to understand progress in order to plan and complete teaching that increases in difficulty, and to be able to assess progress within the learning of a subject. There are, however, different views of what a degree of difficulty means. Disciplinary views of progressions are often bound to disciplinary systematics, in which some disciplinary content is considered fundamental, some is considered more advanced and some is considered harder than other content. Some working methods and general competences are considered harder to acquire than others and must therefore be learned gradually. Regardless of which area you wish to progress in, progression is a development based on views of the field and competences in general, which are often related to a duration of sorts. The didactic planning of teaching does not, however, require a direct correspondence between the discipline’s or the competence’s progression and the course of teaching’s progression. Other aspects, such as motivation or educational structure, are just as important. It is, for example, not particularly exciting to begin a course with a large number of definitions or basic concepts before starting work on problems that are more in touch with reality. It is a matter of continuous debate whether you can learn a discipline through projects or 83

whether projects are only possible when you’ve formed a solid disciplinary foundation. In the end, such discussions reflect different approaches to learning, which we will examine below. A number of taxonomies (i.e., classifications, systematisations, often hierarchically organised) are used within the educational system to indicate a progression of learning and what is learnt. The so-called cognitive taxonomies classify knowledge and skills in relation to cognitive processes to describe the levels of educational goals. The most wide-spread is without a doubt Bloom’s taxonomy (chapter 2.2, figure 5, p. 101), which has been developed and revised many times since it was originally published (Bloom 1956). Based on the way students’ written work within a number of fields was structured, Biggs and Collis (1982) developed their SOLO-taxonomy (chapter 2.2, figure 6, p. 102). SOLO stands for Structure of Learning Outcome, and Biggs and Collis found that the structure of assignments from across fields could be divided into five groups of increasing complexity. Where Bloom’s taxonomy concerns fulfilling cognitive requirements, the SOLO-taxonomy concerns how students can organise their knowledge. Neither of the two taxonomies can therefore capture competence progression, which involves thinking as well as presenting solutions in specific situations. Therefore it will often be necessary that teachers in a specific course organise the competences their particular course requires from the students into a hierarchy.

Using progression in practice • For each course, you must outline end goals and indicate steps on the way to end goals. • The individual course elements (the course sessions) can both be aimed towards particular partial aims, and contain progression in themselves. • The requirements must be clear to students, and teaching must enable the students to meet these requirements. • Frequent use of formative evaluations makes students aware of the requirements and to which degree they meet these.

84

Is there a “best practice”? (Or: Can you base teaching on evidence?) The big question is: Which teaching provides the best learning (of the objectives outlined)? It is hard to say anything about the connection between different ways of teaching and student’s learning outcome with any degree of certainty. First of all, teaching must be characterised so precisely that different methods of teaching can be applied and categorised. Secondly, the learning outcome must be clearly defined. Thirdly – and the most difficult – you must be certain that the different outcomes can be ascribed to the teaching in question and not other factors (e.g., students with different prerequisites, teachers’ different motivation, different teaching conditions etc.). It has been possible to study this within natural science teaching because of the relatively homogeneous syllabus as well as the development of standardised tests for measuring learning outcomes. One example is a study involving 62 introductory courses to Physics in secondary education and preliminary higher education in USA with 6,542 pupils and students (Hake 1998). The courses were classified according to their application of “interactive student engagement” (IE), i.e., involvement of students in both cognitive and practical activities, which provided immediate feedback via discussion with fellow students and/or instructors. “Traditional” courses were characterised by their poor application of IE, because they primarily involve lectures without student activities, recipe-based exercises and “solve the equation” math tasks. The IE-courses were characterised by extensive use of IE-methods. All the students were tested with the same test, which was designed to test their understanding of Newton’s mechanics. The result clearly indicated a better score for students who had participated in the IE-course, than for students who had participated in traditional courses. Does that mean there is evidence that IE is a better method of teaching? The question lies at the heart of the call for the use of evidence in the educational system, which dominates the current educational political discourse. Evidence was put on the agenda by the review of the pedagogical research in Denmark completed by OECD by request of the Danish Government in 2004 (OECD 2004). The purpose was to determine how much pedagogical research could be said to produce knowledge that was disseminated to and applied in practice. The premise is that there is a way to determine which teaching is best. It is a job for researchers to find this 85

way, and it is the task of the politicians to implement the knowledge in educational policy. The definition of knowledge used in the OECD review is drawn from the natural sciences, where evidence is measurable and significant correlations exist between cause and effect. For there to be evidence of the efficacy of a particular method of teaching, it must therefore be possible to measure that it leads to results that could not be gained in other ways. This is obviously nearly impossible, since it would require that all variables could be kept constant over an extended period of time, while only one variable was changed, e.g., the way the teacher performed a specific action, and a difference between the students taught by this teacher and other students could be measured. That would allow us to say that, all things being equal, this particular method is best. However, all things are never equal. The same group of students or same conditions cannot be compared. Evidence-based research attempts to take this into consideration by measuring data sets large enough to reduce the element of chance. However, this quantification poses another problem. To be able to measure something about a large number of people, it has to be relatively simple. It is, for example, impossible to “measure” with any certainty all of a teacher’s actions in teaching or the mood in one hundred different classes. Some things can be measured, but only through a significant simplification of the actual actions and the actual atmosphere. It is also impossible to measure whether upper secondary students have become better educated by completing the introductory course. However, it is possible to measure whether they know ten canonised authors. This is the weakness of the quantitative, evidence-based research: if it has to measure something with any precision, the object measured has to be simple and will not be a valid expression of the complexity of education. On the basis of evidence, it is possible to say something relatively precise about something relatively simple. Knowledge about more complex (and usually more interesting) aspects will always be more context-bound and, therefore, only apply to the context studied. This context can be more or less representative of other contexts, and “good” studies will, for many, be the studies that resonate with the assessor’s own reality. As to the relationship between teaching and learning, you can thus only offer very general statements, which must then be adapted to the concrete situation (see figure 4).

86

Learning objectives

Approaches to learning

Disciplinary traditions

Disciplinary content

Learning theories

How do you learn?

Disciplinary views How are disciplines learned?

Organisation of teaching

Choice of subject

Work methods

Teaching environment

Students’ responsibility

Evaluation methods

Figure 4. Key issues and connections between discipline, learning and teaching.

Ideas and practice The central question that connects teaching and learning is: How do you learn the discipline through the discipline’s teaching? Such a question connects some discipline-specific aspects and some learning-theoretical aspects with a number of teaching parameters, as shown in figure 4. The point is that all these elements are used in a given practice, where they are realised by specific people with different ideas about how these elements should be understood. And these ideas are crucial to the approach that everyone involved, both students and teachers, have to the discipline in general, and thus how they act. If a teacher believe that the purpose of teaching in the discipline is to introduce students to the “laws of nature” of a given discipline, the teacher will choose content and teaching methods that facilitate this. If the teacher believes that students learn more through lectures, (s)he will lecture etc. On the other hand, the teaching you receive will have an impact on your view of the discipline as well as on your learning. The phenomenographic research tradition examines such contexts. Students’ and teachers’ views of their discipline, of learning in the dis87

cipline, and of how teaching should be carried out in the discipline are uncovered by means of interviews and questionnaires. Subsequently, this information may for instance be correlated with the students’ outcome from teaching. Views of learning

By the late 1970’s, Ference Marton and Roger Säljö began to study views of learning, and asked people of all ages and with all levels of education what it means to learn something. Across ages and educations, the answers all fell within the following categories (category 6 was added in 1984): 1. Acquiring more knowledge. 2. Remembering and reproducing acquired knowledge. 3. Acquiring facts/procedures that can be used in practice. 4. Understanding. 5. Changing your knowledge and thereby changing your interpretation of the world/your surroundings. 6. Changing your interpretation of your surroundings and thereby change yourself. An individual may subscribe to several of these views of learning. The first three categories represent a view of knowledge as something external, which must be acquired and learned (by heart), while students with the three last views see knowledge as something that must be understood and constructed by the individual. Students in the first categories will often focus on what needs to be learned, while students in the last category will tend to focus on how to learn. These views of learning correlate with the individual’s learning strategies. John Biggs (1987) distinguish between three types of students’ learning and study behaviour: The surface processing student

Students with a superficial, reproducing approach, where the student aims to meet the requirements with the least possible effort. The achieving student

The ambitious, result-oriented student, whose goal is to perform well at the exam rather than seek meaningful insights. 88

The deep processing student

Students with a deep, analytical approach to their studies. These students engage in their studies with a need for understanding and ascribing meaning to what must be learned. They ask questions and go into details and seek to gain an overview. Marton and Säljö (1984) placed students with learning approaches 1 and 2 in the category “surface approach”, and students with learning approaches 4 and 5 in the category “deep approach”. Students with learning approach 3 are somewhere in between (and category 6 had not yet been formulated). It is important to emphasise that these characteristics do not describe the student as a person, but rather describe the student’s study behaviour in specific learning contexts. This is connected to another important point: Students’ learning strategies can generally be considered an adaptation to a given study environment. It is thus the teacher’s most important task to plan teaching so that it encourages deep learning. In the table, some of the research results from one of the best known phenomenographic researchers, Keith Trigwell from Sydney University, are shown. For years now, Keith Trigwell has, in collaboration with different researchers, researched how students’ and teachers’ views of and approaches to disciplines and teaching and learning, and other foundational aspects, correlate. Figure 5 shows how variation in the teacher’s approach to teaching correlates with variations in students’ approaches to learning. Students that are taught by a teacher with a teacher-centered and transmissive approach to teaching are significantly more likely to have a surface approach to teaching than students taught by teachers with an interpretative approach to teaching. Similarly, teachers with a student-centered and interpretative approach have significantly more students with a deep approach to learning. Teacher-centered, transmissive approach to teaching

Student-centered, interpretative approach to teaching

Students with a superficial, reproducing approach to learning

0,37**

-0,46**

Students with a deep analytical approach to learning

-0,14

0,34*

Figure 5. Correlations between teachers’ approaches to teaching and the students’ approaches to learning (Trigwell et al. 1998).

89

Some practical advice • In teaching, emphasise the general structures and the central problems of the topic, and relate sub-elements to these key issues. • Make room for, and encourage, students to ask questions about the subject. • Activate and involve students’ prior knowledge. • Ensure that students’ own interpretations can be related to the discipline’s canonical knowledge. • Emphasise that students must formulate their own hypotheses and arguments for the results found. • Avoid evaluation forms that promote rote learning, and avoid too much content build-up in the reading material – this promotes a surface approach to studying.

Can you change your practice?

The teacher’s learning approaches and view of the discipline thus (partly) define his or her teaching. Conversely, a certain kind of teaching will affect the students’ view of both the discipline and of learning. It is an important point that these ideas are deeply rooted in our personality and are therefore hard to see clearly and even harder to change. The teacher’s daily educational actions, such as choosing working methods, content etc., are based his or her experiences as a teacher. This may be practical experiences or rationales drawn from courses, literature, dialogues etc. The reasons behind the choice of practice are, in turn, based on (often implicit) values and views that basically constitute one’s personality, such as ethics, view of humanity, view of learning etc. You must therefore be careful and not simply trust your experience – what usually works. Once people have found “their” form, their own way to perform the day-to-day teaching, most are inclined to develop and fine-tune this exact approach to teaching. People simply need routines to get through an everyday life, in which many of our actions are demanded of us, and some may be lucky enough to find daily affirmation that their chosen form is good. However, from the perspective of students, this can be unfortunate, because the ideas you have about a discipline and learning do not always correspond to what may be optimal in the particular situation. Perhaps your discipline involves aspects you are not aware of, 90

and perhaps there are other ways of teaching than the ones you know and (perhaps unconsciously) promote in your teaching. Therefore, it is necessary to continuously reflect on your teaching methods and the basic understandings on which they are based. This can be difficult to do on your own, and we recommend that you work together with others, e.g., in a team of teachers affiliated to the same programme of study or the same module.

Literature Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman. Biggs, J. (1987). Student Approaches to Learning and Studying. Hawthorn: Australian Council for Educational Research. Damberg, E., J. Dolin & G.H. Ingerslev (2006). Gymnasiepædagogik. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag. Dysthe, O. (1997). Det flerstemmige klasserum: Skrivning og samtale for at lære. Aarhus: Klim. Gade, A. (2003). Hjerneprocesser. Kognition og neurovidenskab. Copenhagen: Frydenlund. Hake, R.R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1): 64-74. Krogh, L.B. & J. Dolin (2011). PISA 2006 Science testen og danske elevers naturfaglige formåen. INDs Skriftserie nr. 23. Copenhagen: Copenhagen University. http://www.ind.ku.dk/publikationer/inds_skriftserie/vap3/. Lave, J. & E. Wenger (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Danish edition: Situeret læring og andre tekster. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag 2005). Marton, F. & R. Säljö (1984). Approaches to Learning. In: F. Marton, D. Hounsell & N.J. Entwistle, The Experience of Learning: Implications for Teaching and Studying in Higher Education. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press. Nielsen, K. & S. Kvale (eds.) (1999). Mesterlære – læring som social praksis. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag. Sfard, A. (1998). On Two Metaphors for Learning and the Dangers of Choosing Just One. Educational Researcher, 27(2): 4-13. Trigwell, K., P. Ramsden, M. Prosser & E. Martin (1998). Improving student learning through a focus on the teaching context. In: C. Rust (ed.), Improving Student Learning. Improving Students as Learners. Oxford: Oxford Centre for staff and Learning Development.

91

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Wenger, E. (2004). Praksisfællesskaber. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

92

2.2 University teaching and learning – models and concepts ANNE METTE MØRCKE AND CAMILLA ØSTERBERG RUMP

This chapter concerns models and principles for structuring teaching and study programmes on a broader scale. The important questions in this context are: What is the aim of the programme? How do the courses relate to the programme’s ‘s overall learning outcomes? How does the assessment program align with these learning outcomes? How are teaching and learning activities aligned with assessment and the learning outcomes? However, the central question is: How do we structure the programme to support students’ learning? The models and principles of university teaching and learning can thus be seen as the framework that organises students’ work with the content. Models and principles of university teaching and learning are related to the European term ‘Didaktik’ (didactics), which in English literature is referred to as curriculum theory or the broader concept theory of teaching and learning. We use the terms ‘didactics’ or theory of teaching and learning in their broad sense: As the planning of education and teaching in relation to the additional pedagogical considerations teachers must take into account, i.e., the why, what and how of teaching. When teachers address these questions in relation to the teaching of subject, we call it disciplinary didactics. Because of the multiplicity of theories, there is no single correct model, but a range of competing, and perhaps even conflicting, pedagogical models and principles. Later in this chapter, we will present selected, well-substantiated, disparate teaching and learning models.

Instructions and options Research indicates that courses focusing on tips and tricks to teachers are not nearly as effective for teaching, and thus for students’ learning, as courses designed to equip teachers to reflect on teaching and thereby to develop their teaching. Models and principles for teaching can be seen 93

as a starting point for reflection about teaching, and the intention of this section is to contribute to teachers’ reflection about education in general and their own teaching in particular. However, teaching is always aimed at specific students, in a specific discipline and with a specific teacher. Therefore, teachers should question the chosen models and principles. The key in this respect is to examine whether the model is the best one to support students’ learning activities in the given context. You can, for example, take as your starting point student evaluations, assignments, classroom/LMS dialogues, tests and assessments. (More inspiration can be found in chapter 6.2.) We strongly recommend that you – for example once a year – together with colleagues procure this information about students and their learning, and critically analyse your own course descriptions and teaching plans in light of the alignment model, which we will present in the following section. In our experience, drawn from many courses about university teaching and learning, such exercises can result in deep, contemplative discussions in a teacher group – often followed by thoroughly deliberated changes in plans and practice. In addition, we recommend that you base learning outcomes on a relevant taxonomy. A taxonomy is a logically and hierarchically structured system of classification. One of the most important points of using a taxonomy is that it shows how you intend to organise progression throughout the programme and the courses. Using a taxonomy can focus and clarify the content of teaching – the ‘what’ – and thus indirectly support the choice of teaching method – the ‘how’ – as well as inspire fundamental discussions of learning outcomes in the teacher group – the ‘why’. The choice of specific taxonomy must be based on the disciplinary context (we present taxonomies later in this chapter).

Models and principles of university teaching and learning Below, we present and compare a few selected models that are significant to the mind-set and practice of contemporary Danish university teaching and learning. In the table below, the focus, advantages and disadvantages of each model and principle are briefly outlined. They will be presented in the indicated order in the chapter.

94

Model or principle

Focus

Advantages (use)

Disadvantages (use)

The didactic triangle

Focus on relationships between the three elements of teaching: students, teachers and content

Good basis for analyses of teaching

Students’ learning outcome, the role of assessment and education perspectives are absent

Klafki’s developmental model

Focus on ideal educational (German: bildung) objectivess from a human-science point of view

Strong foundation for discipline-based discussion about content that goes beyond students’ acquisition of knowledge and skills

Very few practical directions for planning teaching

Biggs’ constructive alignment

Focus on learning outcomes, learning activities and assessment, taking students’ learning as its starting point

Strong tool for creating alignment between learning outcomes, assessment, and learning activities

Teachers and their relationships to students as well as the specific content of teaching is missing

Prosser and Trigwell’s 3P model

Focus on presage, process and product with the students’ learning as a basis

Complete model including students’ prerequisites, learning, relationship to the teacher, and outcome of teaching

Complex model making it hard to use in the individual teacher’s practice

Figure 1. Overview of some important models of and principles for university teaching and learning.

The didactic triangle

The didactic triangle is a classic part of Danish – and Nordic and German – curriculum theory (Grundem & Hopmann 2002).

Content

communication

Teacher

learning process

relationship

Student

Figure 2. The didactic triangle shows the relationship between teacher, student and the content of teaching.

95

It is difficult to find a textbook for Danish teachers that does not mention it. The basic model is simple: As a minimum, teaching consists of content, a student and a teacher. In research based on the didactic triangle, focus is on teachers, class-room pedagogy, interaction with students and their education, and the content of teaching. Even though the model is simple, teaching is considered a complex activity. The relationship between teachers and students, the teachers’ communicating role, and the students’ learning process are crucial to the quality of teaching, and form the focus for planning and development. However, the content turns the interaction between students and teacher into teaching, and therefore the choice of content is fundamental in the didactic triangle (Laursen 1999: 23-27). Paradoxically, the rationales behind content-related choices in teaching have been all but ignored in university teaching and learning research. One important exception is Wagenschein, who concerned himself with the natural science teacher’s choice of subject-matter through his exemplary principle (Wagenschein 2000). The idea is that content overload leads to surface learning, and this is a constant problem in education because new knowledge is produced faster than the old becomes obsolete. Therefore, teaching must focus on particular parts of the subject-matter that in one way or other are mirrors of the whole: The exemplary parts. The examples may for example reflect some fundamental principles, models, ways of thinking, applications, or analyses, and the exemplary principle could also be used in other fields than the natural sciences. Furthermore, the teaching of specific content is also discussed in international subject-based journals such as Journal of Engineering Education, Medical Education, Studies in Science Education and many more. Most university libraries grant online access to these resources. Keiding has categorised a number of models based on the didactic triangle (Keiding 2005: 30-33), and has identified their strengths and blind spots. If the teacher-content axis (communication) is the central theme, the student can easily come to occupy the blind spot in the model. If, on the other hand, the student-content axis (learning process) is the central theme, the blind spot can easily cover the teacher. Klafki’s educational theory

Klafki’s educational theory (German: Bildungstheorie und Didaktik) (Klafki 2001) was developed in the 1970’s. Klafki’s principles belong to a 96

human-science interpretation of teaching and learning theory. The central theme of his model is located on the student-content axis on the didactic triangle. Klafki argued that you should use ideal educational objectives as points of orientation. Students must work with topical key problems, but must primarily acquire attitudes and abilitiess that go beyond these. Klafki emphasised four fundamental attitudes and abilities: 1) willingness and ability to be critical, and also self-critical, 2) willingness and ability to engage in argumentation, 3) empathy, and 4) the ability to identify connections and relations. Thus education does not merely include a cognitive level. According to Klafki, the necessary acquisition of knowledge and skills is instrumental, and thus not a goal in itself. Note that although the teacher fulfils a task in teaching, focus is on the students and content of teaching in this educational theory. Klafki’s ideas are still very much alive in Danish pedagogy. In university circles, you will frequently meet thinking that stems from or shares ideas from this model. Constructive alignment

In large parts of the Anglo-American literature, the basis for models is often completely different than the content-teacher-student triangle shown above: Focus there has purely been on the students. The 1980’s saw a fundamental change in higher education research and in the Anglo-American literature, presumable due to the emergence of the mass universities. In this research, a change occurs from the focus on the teacher to a focus on what students actually learn (Ramsden 1999). In continuation of these studies, it becomes relevant how teaching can support students’ development of a deep approach to learning. Attention changes to learning and the students, and the question of “which method of teaching?” becomes the question of “which teaching and learning activities?” and “what must students do?”. Constructive alignment (Biggs & Tang 2007) and the 3P model (Prosser & Trigwell 1999), which will be presented in the following section, are central examples of student-centered teaching. Biggs’ constructive alignment model describes how the relationship between learning outcomes, learning activities and assessment together conditions the students’ learning. The basic assumption of constructive alignment is that learning is a result of students’ activities (Biggs & Tang 2007). Alignment, in this respect, means something along the lines of correspondence or “side by side”. The outset is clearly defined learning outcomes. The assessment 97

system should test these exact outcomes and the students must show that they have reached these learning outcomes. The learning activities (including teaching) must support this. Provided that outcomes, assessment and learning activities are in alignment, students can engage deeply in learning – as shown in this model:

Learning outcome

Students’ deep learning

Assessment

Learning activity

Figure 3. Biggs’ constructive alignment model.

The alignment model stems from the realisation that students have been able to pass exams without a solid understanding of subject-matter. This can happen if the exam, for example, tests a fairly rudimentary understanding of concepts rather than the academic subject knowledge that was the purpose of teaching. Through interviews it has been discovered that students experienced that attaining deep understanding was impossible, and that they instead prioritised passing their exams. In other words: Assessment rules! This mechanism is termed “the backwash-effect”. One solution to this challenge is to make sure that assessment steers students in the right direction. The principles behind alignment are summarised in a short film by The 3P model

Among other things, the alignment model is based on “The 3P model” (see figure 4), which has been developed on the basis of years of research involving qualitative and quantitative analyses of the relations in the model (Prosser & Trigwell 1999). The tree P’s stand for “presage”, “process” and “product”, which, according to the 3P model, are the important aspects of education: The students’ prerequisites, the students’ learning process in collaboration with the teacher, and the learning outcome. 98

Learning is, in this respect, considered relational; learning consists in changing (differentiating and expanding) the relation between the student and his/her context. Approaches to learning and teaching are also considered relational; you establish different approaches depending on the context. This means that students’ prerequisites and prior experiences and their encounter with the teaching context determines their experienced learning context (learning activities and learning environment), which determines the student’s approach to learning (deep/surface), which in turn determines the learning outcome. The teacher can affect the learning environment and thus indirectly change students’ approaches to learning and thereby their outcome. Presage

Process

Product

Students’ prior experiences Experienced learning context

Students’ approach to learning

Experienced teaching context

Teachers’ approach to teaching

Outcomes of learning

Teaching-learning context

Teachers’ prior experiences and context

Figure 4. The 3P model shows the relationship between presage, process and product.

Summary

To summarise, the didactic triangle is first and foremost a model for teaching, and its strength lies in its attempt to both focus on the teachers, the students, and the teaching content. This is a good tool for discussions with colleagues and for research in university class-room pedagogy, teacher-student relations, and students’ personal development. A tendency to view teaching as something walled-off and private between the involved teacher and student can be the model’s Achilles’ heel. The alignment-models are first and foremost course models, and their strength lies in an attempt to make this “private space” explicit and public to students, academic staff, and society. By making learning outcomes, assessment,

99

criteria, and learning activities explicit, the alignment models provide a tool for both planning and reform of university teaching.

Taxonomies Insight into taxonomies is invaluable for the discussion of the what and how of teaching. A taxonomy can help clarify learning objectives, so that teachers and students understand their purpose as unequivocally as possible. We highly recommend that you take a taxonomy as the starting point for goal description. The choice of taxonomy must depend on the field and contexts, and therefore three different taxonomies are presented in the following. The cognitive taxonomy (Bloom’s taxonomy)

In 1948, a group of American college-examiners agreed to develop an taxonomy of learning objectives (Bloom 1956). They decided to divide the taxonomy into cognitive, emotive and psychomotoric objectives – and to begin with the cognitive objectives. This resulted in the globally acknowledged taxonomy known as “Bloom’s taxonomy” after its primary author. The taxonomy includes six main categories: Knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The six categories increase in cognitive complexity, and so we speak of lower level and higher level objectives. The taxonomy does not include “level of difficulty” (disciplinary complexity). An application objective in one subject can be harder (more complex) than a synthesis objective in another. The objective of a surgeon learning to use extensive factual anatomical knowledge in connection with an operation can, for example, be significantly harder to attain (more complex) than the objective of a medical student interpreting pre-selected data in an assignment. The progression of Bloom’s (cognitive) taxonomy can therefore be used in the planning of relevant intellectual activities in teaching, while all levels of the taxonomy can be part of all levels of education. Although Bloom’s taxonomy has become so important to our understanding of objectives and progression, it can of course be criticised – and it has been. Anderson and Krathwohl have contributed to an update of the taxonomy in an attempt to make it more relevant (Anderson & Krath100

wohl 2001). Changes have been made to both terminology and structure. The terminology now corresponds better to models focused on learning objectives, such as the alignment model. Furthermore, the category ‘knowledge’ has been significantly revised, and the category ‘synthesis’ has been deleted and the category ‘create’ has been added: Evaluate, Create Synthesis, Evaluate Analysis, Analyse Application, Apply Comprehension, Understand Knowledge, Remember

Figure 5. The revised Bloom’s taxonomy.

The revised cognitive taxonomy is rarely used in practice in higher education despite the good intentions behind the huge task involved in updating Bloom’s original work. This may be because Bloom’s taxonomy was originally developed to assess students’ outcome of so-called “general education”, i.e., primary and secondary education. Danish higher education is more discipline-based, and so are its objectives. SOLO-taxonomy

Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy is generally focused on teacher and content. Another, more fundamental, criticism of Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy than the above revision has emerged, one that is based on a didactics with a more distinct focus on students’ deep learning and their outcome (Biggs & Tang 2007). The hierarchy of the cognitive taxonomy is also criticised, particularly objectives described with words such as “remembering” and “understanding” – for what does it mean to understand? How can learning objectives be defined, so they can be accurately assessed, and so that students can show they have reached the objectives? As part of the devel101

opment of the alignment model, Biggs developed the SOLO-taxonomy as another response to these questions – see figure 6 below.

identify, name, define, mark

define, describe, enumerate



 Uni-structural

Multi-structural

Quantitative levels

relate, analyse, apply

discuss, evaluate, create  













Relational

Extended abstract

Qualitative levels

Figure 6. SOLO-taxonomy described according to the four main categories (levels of understanding). The category ‘pre-structural’ (no understanding) has been left out.

SOLO refers to Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome, and consists of 5 increasingly complex levels of understanding. The first level is called pre-structural. At this level, the student has no understanding, i.e., no knowledge of the area, so the pre-structural level can form part of an assessment, but it obviously makes little sense to define pre-structural learning objectives. The first level of understanding is denoted uni-structural, and at this level, students are able to repeat terminology, individual structures and self-contained concepts. The difference between uni-structural and multi-structural understanding, which is the next level, is quantitative; the student can repeat more terms, structures and concepts within the same subject and in greater detail. The student can narrate something, and this narrative can be in the shape of both numbers, illustrations and/or descriptions. The difference between a multi-structural and relational understanding, which is the third level of understanding, is not quantitative, but qualitative, as the student at this level can demonstrate coherent understanding by integrating facts, concepts and theories in a structure and apply concepts to a set of data or a problem. Finally the fourth level entails extended abstract understanding, meaning that the student can go beyond the concrete and move into other subjects, question what is known and eventually construct new knowledge. 102

Other taxonomies

The two taxonomies above are both cognitive, and a large number of other cognitive as well as emotive and psychomotoric taxonomies also exist (Anderson & Krathwohl 2001). Furthermore, there are university disciplines in which learning objectives that focus on practical, professional competence are a tradition. Such objectives cannot be expressed well in cognitive taxonomies. The health sciences, for example, also use a taxonomy which categorises four stages of professional development (Pangano & Holmboe 2008: 24-41). This taxonomy is called RIME, and operates with four levels: reporter, interpreter, manager and educator. These are significantly different from the cognitive taxonomies’ categories, as knowledge, skills and attitudes are all integrated. In relation to other taxonomies, the point is that taxonomies represent a number of negative and positive choices that can be discussed. The crucial thing is to establish a shared frame of reference within one’s field. Summary

Based on our presentation of the didactic triangle, Klafki’s didactics of education, constructive alignment and the 3P model, we recommend you analyse your teaching practice and planning by means of one of the didactic models. In our experience, the alignment model is particularly useful for such an analysis, but the didactic triangle and other pedagogical models may also provide a good foundation for such a small-scale development project. The three taxonomies presented above can furthermore be included in a critical view of the outlined learning objectives, and thus form a robust argument not just for what to teach, but also how and why to teach in a particular way. Objectives that have been organised in a taxonomy can form a solid, concrete foundation for supervision of and feedback to students as well as assessment criteria, and thus as grounds for a given grade and discussion with an external examiner.

Resources We would recommend two very good general textbooks to those who want to read more about didactics. Biggs, J. & C. Tang (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. UK: Open University Press. – The book is aimed at higher education and is based on constructive alignment. 103

From this starting point, the authors discuss their interpretation of learning and didactics, learning outcomes, teaching planning, as well as exams and assessment. It is written from an Australian-Asian point of departure, but parallels can easily be drawn to Danish conditions. In continuation of this, but on a higher academic level and including substantially more research, we recommend Prosser, M. & K. Trigwell (1999). Understanding Learning and Teaching. The Experience in Higher Education. UK: Open University Press. If you are looking for a different starting point we recommend Hiim, H. & E. Hippe (2007). Læring gennem oplevelse, forståelse og handling. En studiebog i didaktik. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. – This book is aimed at teaching in primary school, but can be read by university teachers. It takes as its starting point a Nordic, human-science interpretation of the didactic triangle called “the didactical relationship model”. From this starting point the authors discuss teaching planning and educational development.

Literature Anderson, L.W. & D.R. Krathwohl (eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, complete edition. New York: Longman. Bloom, B.S. (ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company. Brabrand, C. (2009). Teaching Teaching and Understanding Understanding (available online). Gundem, B.B. & S. Hopmann (eds.) (2002). Didaktik and/or Curriculum. An international dialogue. New York: Peter Lang. Keiding, T.B. (2005). Hvorfra min verden går. Et Luhmann-inspireret bidrag til didaktikken. Ph.d.-dissertation. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitet. Klafki, W. (2001). Dannelsesteori og didaktik – nye studier. Aarhus: Klim. Laursen, P.F. (1999). Didaktik og kognition. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. Pangano, L.N. & E.S. Holmboe (2006). Evaluation forms and global rating scales. In: E.S. Holmboe & R.E. Hawkins (eds.), Practical guide to the evaluation of clinical competence. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier: 419-428. Ramsden, P. (1999). Strategier for bedre undervisning. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. Wagenschein, M. (2000). Teaching to understand: On the concept of the exemplary in teaching. In: I. Westbury, S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German didaktik tradition. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

104

2.3 Teaching environment SEBASTIAN HORST AND GITTE HOLTEN INGERSLEV

This chapter concerns the factors that play a role for a good teaching environment, and that support learning in university education. This chapter also explains some things the teacher can do to contribute to a good teaching environment. Based on didactical and pedagogical research as well as international experience in establishing educational institutions, the aim with the chapter is to identify what we should require of physical teaching environments in the future, as well as what the individual teacher can do to improve the teaching environment. Furthermore, this chapter will discuss certain emotive factors a teacher might apply in his or her didactical practice to improve students’ affiliation to their educational institution. Because a much larger group of students are accepted into higher education than previously, it has become necessary to redefine and rethink the teacher’s tasks, both in terms of the physical layout of the classroom and the emotive teaching environment. The aim of this chapter is thus to contribute to considerations of how you, as a teacher, can work on these aspects. The concept “teaching environments” is often not very well defined. In its broadest sense, a teaching environment can include anything that plays a role in how teaching is carried out, and how students and teachers experience the education. The consequence of such an broad definition is that teaching environments will also encompass the culture in an educational institution, which includes the norms and values of teaching, the rules and the way these are enforced. The physical context affects teaching and education. The physical teaching environment includes all physical aspects of university life, i.e., classrooms, common rooms, study facilities, libraries, labs, outdoor areas, connection to surrounding environments, transport options, as well as the organisation of students, scientific and technical/administrative staff. In practice, the physical frameworks will interact with other aspects, particularly the mental/social environment, the organisational and also the disciplinary environment, i.e., which disciplinary activities that are actu105

ally carried out. It is not possible to define general requirements for the physical teaching environment without taking into account what actually characterises university education. Therefore, the following is based on the characteristics of university education – and from that starting point, we identify some of the consequences these characteristics have for the physical teaching environment. There is not just one answer as to what constitutes a good physical teaching environment – there are many. The solutions you choose depend on what you wish to achieve, and you must take into account both the culture of the given educational institution and the changes you hope to incur. It is important not to reduce the debate about the physical teaching environment to just the quantity of student facilities and services. This subject requires a broader discussion of which qualities the universities of the future must support and facilitate. In 2007, the Danish Building & Property Agency organised an essay contest about “the good study environment”. Mette Bergenser and Linda Lützau Nielsen – then students at Copenhagen University’s Institute of Anthropology – were awarded second place for an essay in which the two students identified four qualities that the physical framework should provide: Immersion, Knowledge, Inspiration and Connectedness. In the essay, the authors extol the virtues of an environment where students can concentrate and still experience the presence and small-talk of fellow students. Often, the university’s knowledge space is limited to classrooms or individual work spaces. In this way, the current construction of universities reflects a classic understanding of knowledge as something that must merely be transmitted from teacher to student or something that is drawn from a book. But knowledge can be learnt, exchanged, created and developed in many different contexts and activities. This multifarious concept of learning should be reflected in the layout of the university’s space.

What can the teacher do to create a good teaching environment? Many aspects of the physical teaching environment cannot be changed by the individual teacher. Nevertheless, a number of aspects can be changed, or at least influenced – and this can lead to change in the long term. Here, it is useful to distinguish between the overall teaching environments of a

106

study programme and the teaching environment of a certain subject element in a certain room. It is very important to integrate the general layout of a study programme’s physical teaching environment with the research environment, so that students and staff spend their day in close proximity. Functions and facilities should be in the same building, and shared facilities (canteens, coffee machines, libraries etc.) should be used by both students and faculty. The physical teaching environment must include facilities where students can work as researchers – either in shape of special student facilities or of access to research facilities. 24-hour access to working spaces and group rooms should be a matter of fact. Informal learning spaces in the form of cafés, kitchenettes, group rooms, meeting rooms etc., that enable the integration of social and disciplinary activities must be provided. These kinds of facilities are especially crucial to first-year students. As the contributions to the essay contest mentioned above demonstrated, it is important to both students and staff that the place’s history, field of research, values and the people who have helped form it can be felt. We call this the place’s disciplinary invitation (cf. Inge Mette Kirkeby in Horst & Misfeldt 2010): Can it be felt which fields are worked on here, the history of the field, and how it is developing? This also includes the natural need to leave one’s personal mark on the place through layout and decor. Study boards, teaching committees, collaboration committees etc. must work for all of these elements. I.e., you must consider it part of your role as a teacher to be a proponent of connecting the physical frameworks to the teaching objectives and the field’s identity. The most important thing that the individual teacher can do in his or her own teaching is to consider variation. Good teaching facilitates learning by applying different approaches, i.e., communicating to large and small groups interspersed with students’ work alone and in groups – and with frequent feedback from the teacher. As a teacher, you must therefore attempt to gain access to differently designed classrooms that can facilitate different ways of teaching. We can distinguish between the degree of classroom programming: A hard-programmed classroom (e.g., a traditional auditorium) is optimised for a particular purpose and therefore provides fewer options for other uses. A soft-programmed classroom is flexible, and can easily be adapted to a different purpose (via movable blackboards, mobile tables and chairs et al.), but may prove harder to optimise to a particular way of teaching. When you are responsible for a course, you will often have to tell the 107

local administration which (types of) classrooms you want for your course well before the teaching begins. If you have a precise plan for which activities will take place when, you can naturally try to select the most suitable rooms. However, it will often be an advantage to pick soft-programmed rooms, which allow you to change the layout as needed. Auditoriums are difficult to use for anything but lectures, but it is possible, e.g. to have students in groups of two or three form a buzz group or to discuss their assignments. In a soft-programmed room, such as classrooms with a flat floor and loose tables and chairs, teachers can arrange the furniture to indicate the aim of the next session: • Rows of tables where everyone faces the blackboard/screen creates the expectation that the teacher is the active party giving presentations and expositions, while students are the audience. • Setting up individual tables for each student signals that students will be working alone, like a traditional written exam. • Tables in a semi-circle creates the expectation that the class will discuss and work with the subject in collaboration with the teacher. • Tables for groups of 4-8 students creates the expectation that the most important part of the teaching will be what takes place in the groups, e.g., problem-solving or group discussions. • Removing tables/writing spaces removes any chance of taking notes and using a computer, and can therefore make room for focusing on other things, such as orality, discussion, body language or use of objects, apparatus and resources. Through simple changes of the physical teaching environment, teachers can indicate the purpose of the teaching. Naturally moving furniture around can be tiresome, especially with the heavy and inflexible furniture typically found in universities. However, we recommend using a set-up that supports the most important activity in your teaching. The educations that include both theory and more practical teaching, e.g., lab work or field work, face special challenges in ensuring transfer between what takes place in the different forms of teaching. Coherence in space and time between different types of teaching facilities, especially theoretical and practical, ensures that knowledge from one area can be applied in another. For example, combination classrooms, where both

108

theory teaching and (lighter) lab exercises can be conducted. Naturally, the physical environment alone cannot create coherence between practice and theory. A disconnect can easily occur between scheduled teaching, where the teacher is active, and the study time students plan themselves for reading and completing assignments. Teachers can often increase the quality of students’ work by showing an interest in what students actually do outside of planned teaching. This can both be done by inviting students to consultations in your office – however, this can be an overwhelming experience for some, especially perhaps first-year students! – or by inquiring into how students usually work with the field’s assignments etc., and by being around at specific times to give feedback. This rarely requires changes in the physical frameworks, but can greatly affect students’ view of what it means to study at a university, and make students feel comfortable about supervision. Here we must make mention of the significance of interpersonal relationships between students and teacher. These are hugely important for students throughout their education, and can contribute to increased motivation and fewer drop-outs. Therefore, it is important that a teacher: • Follows the norms for decent behaviour. • Establishes and enforces rules for good behaviour and tone in teaching – it is, e.g., unacceptable to laugh at or ignore fellow students’ contribution in teaching. • Strives to make everyone feel comfortable, and does not only discuss with the best students, but constructs discussions everyone can participate in. • Learns the students’ names. • Actively works on the social aspects of the study programme – supports the establishment of study groups. • Spends time with students, also informally, i.e., outside of teaching. E.g., organises academic content for the student bar or day seminars where students can present semester papers or dissertations. • Welcomes the students. Assert yourself during the introductory period – be present and contribute to making students feel welcome.

109

Research-based starting points for planning teaching The physical teaching environment must support learning and indicate the teacher’s approach to learning. It is no easy matter to produce general theories of what learning actually is (see chapter 2.1), that are sufficiently specific to be converted into robust teaching precepts, which in turn result in specific requirements to the teaching environment. The optimal learning approach will depend on what needs to be learned and by whom. As is evident from chapter 2.1, learning theories can generally be divided into three (overlapping) main categories: Constructivist learning theories, apprenticeship theories and psychodynamic learning theories. It is not expedient to select the theory or theories that best describe university education – each of the three theories tells us something useful about what is needed to generate learning. The point is to demonstrate that learning can arise in many ways, and therefore the teaching environment must make room for students to work in many different ways, which all reflect the insights from the three theories. If the apprenticeship theory’s communicative elements are to be realised for many students simultaneously (e.g., in the shape of lectures), room must also be made for more constructivist activities. And regardless of learning approaches, the promotion of students’ engagement and emotional well-being must be considered. The physical requirements of such teaching can be boiled down to flexibility and adaptation. There must be room for lectures, student presentations, group projects, individual immersion etc. One important aspect of learning is the feedback the student receives. It is both academically constructive and highly motivating, as it constitutes direct communication between student and teacher. Many of the psychodynamic elements are at play here. Thus, feedback must be enabled through, for example, supervision rooms, feedback in teachers’ offices and by means of IT. Research indicates that students’ opportunities for meeting up outside the formalised sessions, e.g., to network, discuss and debate, improve their learning (Markwell 2007). Informal spaces for socialising sparks interaction between students, which is crucial for the incorporation of students into the university culture and for reducing drop-out rates (Kuh 1995). Research also indicates that this is particularly important during the first year of studies (Krause & Coates 2008). Informal learning spaces can be adapted to specific studies, in order to enable the integration of disciplinary activities with leisure- and social activities. The informal spaces 110

must be in proximity to teachers’ offices and classrooms, so teachers are encouraged to form part of the environment. Naturally, different teaching cultures have developed from the disciplines of different faculties, and these cultures must be optimised through the physical layout. One example is lab exercises in the natural sciences, which in some places are conducted separately from theoretical teaching. Another example is the internships of professional bachelors, which takes place in the actual workplace far from the university college. The danger is that theory and practice are separated. Therefore it is crucial to enable theoretical immersion in practice-oriented classrooms and vice versa. Finally, it is important with a measure of coherence between teaching and assessment/exams (often called alignment). The qualification framework (see chapter 1.2 and 2.3), which is applied in the accreditation of study programmes, prescribes – by law – that study programmes’ learning outcomes must be described in terms of competences. This competence mentality reinforces the demand for coherence between the activities in teaching and the later assessments. Therefore the facilities for evaluation of specific competences must reflect the teaching that has taken place, and this can naturally affect the physical frameworks: If you want to develop lab competences, you must be able to test students’ lab competences.

Research-based education requires integration with research facilities The University Act states that university education must be research-based. ‘Research-based’ can be interpreted in different ways, (see chapter 2.2), but usually the expectation is that teaching is connected to a research environment. The significance of this to the physical teaching environment depends on what you understand by “connected”: Is it merely the teachers, who, by virtue of their research activities, create a connection? Or are the teaching activities themselves integrated in the research environment? There is every indication that integration in the research environment creates an actual connection between teaching and research (Jenkins & Healey 2005). This has great significance for the physical planning, as it means that research facilities and teaching facilities should not be separate – e.g., in different buildings. Instead they must be located together, so students find themselves to be a natural part of a research environment, and so researchers naturally experience being part of a teaching environment – even if 111

they do not teach. Of course this does not preclude the existence of facilities that are reserved for certain groups in the university – the important thing is that everyone feels part of a community. Nor does integration mean that everyone must work in open-plan offices, as the need for peace and quiet for working, reading and writing must be taken into consideration. It is also normal to assume that research-based education means that teaching entails training in scientific methods in collaboration with practising researchers. This may be the distinguishing feature between university education and other educations – and at the same time it is the most ambitious aspect to fulfil in regards to the physical teaching environment. For many sciences, this training will make demands on the facilities: You can obviously not practice lab work without using a lab. You cannot train yourself for field work without spending time in the field. However, in relation to the more theoretical parts of scientific method, this aspect has some consequences: If the student is to be able to replicate the researcher’s working methods, this requires facilities that are similar to the researcher’s: individual working spaces, meeting rooms, seminar activities, IT-resources, administrative aids etc.

Resources The Danish Centre for Teaching Environments (DCUM) is a knowledge centre on teaching environments in educational institutions, and they have a number of interesting reports (in Danish) available at their website. DCUM also coordinates a network for study environments at universities which you can sign up for. http://dcum.dk/. The Department of Science Education at the University of Copenhagen has worked with the physical study environment and published a report on this. www.ind.ku.dk/undervisningsmiljo. To find out more about students’ views of what is important for a study environment, you can read the entries (in Danish) from the essay competition for students: Competition about Study Environment – physical frameworks. http://bygningsstyrelsen.dk/publikationer/sammenfatning-af-essay-konkurrence-2007/. One very inspiring (Danish) publication with many examples is: Campus og studiemiljø. Fysiske rammer til morgendagens universiteter. Copenhagen: The Danish Building & Property Agency, Ministry of Higher Education and Development. 112

Literature Horst, S. & M. Misfeldt (eds.) (2010). Fremtidens undervisningsmiljø på universitetet. Københavns Universitet, Copenhagen. Found at www.ind.ku.dk/undervisningsmiljo. Jamieson, P. et al. (2000). Place and Space in the Design of New Learning Environments. Higher Education Research and Development, 19(2): 221-236. Downloaded 15 March 2012 from http://tlu.ecom.unimelb.edu.au/teaching_staff/ collaborative_learning/jamiesonHERD.pdf. Jenkins, A. & M. Healey (2005). Institutional strategies to link teaching and research. York: The Higher Education Academy. Keiding, T.B. (2009). Undervisningsrum og læringsoplevelser. Arkitekten, 7. Kirkeby, I.M. et al. (2003). Fremtidens Universitet – skitserende programanalyse. Copenhagen: Rum Form Funktion. Krause, K.L. & H. Coates (2008). Student engagement in first-year university. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5): 493-505. Kuh, G.D. (1995). The other curriculum: out-of-class experiences associated with student learning and personal development. Journal of Higher Education, 66(2): 123-155. Markwell, D. (2007). A large and liberal education: Higher education for the 21st century. Melbourne: Australian Scholarly Press. Oblinger, D.G. (ed.) (2006). Learning Spaces, Educause. Downloaded 15 March 2012 from http://www.educause.edu/learningspaces.

113

114

3.1 Who are the students? BJØRN FRIIS JOHANNSEN, LARS ULRIKSEN AND HENRIETTE TOLSTRUP HOLMEGAARD

Is it really necessary that I relate to university students as of late modernity? This was a question recently posed by a participant on the teaching development programme at our university. It is a good question, and a type of question that is often asked by new university teachers. The question may refer to whether faculty are obliged to relate personally to their students, but may also simply question whether it is at all possible to relate to all of one’s students at the same time. The question may also originate from a surprise at the diversity one encounters among students, and from wondering at the apparently waning interest among students. Why do they act as pupils and not students? Why are they so preoccupied by things outside of university? In this chapter, we seek to address the teacher’s inevitable surprise at the students, which may often arise out of the notion that it is the contents and not the students that must be of foremost concern for any teacher. The foremost concern of this chapter is that the teacher will benefit from actively and explicitly addressing what is presupposed in dealing with students and by students dealing with their learning – including the implied assumptions that are also at play in teaching-learning situations. If the teacher does not relate to the students, the students will react by attempting to guess what is expected of them, and this does not necessarily lead to the best study practice. In this chapter, we will suggest ideas for how teachers can take into account and make explicit the often implicit assumptions about who the students are. To illustrate what this chapter is about, we bring a vignette based on an interview study with pharmaceutical students at the University of Copenhagen. The vignette is meant to illustrate some of the tacit assumptions that students encounter and which influence their ways and possibilities for participating in teaching and learning.

115

Pharmacist students’ prior knowledge and understanding Pharmaceutical science students fail more and more courses, over and over again – although teachers in the programme have already done much and aim to do even more to help them. But it has proven something of a challenge, because the teachers feel they have little or no contact with a large group of students. Furthermore, it seems to be this same group of students who repeatedly fail their courses. The students have many different reasons for studying to become pharmaceutical scientists. For one student, the dream of becoming a pharmacist appears an attractive alternative to working in a shop. For another, working as a pharmaceutical chemist at a medical company means doing work of real and practical value, while yet another student might think of the pharmaceutical sciences as an avenue for landing a well-paid job. Some study pharmaceuticals to do research at the university, yet others think of pharmaceutics as just laboratory work. Some use the programme as a way to get accepted into medicine, some have been pressured by their parents to choose the programme, and others have just ended up in the programme more or less by coincidence. During their first year of study, they do not encounter many courses that actually involve pharmaceutics – at least not explicitly. The students take statistics. Statistics is certainly not pharmaceutics. Statistics may become relevant for pharmaceutical scientists in certain situations, but when they take statistics, they do not use laboratory data, although this would have been relevant. They study the same kind of statistics also taught to engineering and natural science students: coloured marbles drawn at random from velvet bags, dices, lottery tickets and that kind of stuff. They take physics, which could definitely be related to pharmacy. But it is the kind of physics that is about planetary motion. When they are in chemistry class it takes place in lab and of all the disciplines, chemistry must be among the most important to a prospective pharmaceutical scientist. Still, the courses on chemistry neither deal with the chemistry of the human body nor with that of medicine. This means that no matter how first year students twist and turn their experience, none of these courses offer any clear indications of what might be important if you want to become a good pharmacist, researcher, chemist, lab technician or medical student. Instead, students attempt to create meaning that makes sense to them, each individually. One student suggestion for how to interpret the purpose of the courses is that they ensure that all students have the same prerequisites for con-

116

tinuing the programme. The curriculum consists of many courses that at first glance appear indistinguishable from upper secondary school subjects. This interpretation is fatal. Especially if students find social integration more important compared to lectures and recitals that appear to cover what was already covered in upper secondary. It is not unusual to encounter students who failed chemistry the first time around because they thought it was about chemistry they already knew. Another kind of student is uncertain of what he or she must do to become a good student. Such students do what they are told to do and yet they fail. Let us consider the example of chemistry again. Lectures play a central role in the course plan, because this is where the students first encounter the theoretical content they will hence make use of during recitals before they try it out in the laboratories. If at some point students find something difficult, a likely interpretation on the students part, is that he or she did not “gain” sufficiently from the lectures. A student that “does what he or she is told”, will therefore easily end up focusing on reading and going to lectures, regardless of whether the institution intended for lectures to be as centrally important as they become in the minds of the students. From the perspective of such a lecture-centered logic, a student who struggles to do course-assignments will readily end up staying home reading over the same texts again and again, in the vane hope that this is what it takes to become better at these assignments. A strategy that does not centre on lectures would perhaps be one that suggested to practice course-assignments by going to recitals instead. Lab experiments, on the other hand, are a different matter. They are mandatory. Students cannot simply stay at home and read if the experiments are too difficult. Instead, a viable option might be to glide into the background and just do what other students seem to be doing. And at the other end of the shared dining hall, we find the teachers, more puzzled than ever. Again and again their students seem to hit a brick wall which they seem to hardly notice. Maybe it is completely legitimate, the teachers think, that everyone is given an extra chance – or maybe three. Then again, sometimes enough is enough, and someone ought to do something. But what can you tell students who fail? That some of them simply do not belong at university? Interestingly, what really helps is for students to drop lectures and simply practice on assignments given on previous exams to learn how to pass their exam. This is a solution students have discovered for themselves. It is not a suggestion written anywhere official and nobody seriously believes that this is what it takes to become a good pharmaceutical scientist. And

117

even though this helps students pass their exams, nobody truly feels or believes that this was ever the point, nor ever the intention. (Based on Johannsen 2012)

Challenges to teaching: Who are the students? In the vignette, the students struggled to figure out how to participate in different teaching and learning activities and to decide how to prioritise their effort. The teachers were puzzled by the students’ actions. This points to the existence of certain presumptions or expectations about the students who are enrolled in the programme. These assumptions concern the students’ reasons for starting their studies, the students’ attitude to the programme’s content, how to engage and deal with the work loads. They concern assumptions regarding the students’ abilities to manage their time studying, and assumptions about what life is like for a student. These are not necessarily explicit assumptions. No one has planned the study programme to fit some notion of the ideal-typical student. Instead, programmes have been created and shaped based on implicit assumptions shared among teachers and many of the students. Such assumptions manifest themselves in the structure of the study programme (e.g., the order of courses and subjects) and the teaching methods employed. They also manifest themselves in the teachers’ ideas about what characterises the discipline and what students ought to be like, as well as in students’ mutual expectations. In some programmes, the teacher will assume that students take on strategies for studying that ensures they will develop academically, while in others, teachers will expect students to employ strategies targeted at becoming attractive candidates for certain jobs. In both cases, this affects the way teachers expect students to engage and participate in teaching and learning. In this chapter, we consider the role of the teacher and teaching in relation to these implicit assumptions of what students are, should be and can become. In the next section, we consider these questions, but from the students’ perspective. The implied student

Implicit assumptions about what students are, should be and can become 118

as a matter of studying make up the implied student (Ulriksen 2009). An analysis of the implied student therefore includes a number of aspects concerning what you might call the programme’s or discipline’s culture and traditions. In this regard there may be several and different assumptions at play in the same programme. Some of the pharmaceutical science teachers may assume that students will end up working at pharmacies, while other teachers view medical research as the unspoken goal for student graduates from programme. Such different objectives will point to why different reasons for particular content is of particular import and in turn, why different and only certain aspects of pharmaceutics and introductory courses are of special interest. Similarly, some teaching and learning activities require of students that they are passive and patient (e.g., lectures) while others require students who are active and enterprising (e.g., problem-based activities). An important point is that the implied student is just that – implied. Often, neither students nor teachers are aware that these assumptions exist and that they may be in conflict with students’ expectations. We may even be dealing with opposing assumptions born out of several of the programme’s implied students. At the same time, a large part of students’ time at university involves finding ways to integrate and become integrated (cf. Tinto 1993), which for a student means shaping oneself to better fit and fit ones expectations to interpretations of both covert and overt requirements. This also means that when teachers wonder why students do or do not do certain things, it may be due to the fact that students expect the education and the teaching to be something else than what is assumed by teachers and the study programme – and not necessarily because the students are lazy, dumb or just disinclined. Teaching affects students

The concept of the implied student is about what is presupposed if students are to safely navigate cultures and traditions inherent to their study programmes. This navigation constitutes a journey and process for the student and requires an ability to read both the implied and explicit coding of what it means to be a student on any particular study programme. How teachers plan and execute teaching and learning activities play an all important role in deciding what students can and must do, how much responsibility they have and must take on, and how they must focus their 119

engagement. However, in some cases, the one aspect of a teaching and learning activity might affect other or different activities too: • Programmes with very little scheduled teaching and much time allocated for independent reading requires that students are sufficiently engaged by their course to motivate searching out effective ways of studying independently. However, very few students have any significant experience with learning independently why many are likely to feel overwhelmed by such a requirement. As a consequence, they may never get around to reading at all, and instead they develop strategies aimed at finding out what seems to be required of them, rather than to persistently study “at home by their desks”. • Programmes overloaded by contents and lots of teaching assume that students conscientiously read at home until they understand in addition to participating in lectures and recitals. However, teaching often takes place at a pace, where students constantly feel they are falling behind. They fight and struggle to keep up and turn their focus only at what is required to pass the exams. They do the problems teachers give them and hope to reach an understanding of the underlying theory at a different time. • Many programmes include introductory “toolbox” courses that presents students with basic knowledge that is presumed necessary for courses to come, but which do not offer any insight into the discipline in their own right. From the programme director’s perspective sequencing the fundamentals first, is only logical, and this, the students will be required to acknowledge and accept. But for many students these courses are felt to be serious obstacles, to which they fail to relate purpose and relevance with respect to the larger context of their study programmes. Instead, students learn to bear boredom and what appears to be teaching devoid of external purpose. And because these courses are often taught at the beginning of a study programme, they shape the way students study for the remainder of their education. It thus seems that neither the choice of teaching-learning activities nor how to make parts of the course relate to a larger whole are matters that can be treated independently of the course’s learning objectives. On the other hand, one must bear in mind that a certain framing of teaching-learning activities do not ensure that students adopt certain corresponding be120

haviours. Instead, student behaviour reflects their interpretation of the teaching and learning activities. Choosing how to frame teaching and learning activities is thus a matter of taking into account students’ possibilities for participating in these activities, and of taking into account how you wish that students engage with their studies. Furthermore, framing is also a matter of considering how any activity or course fits in a broader perspective; a matter of considering how to make your teaching congruent with the education as a whole. It is for these reasons that Noel Entwistle (2009) argues for reaching for “congruence” between the elements and courses that comprises the study programme, and thus taking on a more holistic perspective compared to John Biggs & Catherine Tang (2007, cf. chapter 2.2) concept of “constructive alignment”. The concept of congruence emphasizes the idea that students need to construct meaning out of course content by also relating it to other parts of the study programme and other aspects of their education. This does not mean that students should be left to their own devices when working to bridge purpose and meaning across courses. Congruence is still the teacher’s responsibility. Student integration at university

In the previous section, we discussed how implicit expectations of students influence the way we teach. In this section, we will look at the student’s role in learning and in participating in teaching and learning activities. Referring back to the vignette, this section thus offers an explanation of why the pharmaceutical science students stay in their programme although they have clearly run smack up against the brick wall that is the exam. We shall do so by examining the students’ integration process. When students begin at university, it is often with great enthusiasm. They can hardly wait to commence the exciting journey into the studies they have carefully chosen. Still, a large percentage of these students drop out during their undergraduate years. In 2009, the attrition rates among undergraduate students were 17 % in the medical sciences, 30 % in technical educations, 38 % in the humanities and 39 % in the natural sciences. Of these, half left during their first year. There is no one simple explanation as to why students do not complete the education they start. However, there are a number of factors that greatly affect whether a student completes his or her education (for an international review of research on drop-out and student retention, 121

see Ulriksen, Madsen & Holmegaard 2010). Some reasons may appear to be rooted outside of the programme context (e.g., the reason for choosing the programme), other reasons involve the student’s interpretation of academic requirements, and some reasons may relate to the study programme and educational institution itself. Finances, housing, private and social factors that have no immediate relation to the study programme may also affect the student’s departure decision. Factors that influence students’ decision to stay or leave cannot be understood independently, but must be considered interdependent. Therefore it is no use to dismiss drop-outs or a failed exam as if rooted in external factors (e.g., that the student’s academic preparation was insufficient or that the quality of his or her work was poor) – just as it is of no use to consider high retention and completion rates the sole deciding factor in the success of a study programme. The crucial factor is the relationship between the students who arrive at university, the expectations they are met with and the conditions for learning they face. Integration: Social and academic

Tinto’s longitudinal model of institutional departure (see below), illustrates the many influences on a student’s decision to persist. The model is meant to describe and explain that student attrition is a process that takes place over time. But the model can also be used to identify and make explicit some of the most important characteristics of the students’ encounters with university: who the students are, what their goals, commitment and experiences are, while at university, are significant factors in explaining how well the students fare at university. According to Tinto’s model, all these factors point towards the issue of how well the student is integrated at the university – which we know is crucial (cf. Jensen et al. 2011). The model is therefore eminently suited to illustrate the factors crucial to what students bring with them and how they engage in the teaching and learning activities. This is what we will be doing in the following, but with an emphasis on “Institutional Experiences”. In brief, Tinto’s model points at two aspects of students’ integration at university: academic and social integration. The academic and social integration both include a formal and informal component.

122

PRE-ENTRY ATTRIBUTES

GOALS AND COMMITMENTS

INSTITUTIONAL EXPERIENCES

INTEGRATION

GOALS AND COMMITMENTS

OUTCOME

ACADEMIC SYSTEM FORMAL ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE FAMILY BACKGROUND

INTENTIONS

GOALS AND INSTITUTIONAL COMMITMENTS

SKILLS AND ABILITIES

PRIOR SCHOOLING EXTERNAL COMMITMENTS

FACULTY/STAFF INTERACTIONS

ACADEMIC INTEGRATION

INFORMAL FORMAL EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES PEER GROUP INTERACTIONS INFORMAL SOCIAL SYSTEM

SOCIAL INTEGRATION

INTENTIONS

GOAL AND INSTITUTIONAL COMMITMENT

DEPARTURE DECISION

EXTERNAL COMMITMENTS

SOCIETY TIME (T)

Figure 1. Tinto’s longitudinal model of institutional departure (adapted from Tinto 1993).

The formal component of academic integration is about whether or not the institution acknowledges the student as legitimate. This is particularly relevant in relation to examination results. The informal component is about how the student makes the discipline his or her “own”. Does the student see the relevance? Is the content experienced as interesting? Is the student engaged? Thus, the one component of academic integration is a reflection of the institution’s evaluation of the student, while the other is a reflection of the student’s evaluation of his or her own role at the institution. Social integration is a about a sense of belonging to the community at the institution and the discipline. Only rarely will there be one particular way to integrate, because the institution or the education is comprised by many communities that are defined through different aims and purposes – e.g., first-year students, master students, tutors, student unions, clubs etc. Social integration is crucial in making students want to spend time at their institution, and in allowing students access to help and support when studying becomes hard. Students’ academic and social integration is also connected to their 123

attitudes and goal commitments. A study performed at the faculty of Humanities at the University of Copenhagen showed that students could have highly disparate ‘study patterns’. These patterns related to what students experienced as a good life as a student (Boeskov et al. 2003). For some this involved engaging deeply with the academic content, whereas others approached their studies as a sort of hobby, while others emphasized how future job opportunities were key to their ways of engaging, whereas yet others found the social relations at the study to be the most important. A student’s study pattern is not set in stone – it can change over time. However, students emphasize aspects of their integrated differently depending on their study pattern at a given time. The important point here is that students are different, that their differences are related to the content and structure of the study programme, and that students continue to change – for example, as a result of the teaching they participate in (cf. the section “Teaching affects students” p. 119).

Options We have shown how both the teacher’s expectations of students and the teaching itself interact with students’ prior knowledge and experiences. And we have discussed how academic and social integration is important when students consider whether to opt out or to continue with their studies. This leaves us with one central question: What can the teacher do? One important thing is to understand who the students are and where their interests lie. One particularly important tool is for the teacher to actively include the students, and to establish a dialogue with students about their ideas and experiences. It is therefore important that the teacher starts a dialogue that addresses questions of purpose and the students’ and institutions’ expectations to one another. Before teaching

• Prepare the course by looking at study statistics and course plans to gain an overview of the experiences and prior knowledge that students carry with them: What are the students’ academic backgrounds? Which courses have they previously followed in the programme? Where do the programme’s graduates eventually find employment? 124

• Conduct a survey on the course website: Ask students to describe what they expect to learn from the course: What do they expect to be particularly interesting? Particularly difficult? Ask them to describe what connection they see between the course and previous and future courses. These descriptions can be used in the introductions, but also for negotiation of expectations during the course. Which expectations are met through the teaching and how? Which are not met here but in other courses – and which expectations will probably not be met at all during the programme? This requires that the teacher has a sense or feel for the programme’s content as a whole. This negotiation of expectations is crucial to students’ integration, and contributes to minimising the gap between their expectations and the actual content. • When it comes to the implied student, the teacher can try to make some of the implicit assumptions explicit. Not all the assumptions can be brought to light, not least because some are hidden from the teacher as well, but it is worth a try. At the same time, you must attempt to make teaching accommodating in both form and content, so that students with different interests, orientations and backgrounds can be included and can involve themselves in different ways – even if teaching cannot be adapted to everything and everyone. Together with the other teachers at the course or the programme, you can for example: -- Consider the methods of teaching and assessment that students encounter. Which competences do the methods presuppose the students have? -- Brainstorm about your ideal students and what characterises them. Consider two competent students: describe what make them good students. -- Hold a meeting for the programme’s teachers, and discuss whether you value the same features in students. In teaching

• Students will not necessarily take the relevance of your course for granted. It must continuously be explained and justified. Why does the pharmaceutic science programme begin with courses in maths, physics and chemistry for example? And why should students read novels from the past, if they are interested in more recent literature? 125

• Make students engage with contents in ways that reveal to you what they think of it. In smaller classes, students can work in groups to make concept maps of (parts of) the course content. In larger (and smaller) classes, students can reflect on what they find particularly important about a theme or the entire course as part of their preparation and writing. • Consider if there are more ways for students to legitimately engage in learning during the course. Especially during the beginning of the course, it is important to communicate to students how they best prepare for the course and what it means to participate in your teaching: how do students need to study on their own, how should they engage with the texts and what role does the reading have in their learning in the course? The important thing in relation to student engagement is to make your conditions and course requirements explicit to thus facilitate students’ formal academic integration. • Demonstrate the relevance of the course content, e.g. by refering to other and future courses or even job functions. The purpose of the teaching-learning activities need to be clear for students to find ways to meaningfully engage in the course without having to turn to unqualified guesswork – as was the case with the pharmaceutical science students. • Grant students freedom of choice in relation to the content, working methods and academic challenges. This creates space for students with different learning needs, expectations, interests and reasons for studying – and for their different integration strategies. The choices must all lead to fulfilling the learning objectives, but allow for different ways for doing so. • Use different kinds of examples when showing students why the course is relevant, and what it can be used for: Students are interested in different things, and more examples and angles on the course content increase the possibility that more students find the course relevant and that some even learn to find it fascinating. • Halfway through, it may be relevant to ask students to reflect on their expectations again. The purpose of this exercise is to encourage an ongoing negotiation of expectations. Ask questions like: What are your expectations of the course, the teacher and yourself for the remainder of the course? To which degree do you think these will be met? What can you do? What do you need the teacher to do? Such

126

exercises can be included as part of the students’ preparation (for example through an anonymous survey on the course website). Evaluation of teaching

• As part of your evaluation of the course, you can choose to investigate for yourself the apparent variation in students’ ways to engage and work with the discipline, and consider how you can accommodate this variation while still ensuring that course objectives are met. • Evaluate your teaching using different methods for different purposes – e.g., through focus group interviews, short 2-minute essays and so forth (see chapter 6.2). Rationales: Who are the students and what do they bring?

The previous sections suggest that student active engagement can be used as an important tool for teachers to gain insight into students’ ways and rationales for participating and learning. But what kinds of students enroll at universities today, and what prior knowledge and experiences do they bring with them? Considering the past 50-60 years, the universities have changed from only accepting a very limited percentage of a cohort to being institutions that are expected to eventually educate and graduate one in every five children born after the year 2008. This change is what we call the massification of universities. The increase in students also means that students are more diverse than previously – regardless of the fact that still it is more likely that a child born out of an academic family pursues a university degree compared to children with different socio-economic backgrounds. However, this picture differs from programme to programme, as does the percentage of accepted students from non-Western countries and the percentage of male and female students. If you have been a university teacher for a long time, you will have experienced great changes over the years. If you are a new teacher, you may have the feeling that students form a different group than when you were a student yourself. It is however a change that takes place over time, and it is a change that is taking place very differently at different programmes (for specific examples of student compositions by programme see Thomsen 2008). Another significant aspect is the experiences that students bring with them from their prior schooling. These experiences will have 127

equipped them with a repertoire that affects their ability to manage time on task, how they respond to control,, and not least how they navigate requirements, assessment and learning objectives. Students brought this repertoire with them from their prior schooling and it is all they have at their disposal for learning how to navigate higher education. Upper secondary prerequisites

Three conditions related to students’ experience from upper secondary school are of particular significance when we consider students’ repertoires: • Their experience with time management. • Their experience with handling requirements. • Changes connected to the Danish upper secondary education school reform from 2005. The first condition is related to the challenges students face in terms of time management and planning. A new university student has 10-11 years of experience from primary school and 2-3 years of experience from upper secondary school. In upper secondary, they have had an average of 26-27 compulsory lessons a week (and written warnings if they fail to show up), as well as obligatory written assignments. In other words, students have been infused into a system where their time and activities were sanctioned, controlled and prioritised externally. This means that our students were trained to deal with requirements, mandatory elements and sanctions, and have gotten used to a high degree of external control. Teachers decided what must be handed in when, and the school decided when and how to prioritise a large proportion of their study activities. The second condition is related to handling requirements. During upper secondary school, students also encountered exams and had to handle requirements. Many upper secondary students realise that to retain a certain degree of choice after upper secondary school, they have to think about how to get high grades. Consequently, a very important part of upper secondary school revolves around the final grade point average, which is derived in part from exam results, partly from grades on certain written assignments and partly from grades awarded for classroom participation. Some higher education programmes are peopled with students, who were good at this game. Presumably, they were also good at learning 128

and understanding what was going on otherwise. In this sense they are competent as students. However, they have three years of experience in focusing on what happens at the very end – the exam. In contrast to this, the students who were not as good at getting good grades in upper secondary school carry this experience with them, even though what they actually learned from that experience can differ to great extent. The third condition is related to the upper secondary education school reform, which changed how academic standards were perceived of and evaluated. The reform was not radical, but two aspects of the reform are worth considering. One is that learning objectives are thought of in terms of competences, and even though subjects are still defined through core knowledge and concept, the actual contents that students have worked with in upper secondary school may vary somewhat. As a university teacher, you cannot assume that everyone has covered the same contents. The second aspect is the emphases on students’ ability to carry out work across disciplines, to work independently on large assignments, and to make methodological reflections. Today, eight years later, it is still not clear whether the reform was a success or not. While it is true that previous student generations were capable in ways that today’s students are not, the same is true the other way around. This would also be the case if we were to compare university graduates from 2014 with those from 1994. Choice and choice expectations

It has been established through recent research that the choice of education is not merely a question of matching interest and education. The choice is an aspect and matter of students’ work at forming and shaping their identities (cf. Holmegaard, Ulriksen & Madsen 2014). It is an endeavour centrally characteristic to “students of late modernity”. When young people pursue a degree in higher education many factors are at play. Students’ choice of study will be based on whether they can pursue an interest, whether the education leads to a rewarding work life and life in general etc. But the choice will also be about whether or not the prospective student thinks of him- or herself as the sort of person that studies in a given programme, education or university. The choice contains many expectations as to how studying will be like, who else will be studying in the programme, and how student life will be in general. Furthermore, the choice is about making a realistic choice. Something that fits what the student believes he or she could become good at. 129

In many cases, the choice is thus a deliberation that involves and revolves around an array of considerations. And students feel that it is their own, personal task to manage and make that choice responsibly. This is complicated by an ever growing number of educational programmes on offer, making it ever harder for students to navigate and get a sense of all available choices. Add to that, the complication introduced to making sense of the specifics concerning particular programmes and contents, when students maintain that making the choice is an individual responsibility. But why might this be relevant to university teachers? It is relevant because the content of study programmes is not the only thing students consider, nor is it necessarily among their primary concerns. A student’s choice and expectations concerning his or her future education combines into a patchwork that must ultimately come together to make unequivocal sense – a kind of sense that to the individual student literally is life. This effort to find the perfect study programme, is one that is central to many students. The choice is a serious and careful decision, the end result of exhaustive deliberations about how they want to develop as persons, far from “mere” careful analyses of disciplinary contents. Therefore, only few students arrive at their destined study programme with a clear idea of what courses they will be taking in their first year, and what these courses will teach them. Instead, they expect to meet something resembles what the discipline is made out to be from day one. They expect it to be relevant and interesting and that they will be motivated by the content matter. They also expect that it requires a special effort to study at university. However, they may not have a clear idea of what the actual courses involve. If students did not create their impression of their chosen field of study from course descriptions, where did their impression of the discipline come from? It could be the research discipline they lean on, or the discipline as it is construed publicly (e.g. on university web pages under headings like “What can I become?” and “What do pharmaceutical scientists do?”). In some cases, students’ expectations of the study programme are based on their knowledge of the field as communicated through corresponding upper secondary level subject. The expectations students arrive with at class are highly significant to their engagement, their motivation and, in at worst, their decision to leave.

130

What do students find difficult during their transition to university?

Studies of first-year students, which are abundant among studies of university transition, indicate that students do not experience academic requirements as the greatest challenge in their transition to university. The challenge they experience most is how to manage their time and plan their studies. Add to this the gap that exists between the content they expected to meet and the content they actually meet. This gap undermines the students’ motivation and their conviction that they made the right choice of education, which makes them especially vulnerable if they struggle to pass their exams. The challenge students experience regarding how to plan their studies relates to the fact that the reality at university is significantly different from what students experienced during upper secondary school. Students are typically required to read much more (and often in a foreign language) when they prepare for lectures compared to what they are used to. Furthermore, university studies are structured differently. As mentioned, students are used to up to 30 hours of scheduled lessons a week. However, the amount of homework would perhaps only amount to 10 hours a week. In many university programmes, it is the other way around. Here students normally have between 10-20 hours of scheduled lessons a week, while the remainder of the work week is thought of as independent studies. This means that students must be able to manage their time, and make sure not to waste it. They must adjust the way they read to focus on what is most important and to engage with the text in the right manner. These are requirements that many students find it difficult to meet. Their studies are fast-paced, it is challenging to find time to read everything, it is hard to plan and especially plan to include time for anything other than reading. When students are not able to focus their reading the right way, they tend to lose motivation. They end up by blaming themselves, in the belief that they should and could make a better effort. It is noteworthy how these aspects of student life do not in themselves an expression of difficulties understanding the content matter, but are expressions of a difficulty just getting started with the content matter. Some students’ repertoires fall short, and the experience gained through previous schooling turn out to be inadequate. Seen from the outside (and often from the inside as well!) it appears as if they do not invest sufficient interest and energy, are lazy and not seriously engaged in and committed to the study programme they applied to. Despite of how distorted this

131

picture may be compared to the actual struggle students endure, it is a picture both students and teachers agree to.

Conclusion Is it really necessary that a university teacher cares and tries to relate to university students as of late modernity? Yes, because it is important that the teacher knows the students, their interests and their prior knowledge and experiences. We do not mean that all teachers should commence extensive studies on late modern youth, but rather that the teacher should have an invested interest in the background, repertoire and expectations that students have when they arrive at university and continue through their education. This, because it is of crucial importance to students’ participation in teaching and learning, to their motivation, to their academic and social integration, and ultimately to their attrition or retention. Interests, knowledge and experiences are not something that students passively carry with them. These are also met in teaching in certain ways. The teacher should therefore consider the framework of teaching and which implied students this teaching presupposes. To be invested in students, their backgrounds and interests means to make sincere attempts at understanding students’ reasons for acting in certain (and sometimes unexpected and inappropriate) ways. It means to make teaching a tool for clarifying and supporting students to adapt and expand their modes of engagement. This chapter provided suggestions for why and how the teacher can make use of this tool in practice.

Resources Entwistle, N. (2009). Teaching for Understanding at University: Deep Approaches and Distinctive Ways of Thinking. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. – Noel Entwistle’s book on teaching, aimed at helping students understand the content of teaching, is a modern book, compared to, ex. Biggs’ and Tang’s commonplace book. Its’ basis is a contemporary account of what students want from their education. It is particularly suited to teachers who must ensure students a good learning outcome despite the countless reasons they might have for participating in the course. At the same time, this book offers very particular in its sugges132

tions and advice for teachers without simplifying or being superficial (203 pages). Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. 2nd edition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. – Vincent Tinto offers a thorough and persuading investigation of many of the positions educational research has held in the attempts to understand the conditions surrounding drop-out from university. To this end, he also treats the issue of who the students are and why they engage in learning in a convincing and well-reasoned way – and in a way that is of relevance to many people employed at universities (296 pages). Ulriksen, L. (2009). The Implied Student. Studies in Higher Education, 34(5): 517-532. – The concept of the implied student was used in this chapter to make claims of a more general character. Lars Ulriksen’s article provides a thorough introduction to the concept, and uses it to analyse the Bachelor programme in Natural Sciences at Roskilde University. We recommend the article, because it will be particularly relevant for teachers who want to do further work on articulating the implicit, but important, aspects characteristic of what they teach.

Literature Biggs, J. & C. Tang (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Boeskov, S. et al. (2003). De gode studieliv. En kvalitativ undersøgelse af studiemønstre, studieskift og frafald ved Det Humanistiske Fakultet på Københavns Universitet. Copenhagen: Faculty of Humanities, Københavns Universitet. Holmegaard, H.T., L. Ulriksen & L.M. Madsen (2014). The Process of Choosing What to Study. A Longitudinal Study of Upper Secondary Students’ Identity Work when Choosing Higher Education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(1): 21-40. Illeris, K., N. Katznelson, B. Simonsen & L. Ulriksen (2002). Ungdom, identitet og uddannelse. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag. Jensen, T.K. et al. (2011). Studiemiljø 2011: Undersøgelse af studiemiljøet ved Aarhus Universitet (rapport nr. 1). Aarhus: Aarhus University. Johannsen, B.F. (2012). At dumpe på farma: En interviewundersøgelse. IND’s skriftserie nr. 24. Copenhagen: Department for Science Education, University of Copenhagen

133

Thomsen, J.P. (2008). Social differentiering og kulturel praksis på danske universitetsuddannelser. Ph.d. Roskilde: Roskilde University. Ulriksen, L., H.T. Holmegaard & L.M. Madsen (2010). What do we know about explanations for drop-out/opt out among young people from STM higher education programmes? Studies in Science Education, 46(2): 209-244.

134

3.2 Course descriptions FREDERIK VOETMANN CHRISTIANSEN, SEBASTIAN HORST AND CAMILLA ØSTERBERG RUMP

In Denmark, university teachers must write course descriptions and use the descriptions actively in the planning, execution and evaluation of their teaching. In this chapter, we will outline the requirements to course descriptions, and discuss how best to prepare them.

Course descriptions are part of the regulations Each study programme is subject to a set of regulations (Danish: Studieordning), which describes the objectives, structure and rules of the programme. This includes a description of the general learning objectives of the programme, and you must refer to these when you produce course descriptions for individual courses. Formally, the course descriptions of each study unit form part of the regulations of the programme in question. Each study programme is governed by a study board that, among other things, is responsible for designing the regulations of the programme, and which treats the academic questions related to the programme. In some institutions, a study board may only be in charge of a single or a few programmes, while in other places, a range of programmes are governed by one study board. For a course to be established at all, the study board must first approve the course descriptions. The study boards collect course descriptions from the programme’s teachers, and may request changes to be made, e.g., the exam format, teaching methods, or goal descriptions. This process is important to keep in mind, not least because this structure often determines when the course descriptions must be submitted. It is not uncommon that revisions of course descriptions must be made as least a full semester before the course starts.

135

What should a course description include? Typically, each study board has a template for course descriptions for each programme. Contact the head of studies to make sure that your draft adheres to the required format. The course descriptions must always include a goal description or learning objective. Furthermore, a course description will usually include a description of the course’s purpose, scope, teaching method(s), exam type(s) and content. Learning objectives are the recurring element in any course description, because these objectives have come to play a crucial role in describing university education within the last ten years. This is due to the focus on competences or outcomes in education as described in chapter 1.1. The notion of “constructive alignment” (Biggs & Tang 2007) – that the course’s objectives, teaching activities and exam type(s) must mutually support each other (see chapter 2.2) – has become certified by Danish legislation in recent years. In the examination order it is stated: “The objective of the examination is to assess the extent to which the student’s qualifications comply with the academic objectives stipulated for the subjects/subject elements of the programme in the curriculum” (§ 2) and “The programme must include a variety of examination forms, which must reflect the content and working methods of the course” (§ 3). Correspondingly “The Order on the Grading Scale and Other Forms of Assessment” says: “In the rules for the individual study programme, the university lays down precise descriptions of objectives and criteria for assessing the fulfilment of such objectives [..] for the individual elements which are concluded with a test” (§ 10, sec. 2). We are thus required by law to define objectives for student outcomes, to plan and carry out teaching that enables students to meet the goals and to assess the students’ performances on the basis of these goals. But what constitutes an objective for student outcome? Is it necessarily a competence description? Formally, an objective for student outcome describes the (intended) “learning outcome in the form of knowledge, skills and competences” (The Ministerial Order on Bachelor and Master’s Degree Programmes at Universities § 30 (2)). The wording “knowledge, skills and competences” stems from the Danish Qualifications Framework. In order to answer the question of whether goal descriptions are competence descriptions, we must describe this tripartition in more depth.

136

Goal descriptions and the Danish Qualifications Framework As a result of the Bologna Process, Danish university programmes have been restructured on the basis of a new qualifications framework structure, which constitutes the foundation of the University Programme Order and the orders on accreditation of education. The restructuring was carried out in two steps (2003 and 2007), and has been a key factor in establishing ‘competence’ as the focal point for development of study programmes in Denmark. The current qualifications framework (The Qualifications Framework 2007) comprises the Danish interpretation of the European “Qualifications Framework”. The objectives of education are defined as the learning outcomes, which all students, be they Bachelors, Masters or PhDs, must achieve in order to graduate. Furthermore, these new study programmes must support a general labour-market oriented competence profile, and a number of explicit goals for students’ learning outcomes must be formulated for each individual educational element on the basis of three categories: competences, skills and knowledge (see the text box below). The current qualifications framework prescribes that all study programme regulations must include a general description of the programme’s objective, using the qualifications framework’s distinction between knowledge, skills and competences. The same applies to the individual course descriptions. Prior to the 2007 qualifications framework, another distinction was used (described in the “qualification key” from 2004). In this distinction, it was unambiguously stated that a programme’s or individual course’s objective must be in the form of a competence description – or a so-called competence profile. In this document, a distinction was made between “disciplinary”, “academic” and “practical” competences. The qualifications framework from 2007 has the following to say about the new distinction between knowledge, skills and competences: Please note: In the new description model, the objectives of education should not only be defined as different competences. Competences are still an important category, but knowledge and skills are reintroduced as important categories for describing the desired learning outcome, which a student can expect to have achieved by the end of his or her education. (Referencegruppen 2007: 6)

137

Based on this somewhat opaque passage, it seems clear that knowledge and skills are elements of a learning outcome, but that they differ from competences. However, it is unclear how they differ from competences, or what the actual relationship between knowledge, skills and competences is. These new categories have clearly given rise to confusion. This is partly due to the ambiguity of the competence concept (as described in chapter 1.1), but even more due to the fact that the categories skills and knowledge are poorly defined, and it is unclear how knowledge, skills and competences are connected. Below, you can read the definitions of the learning outcomes – we believe that there is a need for further interpretation of these concepts before they can be used to make useful course descriptions.

Learning outcomes described with competences, skills and knowledge (quoted from the Qualifications Framework) Knowledge

Knowledge means knowledge and understanding of a subject. Knowledge contains the following aspects: • The type of knowledge involved: knowledge about theory or knowledge about practice; knowledge of a subject or a field or within a profession. • The complexity of this knowledge: the degree of complexity and how predictable or unpredictable the situation is in which this knowledge is mastered. • Understanding: the ability to place one’s knowledge in a context. For example, understanding is expressed when one explains something to others. Skills

Skills means what a person can do or accomplish. Skills contains the following aspects: • The type of skill involved: practical, cognitive, creative or communicative. • The complexity of the problem solving: the problem solving this skill is to be applied to and the complexity of this task. • Communication: the communication that is required, the complexity of the message, to which target groups and with which instruments.

138

Competence

Competence concerns responsibility and autonomy and states the ability to apply knowledge and skills in a work situation or in a study-related context. Competence contains the following aspects: • Space for action: the type of work and/or study-related contexts in which the knowledge and skills are brought into play, and the degree of unpredictability and changeability in these contexts. • Cooperation and responsibility: the ability to take responsibility for one’s own work and the work of others and the complexity of the cooperative situations in which one can engage. • Learning: the ability to take responsibility for one’s own learning and that of others. (Source: The Qualifications Framework/Concepts)

How do competences, skills and knowledge differ from one another? We believe interpretation is needed to make the concepts competences, skills and knowledge (cf. the text box below) applicable. In the qualifications framework, knowledge is defined in a way that blurs the distinction between knowledge and competences. This is unfortunate, as the whole point of introducing “competence” was to focus on the student’s learning outcome rather than the curriculum. By reintroducing “knowledge” as a learning outcome category, you run the risk of repeating the same fallacy that education has suffered from historically: Confusing what has been taught with what has been learned. Since goals must apparently be defined in terms of competences, the knowledge category ought to be used to define something else: the content areas, subject areas or problem areas of the course, subject element or education, i.e., the academic areas treated in the programme. Therefore this category (knowledge) is applied in the curriculum (and course descriptions) to describe the content that you will work with, such as the academic areas that the subject is usually divided into (for many programmes this also corresponds to course titles). In this interpretation, “knowledge” represents the academic content or the subject areas taught, defined, for example, by textbooks or assignments. The knowledge category thus describes the subject- and problem areas that the competences must be obtained in relation to. 139

Skills on the other hand is a concept that must be understood as something between subject areas and competences. In the official definition, the meaning of skills is further defined – especially with regard to how they differ from competences: The distinction between skills and competences is evident when the student, more or less on his or her own, independently transfers concrete skills to new areas and contexts. An example of a distinction between language skills and communicative competences may serve to illustrate this. Language skills are the building blocks that the competent language-user brings into play in new communicative contexts. Communicative competence denotes the ability to produce a suitable utterance in each communication situation on the basis of knowledge and skills in a range of areas (e.g., phonetics, morphology, syntax, vocabulary, pragmatics, conversation situations and scenarios, stylistic level and culture). (Referencegruppen 2007: 7)

This quote supports an interpretation of skills as techniques, methods, procedures etc., that are executed instrumentally and do not leave room for individual interpretation of the task, i.e., processes that are independent of who carries them out as there is only one standard by which to measure the quality of a skill (whereas assessing a competence will always depend on the context). Examples of skills includes lab techniques, calculation techniques, measuring, statistic treatment of data, transcription techniques and application of certain apparatus/IT, but also methods for carrying out surveys, analyses etc. Note that a technique considered a skill in one education – e.g., because it has an instrumental, application-oriented purpose – may be considered a competence in a different education where it may be considered essential that the student becomes a critical, independent user and developer of the technique. We are not convinced that it is relevant for all courses to define skills that need to be learned. However, we recognise that some courses have valid reasons for distinguishing between what is learnt instrumentally (skills) and aspects where the context and student are crucial for execution (competence). The teacher should master this distinction, because it will be very useful in discussions with students about a course’s learning objectives. We maintain that there are many good reasons for using competence

140

descriptions to define academic goals, because a competence description indicates which types of learning activities are relevant better than a syllabus. This may help ease the selection of content and maintain focus on students’ active work with the content. To make sense of the tripartition of knowledge, skills and competences, we find it necessary to maintain the competence concept as the core concept, and interpret the concepts of skills and knowledge as described above. The next question is how to write a good course description and how to apply it in practice. We shall address this below. Advice no. 1: Competence goals must describe the students’ capability for action

A description of competence goals describes what students must be able to do with the academic content after the course. Do not use competence descriptions to describe the academic content (syllabus) of the course. It may be that the template for course descriptions will include a category on “academic content”. If so, describe the content there, and not in the competence description, or describe it under the “Knowledge”-category.

Two examples of learning objectives for specific courses. The first example is divided into competences, skills and knowledge Competence description (including skills and knowledge) for the course “General Breeding of Domestic Animals” (see Ask 2010: 6). Competences

• Elaborate a research question for the problem area in relation to domestic animal breeding or the preservation of (domestic animal) genetic resources. • Collect, analyse and interpret scientific information about a specific topic in relation to domestic animal breeding or preservation of (domestic animal) genetic resources. • Discuss and evaluate the effect of different inbreeding restriction strategies, reproduction and gene technology for the conservation of (domestic animal) genetic resources.

141

Skills

• Calculate kinship, degree of inbreeding, genetic parameters, breeding value and heterosis for simple data set. • Calculate expected genetic progress for a given (domestic animal) population. Knowledge

• Describe the national and global distribution, as well as individual performance level of the most important domestic animal breeds within the species that are most important to production in Denmark. • Describe the breeding programme for individual species: including breeding goals, methods for genetic evaluation and genetic parameters for important features, structure (registration strategies, selection steps and mating strategies), and use of reproduction/gene technologies. • Explain the following concepts and what they mean to the breeding-based development of a domestic animal population: genetic variation, heritability, inbreeding, selection intensity, breeding value security, breeding value evaluation methods and genetic consequences. • Explain the correlation between domestic animals’ genetics, environment and phenotypical performances in a population. • Describe a simple breeding programme for conservation of (domestic animal) genetic resources. Competence descriptions for the course: “Basic Course in the Science Education Didactics”, University of Copenhagen

• By the end of the course, students are expected to be able to apply disciplinary didactic literature, concepts and methods to: Analyse rationales and goal descriptions in the official guidelines for teaching. • Describe and evaluate students’ academic learning, including cognitive, meta-cognitive and emotive factors. • Outline a short course of teaching, both for single-discipline and interdisciplinary courses (own disciplines in interplay with other disciplines). The students must in particular be able to design and analyse specific student assignments, and to justify his or her choice of teaching and assessment method. • Analyse and evaluate pupils’ academic performance. • Apply disciplinary didactic terminology and theory correctly and use it to argue, on the basis of learning theory, for the content and sequencing of student activities in relation to teaching.

142

Advice no. 2: Consider the relationship between objectives, teaching and learning activities and assessment

A good goal description tells the reader something about both the teaching activities and exam (assuming there is a reasonable connection). Not because the goal description establishes these things unequivocally (typically these are described elsewhere in the course description), but because a reader, by reading the goal description alone, will be able to form a fairly accurate idea about which teaching methods and exam types will (presumably) be used. On the basis of the last example, one might imagine that students must independently produce papers that design and analyse courses, assess pupils’ academic performance and argue (orally or in writing) for didactic organisation and sequencing of teaching. Advice no. 3: Keep in mind that the description has many target groups

The goal description has many target groups: The study board, teacher groups, the students on the course, prospective students, external examiners and teachers that teach other courses. All these groups must be able to read and find what they look for in the goal description. To accommodate this, the goal description should obviously not be too esoteric/implicit, nor be so general that it loses meaning. Try to make it reasonably short (e.g., use 3-5 bullet points instead of elaborate descriptions) and save the more elaborate description for in-depth discussions with colleagues or for students once the course has begun. Advice no. 4: Choose the right “action verbs”

Using precise verbs to describe students’ competences and skills is another important element. We still see goal descriptions stating that “students must understand” this and that. Naturally, this is informative in relation to which content areas are covered, but this choice of verb tells the reader nothing useful about what students are actually supposed to be able to do, and it is actually a disguised content description rather than a competence description. What does it mean that a student has understood something? There are different degrees of understanding in relation to the level of competence at which the student must master specific parts of the content. The different competence taxonomies may be beneficial, e.g., 143

the SOLO-taxonomy (see figure 6 in chapter 2.2), which was developed to describe higher education objectives, and “Bloom’s taxonomy of the cognitive area” (see figure 5 in chapter 2.2), which applies to all levels of education. The pedagogical community has discussed whether the higher levels of such taxonomies actually require the underlying levels like “understanding” and “application” in Bloom’s taxonomy. There are many examples of students being able to apply methods and techniques instrumentally, without actually understanding them, by using them as “black boxes”. For instance, students who are able to apply a certain formula, but cannot explain the meaning of the constituent terms of the formula. Furthermore, it is easy to find field-specific examples where the taxonomies do not correspond well to reality. “Being able to identify/distinguish” is for example on a low taxonomic level in both SOLO and Bloom’s taxonomy, but this can sometimes be a higher-level competence: For example being able to distinguish poisonous and non-poisonous algae types in Danish coastal areas on the basis of morphology. The complexity of identification means that the “normal” taxonomic levels do not fit in this particular context. These exceptions, however, do not change the fact that the taxonomies are generally useful and can provide inspiration for writing learning objectives. Advice no. 5: Consider the part the course plays in the programme

You must not only focus on your own course, but also on the way the course fits with the programme in general. Study the objective of the programme as described in the regulations (Danish: Studieordning). Consider whether (and how) your own course contributes to fulfilling the programme’s general objectives. You should carefully consider how the course contributes to what we refer to as the programme’s “broader competences”, such as communication and being able to form part of interdisciplinary teams or being able to contribute to innovation. It is, unfortunately, not unusual that such broad competences are viewed by everyone as “somebody else’s problem”. If there are competences in the general description of the programme that your course does not contribute to, consider and discuss with colleagues where the students will actually acquire those competences.

144

Advice no. 6: Discuss the course description with students at the beginning and throughout the course

Many competence descriptions lead quiet lives of their own in online course descriptions, and neither students nor teachers give them much thought. Sometimes this is fine because the quality of the descriptions is so poor anyway. However, competence descriptions can be very useful for the teacher in clarifying expectations to students, and numerous studies indicate that well-defined objectives helps students in their learning process. We recommend that you present the course’s learning objectives in the very first course session, and that you make the objectives – particularly the competence objectives – an ongoing object of reflection and discussion throughout the course. If the objectives are well aligned with the exam, this will almost automatically lead to a discussion of what is expected of students at the exam. After all, these are the goals against which students’ performance are assessed in the exam. It is a good idea to make these discussions concrete in relation to students’ work, e.g., by emphasising (parts of) student papers and presentations that exemplify how to meet the objectives. Advice no. 7: Discuss the goal descriptions with other teachers on the course

In many courses – especially in programmes with a large number of students – many teachers share the teaching; usually more than five and sometimes more than 20 different teachers can teach parts of a given course. Ensuring coherence in such courses can be quite a challenge. A good description of competences, skills and knowledge can be useful to a “common footing” among teachers. Below is an extract from a report written by a lecturer to describe a course of teaching where this was not done: During the first coordination meeting in the teaching group, we began with the practical planning of the course. This planning involved selecting a textbook, definition of the syllabus, selecting lab exercises and teaching method. Considering that the course had not been taught before and not all teachers had worked together previously, the teaching group ought to have discussed the course’s competence objectives and academic focus. The lack of a shared

145

focus in the teaching group manifested itself through a number of comments in student evaluations: “Difficult to know what was important”, “You must share a common goal for teaching”, and that there was lack of “Agreement among teachers about what we had to learn.” (Extract from project by a former student on a teaching and learning in higher education programme at the University of Copenhagen)

Naturally, it is important to discuss the selection of lab exercises, content etc., but without a common understanding of the course’s overall objective it may be hard to determine these questions adequately. A former student from the teaching and learning in higher education programme at the University of Copenhagen (Worsaae 2010) finds it useful to start with an introductory meeting for all involved teachers to discuss the course on the basis of a so-called “competence matrix” – a matrix that depicts and connects the course competences with the themes of the course’s content. Each teacher is then asked (during or before the meeting) to describe how and how much the content theme they are responsible for contributes to the course’s general competence objectives – possibly with a scale or based on the levels in Bloom’s taxonomy. In this way, the competence matrix becomes a “map” of the course as a whole, which can be very useful for all teachers involved in the course. Another reason why it is crucial that the course teachers understand the meaning of competence descriptions is that competence descriptions are used for assessing students’ exam performances. It is extremely unfortunate if discrepancies in the interpretation of the goal descriptions are not pointed out before the exam.

Conclusion Over the past 10 years, competence descriptions of study programmes have gradually permeated the entire Danish educational system, to the point where they are now a relatively integrated part of the system, even at the university level. For many years now, we have asked participants in the teaching and learning course in higher education at the University of Copenhagen to analyse the quality of the learning objectives in their own courses. It is satisfying to see that the descriptions have improved year by year. Thinking about learning in terms of competences has gained a foothold, even though it is a new mindset at the university level. It is not 146

unlikely that the tripartition of competences, skills and knowledge will be replaced by a different way of describing learning outcomes at some point. However, it is reasonable to assume that the idea of describing education through the competences the students must acquire (their learning outcome) will be part of the university for a long time to come.

Resources In the early 2000’s, the Danish Ministry of Education published a number of texts about competence descriptions of university programmes within different fields as well as some interdisciplinary publications. Of these, we highly recommend the report Competences and Mathematical Learning: http://milne.ruc.dk/imfufatekster/pdf/485web_b.pdf Gregersen, F. et. al. (2003). Fremtidens danskfag – en diskussion af dansk­ faglighed og et bud på dens fremtid. Uddannelsesstyrelsens temahæfte­ serie, nr. 1. Copenhagen: Ministry of Education. Andersen, N.O. et. al. (2003). Fremtidens naturfaglige uddannelser – naturfag for alle. Uddannelsesstyrelsens temahæfteserie, nr. 7. Ministry of Education. Niss, M. and T.H. Jensen (2002). Kompetencer og matematiklæring. Udannelsesstyrelsens temahæfteserie, nr. 18. Copenhagen: Ministry of Education. For a strictly university-level perspective on competence thinking, we recommend: Marton, F. & J. Bowden (1998). The University of Learning: Beyond Quality and Competence. New York: Kogan Page Ltd.

Literature Ask, B. (2010). Restrukturering af kurset Almen Husdyravl. In: F.V. Christiansen, J. Sølberg & H.W. Hansen, Improving University Science Teaching and Learning – Pedagogical Projects, 2. Copenhagen: Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagenn: 3-19. Biggs, J. & C. Tang (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. Maiden Head: Open University Press.

147

Referencegruppen (2007). Ny dansk kvalifikationsramme for videregående uddannelse. The Reference Group on a new Danish qualification framework, May 2007. Worsaae, K. (2010). Coordination and development of a master course with many teachers – using a ‘Competence matrix’ for the planning process. In: F.V. Christiansen, C. Rump & L. Degn, Improving University Science Teaching and Learning – Pedagogical Projects 2008, 1. Copenhagen: Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen: 183-190.

148

3.3 Session planning PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN

The teacher’s challenges All teachers face certain challenges when they plan teaching that take students’ learning into account. This applies to the specific session, the session in relation to the course, and to the course’s overriding learning objectives. One particular challenge is to strike a balance between the expert’s (the teacher’s) knowledge and abilities, which students often express a desire to acquire, and the students’ learning (skills, competences) beyond what the teacher supplies. On the first page of the first chapter of his bestselling textbook on session planning, What’s the Use of Lectures, Donald A. Bligh writes about the shortcomings of normal sessions: The lecture is as effective as other methods for transmitting information. Most lectures are not as effective as discussion for promoting thought. Changing attitudes should not normally be the major objective of a lecture. 1. Lectures are relatively ineffective for teaching values associated with subject matter. 2. Lectures are relative ineffective for inspiring interest in a subject. 3. Lectures are relatively ineffective for personal and social adjustment. Lectures are relatively ineffective for teaching behavioral skills.

(In the remainder of the book Bligh offers suggestions for improving the learning potentials of sessions). With this challenge in mind, I suggest a session planning that: • Incorporates learning objectives and learning outcomes (of the sessions, but also in connection with the overall learning objectives of the course) (Biggs & Tang 2007). • Recognises the students in the didactic triangle (see e.g., p. 95). 149

• Is based on student activities (monologues alone cannot provide students with the skills and competences that are assessed at exams) (e.g., Biggs & Tang 2007, Race 2007, Herskin 2001, Bean 1996). • Avoids overloading the session with content and allows learning rather than content logic to govern the proceedings (e.g. Fink 2003, see p. 166). • Provides students with opportunities to influence the course’s content and form within the framework of the study programme (and allows the teacher to relinquish control). • Contextualises every session to the course plan’s learning objectives, content development and progression by establishing an overview and frameworks of understanding. • Bases the session on questions and key points (with relevant models of understanding) (Herskin 2001, Bligh 2000). • Facilitates meta-communication of the content’s learning objectives and context in the course. • Also includes motivation, exam types, academic study skills, cooperation, and disciplinary skills.

The teacher’s planning In the following, you will find a number of specific planning options. The guiding principles of the session

The pentagon model below provides an overview of certain elements, which the teacher must consider in his or her planning. The teacher can simply fill out each corner as a basis for planning. The context of the session

Another parameter to consider in planning is the context of the course and programme as a whole. At which stage of the education is the course held? Which kind of course are we dealing with? Is it a subject, theme, or skill course? I.e., what are the students’ academic prerequisites, and what are the course’s general learning objectives? In chapter 3.4. Course Planning, I shall examine how to include the course’s general learning objectives and the students’ specific prerequisites. 150

Focus, learning objectives for the session, questions and points

Structure Materials Teaching methods and learning activities

Tools of understanding (concepts, theories, models etc.)

Purpose and context in the course

Academic content

Figure 1. The teaching pentagon.

The session’s learning objectives

The session’s learning objectives are the absolute guiding principles. The session’s learning objectives can be described in terms of what you want the students to take with them from the session: When the session is over, what should students • Know • Understand • Be able to • Do However, there are usually more concrete learning objectives in a single session. Below is a list of specific learning objectives, such as being able to: • Analyse • Evaluate • Assess, evaluate • Calculate • Design • Reflect • Criticise • Contextualise • Categorise and many more. 151

See more objectives in the description of Bloom’s taxonomy of learning objectives and the SOLO-taxonomy on p. 100ff. Defining the session’s learning objectives is important, because the learning objectives affect the choice of material, teaching methods and activities. Each learning objective can be addressed with certain teaching methods and activities. This list of learning objectives is based on the division into knowledge, skills and competences prescribed by the Qualification Framework (2011, see the rationales below) for the establishment of learning objectives. Who or what governs? Students’ motivation and engagement

The question of who or what governs the session planning is a fundamental pedagogical question: Is it the teacher, the students or the logic of the material? Should teaching prioritise student activities or the academic content and the teacher’s dissemination of that content? What kind of discipline are we dealing with? Fact-based, discussion-oriented, or interpretative? In fact-based disciplines, the agenda and thus the key points are often predetermined. In discussion-oriented and interpretative disciplines, the key points are open to debate and allow students to participate and share their interpretation of the points. The students find it most motivating and engaging if they are involved in planning, both in regards to content and form, and that students’ preparation and activities in and between sessions are used in the sessions themselves. Preparing session activities

Part of the teacher’s preparation of sessions consists in selecting the activities that best promote students’ work with, and outcome of, sessions and the individual session themes. I suggest that you begin by deciding what kind of participant activity the session should involve, and then choose teacher presentations and other input. Students primarily learn by working with the material themselves. This section assumes that student activities are a permanent part of sessions. Also see the section on activities in teaching, p. 229ff.

152

Dividing sessions into sequences

A session will (normally) consist of sequences. A sequence is a sub-element of the session with its own theme, focus and key learning point for that part of the session which, together with the other key points, comprises the session’s theme. The key point supports the focus on the sequence’s content. A key learning point will often be formulated as a question or as a kind of heading for the element in the session. (Herskin 2001, Bligh 2000).

A key learning point is … a communicative/pedagogical ‘hook’ in the shape of an important disciplinary • Statement • Fact • Argument • Angle • Understanding • Epistemological goal • … … on which the student can base his or her understanding of the content, and/or is open to discussion.

The structure of a sequence

Structuring sessions in sequences has a number of advantages. It provides variation and renewed attention; it allows for work with different activities and thereby different learning objectives in the same session. The teacher may, for example, divide the session into 20-minute sequences and switch between teacher presentations and student activities. A good rule of thumb has it that most people listening to monologues cannot concentrate for more than 20 minutes at a time – considering this; it is remarkable that we still see lectures based on the teacher’s academic knowledge and the material rather than student learning. A sequence can be structured systematically with a beginning and end to consolidate the academic content, e.g. an introduction to the theme, its context in the session and the point(s) of the elements. The sequence-structured session can also aid students in contextualising ses153

sions, especially sessions in which a large amount of diverse material is covered. The beginning and end can also be made the object of discussion and contextualisation with students – if the session’s content and learning objectives make this viable. Session’s beginning and end

It is most expedient to define the framework for a session’s content at the beginning and end of the session:

Proposed baseline session structure To begin with, you can

• Sum up the previous session: What is today’s starting point? • Sum up the students’ activities and preparation since the previous session. • List the (learning) objectives of the session. • Ask questions that may need clarification. • Provide an overview of the session’s content elements. • Put the session into the context of the entire course (‘s learning objectives). • “Warm up” with, for instance, non-stop writing for three minutes or brainstorms over the topic of the day. The session’s academic content can be structured:

• As content-based sequences/-elements/-activities with different themes. • Around students’ preparation and activities since the previous session. • Around key learning points (see below). • Around transitions from one theme to the next. • In relation to the course as a whole. In closing, you can

• Sum up (in relation to the objectives of the day). • Relate the session to the course’s learning objectives. • Evaluate the session. • Present the content, themes, questions of next session. • Suggest reading, activities and other work to be done before the next session.

154

Selecting academic material (texts) for the session

Both teacher and students often complain that teaching suffers from material overload, both in the session itself and in the readings for sessions. As a teacher, it is difficult to limit the material, because there is just so much that is academically and topically relevant. One way of dealing with this challenge is to let the session’s key learning points and activities govern the selection of material – and not the material’s disciplinary logic. The teacher can (and ought to) inform students of what they are to do before the next session: What must be prepared/read thoroughly before the session, what can be read as background and prerequisite reading, and what should be considered self-study (with reading guides and qualification by the teacher). Models of understanding

Models of understanding means to employ visualisation, logic/system and/or a narrative to create a connection between the academic content and something the listener can relate to and connect with, e.g.: • Images • Graphs, tables • Models • Comparisons • Examples • Narratives/process/sequence, persons, plot A model of understanding makes content, especially complex and abstract content, concrete and relevant. The aim is to establish a kind of parallel-communication, i.e., the material is presented in two or more ways. Using models of understanding, especially in teacher’s oral presentations, will further understanding and decrease information density, so the material has more time to sink in. You can even ask students to produce these models and materials. Resources, handouts etc.

Using resources, such as PowerPoints, handouts, specific material (objects), podcasts, and videos is also parallel communication, and thus a tool to strengthen understanding and learning in teaching. If in doubt about choice and use of suitable resources, there is help to be found below. 155

Taking students’ preparation as a starting point

One common complaint from students and new students in particular, is that e.g., read texts are not brought up in the session, so students are unsure of whether their understanding, views and reflections were valid/ reasonable/acceptable. But if you ask students to help with the preparation for the session, you improve their learning, attention and motivation whether students were asked to do readings, homework, assignments or exercises: both their work and preparation improves if students know their work is taken seriously and will be used in sessions. Unprepared students – what should you do? All this naturally presupposes that the students will show up prepared. But what if you have planned the session based on student preparation and they turn up unprepared? Or if some are prepared and some are not? How can you take this into account in your session planning? First of all, session planning must be based on mutual agreements and negotiation of expectations unless you are planning monologues and activities that do not require preparation. It is not possible to set guidelines for a session that cannot be carried out as planned because (many) students have come unprepared. However, some options include: • Carry out the session by lecturing – this is not a pedagogical solution. • Allow the unprepared students to catch up during the session – this is not a particularly good solution either, as the prepared students will feel neglected/let down. • Divide the class into prepared and unprepared students and have different activities prepared for each group – a solution with a high level of service. • Ignore the unprepared students and carry out the session with the (few) prepared students – the tough approach that benefits the prepared students, and demonstrates the unprepared students an important lesson. • Cancel the session if all the students show up unprepared – this solution requires some courage. • Let the prepared students inform/teach the unprepared – a sympathetic solution. The last solution is not quite as unfair to the prepared students as it may sound. Letting students teach often results in great learning outcomes.

156

But as stated above: The best thing to do is to negotiate expectations at the beginning, so students are aware of possible consequences, and know that you plan your teaching to include student preparation will be used in sessions. Planning students’ work between sessions

Universities generally consider a study week to amount to 37 hours and programmes of study must be planned accordingly. If you look into how many sessions students have a week on the programme and level in question, you can work out how much time you can reasonably ask them to devote to homework (reading, assignments etc.). Meta-communication

It is a huge advantage to students if the teacher clearly meta-communicates content, goals and use of teaching: What is known at the session’s beginning; what is learned during the session and what points towards the next session (preparation, activities etc.). It is all about placing the session in the context of the course and semester plan. It furthermore involves ensuring that “everything” is included and communicating and explicating what the students must: • Read up • Practice • Use the session itself for Attention – how to get it?

One basic prerequisite for learning is the students’ attention. To get their attention, the teacher can: • Explain the usefulness and relevance in relation to the course, the programme, the exam, future jobs. • Demonstrate and be personally engaged in the subject. • Point out the new (experiments, research). • Use visual examples (video, sound etc.). • Provoke the students. • Tell a story or an anecdote.

157

• Ask students to share their experiences and/or thoughts about the subject. • Include student activities that require student engagement. (Adapted from Mortiboys 2010: 8f.) This is not just a matter of disseminating knowledge and skills, but also about putting it into an application-oriented, personalised and illustrative form. Session planning in table form

It can be helpful to prepare sessions systematically. This table (as it is, or adapted to your own teaching) can be useful, either filled out or merely as a reminder. Session theme: ___________________ and key learning points: _______________________ Subthemes, content elements, sequences: What data, which theories, which methods

Learning objectives, know­ ledge, abilities (skills), actions/work (competences)

Points, “hooks”, questions

Teaching methods, activities in and between sessions: What do the students do? What does the teacher do? (Lectures, group work, dialogue, seminars etc.)

“Tools of understanding” (concepts, theories, models, examples, cases, visualisations, comparisons etc.)

Materials, resources, handouts, sources

Feedback, how, when?

Figure 2. Table for session planning.

The so-called London-model is a simpler and widely used table, which is filled out for each session:

158

Table for session planning: The London-model Session: Date and time: Teacher(s): Location: Learning objectives: Content: Sources related to the session: Preparation for the session:

Sequencing and variation

The teacher must also prioritise planning or creating opportunities for sequencing and variation, i.e., make sure that changes in themes, pace and breaks are tailored to the situation, content and points. The teacher must also plan sessions according to what students can only learn through face-to-face meetings with the teacher and other students, and what they can (best) acquire outside sessions.

Handouts as learning tools Handouts can be Informative

• Definitions of concepts • Facts (e.g., numbers, statistics which must be precise) • References Explanatory

• Models • Diagrams, tables, flow charts • Examples • Assignment instructions • Illustrations 159

Interactive

• Cases • Exercises • Questionnaires Supportive

• Tables of contents • Key learning points • PowerPoint prints (e.g., with room for note-taking) Reasons to use handouts

Handouts can be helpful to both students and teacher. Handouts can: • Present information that cannot be given orally during teaching. • Support memory. • Provide an overview and structural overview. • Save students’ time when taking notes or guide note-taking. • Have an interactive function that activates the students. The important thing is what students do with the handouts. Handouts should be learning tools, not simply information. (Mortiboys: 84, Race: 100) • Complement teaching, e.g., both “need to have” and “nice to have” cover material that is not brought up in the session (Race & Pickford 2007). Points to be aware of before using handouts

• Should you use handouts? Do they distract and deactivate students? • You must assess which handouts are suitable and useful and which are not. Choosing handouts must be based on the course’s learning objectives, the session’s learning objectives and the actual teaching situation. • When should they be handed out? Before, during or after sessions? • Which medium? Online (Learning Management Systems), paper? • What is the handout’s function in the session? See the list above. • How do you connect the teaching and the handouts?

160

Three good resources for working with handouts are:

Race (2007). The Lecturer’s Toolkit. A Practical Guide to Assessment Learning and Teaching. 100-1004. – Here you can find a checklist and guide for designing handouts. Bligh (2000). What’s the Use of Lectures?: 148-162. – An entire chapter about the use of handouts. The Faculty Metro (www.undervisermetro.au.dk) provides many concrete examples of the design and use of handouts.

Reasons The three most important reasons (see also chapter 4.5.1 Activities in and between teaching) underlying the suggestions in this chapter are: Reason 1: Alignment, learning objectives

Alignment and learning objectives are connected in that the achieved competences (which are tested in exams) determine the objectives and frameworks for the contents of teaching (Biggs & Tang 2007), and the Qualification Framework 2011 determines the learning objectives of Danish education. For a comprehensive discussion of alignment, see chapter 3.2, p. 97ff. Reason 2: Participant activity and involvement

University teachers widely agree that student participation promotes learning • Because skills are practiced when students actively interact with material and in dialogue. • By ensuring that students can participate in the academic community, and not just observe it. • By improving students’ attention. • Because the teacher can observe students’ understanding and acquisition of the material. • Because participants become resources to one another. (Bean 1996, Bligh 2000, Herskin 2001, Knight 2002, Mortiboys 2010, Race 2007 and many more). 161

Reason 3: Points and tools of understanding

Herskin (2001) and Bligh (2000) (and other educational developers in the bibliography) point out that learning is improved if the session’s content is sequential and focused (in key learning points), and if the points are supported by models of understanding.

Resources Bean, John C. (1996). Engaging Ideas. The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing. Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. – John Bean offers many suggestions of what to include as elements in sessions. Bligh, Donald A. (2000). What’s the Use of Lectures? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Higher Education and Adult Education Series. – The starting point of this book is that ordinary sessions are only good for disseminating information. Hereafter Bligh uses the rest of the book to suggest specific pedagogical activities etc. to improve the pedagogical potential of sessions. You can skip the first chapters and go straight to the pedagogical suggestions. Race, Phil (2007). The Lecturer’s Toolkit. A Practical Guide to Assessment Learning and Teaching. 3rd ed. London: Routledge. – Practical handbook with concrete advice and instructions.

Literature Bean, J.C. (1996). Engaging Ideas. The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Biggs, J. & C. Tang (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 3rd ed. Maidenhead: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. Bligh, D.A. (2000). What’s the Use of Lectures? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Herskin, B. (2001). Undervisningsteknik for universitetslærere. 2nd ed. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Knight, P.T. (2002). Being a Teacher in Higher Education. England: Open University Press. Ministry of Higher Education and Science. Danish Qualifications Framework for Higher Education. Ministry of Higher Education and Science (website).

162

Mortiboys, A. (2010). How to Be an Effective Teacher in Higher Education. Answers to Lecturers’s Questions. England: Open University Press. Race, P. (2007). The Lecturer’s Toolkit. A Practical Guide to Assessment Learning and Teaching. 3rd ed. England: Routledge. Race, P. & R. Pickford (2007). Making Teaching Work. “Teaching Smarter” in Post-Compulsory Education. London: Sage Publications.

163

164

3.4 Course planning PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN

This chapter should be read along with 3.3 Session Planning.

Challenges In a number of introductory courses on university teaching and learning for PhD-students at the University of Copenhagen’s Faculty of Humanities, participants wanted to learn how to structure an entire semester’s lesson plan. This reflects how challenging planning a whole course is – even for the more seasoned teacher. There are many factors to take into consideration. The teacher is required to: • Have an overview of the material and its elements. • Assess the time available. • Take students’ competences and learning into account. • Know what to assess in the exam – i.e., the course’s learning objectives. • Decide how much influence students should have on teaching. The teacher must balance these requirements in his or her planning. I find three challenges to be essential: Translating learning objectives into pedagogical practice

The course’s learning objectives form the guiding principle for planning. The learning objectives are usually determined in the course’s curriculum, but how are these translated into pedagogical practice? The challenge is that the learning objectives (knowledge, skills and competences) must • Be translated into the specific course’s content and activities. • Be divided among the individual course sessions. 165

• Be coherent. • Have a progressive structure. • Result in relevant exam types. In this context, “competences” refer to the ability to implement and apply knowledge and skills in a specific context, be it academic studies or professionally. Thus, acquisition of competences denotes an ability to contextualise one’s knowledge and skills. Planning according to student learning and not the material’s logic

It is a challenge for many (most?) teachers to downplay the material’s and the content’s disciplinary logic, and instead focus on students’ learning outcome (Knight 2000: 170, Fink 2005). Teachers often focus on the academic content, both because they feel responsible, and because they are enthusiastic about exactly that. However, it is easy to overlook the fact that the purpose of teaching is the students’ learning outcome. Two particular challenges are: • Adjusting the amount of material, reading and activities to the students’ level and the time available (e.g., Race & Pickford 2007: 25). This is also related to the fact that students’ workload should be proportionate to the course’s ECTS-points. • Recognising students’ starting level (which is something all educational developers mention). Read more about this in chapter 3.1. To be or not to be – in control

One particular challenge for teachers of modern university teaching and learning is the difference between being in control and not being in control of the course’s content and form. Some things can be negotiated with students and some cannot: • What opportunities do students have to construct answers to the course’s questions/themes? Is there a disciplinary “truth” in this particular field, or are there several options, which the students must work with and contribute to? Is the course based on the teacher’s dissemination of knowledge or is it research(like) and problem-based? • What is the teacher responsible for and what is up to the students? 166

What opportunities for influencing the course’s themes do students have or are given? • What is a proper balance between the teacher’s presentation and students’ activity?

The course planner’s options These three main challenges form the starting point for the practical suggestions and options for course planning that I shall present in the following. The suggestions are presented in tables and are intended to form a starting point for planning. The final form, degree of detail, opportunities for changes and revision of the course planning must depend on the course’s learning objectives, content and academic level. Criteria for a good course plan

A good course plan is beneficial to both students and teacher. The overriding criteria for a good course plan, according to Angelo (2012, adapted by me) are that: • Students are convinced of the importance of the course (during their studies or after). • The plan is focused on the discipline’s or subject’s constituent concepts. • The plan is aligned with learning objectives and exam requirements. • It makes the course academically challenging and demanding. • It meshes the course and the programme as a whole. • The course is designed to minimise wasted time for both students and teacher (work effort, preparation). Those criteria govern the following suggestions for the content and development of a good course plan.

A course’s content One prerequisite of a course plan is that it takes the context of the course into account, viz.: 167

What are the course’s learning objectives and who are the students? What is the formal framework for the course (curriculum etc.), and what competences do the participants bring, both in terms of their general study skills and specifically in relation to the course? A teacher must know these things before (s)he considers the course’s content and activities. Education researchers and textbook authors (e.g. Race 2007, Race & Pickford 2007, Mortiboys 2010, Knight 2002) generally agree that learning objectives and students are the best starting point for planning (and not merely the academic content). You can gain an overview of the course’s prerequisites and determining factors. The pedagogical version of the pentagon model below (Rienecker & Stray Jørgensen 2012, Stray Jørgensen, Rienecker & Skov 2011) provide a basis for analysis. The pentagon model was originally developed to introduce students to academic writing. The version below, however, has been adapted to university teaching in order to ensure that the planner takes the course’s subject knowledge, student competences and pedagogical focus into account:

5: The course’s · Structure · Sequences, learning points · Teaching methods · Materials · Activities inand outside of teaching · Context, student influence

1: Academic focus Learning objectives, students’ prior knowledge and prerequisites

2: Purpose and context Themes, questions, development of competences

4: Perspectives, theories, methods

3: Academic material/content Conceptualising and explanatory models

Figure 1. Pedagogical pentagon model – course planning.

The teacher can simply fill out all the corners of the pentagon as a basis for course planning.

168

The course’s framework The following table also provides a systematic overview of the factors that comprise the framework for the course. The table can be used as the starting point for planning and for the course description: Framework and conditions for course planning Curriculum, course level (graduate, postgraduate), exam regulations, learning objectives: Knowledge, skills and competences. Students’ influence on course content and form. Knowledge disseminating or explorative course? Participants’ skills and competences, general study skills, specific course competences, requirements (see also chapter 3.1). Course content The course’s subject, purpose, focus, perspective. The course’s themes, questions, learning points, subtopics, progression. Carrying out the course Teaching methods oral/written activities, feedback forms, meta-communication. Participant activities (dialogue, group projects, collaboration, oral presentations) (see also chapter 4.5.1). Materials, texts, resources (extent and position on course). Assessment Papers. Feedback and evaluation methods, exam types. Course evaluation.

Figure 2. Frameworks and conditions for course planning.

Plan backwards: The course’s learning objectives as guiding principles

The learning objectives tested in exams must be course elements, not just the knowledge, but also the skills and competences involved: If, for example, analytical skills are among the learning objectives, the course must include activities involving analysis. In the curriculum, for example, learning objectives are often expressed in terms of knowledge, skills and competences which, ideally, must be assessed. If the student is to have a 169

reasonable chance of demonstrating that he or she lives up to the learning objectives, these must be presented, demonstrated and practiced in teaching. Therefore, courses can ideally be planned backwards, i.e., on the basis of the course’s learning objectives and exams types (described locally and in the curriculum). The learning objectives and the course content and focus guide the pedagogical pentagon model’s remaining corners. The learning objectives are assessed in exams or other ways, and must ideally correspond to the course’s content and form. The first task of course planning is thus to transpose the curriculum’s stated learning objectives for the specific course with an eye to students’ competences: What academic knowledge, what academic and study-relevant skills and what academic or professional competences does the course aim to provide the students? It is also important to consider other aspects than purely academic goals, and to include more general competences such as: • Innovation and creativity • Project management • Teamwork Read more about learning objectives in chapter 3.2. The second task of course planning is to consider whether the course is (or is planned to be) knowledge disseminating (the teacher disseminates knowledge about the subject) or it is based on student research, such as problem/project and case-based learning. Planning in table form

The table below can form the basis for an actual course plan in which the teacher, insofar as possible, fills out each section for the entire course before the course starts. The table includes all the factors and elements that comprise the frameworks and conditions treated above. However, the table should not be considered completed and set in stone once it has been filled out, but rather as a tool for taking stock of and evaluating the plan as well as a basis for on-going revision and adjustment. When filled out, the table can also serve as the basis for information and for discussion with the course participants.

170

The first and last course sessions usually have special functions, such as introduction and summing up. Read more about this in chapter 3.3 Lesson planning. The course’s main learning objectives (competences, skills, knowledge)

Sessions

Learning objectives (competences, skills, knowledge)

Content elements, themes, questions, sources, theories, etc.

Teaching methods

Materials (textbooks, handouts etc.)

Student activity in sessions

Students’ work, activities outside sessions

Sessions’ relevance for exams

1. Intro 2.-11. (to be developed) 12. Outro

Figure 3. Elements in course planning.

Suggestions for planning principles Plan backwards with learning objectives

As described above, you can start from the end by using the course’s learning objectives and from these assess whether the content and activities of the course point towards fulfilling the stated objectives. Plan using students’ activities

Instead of beginning with content elements and sub-topics, you can choose student activities that support students’ acquisition of knowledge and study skills central to the course. Taking activities as the starting point is useful, because the activities would (normally) “require” content, while content elements do not necessarily require activities. Create coherence between the course’s elements

There must be coherence and progression in the course, not just from session to session, but also from sessions to students’ activities outside sessions. One way to demonstrate coherence and progression is by devoting time in each session to sum up the students’ preparation and activities between 171

sessions, and by spending time preparing the students for the work and reading for the next session. (See 3.3 Session planning.)

Discussion of using learning objectives (exams) as the guiding principle And now what? Does aiming the planning of courses (and teaching and other educational aspects) at exams (alignment) kill creativity? Is aligned teaching and learning so mechanical that there is no room for innovation and development? This discussion can take place on an institutional level with colleagues as well as more specifically with students. The options during planning lies in the interpretation of the overriding learning objectives of the course. Furthermore, it is possible to plan parallel activities in relation to the course, for example, student activities outside teaching. See 4.5.1 Activities in and between teaching. Among others, the discussion is led by Hanne Leth Andersen (2010) in the article “‘Constructive Alignment’ og risikoen for en forsimplet universitetspædagogik” [Lit: Constructive Alignment and the risk of simplified university teaching and learning].

Rationales The suggestions and principles above are underpinned by the following rationales: Alignment and “backwards planning”

The overriding rationale behind course planning is the principle of ‘constructive alignment’ (Biggs & Tang, 2007, The Qualification Framework 2011): Which competences, skills, knowledge constitute learning objectives and will be assessed? Planning backwards almost become the peremptory consequence of this (Fink 2003, Angelo 2012 and many more).

172

Student activity and involvement

Educational developers generally agree that as much student activity as possible promotes learning because • Skills and competencees are trained through students’ own active interaction with material and in dialogue. • Students can “participate in the academic discourse community” rather than just observe it. • Activity requires students’ attention. • The teacher can observe students’ understanding and learning. • Students can collaborate. (Bean 1996, Bligh 2000, Herskin 2001, Knight 2002, Mortiboys 2010, Race 2007 and many more). Focus on student learning comes before the content

Today, focus is on learning-centered planning in contrast to content-centered teaching. Many have been subjected to content-centered teaching without learning much and thus they have not been able to use the content taught. Dee Fink, geographer and educational developer, has become particularly renowned for his work with course design. Instead of what he calls the “content-centered approach” which results in a “List of Topics” he advocates a “learning-centered approach” which consists of “designing learning experiences” (Fink 2005).

Resources The following references are useful for suggestions and guidance when planning courses. Hunt, L. & D. Chalmers (eds.) (2012). University Teaching in Focus. A Learning-centered approach. Victoria, Australia: Acer Press. Especially Part 2: Focus on curriculum (p. 92-181) is relevant (but the whole book is a powerful resume of the views of the best educational developers, e.g., Biggs & Tang 2007, Fink 2003, Race 2007, Healey 2005, some of whom contributed to the book). Fink, L.D. (2003). Creatiing Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 173

Based on learning objectives, assessment/feedback and learning activities. On his website (http://www.designlearning.org/examples-of-design/examples/), you can find examples of course plans from different disciplines and levels. Faculty Metro (undervisermetro.au.dk) – is a web resource with a number of good teaching practices for teachers. Contributors are teachers from the Faculty of Arts at Aarhus University.

Literature Andersen, H.L. (2010). “Constructive alignment” og risikoen for en forsimplet universitetspædagogik. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 5(9): 30-36. Angelo, T. (2012). Designing subjects for learning: practical research-based principles and guidelines. In Hunt & Chalmers (eds.), University Teaching in Focus. A learning-centered approach. Victoria, Australia: Acer Press. Biggs, J. & C. Tang (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 3rd ed. Maidenhead: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching: Exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry based learning. In: R. Barnett (ed.), Reshaping the university. New relations between research, scholarship and teaching. Berkshire: Open University Press: 67-78. Jenkins, A. & M. Healey (2012). Research-led or research-based undergraduate curricula. In: L. Hunt & D. Chalmers (eds.), University Teaching in Focus. A learning-centered approach. Victoria, Australia: Acer Press. Knight, P.T. (2002). Being a Teacher in Higher Education. England: Open University Press. Ministry of Higher Education and Science. Kvalifikationsrammen for Livslang Læ­r ing. http://www.iu.dk/nyheder/dokumentation/kvalifikationsrammer. View­ed June 2011. Mortiboys, A. (2010). How to Be an Effective Teacher in Higher Education. Answers to Lecturers’ Questions. England: Open University Press. Race, P. (2007). The Lecturer’s Toolkit. A Practical Guide to Assessment Learning and Teaching. 3rd ed. London: Routledge. Race, P. & R. Pickford (2007). Making Teaching Work. “Teaching Smarter” in Post-Compulsory Education. London: Sage Publications. Rienecker, L. & P. Stray Jørgensen (2012). The Good Paper. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Stray Jørgensen, P., L. Rienecker & S. Skov (2011). Specielt om specialer. En aktivitetsbog. 4th ed. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.

174

3.5 Instructing written assignments PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN

This section should be read in connection with the chapters 4.5.1 Activities in and between teaching, 3.3 Session planning and 3.4 Course Planning. When teaching involves assignments and other study activities, it is an advantage for both students and teachers if instructions are specific, precise and contextualised in teaching. The purpose of these assignment instructions is to prevent confusion about the purpose and aims of assignments. Students demand clear instructions, goals and requirements for assignments (both oral and written). On the other hand, good instructions for both assignments and activities allow the teacher to monitor and target assignments and activities to students’ possible outcome and learning. Instructions for assignments must be aimed at the assignment’s and course’s present learning objectives. However, in addition to learning objectives, the purpose of good instructions is simply to make the assignment easier for students to get started on, because confusion and ambiguity are avoided and the teacher does not have to deal with explanations, excuses and poor and erroneous replies.

Instructions, options Instructions for assignments can be based on this list: Title (e.g., with main text type, e.g., analysis, discussion, characterisation) Possible clarification of content/problem (research question) Purpose of assignment Context (context in course, course element, study etc.)

175

Relation to previous assignments and background for future assignments Dimensioning (scope, elements, delimitation) Time (deadline(s), possible suggestions for time management) Formal requirements, requirements to product and form Success criteria, emphasis of the assignment’s parts Evaluation (how, when, who), review of assignment

Figure 1. Table for instructing assignments.

Less can do it, but the table encourages considering all parameters. The preceding considerations teachers must make are: • What are the learning objectives – both of the course and the individual assignment? What are the requirements and criteria for a solved assignment? How complex is the aim of the assignment? What level of Bloom’s taxonomy (see p. 101) is the assignment aimed at? • Which kinds of assignments may facilitate reaching the learning objectives? What are the primary and secondary goals of the assignment? Is the objective that students acquire knowledge, skills and/or competences? Are students required to solve practical tasks (interviews, information collection etc.)? • Are actual, specific study skills the objective (e.g., if the skill in question is ‘analysis’, is the student required to practice his or her analytical skills in the assignment)? Is it a critical thinking skill exercise, where students are expected to reflect on a subject, problem or something similar? Do the learning objectives prepare the ground for written or oral assignments, or is it left up to the students? See more about activities in course sessions and between sessions in chapter 4.5.1. • Is it a free or set assignment? To which extent are you, as the teacher, in control of the assignment in regards to students’ options and the product’s content and form? Is the assignment meant to test knowledge and/or skills? Are students allowed to define the assignment to some degree and if so, within which frameworks?

176

• Which specific framework is set for the assignment? Does it take place in a “closed space” (where e.g., cheating or plagiarism is impossible?) What limitations, possibilities and possible precepts exist with regards to use of tools, computers and programmes?

Rationales Rationales behind the writing of assignments are the same as the rationales behind teaching itself. The learning objectives and alignment principle govern the principle of student activities as learning potential, motivation and engagement (Biggs & Tang 2007). See also the rationales in chapters 3.4 Course planning, 3.3 Session Planning, 4.5.1 Activities in and between teaching and the account of the alignment principle in chapter 2.2 University teaching and learning models and principles, p. 97f.

Resources Faculty Metro (undervisermetro.au.dk) – A web resource with good teaching practices for teachers. Contributors are teachers from the Faculty of Arts at Aarhus University. Many contributions include examples of precise instruction of assignments and activities.

Literature Biggs, J. & C. Tang (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 3rd ed. Maidenhead: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. Bloom, B.S. (ed.) (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company. Skov, S. (2008). Bundne opgaver – hjemmeopgaver og eksamensopgaver på videregående uddannelser. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.

177

178

4.1 Lecturing BETTINA DAHL AND RIE TROELSEN

Introduction Many consider lectures an impossible, yet tolerated learning situation. Impossible, because the student is up against so many odds: a great degree of passivity, no direct contact with the teacher or fellow students, and with a documented drop in concentration after merely 20 minutes. Tolerated, because lectures is often the most cost-efficient teaching method, operating with a teacher-student ratio of up to 1:250, or perhaps even higher. However, as we shall explain in this chapter, we believe that good lectures do exist! The key is to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the lecture – and then to cultivate the strengths. But what constitutes a lecture? Contrary to public opinion, the number of students do not determine whether or not something is a lecture. You can carry out dialogue-based teaching for a class of 100 students just as you can easily (unfortunately) hold one-way lectures for just two students. The lecture form is not limited by the medium either – lectures can be live, or streamed (i.e., recorded so students in other locations can follow the lecture live), or available as a podcasts, which allows students to choose when and how many times they wish to follow the lecture. In a lecture, the teacher does the talking from some sort of stage, so that students face and have full view of the teacher. The room, and the fact that the teacher does most of the talking, means that students’ attention is almost exclusively on the teacher.

Pedagogical challenges One of the greatest challenges of lectures as a teaching method is the inherent unidirectional communication: the idea is that the students learn by seeing, hearing, and experiences the teacher. One-way communication by nature leads to limited options in matching teaching to the individual 179

student. If lectures are to function efficiently, the teacher must, well in advance, prepare content and form based on an imaginary representative student, which is far from easy. As a teacher, you assume a certain academic standard from your students, you may assume that students have prepared for the lecture in a certain way, or you may presuppose particular interest in a given subject, all of which may turn out to be partly or completely wrong. With the typical student so complex and unpredictable, teachers often structure the lecture’s message on the field’s premises rather than the unpredictable students’. In other words, the obvious solution would be to explain the material using disciplinary logic: main points followed by a number of sub points with some exceptions strewn in, and then on to the next main point. However, disciplinary logic is the expert’s way to organise content. The expert has already covered the full syllabus (at least) once, and therefore has an overview, sees connections and limits, and knows when the topic will be brought back into play, challenged or substantiated. Students are only just acquiring this overview, and will typically need to depend on the teacher’s overview. In many cases, these two consequences of unidirectional communication – the impossibility of targeting the message and the tendency to structure content based on disciplinary rather than participant logic – leads to passivity in students. They become the audience of the teacher’s performance and will increasingly resort to Facebook, Tetris or YouTube to avoid dozing off. One easy way for the teacher to avoid a dozing audience would be to resort to showmanship, drama or academic stand-up. Too easy, in fact. One great pedagogical challenge for lecturers is precisely that they, in their eagerness to stave off passivity, turn their teaching into a circus, so it is impossible for students to drift off – not in a normal every-day sense, but unfortunately not in the sense of academic contemplation either. However, the greatest pedagogical challenge for lecturing as a teaching method, is its ritual position in university teaching. The lecture exists as a teaching method because it has existed for many years, and because for many it is the epitome of university teaching. Both teachers and students expect the same from lectures: the transmittance of information, which does not promote a deep learning approach. It is therefore important that the teacher frees himself from the ritual and instead realises what a lecture can and should do, and which opportunities for deep and activating learning that lectures, despite everything, comprise. 180

The good lecture

Despite the pedagogical challenges, we still find that lectures are justifiable because the lecture is ideal for creating an overview, for reducing complex problems to comprehensible entities, and for creating motivation and inspiration for continued learning. The good lecture can, better than any other form of teaching, provide an overview of a field, draw lines and put things into perspective in a short time span. In a lecture, we benefit from the overview and perspective of experts – rather than going through a textbook slavishly, you should instead introduce students to something that is not in the textbook. This could be highlighting your points in relation to different textbooks, putting the textbook’s theoretical points into a practical perspective or comparing the textbook facts to the most recent research. Lectures are not suited for going through a textbook, but should rather be a supplement to the textbook by showing a different way to approach the subject. The good lecture can reduce the complexity by explaining key concepts, summarise large text portions, prioritise topics in a textbook and provide reading guides for future texts. Again, thanks to the expert, the good lecture can also provide motivation and inspiration for further studies. Lectures can set the stage for student’s further work by demonstrating why they should make an effort to learn a given subject. And lectures can pick up and connect content from other courses and build bridges to the next course: What have the students learned so far, and what do they still need to learn? Furthermore, the good lecture is engaging! Engaging in a way that balances the sleep-inducing and the vaudeville. Engaging on the basis of unambiguous and articulated academic and learning-related reasons, and engaging in not just involving students in different activities, but also in involving the individual student’s different learning channels, as the lecture can give both visual and auditive impressions.

Considerations before a lecture We will now offer specific advice for planning and carrying out a lecture. How do you do this in practice? How do you engage the students? We will touch on certain key areas, but see also the bibliography for references and further inspiration.

181

A lecture is a conversation and not a monologue.

The lecture’s primary medium is the lecturer and his ability to speak. A good lecturer is not just characterised by his command of the material, but also by his ability to explain the material and be present. This calls for a view of your students as conversation partners and not just as someone you talk to. This basically means that you take the receiver into account in the structure and shaping of your message. You might therefore work out a plan for a lecture containing some essential elements you wish the students to understand. As a lecturer, you must select and deselect; there are facts, ideas and examples that are more important than others, and it is an art to make these distinctions. One way to ensure that the lecture becomes a conversation rather than a monologue is related to the lecturer’s use of time outside the lecture room. After lectures, you may ask students to write down questions they find hard – and then use these questions as talking points in the following lecture. Or you can ask students to write down the following before a lecture: What do I find the most difficult in today’s lecture? Which questions do I expect to get an answer to? And after the lecture you may ask students to write down the following: I still need an answer to… I still do not understand… To answer these questions, I will… You can collect these questions and use them for future planning. Use of media

You can select from a number of media in teaching, but often the external framework will limit your options. For lectures, limitations may involve the number and the position of blackboards (chalkboards as well as interactive boards), the quality of projectors and loudspeakers as well as lighting and the acoustics of the lecture room. It is only natural to base decisions on practical considerations such as whether everyone is able to see and hear, but you must also consider which medium is best for promoting the course’s learning objectives. PowerPoint is well suited for visualisation, and a PowerPoint presentation is easy to revise. However, it also has weaknesses. There is a big risk that the lecturer will follow the slides blindly and not make adjustments on the basis of students’ questions or other input during the lecture. If visualisation is central to your lecture, PowerPoint may prove a good medium, however, if the important thing is that you can be flexible and change direction and perhaps answer questions during the lec-

182

ture, a blackboard may be more suitable. However, another option is to make a number of slides at the end of your PowerPoint which cover the most frequently asked questions, and which you can quickly scroll to if a certain aspect needs to be discussed further. Blackboards are the better choice when the lecturer needs to be able to change the structure and focus quickly, and they simultaneously force the lecturer to move around, which may improve students’ focus. It is also possible to make drawings and illustrations instantly to respond to specific questions from students. Furthermore, the blackboard excels in its ability to lower the teaching pace, and they rarely break down. The majority of teachers use a combination of media to the extent that is technically possible. Materials for students

Should you distribute handouts to your students (e.g., PowerPoint slides) before or after the lecture? And should you even bring materials and artefacts to lectures? The answer depends on whether and how it will aid students’ learning process. Handouts in connection with lectures are a matter of opinion. The advantages of handouts (in paper or electronic format) are that students do not have to spend time copying the lecturer’s slides, but can instead add their own notes in the margins. It can also provide students with a certain overview of the lecture. However, the disadvantages are that students do not learn to take notes and may pre-empt the lecturer’s points by “reading ahead”. To exploit the advantages and minimise the disadvantages, you might plan your handouts as an extra learning resource, which in most cases will mean they should not simply be a one-to-one copy of the presentation, but be specially adapted material. In all cases, there will be environmental, financial, distribution-related and other practical aspects to consider in connection with handouts. Herskin (2001) recommends giving students access to handouts before the lecture if it is a teaching situation, whereas you should avoid this if the lecture is more inspirational, or it is essential that attention is focused on the lecturer. Finally it is worth considering whether other material than handouts could increase the learning outcome. Lecturers can for example bring an artefact (a bone, advert, pendulum, textile etc.) to illustrate a point.

183

Activities while you lecture Breaks and variation in lectures

Neither students’ nor teacher’s attention span is constant throughout a lecture. As illustrated in figure 1 (Bligh 2000: 50-53), a gradual decrease occurs in the lecturer’s attention span, but student’s attention is increased at the beginning, then decreases and increases again at prospect of the impending end of the lecture. Level of concentration Lecturer Students

Learning gained after break

Learning lost during break

Time during lecture Break

Figure 1. Illustration of the development of students’ outcome from a lecture.

Studies indicate that students can stay concentrated for 20 minutes at most, but as the right part of the figure shows, you can include breaks, which improve the attention span to close to the initial level. However, what does a break consist of? It may be anything from asking students to stand up and move about a little, posing questions they must discuss with the person next to them, give students time to organise their notes (e.g., with help from the person next to them), showing a new picture/ example or the like, to add variation to the lecture. Another option is to ask students to discuss a certain point, take notes about a certain central concept, or predict a result, and then resume the lecture. These activities will make students cognitively active and focus their attention. Variation is important, and we know that the first and last things said in a lecture are remembered better than the things said in the middle – the so-called curve effect. The middle part is quickly forgotten due to both 184

proactive and retroactive interference from the other material, and interference between two pieces of information or facts is greatest if they are similar, content-wise. Things are easier to remember if they differ from each other. The curve effect can therefore be neutralised by structuring the lecture around contrasts, new points or surprising facts and – again – breaks and silence. Buzz groups and questions

To create some variation during a lecture, you may include questions for students to discuss or answer, for example in pairs – the so-called “buzz groups”. Following this, students can present their answers by voting, either by putting up their hands, marking with a previously printed answer sheet or electronically with the use of clickers or other student response systems. The best buzz group questions focus on a single concept, have suitable multiple choice answers that reflect typical misconceptions, are clearly formulated and are suitable for the current academic level. The effect of buzz groups is that students’ attention is focused on underlying concepts, and the lecture becomes less rigid – more improvisation is necessary (not all lecturers consider this an advantage). During silent periods (when students are contemplating the issue at hand) you, as the lecturer, can take a deep breath and relax, and during discussions you can listen passively to students explain things in their own words – sometimes they are better at explaining to fellow students, and you learn a lot about what is going on in your students’ minds and the problems they encounter. Buzz groups can also be used to ask many other types of questions. You can ask information questions (how many would solve the assignment using method x?), and engagement questions (which of the following statements do you most agree with?), or reflection questions (what do you know about this topic already?). The learning-related success of buzz groups depends on the teacher having reflected sufficiently on the question’s type, function and place in the lecture, as well as what the answers can and must be used for in the rest of lecture. Time for taking notes and answers to questions

We can only hold 7 +/-2 elements in our short-term memory at a time, and a stream of words that students do not understand will only be remembered for two to five seconds (Bligh 2000). This means that it is important 185

that you remain silent after central points, and possibly even repeat them, and that you, after posing a question, allot a reasonable amount of time for students to consider and then answer the question. This also applies for rhetorical questions where students do not answer as such, but are challenged to do some thoughts. The amount, the quality and the type of answer will be influenced by the time given to answer, just as time enables the consolidation and reflection on the lecture’s content. Furthermore, it helps students if the lecturer, during the lecture, makes time for students to take and organise their notes. Repetition

To consolidate the memory, it is important to recall knowledge within the first half hour of hearing it. Repetition can beneficially be included in the lecture itself. For example asking students to write so-called “one-minute-paper” at the end of the lecture to write down the salient points individually. If you are teaching a small class, you may also ask students to hand in their answers to questions such as “what was the central thing I learned today”, “what didn’t I understand”, “what would I like to know before the next lecture?”. This makes students active and can be a source of valuable feedback for the lecturer.

Rationales Activity is the best way to ensure that a lecture doesn’t devolve into a transferral of notes. We shall now discuss why ‘activity’ works at all in relation to the way people generally acquire knowledge. All our knowledge stems from our experiences, e.g., from throwing things, using our senses, working with something, thinking about it etc. We organise our knowledge in mental structures, and some of these structures are formed on the basis of other structures. Learning always occurs through a person’s active mental (re-)construction of existing knowledge and experience (hence the word “constructivism”). By always, we really do mean always. You cannot “teach in a constructivist manner” as all learning happens through construction, regardless of the teaching method. Constructivism is often misinterpreted as meaning that the teacher may not say anything, or that students preferably must work in groups and “discover” everything on their own, or at most be coached by a teacher. Students can learn some186

thing from a teacher talking, but students do not always learn something through a lecture. To be able to learn from a lecture, students must have fitting mental structure in relation to what they are to learn, and they must relate actively to what they are learning.

The lecturer as a performer In the above, we have focused on the way learning in lectures can be optimised, and as a reader you may have formed the impression that the teacher as a person is irrelevant as long as the right activities are put into play. Naturally this is not the whole truth. The teacher is – especially in a lecture situation – also a performer. Therefore, the good lecturer considers his body language and voice. Effective communication happens on three levels: body language, voice and words (Mehrabian 1981). Therefore, it is also important to pay attention to posture, gestures, eye contact, and position in the room. Although words are only part of effective communication, these must still be chosen carefully! You should take inspiration from the field of rhetoric, which is the art of speaking and writing efficiently. To convince someone, you must, according to Aristotle, appeal to them in three different ways, using logos, pathos and ethos, respectively. Logos refers to an appeal to the intellect. To persuade by means of reasoning, you must know your material and the content must have (academic) substance. Pathos means to persuade by appealing to the listener’s emotions. This calls for a friendly atmosphere and engagement and facilitation of mental images in the listener, and you must make the listeners identify with the content of the lecture. Ethos also involves an appeal to listener’s emotions, but means that you convince the listener by your own character (your authority, position, institution). If you emanate honesty, competence, engagement and good will, the listeners will trust you as a person and, by extension, believe in your claims. To conclude, we will summarise the characteristics of the good lecture: students who are engaged through buzz groups, note taking, one-minute-papers and the like, academic content that is planned according to participant logic rather that disciplinary logic, and not least a teacher who has carefully considered the use of handouts, media, activities and bodily effects. This is one recipe to make lectures a good learning experience for students and a good teaching experience for teachers. 187

Resources Race, P. (2007). The lecturer’s toolkit. A practical guide to assessment, learning and teaching. 3rd ed. London & New York: Routledge. – Race examines handouts, the use of PowerPoint and the structure of lectures, and the book includes a large amount of advice, recommendations and suggestions for practice/action. Gibbs, G. (2011). Twenty terrible reasons for lecturing. http://www.brookes. ac.uk/services/ocsld/resources/20reasons.html – Gibbs discusses here in depth the pedagogical challenges related to the ritual position of the lecture. Edwards, H., B. Smith & G. Webb (ed.) (2001). Lecturing: Case studies, experience and practice. London: Kogan Page. – This manual provides practical advice on good lecturing techniques and features real-life hints, tips and examples of good and bad practice.

Literature Bligh, D. (2000). What’s the use of lectures? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Herskin, B. (2001). Undervisningsteknik for universitetslærere – formidling og aktivering. 2nd ed. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Mehrabian, A. (1981). Silent messages: Implicit communication of emotions and attitudes. Belmont: Wadsworth.

188

4.2 Group work GERD CHRISTENSEN

Definition and history The term “group work” covers different ways of structuring teaching. Group work is thus applied for different purposes. In university teaching, the most common types of group work are: • The discussion group, the purpose of which is to discuss a problem. • The study group, the purpose of which is to discuss texts read by everyone with the aim of increased/improved understanding. • The writing group, the purpose of which is to develop and discuss the member’s written products. • The response/feedback group, the purpose of which is to give feedback to oral or written presentations. • The project group, the purpose of which is to conduct a project to produce a common product. The product may be a written report or a presentation, a happening, a film or another type of cultural artefact. In a study context, the product most often consists of a written project report and a presentation. All the methods for group work require students to communicate and (often) produce some form of product, even if this product is merely a summary of their discussion. The methods mostly differ in terms of time expenditure. “Group work” thus covers different work patterns from short term “buzz groups” to long-term project and study groups that continue for several semesters or even years. In the long-lasting groups, some members may be added or replaced along the way. The interest in groups and group work within education can be traced back to the pedagogical progressivism, which was established in Europe and USA at the end of the 1800’s. The first documented attempts to use groups and group work within schools in Denmark took place at Vanløse School in the 1920s. Following the progressivism, these attempts were 189

established as an explicit reaction against“traditional pedagogy”, which in city schools at the time consisted of a combination of examinations and class teaching, the latter being a new teaching method at that time. Although forms of group work were known from smaller schools, village schools and free schools, the attempt of the 1920s was a relatively isolated experiment, and up until the 1950s, group work was rarely used within the established education system. In the years after the 1950s, groups and group works became more and more widespread in education, and throughout the 1960s and 1970s group work became one of the fundamental principles for progressive – i.e., “modern” and “up to date” – teaching. At this time, group work was also introduced at other levels of the educational system, including university teaching. Group work is perhaps best known for its position in project studies with the establishment of the universities in Roskilde (RUC) and Aalborg (AAU). As a specific educational strategy, group work is based on an explicit rejection of traditional teaching methods such as classroom teaching and lectures; teaching methods considered “reactionary”, “old-fashioned” and “teacher-centered”. Since group work was introduced as different from these in the positive sense, it automatically came to be associated with the terms “progressive”, “modern”, and “pupil- or student-centered”. In contrast to lectures, where the teacher is in charge, group work requires students to be the agents, while the teacher becomes less dominant. With these kinds of reasons, numerous group works have been implemented at all levels of education since the 1970s. However, this has often occurred without proper reflection of why group work should be implemented, what group work promotes and how the groups were going to collaborate. Only rarely have pupils and students been trained in or even instructed to the methods of group work before they have been sat down to work in groups. Instead, group work has been naturalized and is now considered a work pattern that will occur of itself, and which needs neither intervention nor training; a condition that presumably can be ascribed to the mentioned idea of group work as a positive, progressive pedagogical working method.

Pedagogical challenges in connection with group work However, organising group work and demanding students to collaborate in groups, without any training is not without challenges. Most people 190

who have tried group work in school or at work know that interpersonal dynamics are key, when people have to collaborate. Groups are thus not innocent forums for discussion, learning and growth, as progressive pedagogy assumes. They are arenas of power struggles and personal positioning. However, group work also contains considerable learning potentials. In order to make the most of the group work, the teacher must be wary of the possible problems, and ensure that students are introduced to the particular pitfalls of the group work, and in how to avoids these. In other words, group work is not laissez-faire pedagogy, but a number of work patterns that require an engaged and observant teacher. Students have different opinions and experiences of group work. While some enjoy the group work, others dislike it so much that they avoid study programmes where it is required. Even short-term group work that is part of a lesson may discourage some students. Often, this aversion towards group work is caused by bad experiences with the work pattern: The other group members were too lazy, too stupid or too dominant, and the group work was laden by conflicts of a type that were difficult to address and to solve. In some cases, this has personal consequences for the student, and may lead to a change programmes, dropping out or even a personal crisis that cause permanent injury to the student. If you as a teacher choose to use group work in your teaching, you must therefore consider a number of aspects that will be treated in this chapter: • The group formation – should the teacher form the groups or should students be allowed to form their own groups? • How many students should the groups consist of? • How must group members collaborate? Should the collaboration be structured or unstructured? And if so, why? • What should be the product of the group work?

Different forms of group work It is commonly acknowledged that the advantages of group work are: 1. That students can optimise their reading through discussions with fellow students. You learn more by having to explain things to others, just as the perspective on what is learnt is broadened, and pos-

191

sible misunderstandings can be removed through the group’s discussions. 2. Since group work requires the students to commit to the group, it may lead to an increased effort and thus increased learning and in some cases decreased study time. 3. The group plays a social function, as it can increase the student’s connection to their peers, the education and the institution. 4. Finally, group work can contribute to insight into collaboration and teamwork, which the students can use after their graduation, for example, in a job. Group work, as you can see, affords many advantages. However, when you as a teacher choose to introduce group work as a teaching method, you must make it clear why you have chosen this form over for example lecturing, and what you expect students to gain from the group work. Furthermore, you should carefully consider which kind of group work you may want to implement, how groups should be formed, as well as the size of the groups. Since there is a significant difference between the different work patterns, the working methods involve different challenges. However, one general rule is that the longer and more demanding a group work is, the more care is required in the way the groups are established and in the structuring of the work process.

Suggestions for practice/action Group formation

There are two fundamental principles for group formations (Malmquist et al. 1963): Formally established groups and non-formally established groups. In formally established groups, the teacher often manages the group formation on the basis of certain principles. The principles may be individual or established by the educational institution. It may be mandatory that groups be established from criteria such as homogeneous or heterogeneous gender division, dispersing or concentration of experienced and strong students, interest communities or from similar expectations to the group work. Alternatively group formation can be entirely randomized, e.g., when a teacher asks the students to count to a certain number, where after all students with the same number form a group. 192

In informal groups, the group formation is left up to the students. Here, mutual agreement and criteria such as friendship and popularity may end up playing a crucial role. This principle can thus lead to some students being excluded or ending up in an unfortunate position. At the same time it is not necessarily a good idea that students are given free reins to form groups with students, who are as competent as themselves, or with students they agree with. Likewise, it is often a bad idea that students form work groups with friends or partners. Collaboration is rarely optimal, and may end up costing a friend- or relationship. If you let students form their own groups, you should, as a teacher, encourage them to observe some fundamental rules in the process: To strive for openness and “the random element” towards fellow students in the group formation and to keep in mind that you learn from all group works – perhaps even most from being in a group with people you would not choose to form friendships with. Successful group formations also involves careful deliberation of the groups’ size. Groups in higher education usually consists of 2 to 8 members, and experience shows that groups of 3 to 5 members work best for teaching and studying. For short-term ‘buzz groups’, it is an advantage if groups only consists of two students, who can engage in dialogue. One general rule might be that the shorter the duration of the group work, the smaller the group should be. Negotiation of expectations

When groups are formed, they need tools to structure their work process. The need for a clear framework varies according to the group work’s duration and scope as well as the group’s size. While long term groups, such as project groups, are very dependent on formal procedures, it is less important for short term group work. Similarly, the larger the group, the more important it is to make clear agreements and establish a structured working method (Kolmos & Kofoed 2002). As discussions of expectations and requirements to group work are rarely included as a criterion for group formation, the teacher should ensure that this happens before the group starts working. If not, the group will struggle to function optimally. Naturally this is most important if the group is expected to exist for a long time and, e.g., produce a product such as a project. Negotiation of expectations to the group and the group’s work can either take place through discussions or in writing. In the latter, all group 193

members write down the conditions they consider important to group work on sheets of paper, which are then collected and discussed in the group. This has the advantage of the discussion being based on anonymous and written declarations. Thus, there is a reasonable chance that everyone is heard. The negotiation of expectations should include conditions such as: • Working method: How should the group work, and how can it establish a sound discussion culture? • Time consumption: How often should the group meet and how much should the members be expected to work in between meetings? • Presence: Should all members participate in all meetings? • Decision-making competence: Is the group competent to make decisions if not all members are present? • Expectations to the product: How is it prioritised – and are you striving for a certain result/a certain mark? Usually, it is sufficient for groups to make verbal agreements. However, in some cases, it may prove necessary that group members draw up a written “contract” (see below). This form of agreement or “contract” should not only include the negotiation of expectations, but also describe how the group will maintain discipline as well as which sanctions must become effective if norms and agreements are not observed. As a teacher and supervisor, you must be prepared to discuss these aspects with the group and to point out that the severest sanction, exclusion from the group, must be an option, though it is rarely practised.

Sample: Group contract • Working method: How should the group work, and how can it establish a sound discussion culture (e.g., using “speaking rounds” so everyone gets to speak before input is commented on?) • Time consumption: How often should the group meet, and how much work should each member expect to do in between meetings? • Group meetings: How do you ensure that group meetings are best structured and completed (e.g., sending out the agenda, taking turns at leading/being responsible/chairing)? • Presence: Should all members participate in all meetings? And what degree of absence is acceptable? (Which reasons, how often etc.)?

194

• The relationship between individual and collective work: What must be done between group meetings (e.g., reading, writing drafts etc.)? • Decision-making competence: Is the group capable of making decisions if not all members are present? What are the consequences of lacking decision-making competences? And what are the consequences if the group is not able to make decisions? • Process: How does the group aim to work and produce the report (e.g., reading and writing individual drafts, and collecting written work collectively e.g., in “working pairs”. • Product: Which priority is it given – and are you aiming for a particular result/particular mark (are the group members for example in agreement about working as hard as possible with the aim of getting best possible result, or should ambitions be toned down e.g., because of group members’ jobs outside of university or other exams)? • Sanction types: What happens to group members that do not observe the group’s agreements/arrangements (e.g., reprimands, warnings and in the end possible exclusion)? Signatures from all the members

Structure of the collaboration Discussion culture

Regardless of the group’s size and the duration of the group work, the group must establish a discussion culture. As a teacher or supervisor, you can be helpful and point out that a fruitful discussion culture is based on people being different and that not everyone are as much talking by nature, but that ‘timid’ members may also have some valuable insights, that can be important to the group’s work. Discussion culture thus means that everyone’s arguments must be heard and be discussed, that everyone has equal right to express themselves, and that this must take place in an atmosphere marked by accept and respect – even though the more articulate members have a different opinion, and a decision may be made that does not include all arguments. To maintain a positive atmosphere, it may be a good idea to encourage the group to speak in turns, i.e., all group members are given a certain amount of time to express their views of what is being discussed before anyone responds. When responding, it is important that all group mem195

bers are given equal speaking time. In this way, you avoid that only the first member or two are given time to speak, and that their contributions supersede the agenda. To maintain good order and not overlook or ignore any arguments, it may be a good idea for the group to appoint a chairman and minute-taker. Group members should take turns at these functions. Work discipline

One of the major problems of group work in a teaching context is discipline. This is because these groups are constructed as formally leaderless groups, i.e., they are formed without the appointment of a leader, and every group member is essentially equal. This can lead to power struggles and anarchy. To maintain discipline, group members can be encouraged to take turns as group leader. On the basis of a thorough definition of what this function involves, the group can agree about how to use this role. The role as ‘leader’ may for example include being responsible for the following meeting, for sending out the agenda to the other group members, as well as acting as chairman during the discussions. Since the group members takes turns at being the ‘leader’, each member gets to try this role and experience the work and respect attached to it. Thus, the desire to maintain discipline will naturally follow from having managed or having to manage this function at some point (Hvenegaard et al. 2003). In order to preserve the work discipline, it may be a great advantage to structure meetings by the use of agendas. This is particularly important in larger groups and in project groups of a certain duration (see Christensen 2011). While groups are suited for discussions, certain tasks, particularly in long-term group work, are poorly suited for being carried out in groups. It is not expedient to read together as a group, unless reading aloud. Correspondingly, writing often become an unnecessarily cumbersome process if carried out in a large group. Therefore, group work will often be combined with individual work or work in smaller groups. Each group member reads and studies the material individually, just as individual work can consist of writing drafts, which are later discussed in the larger group. In many groups, drafts are written by sub-groups or in work pairs, whereafter they are further worked on by a different work pair. Working in pairs makes it possible to optimize the benefits of group work by providing someone to discuss things with during the work process. Well-organised collaboration during the draft phase, ensures that the final product presents itself as a coherent and genuinely shared project. 196

Rationales and substantiation from research Attention on the group’s social psychology

A group is obviously not just a forum for work, it is also an arena for social-psychological mechanisms to play out. This structure and explication is crucial to the functioning of the group. Group psychology has identified a number of recurring roles in an average group, such as “the leader”, “the scapegoat”, “the social butterfly” and others (Algren-Ussing & Fruensgaard 1994). Identifying roles in a group, however, is not necessarily particularly productive – not for the individual group member nor for the group’s work as a whole. Group members influence each other’s behaviour, and there will often be some that are more inclined to take control if no one else does, just as there will be some who will take on large workloads, if others are more relaxed. One phenomenon known from longterm group work is that group members are ascribed functions related to the project, e.g., as “the one who gets ideas, “the one who writes”, “the one who does the proof-reading” and “the one who puts in commas in the text”. Just as the leader function should be discussed and taken turns at, it is important that the group members discuss who does what and why. Likewise, it is important that all group members get a chance to be involved in the interesting and demanding tasks and functions. If not, it is not certain that every group member learns equally from the group work. Regardless of whether the group makes agreements about the collaboration and strives to structure this and the meetings as well as possible, it is not always possible to avoid conflicts. Conflicts can arise for many reasons. Conflicts in group work can roughly be divided into academic conflicts, where disagreement is rooted in different views of a question of academic contents, and personal conflicts where the disagreement is not rooted in an academic issue, but is rather a question of “chemistry”, or interpersonal relations. Conflicts can be destructive to the group’s ability to cooperate, but it is important to point out to students that disagreement does not have to be a problem. To the contrary, it is much more problematic that many groups – especially in the beginning of the work process – have a tendency to seek consensus. Although consensus is pleasant, it rarely leads to the best results. These are reached through discussions, where disagreement is perfectly acceptable, but where everyone is heard and respected. However, it will always be an advantage to the group if the conflict is based on academic disagreement. Unfortunately, conflicts that start 197

out as academic disagreement often devolve into personal conflicts. If the group cannot solve the problems and establish a good climate of cooperation by themselves, it may be necessary for the supervisor to interfere. If this does not solve the problem, the group could seek student counselling. Furthermore, special group consultants have been employed at several universities. Regardless of conflicts, group work is often a comfortable forum, where much can be discussed, including topics that are not relevant to the group’s task. This is an important aspect of group work, especially if we are dealing with a group that is meant to exist for a long period of time. In this way, the group work can make students feel more closely attached to the university, and contribute to a generally a better study environment. However, it may be necessary to encourage the group to make formalised agreements about restricting small talk and socialising to certain times to not adversely affect the work effort. A certain discipline is required in order to avoid negative consequences for both the group’s product and for its function as a group. Close attention to the group work may contribute to a better study environment in general. This involves two things in particular: 1. establishing a culture of acceptance and respect for everyone regardless of differences, and 2. establishing clear and explicit agreements and frameworks for the group’s work (Christensen 2006, 2011). While group work as a practice can be traced back to the progressive movement within pedagogy at the beginning of the 1900’s, the research interest for collaboration in groups chiefly stems from small group research, which gained momentum after the Second World War (see e.g., Sjølund 1965 for an overview). In addition to this, research is carried out in relation to the group and project-oriented universities in Roskilde and Aalborg (see e.g., Christensen 2006, Simonsen & Ulriksen 2007) as well as Linköping University in Sweden (Chiriac 2003, Chiriac & Hempel (ed.) 2005).

Resources Chiriac, E.H. & A. Hempel (eds.) (2005). Handbok för grupparbete. Lund: Studentlitteratur. – A thorough introduction to group work. Hvenegaard, H., H. Jessen & P. Hasle (2003). Gruppeorganiseret arbejde. Copenhagen: Frydenlund. – brief introduction to group work in teaching and work life. 198

Malmquist, E., K.-G. Thorén & H. Troensgård (1962). Gruppearbejdets metodik. Copenhagen: Jul. Gjellerup Forlag. – A classic that is still relevant today.

Literature Algren-Ussing, H. & N.O. Fruensgaard (1994). Metode i projektarbejdet. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Chiriac, E.H. (2003). Grupprocesser i utbilding. En studie av gruppers dynamik vid problembaserat lärande. Disputats. Linköping: Linköping Universitet. Christensen, G. (2006). Studieangst og gruppeliv. Unge Pædagoger, 4: 16-24. Christensen, G. (2011). Gruppearbejde som redskab til læring. In: Stray Jørgensen, P. & L. Rienecker (eds.), Studiehåndbogen – for studiestartere på videregående uddannelser. 2nd ed. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Kolmos, A. & P. Kofoed (2002). Sig’ det så. Projektvejledning på Universitetet. Pædagogisk Udviklingscenter. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitetscenter. Sanden, E. & P. Frederiksen (1997). Gruppearbejde i undervisningen. København: Frydenlund grafisk. Simonsen, B. & L. Ulriksen (1998). Universitetsstudier i krise. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag. Sjølund, A. (1965). Gruppepsykologi. Copenhagen: Gyldendals Pædagogiske Bibliotek.

199

200

4.3 Case-based learning LONE KROGH, DIANA STENTOFT, JEPPE EMMERSEN AND PETER MUSAEUS

The case method and its background A case is a narrative, usually told in the third person. It may include data, important information, graphs, appendices, text, pictures, videos and even questions to students, and options or provide the basis for an analysis of complex, realistic problems. The case method is used in many contexts of higher education around the world. One frequently used case method originates from Harvard Business School, where most of the teaching is based on that method (Barnes, Christensen & Hansen 1994). This approach has been widely adopted.

History Case-based learning was introduced in 1870 by the dean of Harvard Law School, Christopher Langdell. Langdell believed that the best way for law students to learn to think like lawyers would be to analyse and discuss actual legal cases. Case-based teaching was based on the assumption that lawyers’ specific decisions in specific legal cases could be generalised by law students and their teachers to help them understand general legal principles. In 1908, the method was introduced to Harvard Business School, where it has since been further developed. Although case-based learning broke with the teacher-centered teaching tradition of the time, the method became so successful that every significant law faculty in The U.S. used case-based teaching by the beginning of the First World War. After the Second World War, the method had emerged in economics and business administration. By the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, problem-based learning was developed in medicine at McMaster and Maastricht universities, and in 1985, Harvard Medical School adopted the case method from Harvard Business School. Thus, no single person, pedagogical theory or

201

institution can be said to be responsible for defining case-based learning (Schulmann 1986). Case-based learning is used to educate competent decision-makers. It is often argued that students develop skills in discernment and reflection through the experiential approach in cases. However it is important to stress that the purpose of case-based learning may vary depending on the audience, field of education etc. Schulmann (1986) broadly defines pedagogical cases as a form of communication where an intention or a plan encounters something unpredictable.

Through case-based learning, students can acquire knowledge, skills and competences at the level of recognition and understanding as well as higher levels of abstraction and problem-solving. Moreover, cases are often used as central components in conveying subject matter and theoretical components thereby bringing these components into play with authentic problems emanating from practice. Figure 1 illustrates how the case-based approach is placed between a teacher-centered approach defined by assignments and clearly defined curriculum and student-centered problem-based project work characterised by students identifying and addressing open-ended and complex problems. Assignment

Case

Project

Student-controlled Problem-based project work

Academic complexity Teacher-controlled

Problem-based (PBL) case-based learning

Case-based learning

Available information/lectures Curriculum-based

Solving complex problems

Figure 1. The interplay between teaching methods and potential learning outcome.

202

Based on the central position of the case-approach, lectures and transmittal of introductory information are typically used as the starting point for case work, during which students independently, individually or in groups, reflect on and process the material in order to analyse and solve the central and complex issues of the case. Thus, on the one hand, cases serve as links between central subject courses and their application to interdisciplinary problems. On the other hand the cases constitute a link between theory and practice, where a cases may emerge from real-life or from the teachers’ research and made to form the basis of discussion and contemplation of disciplinary and interdisciplinary perspectives. In case work, there is rarely just one right answer. Instead, case work provides experience in approximating different solutions to outlined problems. Case-based learning is, as described above, used in universities throughout the Western world. However, it is particularly prevalent in law, economics, business administration, social sciences, medicine and engineering. This chapter includes experiences from case-based learning that are partly documented in the literature (Egedius 2008, Pettersen 2007), and partly drawn from specific examples of using case-based learning in Techno-Anthropology, Medicine and Law at Aalborg University. However, we shall first identify certain special conditions that apply to the use of cases in education. The case method can best be illustrated with an example. The following example is used for the post-vocational pedagogical training of medical professionals in Aarhus:

Kim Johanson Kim Johanson – a young lecturer and kidney specialist at a Nordic university hospital – is an enthusiastic case-teacher. He uses the case-method for class instruction as well as lectures. The medical students have had to get used to learn through cases, but the active students have quickly taken the method on board: “We learn to think like doctors”, one student said at the beginning of the semester. Because the students were not used to the case method, Kim was relatively controlling at the beginning of the semester. He worked hard to bring out all the details of the case, even though his Socratic (= inquisitive) questioning only resonated with the top students. Our observation took place in Kim’s third lecture near the end of the semester. In the university hospital’s amphitheatre, he gave a lecture surrounded by about 100 medical students. He had asked students to read a

203

2-page case (+ a one-page appendix with relevant physiological and clinical data) about a pregnant patient with kidney pain. With only 15 minutes left of the lecture, Kim began to worry that there might not be enough time for students to finish the case. The discussion had revolved around basic physiology, but according to Kim’s plan, focus should have switched to diagnosis and treatment much sooner. Reluctantly, Kim have to acknowledge that he has to step in as the authoritative teacher.

The example demonstrates the importance of carefully considering the case session allowing enough time for students to work through the case. Depending on which approach to cases you choose, there will be different “recipes” for how to best succeed and how the case material in itself can support students’ addressing specific disciplinary problems.

Challenges when working with cases In the following, we will describe four central challenges in planning and using case-based learning in university education. These challenges largely emanate from the way in which we traditionally think about higher education and the embedded understandings of what teaching and learning is, and how a teacher is expected to engage with practice. Challenge 1: Planning and preparation

In the planning of case-based learning, the teacher must first of all define the scope and objectives of the case work. How, for example, do we best ensure interaction and academic progression between different cases used in a course with one final assessment? As described above, cases are based on theoretical and/or practical challenges and problems which prompt further analysis, linking of theoretical or practical perspectives or problem-solving. Working with a case provides students with training and experience with applying theoretical knowledge and experience to identify, analyse and suggest solutions to the disciplinary and educationally relevant problems outlined in the case, and to bring their knowledge into play in new ways. Most often, the problems or challenges of the case cannot be ad204

dressed through routine but require students to apply theoretical knowledge and competence in new ways adapted to the specific situation and educational context, as presented in the case. In addition to strengthening the disciplinary and interdisciplinary dimensions of education, the case approach also supports students’ acquisition of general competences in communication, problem identification, problem solving and independent engagement in complex situations. To ensure both academic progression and development of general academic competences, it is particularly important that teachers in their preparation of cases stop and contemplate the contribution of each individual cases to the discipline, course or module they are intended to support. For example, this can be achieved through mapping out and describing the entire course and thereby demonstrating how components of each case can be related to the learning objectives of the course or the entire programme. Challenge 2: What characterises a good case?

The case teacher should of course select or develop ‘good cases’ for his or her case sessions. The case material typically includes a description of a situation drawn from practice (authentic or constructed). The challenges and problems that must be analysed or solved should be clearly outlined in the description. The case is exemplary in the way it directs students towards theoretical points which are relevant to the course and to both the specific and general academic aims of the programme. The case material often, but not always, includes questions posed by the teacher/case developer – which must be addressed by the students. The questions are posed in a way that inclusion of relevant theory is ensured. Questions developed by the teacher are, however, not a prerequisite for adopting a case-based approach. This is, evident in the health sciences, where a case can be based on patients, and where students are responsible for identifying relevant explanations, and from these explanations draw up the learning objectives to be addressed. Challenge 3: The role of the teacher

It is important that the roles and contributions of students as well as the teacher are clearly defined in the case process. The case approach requires willingness to adjust, when you, as a teacher, change from traditional teaching activities into a role of facilitating students’ work with cas205

es. Case facilitation will appear different to monologue-based lecturing. The case approach further requires that the teacher is willing to listen to students’ interpretations of a case and to initiate discussions if these do not arise. The case teacher can be seen as a Socratic midwife and source of inspiration for students, who are active dialogue partners in identifying, delimiting and analysing problems by applying relevant knowledge. The role of the teacher involves listening to students but also to what is not articulated, for example whether students draw upon their different interpretations. The teacher is in other words the facilitator of students’ work on the central themes and problems of the case. The role as facilitator requires that the teacher is able to sense when students need assistance and when they can work independently. This requires the teacher to deliberately take a step back and let students control the process – especially in situations where students choose a path or perspective different to that of the teacher. Nevertheless, it is the job of the facilitator to guide students through questions if they navigate in a fundamentally problematic direction in relation to case content and the fulfilment of learning objectives of the course. Challenge 4: The role of the student

Experience demonstrate that once students have become used to the case approach and its different set of demands, they find this approach more interesting, motivating and rewarding than traditional approaches to teaching. The primary challenge is to get students to step out of the familiar role as passive receivers associated with the traditional lecture. Furthermore students must be encouraged to prepare for case sessions by reading the case and related literature to be able to analyse and discuss during the case session. The successful outcome of case-based learning depends on students’ participation and engagement to a much greater extent than in other teaching and learning activities. Experience also reveals that some students initially reject participating actively in case learning in favour of teaching activities emphasising the lecturer’s interpretation of academic material. However students are drawn into working with cases when other students refer to the case approach as an exciting and rewarding way of learning. Finally it should be noted that students, who have not participated in some forms of case learning, generally are given lower marks than students who have. This is most likely due to some compe206

tences within disciplines cannot be developed merely by reading according to curriculum. They must be practised and tested. This may include fields where the casework entails training e.g. negotiation techniques and communicative competences.

Pedagogical possibilities There are multiple possibilities for organising and conducting case-based learning. Harvard Business School has, in some areas, been leading the way by incorporating the method into all educational activities. Casebased learning at Harvard Business School, which has inspired the use of cases at some Danish universities, is usually organised into three phases (Pettersen 2007). In phase 1 students work with the case materials individually in preparation for a case seminar. The case material that students work with may comprise 20-30 pages of text, where information and data are part of complex contexts that must be analysed and assessed in light of different disciplines and knowledge domains. Often, cases contain information that requires students to make various calculations and assessments to uncover a basis for decision-making. In phase 2, students are prior to the actual case seminar organised into small groups without supervision. The groups discuss the case and the discussion is organised by the students and typically lasts between 30 and 45 minutes. The purpose of this group discussion is for students to consider how they have each worked with the case materials, which conclusions they have arrived at, and which questions and uncertainties have arisen in the process. The case seminar (phase three) is the main arena in this organisation of the case approach. Between 20 and 60 students participate in the seminar. The leader of the seminar – sometimes referred to as the discussion leader – will often have prepared discussion points and the progression of the case in some detail. The objective is to train students to identify, analyse, structure and evaluate problematic scenarios related to a profession based on disciplinary perspectives, models and theories. Case-based learning as outlined above is simply one example of how learning can be structured, and how the scope of case material, the length and structure of case learning, and the role of the teacher obviously varies

207

from case to case and course to course. It is important to note that case work in higher education must always be adapted to students’ prerequisites, the programme’s disciplinary and professional objectives as well as the learning objectives of the individual courses. Furthermore, experience shows that it is necessary to carefully introduce students to the case approach and present the purpose and frameworks so that a potential change in teaching method and demands for engagement in the learning process are understood and accepted by, students. One central feature of case-based learning is the dialogue among students and between students and teacher and thus the physical setting of the case session plays an important role. It may be expedient to place students in a semi-circle when teaching small groups (Herried 1997), or in amphitheatres when teaching larger groups. The teacher often serves as the chairman and facilitator, who must support students’ discussions about the case (Egidius 2008). In the following, we present three examples of ways to work with casebased learning: Example 1: Case work in three hours – Law

Case work is an integrated part of many law programmes. This particular case is taught over three hours and includes the following phases: 1) Case opening, 2) progression of the case work and 3) case closing. 1. The teacher begins by introducing the theoretical material that will form the basis for the case work. The case description (constructed by the teacher on the basis of real events) will then be handed out. The description comprises a real issue from the legal world. 2. The students will then be divided into groups of four, in which each member is assigned a specific role, described in advance by the teacher, and which each student must follow during the casework. A typical case involves descriptions by three parties: a lawyer, a client and observers. The observers also act as minute-takers and write down the course of events of the casework which is then reported in plenum. The teacher is available to students throughout the case work. If necessary, the teacher may intervene and suggest alternative approaches to the work.

208

3. Casework is concluded in plenum, where each group presents suggestions for problem-solving and the problems they have encountered during their work with the case material. In conclusion, the teacher sums up the theory pertaining to the legal problems. In addition to connecting legal concepts to authentic legal problems, the case approach offers students an opportunity to acquire competences in using legal jargon and structuring legal case scenarios. Example 2: One week case – Medicine and Medicine with Industrial Specialisation

Case learning is in Medicine and Medicine with Industrial Specialisation is – inspired by the educational planning at Hull-York University – organised around cases and to a lesser degree around project work. Medicine is, as all other programmes at Aalborg University, based on a problem-based approach to learning. Students work with each case for one week. Each case comprises a number of activities and learning spaces, including lectures before the case opening session to ensure students are introduced to specific knowledge as a basis for working with the case. Cases are organised into steps: 1. Case opening, which is carried out over 2 hours, and where up to 15 students (two study groups) meet with a facilitator (a teacher) The case material consists of 2-3 patient stories offering different perspectives on the topic of the case. The case opening takes place in phases. A ‘scribe’1, a chairman and a minute-taker is appointed. The chairman leads the presentation of the case and is supported by the facilitator – often the facilitator will only address the chairman rather than the entire group. In the first step students identify relevant concepts and unknown terms. Following this, a brainstorm is carried out where the relationship between different case components is outlined, and together students deduce and formulate the learning objectives of the case. It is the responsibility of the facilitator to ensure that the selected learning objectives are in line 1 A scribe is a student, who notes and structures input and brainstorms on the blackboard, so that all participants may enjoy a visual overview of the case’s content, challenges and eventually also the commonly defined learning objectives.

209

with the learning objectives stipulated in the curriculum of the programme. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the facilitator to supervise and support students in their exploration of knowledge and previous experiences. 2. In the time between opening the case and concluding the case students work on acquire knowledge in order to fulfil the defined learning objectives. This work is supported by a number of learning opportunities including lectures, and sessions with instructors such as exercises, lab sessions, clinical exercises and communication, as well as clinical practice and literature searches, reading individually and in groups. 3. As in the case opening, closing the case takes place with a facilitator and up to 15 students and lasts about 2 hours. In this stage, students present and discuss their work on the case, and theory is discussed in relation to experiences with clinical exercises and practice. The facilitator supports students in their reflections on their learning and identification of gaps in this learning when related to the learning objectives identified during the opening of the case. Each case revolves around a specific topic e.g. a group of organs, and over the course of the medical education, the individual topics appear several times with increasing complexity, which ensures academic progression. The formulations of cases and expectations to the level of students’ responses are adjusted according to progression in the learning objectives (e.g., from knowledge about and understanding to analysis and evaluation at an advanced academic level, or from normal (healthy) state to pathological (sick) state (Wilson 2006)). The method applied here is based on the Maastricht-model and its “seven jumps”. See for example Wood 2003. Example 3: Casework in 10 days – Techno-Anthropology

Techno-Anthropology is interdisciplinary BA- and MA programmes at Aalborg University. The programmes seek to build a bridge between technological development and application and anthropological analysis. The programmes are organised around problem-based project work and 5-ECTS modules based on cases that are specifically planned for each module. In the course module Cases in Applied Technology, each case lasts about a week and a half. Casework includes:

210

1. 1-2 introductory lectures, introducing students to a specific technology and examples of its application. 2. Self-study, where students work on distributed case material and elaborate on this material. 3. Extra lectures and other resources. 4. A seminar with extensive feedback halfway through the case period, where students give and receive feedback and discuss potential challenges or alternative perspectives. A case facilitator participates in the seminars. 5. A concluding case session, where students present and discuss the case. A case facilitator participates in the case presentations. Students work from a set template which is the same in each course of casework. The templates are formed on the basis of the course module’s general learning objectives, and thus help ensure that the learning method is recognisable to students and fulfil the module’s learning objectives. To pass the module, each student must participate actively and satisfactorily in four of the five cases.

Rationales and theoretical foundation for the use of cases in teaching and learning The case method contributes to maintaining focus on both the learning process and the academic content, with which students can develop meta-cognitive and reflective academic competences, i.e. awareness of which resources and methods may lead to professional and personal learning. Thus cases also constitute a method for structuring learning and competence development in the long term, when students, after graduating, move into unknown professional challenges. The method thus invite students to develop: • Communicative competences. Students must be able to communicate about the content of a case at the case opening, during clinical training and in clinical practice as well as when they present their casework at the case closing session. • Ability to structure knowledge. One prerequisite for successful communication is structuring knowledge obtained and processed

211

through the integrated learning elements of the case – lectures, exercises, lab work, resource sessions etc. • The ability to adopt a holistic approach to solving professional problems. This is acquired via integration of theory and practice in the casework simultaneously with the development of collaboration competences when the case requires collaboration with other students. Utilising cases for learning is one method among many and as with any other approach there must be sound academic and learning-related reasons for adopting this method, just as casework in itself does not guarantee students’ learning. Many conditions must be met, as outlined above. One challenge is that many students will experience casework as challenging and very different from the learning strategies they have previously encountered. Some of the prerequisites for casework to be successful is therefore that the teachers prior to the case familiarise students with the purpose and structure of casework and that case material is available, which stimulates students to engage with the academic problems of the case. In designing of cases Wassermann (1994) emphasises the case as a narrative about an aspect of reality, a situation or an experienced course of events which results in a dilemma or climax where we are confronted with the need to make a decision (Pettersen 2005). Pettersen refers to Wassermann who outlines six characteristics of a well-designed case: • It begins in a way that draws the reader into the narrative and course of events immediately. It must capture the reader’s attention so that he or she wants to know more. • Focus are on consequences of real life situations. • It emphasises tensions between different points of view and dilemmas that lead to and stimulate discussion about possible choices and alternative actions. • It engages the reader and makes him or her identify with the main character. The case must both engage and awaken the reader’s need to contribute to resolving the situation. • The case story is authentic and credible in such a way that it becomes natural for the reader to think that this could actually have happened to him or her or that this is a situation he or she might find himself/ herself in.

212

• It is open-ended and ends in an unresolved situation, so that it is the reader’s responsibility to continue and fulfil the course of events/plot line. However, designing a well-structured case is not in itself a guarantee for successful case learning. The form also requires that the teacher is able to assume active leadership and has knowledge of and understands the role he or she must play in relation to the students, as they work on the case. The teacher must be able to alterate between supervising, challenging and supporting students without taking over their work on identifying solutions to the problems, as a condition for fruitful casework is that students are engaged and active in addressing the problems of the case, i.e. they must be active in the learning process. Some differences in the Harvard case method and problem-based learning cases (PBL)

The two approaches both make use of cases, group work and dialogue. The type of case, however, often differs in that the case with the problem-based approach has a greater focus on the independent, student-governed exploration of problems. Designing well-written, authentic and relevant cases is demanding, but once the case is written the experienced case-teacher – who is often both an expert in the academic field of the case and process expert – can run the cases independently. However, problem-based cases often require a number of tutorials in addition to the responsible teacher, and that the casework is of extended duration. Experience demonstrates that with time students are able to take turns at the tutor role. At Maastricht University older students often take on the tutor role. PBL is often seen as one variation of case-based learning, a variation which has developed its own methods for example in its use of supervisors and tutors.

Resources Case-based & Problem-based Teaching & Learning. – Event description, Center for Excellence in Teaching, University of Southern California, http://cet.usc.edu/resources/teaching_learning/case_based.html (downloaded 12.5.12). 213

http://cte.umdnj.edu/active_learning/active_case.cfm http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/collection http://hbsp.harvard.edu/

Literature Barnes, L.B., C.R. Christensen & A.B. Hansen (1994). Teaching and the case method. 3rd ed. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Egidius, H. (1999). PBL och casemetodik. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Herreid, C.F. (1997). What makes a Good Case? Journal of College Science Teacing, 27(3): 163-165. Pettersen, R.C. (2005). Kvalitetslæring i Høgere utdanning – innføring i problem- og praksisbasert didaktikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Shullman, L. (1996). Just in Case: Reflections on Learning from Experience. In: J. Colbert, K. Trimble & P. Desberg (eds.), The Case for Education: Contemporary Approaches for Using Case Methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon: 197-217. Wassermann, S. (1994). Introduction to case-method teaching. A guide to the galaxy. New York: Teachers College Press. Wilson, L.O. (2006). Curriculum Pages. Beyond Bloom – A new Version of the Cognitive Taxonomy. http://www4.uwsp.edu/education/lwilson/curric/newtaxonomy.htm (download 9.05.12). Wood, D.F. (2003). Problem based learning. ABC of learning and teaching in medicine, British Medical Journal. 326(7384): 328-330, February 8.

214

4.4 Problem-based and projectorganised teaching LONE KROGH AND MERETE WIBERG

Introduction Problem-based (PBL) and project-organised works are related terms for work methods that appear individually and together. Both methods are characterised by a high level of student involvement and work with both practice-based and more theoretical problems. Project work is based on the principle that students, within a given framework, must learn the art of identifying, defining and formulating problems they find relevant to solve in relation to a given subject area. One central idea is that the student thereby learns what it means to act professionally in practice, as problems rarely appear ready-defined, but have to be specified and reformulated many times in the research process before any problem-solving can take place. In project work, students must learn to manage and organise a process where many things are uncertain. Ahead of and concurrent with project work, students are taught the field’s theories, techniques and methods, how these are seen as tools for both delimiting and processing problems. A problem-based approach is, to a large extent, based on the work by John Dewey (Dewey 1986). Next over from project work we find PBL, which is an acronym for Problem-Based Learning. PBL need not be project-organised, as problem-based learning can consist of problem-solving in relation to, for example, case-based teaching (see chapter 4.3). In such cases, problems will typically be defined by the teacher, because he or she will describe or choose the case, and a longer course of project work will not necessarily be required. Problem-based learning and project work are thus related working methods and approaches, and are often used concurrently, as “the problem” and relevance to practice is central to both working methods. There are slight differences in the degree of student involvement in defining 215

the problem(s) they wish to work with, and in how the problems are delimited and defined by the teachers to ensure that students’ primary task is problem-solving. Experience shows that students’ motivation for solving problems differs crucially depending on whether these problems are defined by others or themselves. Within all educational fields, disciplinary objectives and learning objectives define which teaching methods to apply. This means that teaching cannot only consist of problem- and project-organised work, but is often supplemented with courses, exercises, lab work and casework. At Aalborg University, problem-based project work in principle makes up about 50 % of all study activities. However, within certain fields, e.g., certain natural scientific disciplines and medicine, other teaching methods take up more space. The project-organised work requires more time than PBL-casework. Often, a combination of project-organisation and PBL is required of the students. At Aalborg University, this combination is denoted “problem-based project work”. Problem-based project work is both a method of organisation, a method of teaching and learning and also a specific pedagogical principle, i.e. a certain way of understanding education and learning, in which students’ problem-based and investigative approach is central to the acquisition of knowledge and skills. This method allows students to acquire knowledge, skills and competences that are considered relevant to professional and academic working life (see e.g., Krogh 2013). This is confirmed in both Danish and international universities, where the PBL-approach has been used for years as a basic principle for the organisation of study programmes (see e.g., Savin-Baden 2004 and Kolmos 2013). Problem-based project work is one way to practice PBL. However, as it explained above, PBL can also be practised in connection with other methods for organising teaching. It is essential that the questions with which students themselves define the given field and educational area form the starting point of teaching and students’ learning as well as the teacher’s supervision. This can even be done in connection with more traditional teaching methods. Figure 1 below illustrates the many work processes students go through when they work with problem-based projects. Progression through these phases is usually not linear, because students work simultaneously on problem analysis and problem-solving. Problem-solving must be understood in a broad sense; it involves defining and illuminating problems. In fields such as the humanities and social sciences, problem-solving rarely entails solving specific problems, but rather elaborating and defining a 216

problem area, which can lead to expanded and alternative options for action and reflection. Literature

Problem analysis

Courses et al.

Research question

Field studies

Deliberations/ decisions regarding theory and methods

Definition and solving of problems

Experiments

Report (conclusions/ visions) THE EXAM

Supervision – Feedback Timeline

Figure 1. Group and project work phases.

Central elements in problem-based project work The point of departure for the following is the combination of project work and PBL, which can be described as “problem-based project work”. This method comprises these central elements: • Group work, project organisation and participant direction and control • Rules for collaboration, supervisor’s role, feedback from fellow students • Problem-based learning, connecting theory and practice, interdisciplinarity • The principle of exemplarity • The teacher’s role as supervisor and the students’ responsibility In the following, we will examine the individual elements with regards to the opportunities and challenges they represent. The teacher’s role as supervisor and the students’ responsibility will be included in the discussion of the individual themes. Furthermore, we will suggest how collaboration can be formalised in the concluding section.

217

Group work, project organisation and student direction? Problem-based project work does not necessarily need to be carried out through group work, but this will often be the case. This is due to both resource- and learning-related reasons. Often, each student will be allocated a certain number of supervision hours from the teacher, and students will simply get more supervision if they work in groups. Furthermore, students often benefit from working together, as they get the opportunity to both receive and give feedback (see chapter 4.6.1 about feedback) to other students. Finally, group work enables students to delve further and deeper into disciplinary problems because the more students, the more aspects of a problem can be covered academically and methodically, provided that the students are able to manage the challenges of collaboration. The learning outcome thus depends on students’ ability to work together. This means that frameworks should be established in advance, describing how collaboration must take place, in order to ensure an appropriate division of labour and mutual feedback. Students do not achieve a great learning outcome if they simply divide the assignment’s chapters between them and combine them into as a shared assignment. A better outcome will be achieved if students write drafts individually, and then process the drafts in collaboration with the other group members. In group work, students can learn to make presentations and receive feedback on this as well as listen to/read other’s drafts and give feedback on these. These are important competences for developing both academic and cooperative skills. The concept ‘student directed’ refers to students setting the agenda, managing and defining their project and, as mentioned earlier, taking ownership by defining and processing problems. As a supervisor, it is crucial that you never assume control of the students’ project. The supervisor’s task is to help students formulate their own ideas and support the development of these through guidance about contexts, literature and application of theory. There is no one correct way to supervise; everything depends on students’ prerequisites as well as the programme’s framework and resources. In principle, the students select problems, theory and data as well as research methods within the general educational frameworks. Some students need a lot of help from their supervisor in this process; from

218

help with formulating a research question (problem(s) to be solved) to finding theories and getting ideas for data collection, while other students manage just fine on their own and simply want the supervisor’s overall assessment of their work. Many students fall somewhere in between on that scale. However, it is crucial that the supervisor does not influence students’ choices to such an extent that both supervisor and students can lay claim to ownership of the project’s problems and solutions. This can cause problems in an exam situation, which is meant to assess the students’ processes and products, and not the supervisor’s. Group work is an excellent context for what is internationally known as “peer learning” (Boud 2001). When group work functions well, it provides many opportunities for students to make good use of each other’s’ potentials and thus to create a synergy in the shared academic and social learning processes. Unfortunately, problems in group work are common. These can consist of one or two students controlling the entire process and excluding other students from central parts of the project work. These students may view the students who do not appear to contribute as unwilling and lazy. However, this is often not the whole story. The problem can just as well be caused by students being forced into passivity due to the dominance of others. As a supervisor it can be hard to find out and tell what goes on with a group and their work. Supervisors can contribute to a good division of labour by talking to all students in supervision and finding out who has contributed what, and how students give feedback to each other and contribute to each other’s areas of responsibility. Challenges can also consist of actual conflicts. One consequence of this may be a group splitting up, which can be the best solution if a conflict gets out of hand. Students can learn much by working in groups and by managing and developing collaborative processes. The best groups are often the ones that openly discuss the problems that may arise in group collaboration. Good supervision can support this process (without psychologising the issue unduly). In feedback, focus should be on the academic work processes, which the following working paper may help you with:

219

Example of working paper made for feedback seminars where groups are trained in giving each other feedback Based on material sent beforehand, feedback groups and/-supervisors must reflect on the following main points: • Research question(s) (e.g. defining problem(s) to be solved): – Is the research question precise enough? – Is the project’s objective clear? • The selected method and theory’s validity re.: problem, data and the project’s objective.

Problem-based learning, connecting theory and practice, interdisciplinarity As mentioned earlier, problem-based project work has a problem-based approach. Students are trained to identify, define and delimit the problem area, often through working with a research question. Students are trained by being introduced to content-related dimensions via courses and other educational events at the beginning of each semester or module. Some programmes offer clarification courses in which students write about their own expectations and desired effort in the project work. Students are placed in groups where they discuss the semester or module’s content and via brainstorms, mind maps or the like, and together they define the questions they wish to work on, at least to begin with. These questions are processed and turned into a research question, which is then discussed with the supervisor and adjusted accordingly. Following this, students discuss possible choice of theories, data and research methods. During the project work process, the research question can be changed, as new knowledge is acquired. PBL is an inductive method where initial problems may be solved quickly, and new problems may appear. When the project reaches its final phase, the research question will have found its final form, and students will have developed different solutions and views of the problem through their studies. Students often struggle for precision when it comes to formulating a research question. The supervisor’s role is to help students identify their research question in the material they have sent, because sometimes a research question isn’t where students claim it to be, it may be hidden in the introduction, or just after what is purported to be the research question. The problem can be that students’ understanding 220

of the problem is too narrow and that students think that the problem ought to be very specific and solvable. However, a research question is often more a matter of delimiting and problematising using theoretical and methodological concepts than about solving a specific problem. This is why people often talk about a research question encompassing students’ curiosity about different phenomena. Thus, the framing is often absent from the section that students refer to as the research question. It is also important to remember that the research question is a tool by which students can learn to work methodically and stringently, and that research questions therefore rarely appear as explicated sentences in science books and articles, where the framing of the problem area is implicit. In the following, we have outlined the function of a research question.

The purpose of a research question is to specify the problems of the research, focus the project and govern • Which methods are relevant? • Which literature is relevant? • Which elements should be included in the report, e.g., theory, data and possible experiments? • The structure of the project report to ensure coherence. The type of research question depends on which branch of study we are dealing with, and which type of knowledge the project is meant to supply (understanding, uncovering of causes, evaluation etc.). The good research question (inspired by Rienecker 2005): • Has a clear primary question, a clear disciplinary problem, and is supplemented by sub-questions. • Governs the project in terms of applicable theory and data (and types of experiments). • Is well-defined and focused. • Is based on thorough and solid documentation and argumentation. • Demonstrate solid knowledge – and relates to/applies the field’s/fields’ concepts, theories and methods. • Evolves during the project. • Is linguistically exact. The research question is adjusted and qualified throughout the work process as the group gradually learns more about the subject.

221

The supervisor’s task is furthermore to help students focus their work by “killing their darlings” and helping them identify ambiguous passages in their work. In addition to this, the supervisor’s task is to help students with the writing process, which e.g., involves teaching students that not all the text they have produced has to be included in the project, and that some text may serve as background material for a structured and coherent project. One fundamental idea behind problem-based project work is that it forms a connection between theory and practice. The idea is that theories must not appear as isolated sections in the text, but must be presented as tools that can be used in practice (to analyse data). However, students should do more than merely apply theory to practice, they should use concepts and theories as tools for exploring the field in practice and to identify possible solutions to stated problems. The American philosopher D. A. Schön concerned himself intensively with the relationship between theory and practice. He spoke critically about an instrumental approach to applying theories: How comes it that in the second half of the twentieth century we find in our universities, embedded not only in men’s minds but in the institutions themselves, a dominant view of professional knowledge as the application of scientific theory and technique to the instrumental problems of practice? (Schön 1983: 30)

Theories cannot simply be pasted onto practice, but can be the starting point that opens students’ eyes to an issue and the nuances herein. At the same time it is important that students do not simply use practice (data) to confirm a theory, but that the theories are used as a basis for critical assessment and understanding of the field, the topic and the research question. For example, it is of no use that students of education want to “paste” a learning theory on to a certain practice and thus confirm this practice. Students must learn to examine and understand practice by means of theories. If a learning theory calls for participation, students can identify different types of participation in practice, while simultaneously being able to discuss strengths and limitations of the theory in question. If there are aspects the theory cannot be used to identify, and if the participation concept provides a certain view of what learning is, students may include other theories about learning based on the lacks of the first theory. One rationale of project-based learning, is that a problem can rarely 222

be defined and solved by means of tools from only one field. Thus, interdisciplinarity is an integral part of problem-based learning. Students may therefore not as a starting point be able to work interdisciplinarily, as they study only one or two subjects. However, interdisciplinarity is an approach that students must learn and take into account when they solve the problems of their project work, and partly something to prepare for in preparation for a professional career. In the following, we will discuss some consequences of the principles of interdisciplinarity.

Interdisciplinarity The project’s questions and problems are processed interdisciplinarily to reflect the complexity of reality. Students’ problems thus define which subjects and areas contribute to their solution. A problem-based study will often require an interdisciplinary approach, as a problem typically represents a complex whole, the solution of which must draw upon several different fields. In problem-based project work, interdisciplinarity is another term for including several different fields. However, the formal frameworks, as defined in the curriculum, will dictate which fields should be included in connection with problem-solving. Furthermore, students often include knowledge and methods in their creative problem-solving strategies, knowledge the supervisor may not be familiar with. This is one of the reasons why supervising students can be so exciting and educational.

The principle of exemplarity One fundamental principle in problem-based project work is that teaching and learning are intended to be exemplary. I.e., instead of learning a large curriculum by heart and taking a multiple-choice exam, students must learn to immerse themselves in issues that are exemplary of the educational and disciplinary whole, and this immersion is expected to be transferable to work with other issues in the field. Thus, it is expected that work with a single case within a discipline can provide students the competences they need for working any aspect of the discipline. One could work with the persecution of the Jewish people during World War II, as it is expected that this immersion can prepare the student to work with 223

other historical periods. In medicine, one could work with a specific type of wound treatment in the hope that this deeper understanding will lead to a broader understanding of wounds and wound treatment in general. One drawback of this idea is that students risk losing the scope in their education because they immerse themselves in a single theme or a single category. This challenge can, to some degree, be countered through careful planning of the education, so elements of the study programme together provide the scope by using different teaching methods. Finally, in project work, it is important that the supervisor supports students in their use of core texts from the field, so that they can also acquire fundamental disciplinary theories in project work. One risk might be that students indulge in rather unconventional theories, which may turn out to be difficult to apply within the field. The strength of the exemplarity principle is the immersion and transfer to other areas. Most people are familiar with the phenomenon of cramming before an exam and quickly learning facts, which are forgotten just as fast. This is less of a risk in in-depth work with theories and methods in relation to project work. Working exemplarily with a problem area within a field, i.e., mastering and testing different theories and methods to address problems within a given area, enables transfer to other areas within a given field of study. The teacher’s role as supervisor and students’ responsibility

The good supervision process greatly depends on how the teacher handles his role as supervisor, and how students take responsibility for their own work processes. The supervisor must be both field- and process oriented, i.e., considers academic content as well as the group processes. The supervisor has varying roles as academic expert, process consultant and examiner, respectively. It is important to be aware of these roles, and to maintain a professional distance to your work. If the supervisor becomes too close with a group, it may become difficult to assess and mark the group’s members later. As a process consultant, you may face both collaborative and academic problems in the group. We have already touched upon these aspects in the section “Group work, project-organisation and student focus”. It may prove useful to formalise supervisor- and student collaboration in the form of a supervision journal in order to avoid or minimise collaborative problems in the group and with the supervisor. 224

A supervision journal might touch on the following topics: • Agreement on continual discussion and evaluation of objectives and students’ work. • Agreement on the frequency of meetings. • Agreement on sending papers for the supervisor to comment. • Specification of supervisor requirements and students’ expectations. • Agreement on the form of supervision. • Agreement on how to prevent and solve conflicts. In some groups, the supervision process is carried out formally in the shape of agenda and minutes, which are sent to the supervisor before supervision. Formalised agreements may seem superfluous, but experience shows that they can be a valuable tool if problems do arise. Furthermore, students learn how to manage a project in a team by using these procedures, which is also an important part of the learning outcome of problem-based project work.

Rationales – theoretical foundation for problem-based project work As described in chapter 1.1, problem-based project work gained ground in the 1970’s as the dominant study form in two new universities, Roskilde and Aalborg, not least due to heavy criticism of the conventional teaching and study forms at the existing universities. Professor Knud Illeris has studied and contributed to the development of the problem-based project work approach for more than a generation (e.g., Illeris 1974). Based on analyses of societal needs for education, Illeris identified three types of qualification that he found necessary for the continued development of society, i.e., 1) skills that can be applied directly to a given task or work process, 2) general adaptive qualifications, which for example encompass attitudinal characteristics (such as the ability to negotiate and investigate, perseverance etc.), combined with willingness to use these characteristics in practice and relate them to an existing work process, and 3) creative and innovative qualifications, including qualifications for scientific and innovative jobs, and qualifications in relation to continued development and collaboration. With reference to Piaget’s theories about 225

learning, Illeris defined accommodative (restructuring of cognitive structures) learning processes as a requirement for creative learning processes. He describes expedient learning processes as processes through which students acquire skills, the ability to adapt and creativity in the interplay between accommodative and assimilative processes (the annexation of new knowledge in existing cognitive structures). He considers these interacting processes a condition for students acquiring holistic competences, comprehensive skills, the ability to adapt and to develop creative skills, which according to Illeris’ analyses, were in societal demand. An alternative didactic concept was developed from his research: problem-based project work, characterised by: Group work, project organisation and student-directed problem-based learning, connection of theory and practice, the exemplarity principle and interdisciplinary work. These principles have been discussed in the above. However, the development of problem-based project work has a long history in pedagogical and learning-related interpretations, inspired by Danish and international researchers and practitioners such as Piaget (1971), Dewey (1986), Lewin (1948), Negt (1975) and C. Wright Mills (1959). Later, inspiration for the education of for example doctors has come from Canada and North-America (Pettersen 1997, Barrows 1996). Today, problem-based project work would be considered to belong to the PBL-tradition, a tradition and approach which, however, call for the application of many different methods of teaching, depending on the branch of study and traditions, but where the problem-based and investigative approach is central. For an account of the development in problem-based project work in relation to the Anglo-Saxon understanding of PBL, we refer to Keiding and Laursen (2008). Problem-based project work thus merely represents one method among others for organising teaching in the PBL-tradition.

Literature Barrows, H.S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. In: L. Wilkerson & W.H. Gijselaers (eds.), Bringing Problem-Based Learning to Higher Education: Theory and Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Boud, D. (2001). Introduction: making the move to peer learning. In: D. Boud,

226

R. Cohen & J. Simpson (eds.), Peer Learning in higher education- learning from and with each other. London: Kogan Page. Dewey, J. (1986). How we think. In: J.A. Boydston (ed.), The Later Works: 19251953, Vol. 8. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press: 105-352. Illeris, K. (1976 [orig. 1974]). Problemorientering og deltagerstyring. Oplæg til en alternativ didaktik. Copenhagen: Munksgaard. Keiding, T.B. & E. Laursen (2008). Projektmetoden iagttaget. Metodens didaktik og anvendelse i universitetsuddannelse. Research report. Aalborg: Department for Education, Learning and Philosophy, Aalborg University. Kolmos, A. (2013). Problem- and Project-based learning in a global perspective – community buidling or certification? In: A.A. Jensen & L. Krogh (eds.), Visions, Challenges and Strategies for Problem Based Learning. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Krogh, L. (2013). The Aalborg PBL model and Employability. In: L.B. Henriksen (ed.), What did you learn in the real world today? – The case of practicum in university education. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Krogh, L., J. Brødslev Olsen & P. Rasmussen (2008). Projektpædagogik, perspektiver fra Aalborg Universitet. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Lewin, K. (ed.) (1948). Resolving social conflicts; selected papers on group dynamics. New York: Harper & Row. Mills, C.W. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press. Negt, O. (1975). Sociologisk fantasi og eksemplarisk indlæring. Roskilde: Roskilde Universitetscenter. Pettersen, R.C. (1997). Problemet først: Problembasert læring som pedagogisk idé og strategi. Oslo: Tano Aschehoug. Piaget, J. (1971). Biology and knowledge; an essay on the relations between organic regulations and cognitive processes. (B. Walsh, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rienecker, L. (2005). Problemformulering på de samfundsvidenskabelige uddannelser. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Savin-Baden, M. (2004). Foundations of Problem-based Learning. Maidenhead: The Society for Research into Higher Education. Schön, D.A., 1983. The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books Inc.

227

228

4.5.1 Activities in and between teaching sessions LOTTE RIENECKER, RIKKE VON MÜLLEN, PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN AND GITTE HOLTEN INGERSLEV

This chapter comprises a number of suggestions for activities in teaching. It can be viewed as a catalogue of ideas for promoting immersion, disciplinary insight and the student’s insight into his or her own learning and academic progression. The chapter describes activities that go beyond listening and taking notes. These activities are primarily based on the material and the teacher rather than on the student’s development of skills and competences. In this chapter, we discuss activities that require more processing of material than mere note-taking. Activities presented in this chapter thus require students to research, solve problems, write or teach, i.e., demonstrate knowledge, skills and competences.

As much activity as possible – why? • Because skills and competences are developed through students’ active interaction with material and in dialogue. • So students can “participate in the disciplinary discursive community”, not just observe it. • To maintain attention. • To promote critical thinking. • So the participants can learn from each other. • So the teacher can facilitate and observe understanding and acquisition in the students.

The chapter opens with an introductory section with general considerations and suggestions for initiatives that activate students and can be used across faculties. Then follow sections that examine the special require229

ments for teaching in, respectively, the humanities, the social, the natural and the medical sciences.

Pedagogical challenges Assuming that students’ learning processes comprise a framework of activities in and between sessions, it falls on the teacher to facilitate a forum for presentation, discussion, testing, instruction and collective reflection on the teaching’s themes. In this case, activities in teaching may to some degree be self-evident. However, the development in a course of teaching happens at very different rates: Many teachers struggle to come up with ideas for activities that supplement and qualify the teacher’s own presentations, which is why this is a recurring topic in teaching and learning in higher education programmes and courses in practical teaching skills for PhD students. Many of the participants in these courses have reservations about the activities they are familiar with, and ideas for appropriate activities can be sparse. Many new teachers come from a monologue-based teaching tradition that has not included many activities apart from note-taking, discussion and student presentations. Classic activities, such as oral student presentations, group work based on questions to the text and open discussions, are known to lead to negative evaluation in some environments: Students would rather listen to the expert relay the texts, especially when there are only few teaching sessions. Many teachers take this to heart: Students sometimes evaluate the most passive teaching as the best and most popular (even though this is not the same as the most educational teaching). As a teacher, you naturally want a good evaluation; you may even depend on this for future employment. Many students thus pull in the direction of teachers’ performing and being in focus. Moreover, teachers, especially new teachers, fear that students will show up unprepared for a class that requires preparation, and that the teacher must then improvise in situations that are hard to prepare for. Therefore, many teachers at traditional universities feel that it is safest to focus on teaching that does not depend on activities that require students’ work in between sessions, i.e., the combination of the teacher’s lecturing and students’ unprepared activities. The pedagogical challenges encompass:

230

• Design, selection and use of motivated participant activities in teaching and between sessions. • Identification of relevant activities for the learner’s acquisition of knowledge, skills and competences. • Negotiation of expectations to the activities’ why and how with students. • Management of the activities. • Integration of activities with read material and the field’s disciplinary traditions.

Activities in teaching In the selection of activities, you should consider: • What will students learn most from by training in teaching? • What is the most important thing for students to learn? • What is hardest for them to do on their own? • What is best suited for the collective forum that teaching constitutes? Perhaps it is absolutely crucial that students learn to calculate probabilities in introductory quantitative method teaching. However, if the math is simple, it may be better to spend the time discussing and uncovering why students must calculate probabilities. Conversely, if there are valid sources that comprehensibly explain the need for probability calculus, but huge practical problems with the calculus, teaching should be spent on supervised problem-solving in groups. It is important not to view the time you teach as isolated units of vital significance, but rather take into account the students’ entire effort throughout the semester, and determine which pieces of the puzzle your teaching can best contribute to, before you decide which teaching activities will ensure this contribution. The methods of teaching and activities you choose must be aligned to the field’s curriculum and course description’s learning objectives. The best teaching uses varied teaching methods and activities adapted to the learning objectives. The learning objectives are expressed in knowledge, skills (qualifications) and competences respectively: • Knowledge is mastery of the content. • Skills are knowing how to use one’s knowledge in actions. • Competences means using skills in a specific context. 231

When you prepare your teaching, it may be expedient to select activities aimed at the learning objectives first, and only then consider necessary field-specific presentations and instruction. One way to evaluate suitable methods of teaching is by applying a taxonomy of learning objectives (read more about taxonomies in chapter 2.2):

After the course, what should students: • Know (present material and facts)? • Understand (be able to analyse and explain)? • Be able to (skills, e.g., be able to analyse)? • Do (perform, act, demonstrate competences)? • Argue (have (an academically founded) opinion of)?

The following is a list of important parameters for the selection of learning activities for teaching:

Parameters for choice of activities • Purpose? There can be many different purposes, e.g., academic, social, building up a disciplinary discourse and terminology, establishing teamwork and a good learning environment, and there may be controlrelated purposes. • Relationship to learning objectives and curriculum? Can the purpose and outcome of the activity be directly related to the learning objectives? Knowledge, skills, competences? Is the process and/or product of the activity important? • Taxonomic level: Should the activity lead to descriptions, concept definitions, categorisation, analyses, interpretations, application of method and theory, design and construction, problem-solving? • Alignment with exam requirements and types of exams (oral, written, traditional assignment, case, project, synopsis)? • Is the activity part of the exam (e.g., courses where activity requirements form an exam type, or where participation in the activity counts towards parts of a collective mark)? • Should the teacher/peers give feedback on the way the activity is carried out?

232

• How does the activity and the session fit together? And the course? Can students use the activity to initiate, train, present, qualify and focus their work between sessions? • Products of the activity? • Documentation of the activity? • Time frame: ten minutes or six hours? • Participants’ prerequisites and preferences: Can students carry out the activity? Can they succeed with it?

You do not have to consider all of these parameters carefully. However, you should be able to provide participants with reasons for: “Why this activity now, carried out in this way, in interplay with this academic content, these learning objectives and these assessments?” Activities that further students’ learning – suggestions and options

The following is a catalogue of activities. These can be varied and combined in the course of teaching. The teacher can also prepare introductory sessions that lead up to and serve as warm-up for the session, or simply for a single theme or a problem. Some are learning activities. Others are good for finishing, summarising and consolidating what is learnt. We have grouped activities into individual activities and pair/group/class activities. The list is for inspiration and is far from comprehensive. Students are active individually

• Non-stop writing: Begin with, e.g., three minutes of individual and unedited writing about the topic of the day or a new theme. Participants’ knowledge about the topic is thereby activated in preparation for the following activities. • Writing in class/during the session: e.g., writing smaller assignments, definitions, questions to theories etc., beginning take-home assignments. • Filling out tables/forms: e.g., forms with questions about topic, literature, homework or systematising material in matrices or other forms of overview tools. • Quizzes and self-scoring tests: activate, reiterate and give students insight into what level they are at. With a bit of artful questioning you 233

can quiz students on more complex learning than merely facts, although there is a limit. As a teacher, you do not have to correct the answers, you can just show students your answers and ask them to correct their own or the answers of the person next to them. If the questions are suitably difficult, they will generally prompt students to either ask the teacher questions or to seek out more knowledge outside of teaching. One obvious choice is to use online quizzes, where the computer corrects students’ responses, and gives the teacher feedback about the students’ level. • Write a summary of the day’s teaching. You can ask students to do this in the last five minutes of teaching. The student is asked to write down the most important points of the session and specify any points he or she has not understood. Writing is carried out in silence and students must concentrate. This activity is good for the memory – and is just as relevant for lectures with large numbers of students as for discussion-based class teaching. • Questions to the topic. After teaching, ask students to write down any questions they still have about the day’s topic. Ask them to hand these questions to the teacher, who can use them to prepare the next session (e.g., on small post-its that can be stuck to the door when they leave), or ask them to suggest how to find the answers to their questions. • Self-evaluation. Ask students to evaluate their own contribution (presentations, reports etc.) and suggest improvements.

Students are active in pairs, groups and in classes

The teacher must ensure that collective work and group work is concrete, focused and controlled. Many students have an aversion to group work. This is often because it is initiated without clear instructions and purpose: “Now if you just talk about… and then we can hear what you talked about afterwards”. When we write about students’ work together in and between sessions in this book, we presuppose that the teacher is active in framing students’ work. In this chapter, we will briefly describe how you as a teacher can manage the process. In chapter 4.2, this is described in relation to group work. Below is a list of suggestions for activities in groups and in plenum. Buzz groups, or talking to the person next to you: The teacher asks a simple, clear question and lets students discuss the answer with the per234

son next to them for one or a couple of minutes. Whether there is one or several right answers to the question, it is excellent training for students to be forced to reflect and test their academic argumentation on a peer. The exercise can also easily be carried out with several hundred students – it is not necessary to summarise in plenum afterwards; the fact that everyone has thought and expressed themselves is useful in itself. Exchanging written work: e.g., parts of assignments, papers, experiences. In advance, students are instructed to bring with them piece of paper with key focus points/questions/considerations, that they wish to present and discuss with a fellow student. These points etc. are exchanged with the person next to them, thereafter the two students discuss the questions. (Students who have not prepared questions must listen). Dialogue in plenum: Prepare an unambiguous and central question, and give the students a long break to think. The goal is to make students reflect rather than get an answer. Keep students intellectually active for as long as possible by asking them to elaborate, explain, argue or exemplify. Do not take over, even if a student asks you to (see also chapter 4.7). Question-answer-sessions and discussions (see also chapter 4.7). Collection of questions, definitions, answers and the like: Anonymous input from a large number of students can be acquired by asking students to write on small post-its that are handed out to students. This is useful when you want questions from your students, but no one wishes to speak up. Instead you can ask all your students to write a question on their post-it and then ask them to exchange post-its with each other until no one knows whose post-it they have. Following this, you can ask if anyone holds a post-it with an interesting question, or simply point someone out and ask them to read their post-it out loud, or ask students to stick their post-its on the door when they leave for a break, and then take a look at them and consider what to discuss in the following session. Group work: It is crucial that group work is complex enough to justify spending teaching hours on it; especially for first-year students, it is preferable that group work is aimed at a product – a solution, an illustration, a hypothesis, a mind map on a poster or something else that students can hand in or put up for collective reflection and further work. It is an advantage if the group work on different tasks/cases/questions/theories, so students have a good reason to listen to the other groups – a variation of the latter is to let one member of each group form new groups and present to each other so everyone practices presenting their group’s results (see also chapter 4.2). 235

Example of group work Making concept maps. Working with concept maps serves two purposes, firstly making students map out and connect different areas in the material, and secondly helping students understand the concepts. The working procedure will typically be that you: 1. Ask students to point out important concepts in the text(s) during their preparation. 2. With the class, pick the 10 most important concepts. 3. Divide the class into groups of three; supply them with a poster-sized piece of paper and post-its. 4. Ask them to write 10 concepts on the post-its and arrange them in a hierarchy they agree on – draw lines between the individual concepts and write on the lines wherein the connection consists. 5. A fter this, collect the concept maps so they can be copied and uploaded to the e-learning platform for the next session. 6. (Optional) Put together new groups in which the individual member argues for his or her group’s original construction of their concept map. In this way, the students’ own concept development and mapping of the material governs the process. 7. (Optional) Discuss the different concept maps’ merits and flaws in a concluding lecture.

Student presentations: Oral presentations must be planned out realistically for both the presenter and the audience to ensure that the audience has well-defined focus points and tasks to do during the presentation. To better prepare for student presentations, the teacher can inform students in advance that their presentation will be evaluated directly after they have given it. This can be done by giving the audience a question and a focus point to consider during the presentation. The audience may fill out forms in which they consider the stated questions and focus points. Hereafter, a short oral evaluation can be carried out, and in conclusion, the presenter is given the filled out forms (which are always an interesting read for the individual student) – there must be very clear guidelines of how to structure this written feedback. These presentations can be used for more than communicating the curriculum, so that the listening students gain something from the presentation they would otherwise not have gained, such 236

as supplementary curriculum, going through additional assignments, illustrations, models, tables, exemplifications, opposing viewpoints, actualisations or alternative procedures. Part of the presentation’s purpose may also be to activate the rest of the class, e.g., by the presenter(s) asking good questions for debate or designs and conducts an exercise with the rest of the class – possibly with quality-assuring help from the teacher. Conference with presentations: This can potentially be included in work with the communicative side of academic presentations. In advance, each group uploads keywords of their presentation to the class website, and you can profitably assign feedback groups to each presentation. Following e.g., independent research processes such as the bachelor project. Feedback on study products and processes, read more in chapter 4.6.1 about feedback. Clickers is another way of quickly and anonymously getting answers from many students. Some teachers report that this is particularly educational when students need to reach an agreement with their fellow students before answering, e.g., by having groups of three share one clicker, because the students are then required to train their academic argumentation to convince their fellow students of the validity of their answer (see also chapter 4.6.2 about clickers). A low-tech-version of this is to let students vote by hand or by using coloured pieces of cardboard. You can also make students vote using their smartphones or online. Summation involves asking students to summarise the key points of the previous session to the person next to them. This could be summarising the last ten minutes of the lecture, formulating a definition of the main concept, explaining the steps in the proof, or whatever may be relevant to repeat and remember. Summations have a positive effect on students’ memory. Problem-solving activities (see e.g., the box Sample activities, p. 244). Assignment activities: To learn and train the writing of assignments, you can have students produce and exchange mind maps in teaching, or have them write lists with general questions. Along the way, students can fill out tables and templates, e.g., the pentagon model (see chapter 5.2) or argumentation models, and answer several questions; and when they start producing text, it is good idea to have them provide oral or written feedback to each other (if feedback is written, the result should be shown to the class so everyone can learn from everyone’s examples), possibly on the basis of a list of criteria formulated by the class or the teacher, or on the basis of model examples selected by the class or the teacher. 237

You will have to try out various activities and make adjustments along the way. You will need to develop a repertoire of short, long, solo- and plenum activities – and not be intimidated if a given activity does not succeed at first. Instructing activities

Activities must be instructed, and preferably in writing, so that all participants can fulfil their role in the activity.

Instructions for activities (on handouts, PowerPoints et al.) • Focus, exact questions, action (in imperative). • Purpose (knowledge, skills, competences). • Time frame for the activity. • Resources and tools to use while doing the activity. • Working method, activity/activities: first, then, hereafter, 1. 2. 3. • Participant role(s). • Wanted product/hand in/feedback, criteria (see also chapter 3.5). • (Optional) Preparation and finishing, forward-looking use of the activity and its products.

The necessity of instruction is acknowledged by many teachers who include learning activities in their sessions. Without instruction about what is wanted, for how long, about how participants must relate during and after, and how they must use the activity in their further studies, the activity may lose focus. Agreements about, and rationales and reasons for, the individual activities are necessary. Renegotiating with students along the way about what they must do to learn something is also a good idea – because activity-based teaching goes against many students’ expectations to and ideal for a classic university education. Before putting the activity into practice, the teacher must also contemplate what his or her own role is while students work; how the work should be concluded, and how the activity can be connected to the material read. Activities should help build up students’ acquisition of disciplinary concepts, theories and methods.

238

An activity sequence 1. 2. 3. 4.

The teacher introduces topic/problem. The activity is introduced and instructed (see below). The activity is carried out. The activity is summarised and results are exchanged, e.g., questions/ summary/exchange in plenum. 5. The teacher relates the activity to the theme and problems, central concepts, theories, methods and data of the course/the session/the element.

Now that we have reviewed and discussed the examples of applied activities in teaching sessions, we shall turn our attention to learning activities between sessions.

Activities between sessions Why focus on time outside of sessions?

The amount of teaching students receive in their study programmes, and how much the students actually study outside of teaching, has been topics of much discussion. However, there is not much focus on the quality of the independent work that students carry out outside of sessions. Often teachers plan teaching as if the few hours they spend with students comprise the key source of students’ learning, and this often leads to material overload and rapid-fire delivery during teaching sessions. • In principle, a study week comprises at least 37 hours. However, no educational institution offers that much teaching, so students have quite a few hours left for study activities that are not planned or supervised by a teacher. The assumption behind this section’s suggestions is that the teacher does not prepare and complete the collection, presentation, exposition and qualification of material for each session on his or her own, but that students collaborate with the teacher, so that students can be trained in the practices of academic research and presentation. The starting point is that focus is on students’ learning, and that teaching at a university partly 239

consists of teachers’ presentations and partly of students’ work between sessions and student activities during sessions. Therefore, study activities between sessions do not just consist of reading one hundred pages of text for each session. In other words, the demand for activity between sessions demonstrates that university education is a full-time occupation, but it also forces students to work thoroughly with the disciplinary methods, concepts and examples, so that students, with time, learn the field’s methods and views and to manage their own time and learning process through their independent work. Therefore teachers face the challenge of ensuring that study activities outside of sessions, between sessions and parallel to sessions are meaningfully integrated in teaching. Teachers must not only prepare and plan study activities, but also plan for the activities’ integration in teaching sessions, relation to teacher presentations (lectures), activities in sessions, current research and use of e-learning etc. See also chapters 3.4 Course planning and 3.3 Session planning. Well-planned student activities between sessions enable the teacher to set up deeper and broader learning objectives, and also allow for teaching to be based on students’ work. Teachers in the classic universities and higher educations face a challenge in planning study activities outside sessions. In a project-oriented form of study, this challenge is to a certain extent resolved when students research and write projects.

Choice and planning of activities When you have contemplated the familiar teaching planning questions (see chapters 3.3 and 3.4) about your teaching’s characteristics, position in the study programme, research and professional context, learning objectives, types of exam, and student competences, the following questions for clarification can be asked: • What types of independent work is required to meet the learning objectives? Some activities also have social or other purposes indirectly related to learning, e.g., aimed at motivation, socialisation, creating a safe atmosphere etc. • Which of these types of independent work require the teacher’s pres240

ence (physical or online), or feedback from the teacher? Which types require that the entire class is present (physical or online), or that the class gives feedback? Which types merely require that there are other students present (physical or online), or that a single fellow student gives feedback? Which types can be completed individually? • Which tools or frameworks must be available for completing activities in a different context than teaching? • How do independent learning activities become meaningful for, and integrated with, the activities in the teaching sessions? • How do students get feedback on their work? How can students know that their work is at the appropriate level, and that they are acquiring the right competences? • How is knowledge of students’ competences obtained so that teaching can be aimed at the appropriate academic level? • How can activities be adapted to the time students can be expected to spend on the course? • How can you frame activities so they encompass purpose, work method and product form, time frame, feedback and application? • How do you ensure a suitable connection between study activity, teaching, exam and possibly professional perspective? Just like activities in sessions, activities outside sessions are learning sequences that are “adequate” when the teacher can apply the elements above systematically in his or her preparation, e.g., by using one of the tables below. The following template prepares the ground for a specific and precise formulation of an activity instruction: • Content/problem. • Purpose of the activity (knowledge, skills, competences, product). • Context (coherence in course, study programme etc.). • Dimensioning (scope, elements, delimitation). • Time (deadline(s), suggestions for time frame). • Instruction, organisation, sequencing in regards to students’ procedure and preparation, possible group activity. • Documentation form (oral, written, genre etc.). • Follow-up (how, when, who?). • Criteria (when is the assignment solved satisfactorily?).

241

You may want to consider framing the study activity during teaching, and collaborate with students to define e.g., application, feedback and documentation form. In this way, study activities contribute to a dialogue-based collaboration between students and between students and teacher. Integration of study activities in teaching

The first step toward better integration of students’ self-study in teaching can be to dispense with the widespread structure of teaching sessions, in which a topic, theme or problem is treated in one session, and is then considered completed, whereafter students are sent home to read about the next topic for the next session. You can use the last part of each teaching session, perhaps just ten minutes, to broach the next teaching topic and prepare students for their homework and study activities. And you can use the first part of each teaching session to share students’ activities (see also von Müllen 2011). This can be illustrated like this:

  Activity

Teaching  

  Activity

Teaching  

Activity

Teaching  

(Change of topic)

Sharing activities

Introduction to a new topic and new activity

Sharing activities

Introduction to a new topic and new activity

(Change of topic)

Sharing activities

Introduction to a new topic and new activity

Figure 1. The connection between teaching and activities outside of teaching.

It is important to spend time in the teaching sessions on students’ activities between teaching sessions. Partly for the sake of optimising the learning outcome, which requires discussion, contextualising, and qualification of the activities’ outcomes, and partly to ensure students’ motivation: To motivate students to be prepared, you may have to design the teaching so that students will struggle to achieve an outcome from teaching if they have not completed the expected preparatory activities. Please note 242

that if the preparation activities are repeated too thoroughly in teaching, time-conscious students may possibly gradually stop preparing. The activities can be evaluated early on in teaching and perhaps even from session to sessions. This allows the teacher to identify what students must learn between sessions and to find out whether this actually happens. Virtual course spaces (Blackboard and others), which are accessible outside teaching as forums for activities outside teaching, can often be very useful. See chapter 4.8 E-learning. Time for activities

The time spent on activities must be seen in relation to students’ total work time. The workload must also be negotiated with the semester’s other class teachers, who are supposed to coordinate and divide students’ work loads, so the activities are consistent with the hours that correspond to the courses’ and the semester’s ECTS-points. Group activities

Group activities have many advantages beyond the activities’ basic outcomes (see chapter 4.2 about group work), but group activities often require special instructions about division of roles and tasks etc. If groups have already been established in or outside teaching, it makes sense to use these groups, whether they be reading, writing, work or project groups. Many of the activities below can be used as both individual and group activities, in established groups, or in groups organised for the specific situation. What if…

What if (some of) the students have not completed their study activities and show up unprepared – many teachers share this fear. One option is to have a plan B: Find suggestions for this in chapter 3.3 Session planning. However, sometimes you can make a point of sacrificing unprepared students’ ability to follow teaching to underline the importance of being prepared. If everyone is unprepared, you can cut short, cancel or postpone teaching. Sample activities

The following are some principal types of activities connected to teaching. 243

For the syllabus • Students read the syllabus with certain angles, questions or purposes. • Students prepare questions to texts in the curriculum. • Students find examples in the daily papers demonstrating the syllabus’ relevance. • Students make illustrations, models, tables, mind maps or similar of the syllabus – e.g., on posters, so everyone’s contributions can be studied simultaneously in the following teaching session. • Students prepare for presenting a view that opposes the syllabus (e.g., assisted by secondary literature that the teacher helps find).

For problem-solving (analyses, calculus assignments etc.) • Students solve problems, do analyses. • Students prepare to explain others how to solve assignments. • Students correct fellow students’ assignments. • Students construct a guide for corrections. • Students construct model examples of assignments for the remaining students (with possible help from the teacher). • Students find data/texts that are suitable for calculating/analysing with the current method. • Students look for methods that are suitable for treating the present data. • Students collect data, carry out research.

For writing papers • Students give each other oral or written feedback in (writing) groups, and the feedback is presented to the class, so that everyone can learn from everyone’s examples, possibly on the basis of the list of criteria compiled by the class or the teacher, or on the basis of model examples selected by the class or teacher.

For training practical skills • Students practice teaching, provide therapy, sing or whatever may be the field’s practical learning objectives.

For research(like) activities • Students conduct interviews, collect questionnaire responses, make field observations or apply other data collection methods.

244

• Students collect objects/texts/images or other things for analysis or exemplification in teaching. • Students analyse scientific research material.

Several examples of activities can be found on the Faculty Metro (undervisermetro.au.dk), a resource for university teachers. The Metro is a place for university teachers from Aarhus University to share their good ideas from practice, so these can be used by other teachers in other fields and contexts. Furthermore, this book contains many examples of how to design study activities; see for example the chapters, 1.2 Research-based teaching, 4.8 E-learning and 4.6.1 Feedback.

Rationales As mentioned above, discussions about activities in teaching and between teaching sessions is a battlefield with the lecture on one side and decentralised, student-activating teaching on the other. This constitutes the special pedagogical challenge of traditional universities: The project-oriented universities minimise teaching in favour of students’ project work and supervision. Activities in teaching conjoin the traditional universities’ great challenges of 1) little teaching, which makes every second precious for the teacher and students, and 2) the necessity of having students actively engaged and with you. At traditional universities, many teachers face a dilemma between the pressure to deliver high-quality research-based teaching and to cover too much material in too few sessions. Therefore, many have perfectly valid reservations about spending valuable teaching time on the less qualifying student activities. Thus it is important to be able to motivate each individual activity both specifically and generally. Rationale: The learning outcome of passive participation is low

On the other side of the dilemma is the fact that we now know that the learning outcome of passive participation is very low, because of how little the passive listener is generally able to recall (see chapter 4.1 The lecture).

245

Rationale: Competence is best acquired through own activity

We also find that the last years, or decades, even, of competence descriptions of all university teaching means that being able to, doing, and action are now considered the highest goal for graduates’ competences rather than (broad) knowledge and a comprehensive overview. The whole point of competence-based teaching is and has been to leave behind a presumed inefficient and drop-out-inducing traditional monologue-based university teaching, about which corporate recruitment panels have complained about low professional self-confidence and lacking performance competences in new graduated students. Rationale: Joint activity includes students in disciplinary discursive communities

Internationally, a change of focus has placed the student rather than the teacher in the spotlight (and since then a further change has included learning and teaching!). One advantage of activities is that the students listen to themselves and their fellow students speak (observe each other write, produce etc.), which improves the sense of academic and social belonging, the disciplinary discursive community and the individual students’ opportunity to participate in the academic conversation in class and personally take on the academic discourse. Inclusion in a disciplinary discursive community helps students stay in their dream programme. Rationale: Activities are a means to alignment between learning objectives and exam

Skills and competences are learning objectives that require students’ activity to be developed. If discussion is the explicit learning objective and the exam type includes discussion, the teaching should encourage students to discuss and prepare the student to master both content and form of the exam requirements. Rationale: The teacher and students need understanding and learning checks

Only by experiencing the students’ academic input in discussions and their academic writing will the teacher know whether the content, level and communication of his or her teaching is suited to this specific group. Therefore, it is important to spend time performing these checks, even just 1-minute concept definitions, or answering a couple of questions in quiz-form. 246

Both the teacher and students need understanding and learning checks, so that the latter can receive feedback on their study actions, and so that the teacher can adjust teaching according to the students. Rationale: Research-based teaching in which students take on the role of researchers requires more participant activity

If research-based teaching is interpreted as the student acting as a researcher (and not just as the communication of the teacher’s or other’s research results), it is important to teach students how to perform research and to encourage their inquiries, i.e., train and monitor the application of academic methods as exemplary learning experiences – and to prioritise and project this in the choice of who should participate in (parts of) the teaching. Rationale: The learning value of feedback is high, and participant activity enables feedback

Feedback is any form of message about the state of learning and products. When students participate in activities with peers, they give academic feedback purely by virtue of bringing other students’ subject knowledge to light. Feedback is central to targeted learning, and to students’ self-image as being in, or on their way into (or out of!) the field. (See the comprehensive empirical research into feedback on www.enhancingfeedback. ed.ac.uk). Activities provide feedback; activities with more students enable quantitatively more feedback. While learning can be achieved through a lecture, feedback cannot, or at least only poorly. Thus, there are many rationales and much research-based evidence for making activities part of every teaching session in alternation with the teacher’s presentations, summaries and directions. Exclusion of participant activities in teaching, or wholly delegating activities to instructors/ tutors and practice teachers due to lack of resources, is not expedient from a learning-based point of view. We encourage readers of this book to do local investigations of what activities are suitable in the given environment among colleagues and students – and in collaboration with colleagues devise, test and evaluate activities – and dare to develop without the guarantee of immediate success.

247

Resources Bligh, D.A. (2000). What’s the Use of Lectures? San Franscisco: Jossey-Bass. The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. – Bligh claims that ordinary session teaching is not particularly well-suited for anything but transmitting information. Bligh then uses the rest of the book to suggest specific pedagogical activities and more to improve the pedagogical potentials of sessions. You may want to skip the first chapters and go straight to the pedagogical directions. Mortiboys, A. (2010). How to Be an Effective Teacher in Higher Education. Answers to Lecturers’ Questions. Maidenhead: Open University Press. – Contains a wealth of briefly described activities. Faculty Metro (http://www.undervisermetro.au.dk). – Faculty Metro is a web resource for university teachers with the purpose of • Establishing practice- and knowledge sharing, inspiration, “shareand-steal” in university teaching and learning. • Developing and documenting learning-oriented teaching practices and student participation in teaching. • Making students full-time students. See in particular: Activities between sessions and Activities in sessions for a number of suggestions for activities in and between teaching.

The Faculty Metro’s contributors are teachers, heads of studies, educational consultants and others working with university teaching and learning. The Faculty Metro contains suggestions, materials, tools, examples, activity descriptions, demonstrations, guides for teachers, instructions for students, videos, literature references.

Literature Bean, J.C. (1996). Engaging Ideas. The Professor’s Guide to Integration Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Biggs, J. & C. Tang (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 3rd ed. Maidenhead: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

248

Herskin, B. (2001). Undervisningsteknik for universitetslærere. 2nd ed. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Ministry of Higher Education and Science. Kvalifikationsrammen for Livslang Læring. (http://www.iu.dk/nyheder/dokumentation/kvalifikationsrammer). Seen June 2011. Novak, J.D. (1991). Clarify with concept maps: A tool for students and teachers alike. The Science Teacher, 58(7): 45-49. For more on concept maps, see Novak’s website http://users.edte.utwente.nl/lanzing/cm_home.htm. Novak, J.D. (1993). How do we learn our lesson?: Taking students through the process. The Science Teacher, 60(3): 50-55. Race, P. (2007). The Lecturer’s Toolkit. A Practical Guide to Assessment Learning and Teaching. 3rd ed. London: Routledge. Race, P. & R. Pickford (2007). Making Teaching Work. “Teaching Smarter” in Post-Compulsory Education. London: Sage Publications. Rienecker, L. & P. Stray Jørgensen (2010). Forståelsestjek (http://hum.ku.dk/underviserportal/genveje/forstaelsesstjek/). Simkins, S. & M.H. Maier (eds.) (2010). Just in Time Teaching: Across the Disciplines, Across the Academy. Sterling: Stylus Publishing. Undervisermetroen. http//.www.undervisermetro.au.dk. von Müllen, R. (2011). At forberede forberedelsen. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 6(10). www.enhancingfeedback.ed.ac.uk.

249

250

4.5.2 Disciplinary activities LOTTE RIENECKER, RIKKE VON MÜLLEN, JENS DOLIN, PETER MUSAEUS AND ANNE METTE MØRCKE

In the following, representatives of the humanistic as well as social, natural and medical scientific faculties, respectively, offer suggestions for activities related to each field’s interpretation of discipline and learning.

Teaching activities in the Humanities Lotte Rienecker

The humanities span factual disciplines such as Archaeology and History to philosophical and other culturally oriented disciplines, and the activities in these disciplines range from skill-oriented to problem-solving – and in between are discussions, reflection, and interpretative activities. The shared foundation is the communicative and cultural competences that form the core of an education in the humanities. In recent years, many new activities for teaching the humanities have appeared, so many, in fact, that some see a danger in the sheer number of activities. The challenge is to choose activities on a reflected basis in relation to material, purpose, frames and student group as described on the previous pages. The activities we have heard both students and teachers refer to as particularly educational and memorable include: collective analysis, collective discussions, collective constructions of communicative and cultural products (e.g., wikis and electronic resources, conference and the like), or problem-solving within the humanities. Collective analysis. In collaboration with students, the teacher analyses a cultural product (text, image, music, case), so that the analysis becomes a learning experience, which demonstrates both how the teacher analyses and qualifies the students’ contribution to the analysis. It is important that students are given the opportunity to analyse and observe both teachers’ and peers’ analyses. When students start by observing the teacher’s analyses and then contribute to, conduct further

251

analysis of or analyse a different example, we speak of an exemplary learning sequence: “Tell me – show me – let me try for myself – give me feedback”. Analysis is the most frequently mentioned learning objective and is a central qualification in course descriptions in the humanities. Collective discussion/argumentation. A number of disciplines (particularly ones that are concerned with interpreting culture) attach great importance to the ability to argue from different positions. Likewise, students’ work on understanding and participating in discussions from their own positions and with knowledge of and respect for others’ positions is also ascribed great importance as a central academic qualification. In some subjects, discussion, both written and oral, is the distinct objective of education and of graduates’ academic identity as participants in public debates about culture, history, people and communication. In these cases, it is important that students are trained to discuss both orally and in writing, and not just to analyse theoretical discussions in writing. Collective construction. Students present their research or exam project at a conference for the class, or for students in the programme (sufficient uninterrupted time is required) just as at academic conferences with chairmen and academic questions and discussions. Serious presentations motivate and strengthen the class’ discursive community. Problem-solving including writing/communicating. The class creates a wiki of, say, the class’ empirical field, which is then published online (many teachers cite the actual receiver group as crucial to motivation). Or students write/produce a product (communication/presentation) for external target groups on commission. Use of class conferences and collectively written products in teaching require a genuine connection to students’ work between sessions. Activities such as holding a conference with student contributions and producing a class/faculty wiki, and activities that put the student in the role of teacher or presenter in general, are especially useful, because the majority of humanists will end up as teachers and communicators themselves; these activities provide professionally relevant competences. Teaching is always educational because teaching and presentation promote audience awareness. And it is especially important that humanists learn to speak and write to different audiences. Therefore, the teaching is particularly focused on activities that further communicative skills and competences.

252

Teaching activities in the Social Sciences Rikke von Müllen

Social science covers everything from philosophical and ethnological disciplines over communicative and clinical disciplines to computer-supported studies and mathematical disciplines. Therefore, all the activities mentioned in section 4.5.1 are relevant to social sciences as a whole. There are many reasons why a teacher in the social sciences should investigate and test activities other than the standard activities such as student presentations, group work and dialogue sessions in plenum. When teaching often takes place in large classes, where dialogue sessions only activate a minority of students, and because many other activities mentioned in this chapter could engage many more students in useful, independent work, it may seem surprising that teachers in the social sciences most often plan to use dialogues in plenum as their primary teaching activity. The possibilities are endless, so long as activities are carefully selected and designed to meet the objectives of teaching in an efficient way. One particularly important aspect of the social sciences is that we are not dealing with an exact science. It is therefore always a possibility to discuss or question results, conditions, angles, choices etc. Whereas problems or theories in the social sciences may sound somewhat simple when presented in general terms, they often become extremely complex when considered in an empirical context in which all the actors, interests, data and limitations of reality are at play. Activities that include data and the “real world” are therefore especially relevant to many social sciences as soon as the learning objectives’ aim for more than mere reproduction. Case work, which is elaborated in chapter 4.3, is an obvious choice as a social science-teaching activity. The more authentic cases you can make or find, the greater the likelihood that the student will approach the task with rigour and energy. If you can find a real organisation or person – be it a company, ministry, NGO, client, professional group or others, where students can help provide clarification, analysis or solutions, it is even more likely that they will do their best. Just like casework, debate exercises and other types of roleplay allow for inclusion of (a part of) reality’s infinite complexity, whether this involves law students conducting mock trials, political science students pretending to be negotiating parties, or sociology students, who have to defend their 253

method’s relevance for addressing a particular problem. Well-designed – and well-aligned – exercises in practical application do not just contribute to practical competences, but will also provide motivation to engage in theoretical work. The complexity of reality can be included in countless other ways. In all teaching of scientific methodology, collection, treatment and analysis of authentic and interesting data make for obvious student activities. In some disciplines, you can carry out (social) experiments with the students as subjects. And in some disciplines, students’ experiences, preferences or networks can be included as data or exemplification. When many of these activities have to accommodate hundreds of students, the teacher may easily become dispirited and resort to one-way communication. However, except for dialogue in plenum, most activities can, with a little additional preparation, be adapted to a large number of students; and then you can rejoice in the fact that the good design will benefit many.

Teaching activities in the Natural Sciences Jens Dolin

The natural sciences encompass many different disciplines, which, however, share a number of features. Nature is the object of research for all the disciplines, and they are all originally empirical, i.e., as a rule they have attempted to deduce information about nature through a continuous development of measuring methods. At the same time, a comprehensive theoretical apparatus has been developed to systematise the knowledge found, and rules have been established for verification. Nature’s enormous complexity is reduced, and laws of nature are trusted, causalities between variables have been identified, and often these are then expressed mathematically. One characteristic of the natural sciences is that the findings are typically presented in many different forms, such as graphs, tables/ charts, diagrams and formulas. Therefore, it is important that students become familiar with these forms. The practical work is a central part of the disciplines. This covers a lot of activities from field- to lab work, and takes on many different guises. The relevance and contents of practical work are continuously discussed, and the formalised exercises, in which students follow set procedures and fill out pre-printed tables, are particularly criticised. In all disciplines, work is done to develop more inquiry-oriented approaches with a higher 254

degree of freedom. It is important – and difficult – to connect practical work with the underlying theory so that practice does not become “hands on – mind off”. IT is used extensively in the natural sciences, and mastery of a broad range of software is necessary. Much effort is put into allowing independent work to replace routine tasks, so that teaching sessions are reserved for dialogue and debate – the so-called flipped classroom. One example is using virtual labs, where students can practice their lab skills so they are able to work more inquiringly when they enter the real labs. The practical work is often combined with modelling. Students must understand, use and develop models of different phenomena and situations, often by means of advanced programmes. Concept construction e.g., by means of concept maps. The natural sciences are concept heavy, and many consider it necessary to know the fundamental concepts before they find themselves able to work with more complex (and perhaps more motivating) problems. The concepts are often also abstract and far from every-day life – mastery of formulas and problem solving takes up much space. Increased project work and a more competence-based approach is beginning to change this. Construction of concept maps is an efficient way of learning concepts. Training in natural scientific argumentation. In recent years, the natural sciences has enjoyed a growing realisation that natural scientific knowledge has also arisen in dialogical contexts, where shared understanding has been established through dialogical processes. Therefore, more and more emphasis is placed on argumentation in natural science teaching in recognition that all knowledge becomes antiquated, but that being able to develop new knowledge and being critical of existing knowledge is the key to learn the natural scientific procedures and processes as well as natural scientific practice.

Teaching activities in the Medical Sciences Peter Musaeus and Anne Mette Mørcke

The landscape of medical education is multifarious, and in Denmark it includes: Biomechanics (chiropractic), pharmacy, public health science, human biology, physical education, medicine (medical science), molecular medicine, health technology, odontology (dentistry) as well as a number of MA programmes in health care, humanistic health research, health technology, informatics and health administration. The academic foun255

dation of these educations ranges wide from primary natural science (molecular medicine, human biology and odontology) to hybrids of natural science and social science (public health), technology (health technology) and medicine, which, in addition to its roots in biomedicine, draws on both the humanities and social sciences. However, one common feature of several health scientific programmes is their strong focus on application and practice: They give access to – and the field’s practitioners become guardians of – a relatively well-defined disciplinary community of practising health practitioners in health promotion, prevention and treatment. Even though the disciplinary range in health educations is too vast for us to formulate one general disciplinary didactics, we will try to elaborate on the above. Participation in practice

Health students are expected to learn to show a professional conduct, where both techno-disciplinary, communicative and ethical consideration of peoples’ health go hand in hand with institutional standards. Research in situated learning (see chapter 2.1) is increasingly used in health research to explain professional learning: That students’ knowledge acquisition cannot be separated from identity transformation, because both learning and identity involve changing relations between students, profession, community, and tools. This requires a learning context where the student may observe, act under competent supervision and perform tasks independently in authentic health environments in order to become co-creators of professional mindsets, language and values (Bleakly 2011). The point is that a focus on practice changes both professional identity and professional knowledge – within the field, the teacher can apply formal learning resources such as role models, mentors, peer-to-peer teaching, facilitated collegial group supervision (Steinert 2010) and conscious/ reflective framing of problem-solving (Branch 2010). Furthermore, clinical teachers can both make use of learning plans, logbooks and supervision to individually support the student’s academic and personal learning (Dornan 2007), and increase their reflection and meta-learning of their positive and negative experiences in clinical learning situations. Problem- and case-based learning

The medical educations aims to produce students, who can use natural 256

scientific principles, acquire – and critically evaluate – knowledge, analyse and solve problems as well as make decisions. In addition to this, the field has incorporated and developed problem-based learning (PBL) and casebased learning (CBL). 40 years of research has demonstrated that PBL – a group-based method of teaching that makes use of mentors and project teaching – make students self-directing, cooperative, critical and studious learners (Sefton 2005). However, in comparison to case teaching, PBL is relatively costly and requires education of tutors etc., and this is one of the reasons why PBL has not been fully implemented in Danish health education. Practical experience, work experience and professional training

Health educations with practical experience typically trains and tests students’ portfolios and clinical logbooks, but computer-based simulators and skill labs (for example, with dummy patients and hospital beds) have also begun to gain ground in Denmark. According to Boursicot and Roberts (2006), health education suffers internationally – and we believe this also applies in Denmark – because objective standards for testing of both technical and non-technical competences such as teamwork and communication are only rarely applied.

Literature Bleakly, A., J. Bligh & J. Browne (2011). Medical Education for the Future. New York: Springer Science. Boursicot, K. & T. Roberts (2006). Setting standards in a professional higher education course: defining the concept of the minimally competent student in performance-based assessment at the level of graduation from medical school. Higher Education Quarterly, 60: 74-90. Branch, W.T. (2010). The road to professionalism: Reflective practice and reflective learning. Patient Education and Counselling, 80: 327-332. Dornan, T., H. Boshuizen, N. King et al. (2007). Medical Education, 41: 84-91. Newble, D. (2004) Techniques for measuring clinical competence: objective structured clinical examinations. Medical Education, 38: 199-204. Sefton, A. (2005). Problem-based learning. In: Dent, J.A. & R.M. Harden (ed.). A Practical Guide for Medical Teachers. New York: Elsevier. Srinivasan, M., M. Wilkes, F. Stevenson et al. (2007). Comparing problem-based

257

learning with case-based learning: Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions. Academic Medicine, 82: 74-82. Steinert, Y., J.D. Boudreau, M. Boillat et al. (2010). The Osler Fellowship: An apprenticeship for medical educators. Academic Medicine, 85: 1242-1249.

258

4.6.1 Feedback LOTTE RIENECKER AND JESPER BRUUN

What is feedback? This chapter concerns feedback aimed to make students learn. Feedback situations are part of the on-going learning process. Feedback theorists (Hattie & Temperly 2007) define feedback as “information provided by an agent (teacher, peer, book, parent, self, experience) regarding aspects of one’s performance or understanding”. We call students’ performances or expressions of understanding ‘products’. Learning-oriented feedback can thus be understood as a reaction to a student’s product with the purpose of increasing learning. The range of products is broad. A product can be a simple mathematical calculation, a spoken sentence or an action. It can be a short project in sociology, a mathematical proof or a dissertation in English. The product is interesting, because it is an expression of what the student can demonstrate at a given time. 1. STUDENTS’ PRIOR EXPERIENCES OF ASSESSMENTS

6. FEED-FORWARD

IN THE SUBJECT/IN THE UNIT

2. PRELIMINARY GUIDANCE

feed-forward into next assignment/ assessment

i.e. DEPLOYMENT OF ENHANCED UNDERSTANDING AND/OR SKILLS IN SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENTS

ABOUT EXPECTATIONS & REQUIREMENTS

embark on assignment

5. SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPORT

3. ONGOING CLARIFICATION

review feedback

4. FEEDBACK ON PERFORMANCE/ ACHIEVEMENT

Figure 1. Feedback loop (Hounsell et al. 2008).

OF EXPECTATIONS

submit assignment

259

Feedback can come from many sources, e.g., another student, a teacher, or digitally. In this chapter, we will discuss learning-oriented feedback between students-teacher, students-students (peer), and student-computer (automated feedback). The English feedback researchers Hounsell et al. call the process “Instruction in papers – supervision – feedback – revision – feedback” a “feedback loop”. Each part of the feedback loop influences the learning process. The figure shows that feedback is – or should be – embedded in a context of experience, information, reading material, planning, teaching, supervision, other students, librarians, exams etc., i.e., feedback is part of a comprehensive study context, and for this reason alone, feedback has many purposes and forms.

Definitions In this chapter we write about • Formative feedback: Forward-looking reactions, both to products in the ma­k ing and to finished products. • Summative feedback: A retrospective reaction to finished presentations. • Analytic feedback: Criteria-based and divided in (often pre-determined) feedback dimensions. Analytic feedback is the counterpoint to holistic feedback, which is feedback based on a comprehensive impression of the whole, i.e., not based on specific criteria.

Pedagogical challenges Insufficient time for feedback

In recent years, feedback has been hailed as one of the most crucial sources for learning. Stakeholders everywhere ask for feedback to be given greater priority among the teachers’ tasks – this includes students, teachers, pedagogical researchers and study administrators. The largest ever Danish investigation of study conditions, Aarhus University’s Study Environment Survey (2011), in which 11,401 students from a number of faculties were asked about teaching and learning, found that many students would prefer more feedback. In its recommendations, the survey concluded that “academic supervision and teachers’ feedback on students’ academic performance could be improved. […] management and heads of studies ought to consider whether it is possible to further prioritise this part of education, 260

and whether use of organised peer-feedback and e-learning activities can release extra resources for feedback.” (Jensen 2011: 15, our translation) Possibly the most challenging pedagogical task is to give students sufficient feedback, since only rarely are teachers allotted time for prolonged feedback or extra written assignments or portfolios. Time is a genuine problem. It takes time to prepare and organise feedback, especially if personal feedback is given to each student on the course. We do not advocate that anyone should spend more time on feedback than they are paid to do. Within this framework, you must delegate your time, and it may only be possible to give collective feedback, master class feedback on single examples, or feedback on short exemplary extracts. In these cases, a little collective and exemplary feedback is better than none at all. Feedback that is not used

However, many supervisors and teachers surprisingly enough complain that the feedback they work hard to provide is often apparently ignored. In connection with personal feedback, some supervisors find that few students attend advertised feedback consultations, and that written assignments are handed in unchanged after exhaustive supervisor feedback. In online activities, teachers who spend much time designing online sessions may find that students skip the feedback section after completing the assignment, and thus a great learning opportunity is lost, and the teacher has wasted his or her time. Non-prioritised feedback

Traditionally, feedback on drafts of papers and dissertations (based on a large number of supervision courses in many fields and faculties in Denmark, where we have discussed examples of supervisors’ written feedback) is produced by the supervisor using comments in a text editor to comment a paper, line by line. The feedback is delivered on the basis of countless criteria, which the students have no detailed knowledge of, a mixture of large and small issues and many minor corrections. Rarely will there be an introductory or concluding global comment or an accompanying email. Non-prioritised, continuous, line-by-line comments are the easiest and perhaps least time-consuming to write. However if feedback does not appear prioritised and structured to the student, the supervisor is acting more like an editor than (s)he is fulfilling a pedagogical function. 261

Is the feedback useful?

It is a pedagogical challenge to give useful, applicable feedback, which stimulates more learning and producing better work. It is not easy to know what applicable learning-oriented feedback is, and when it should come from the teacher, from other students or from a computer – and it calls for negotiation between feedback-givers and receivers, or that learning is evident from (revised) products after the feedback.. Empirical research into feedback has shown that much feedback is not picked up by the student at all. This can be due to a number of reasons, for example that the student does not understand that the feedback is given too late, or because it threatens the student’s self-esteem. However, it may also be that the students fail to see the connection between the feedback and explicit criteria or learning objectives, or that the feedback is not considered important and prioritised, and therefore appears random. Much feedback is not designed to lead to learning. The pedagogical challenges of giving learning-oriented feedback are illustrated as stars in figure 2: 1. STUDENTS’ PRIOR EXPERIENCES OF ASSESSMENTS

6. FEED FORWARD

feed-forward til next assignment/ assessment

little/no recent experience of the task set

2. PRELIMINARY GUIDANCE

guidance misundenstood unfamiliar task – insufficient guidance

feedback comes too late to feed-forward

5. SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPORT

feedback unconstructive

embark on assignment

inadequate grasp of the assessment criteria

3. ONGOING CLARIFICATION

feedback dwells on shortcomings & demotivates

review feedback feedback absent or too sparse

little access to ongoing advice

feedback inconsistent

fedback lacks transparency

4. FEEDBACK ON PERFORMANCE/ ACHIEVEMENT

submit assignment

reluctance to buttonhole tutors

Figure 2. Challenges in relation to feedback (Hounsell et al. 2008).

262

unfamiliar task – no opportunities for practise

Pedagogical recommendations As a teacher and supervisor you must consider • What you should give feedback on and how much to give. • What your feedback criteria should be. • How the feedback criteria must be conveyed, constructed, or negotiated – and by whom (teacher, supervisor, students, other people in the field, external examiners). • Who should give feedback? Teachers and supervisors must consider all feedback as part of the entire study context in which the feedback is given: the programme’s objectives and self-understanding, and the criteria for good studying as described in the curriculum and which are used for assessment. Plan feedback

Below is a table (figure 3) for planning feedback in connection with a course. We suggest that you, in your semester planning, include a plan for which kinds of feedback, apart from the exam, the course teaching will offer. You can also organise peer-feedback. You can download the table here: samfundslitteratur.dk/utl. Study performances for which you provide feedback

Who is the receiver/ giver of feedback

How

Feedback criteria

• What the curriculum specifies that students must know/be able to. • Written papers/assignments. • Oral presentations, group- or individual presentations. • Oral and written contributions to discussions. • Exercises, quizzes, tests. • Study work in general, processes.

• Everyone/selected individuals/volunteers/exemplary. • Teachers à students. • Students à students (peer). • Automated, online. • Users, consumers, internship site etc.

• With/without marks. • Oral/written/dialogue. • On the course platform, via email. • Formatted, free text. • Public/private. • Master class (i.e., feedback on examples in plenum).

• Academic, content-related. • Scientific. • The curriculum’s objectives. • Form/presentation, linguistic. • Criteria in a progression. • Special criteria.

Course 1. Course 2. Course 3.

Figure 3. Feedback form for the semester’s types of feedback.

263

The point of the form is to provide the teacher an overview of dimensions and plans.

Feedback on written and oral student performances In the following, we will discuss the kind of feedback given to students in connection with study work that is assessed according to qualitative criteria (i.e., not scored, counted etc.). We primarily discuss feedback of written work of any length, and of oral presentations and other study presentations – products that the teacher observes, i.e., feedback that requires that several criteria are in play. The best way to proceed depends on the teacher’s purpose for the entire course’s context, practical possibilities and students’ opportunities for utilising the feedback: There is no “good feedback” or “bad feedback” in an absolute sense. However, all aspects of feedback represent pedagogical choices. The students who receive the feedback need to know the individual teacher’s rules, as these can differ from teacher to teacher. Students must thus be prepared, preferably through written information from each teacher: “This is how I do it!” – regardless of whether content/form is negotiable or not. See the section on supervisor’s memorandums of understanding, chapter 5.1, p. 332ff. I.e., the criteria and the form of feedback must be known by the students before they start the work they will receive feedback on. If students understand the framework, it is easier for them to decide what type of feedback they would like on their products. You can, for example, ask students to accompany all text for feedback with an email about what in particular they would like your feedback on. In this way, the individual student is responsible for the feedback (s)he gets. Before feedback

Time frame: Work on the basis of your time frame. How much time can or will you use on formative and summative feedback for the entire class or the individual students? Do you want to give each student the same amount of feedback, or will you differentiate your feedback? Will you or peers give feedback several times or only once on the same product? Will you expand on the way you give feedback?

264

Purpose: Define the purpose of feedback. Why is feedback given in this class? To correct academic content? To encourage further academic reflection, discussion and dialogue? To motivate and keep students in the programme? To teach them the criteria on which they are assessed in the exam? To substantiate and predict marks? So students can learn from giving feedback? These purposes will – if they stand alone – give rise to extremely different feedback. Objective: Determine the objective of all feedback. What must the student understand, do, research, revise, or train after the feedback? Prioritise some or a few realistic objectives for all prepared feedback. Criteria: Familiarise your students with the criteria. Are the criteria described in the course description, are they directly connected to the course’s learning objectives or are there also other criteria at play? Criteria are related to genre. Therefore, there are different criteria for feedback on .

• Students’ homework assignments from session to session. • Contributions to the class’ digital course space. • Communicative products, posters etc. • Design, constructions, products for teaching/assessment. • Research papers (proposals). • Oral presentations in class. The criteria on which you actually assess students’ work are interesting – if they have to be interpreted and explained in relation to the curriculum. You must be able to justify the mark you give on the basis of your summative and eventually your formative feedback, and therefore your formulations must correspond to the mark given – if not, the student may complain. Formatively, students will also appreciate being able to make out their performance level on the basis of the teacher’s feedback. However, you can never guarantee a particular result, and therefore you must always make certain reservations in case the assessment turns out differently. If criteria are not known by the feedback recipients, the feedback may seem idiosyncratic and illegitimate. Communication of feedback criteria: The question of how teachers can make feedback criteria known to the recipients is also a pedagogical question. You can:

265

• Upload a list of criteria to the course space. • Let students define and qualify criteria for e.g., oral presentations which they use to give each other feedback. • Negotiate and develop rather than dictate (some) criteria. • Indicate which types of feedback comments that are “need to know” or “nice to know”. Often, correcting comments about formalities, terminology, facts, numbers, inconsistencies and logical fallacies are indisputable – however, it is not always clear to the recipient which are inevitable corrections and which are “a matter of taste” in regards to style and choice of angle. Below is a feedback form (figure 4). It is an example of analytic feedback, where you react to products in a form so that the criteria are clearly listed and met one by one. The assignment’s structure. Selection, structure and weighting of materials Understanding of the material: Independence (analytical depth, good points, originality) Source treatment. References. Choice of sources. Literature lists. Use of quotes. Consistency Detailed evaluations of academic precision, mastery of language, words and sentences, content, presentation: Summary

Strengths: • ------------------------------------------------• ------------------------------------------------… Weaknesses: • ------------------------------------------------• ------------------------------------------------… My mark:

External examiner’s mark:

Result:

Figure 4. Extract of a feedback form for first-year papers on a programme in the humanities (Voss 2012). The full form can be downloaded here: http://undervisermetro.au.dk/en/feedback/types-of-feedback/feedback-on-written-exercises/.

Form: Determine how you want to give feedback – or arrange peer-feedback. Should it be oral or written? Long or short? Three comments or thirty? Publicly for the class or privately one-on-one? Individualised or formatted, so that all participants receive reactions in the same template?

266

Teacher-student or peer-to-peer? On the course platform? As class instruction with or without examples? Roles and relationships: Feedback contributes to the manifestation of teacher-students and students-students roles and relationships. How would you like to configure your students’ roles through the course’s feedback practice? Can/should students administer the feedback criteria themselves? Can they control the content and form of feedback? How (a) symmetrical a relationship between feedback giver and feedback receiver would you like to establish? Negotiate with your students how they will be involved in the feedback itself. If feedback is oral, the feedback recipient needs to know what his or her role is while the feedback is being given. To enter into dialogue? To take notes and summarise, make an action plan? Qualify the feedback as understandable and useful? Offer own feedback first? Feedback itself: Give prioritised, top-down and criteria-based feedback. Start with the most important on the basis of what is most important for developing and demonstrating competence, and end with the least important. In relation to giving marks, you should consider what students would have to change before you would give them a higher mark. In independent assignments the most important, the deciding factor, is the text’s content and guiding principles: research question, methods, theories, data etc. Then follows documentation, structure, single arguments etc. Language and details in the text come last and are least important for the mark given. Move from global to local comments and discussion themes, from large to small. The first feedback you provide makes the greatest impression and sets the tone. You should therefore: • Prioritise feedback according to your most important comments, especially for smaller papers and first-year students. • Praise the good, then note what can and should be improved, end with useful, formative comments and suggestions, or with a summation of the whole. What should you be able to? Where are you going? How are you doing? What can you do in the future? • Praise locally, not as a preliminary approval. Say or write: I think this passage is good because … • If you have to, give feedback on only part of the material, or give fewer feedback comments, but preferably provide your reasons and criteria.

267

Feedback on poor products

Most teachers eventually have to evaluate products that do not live up to the assignment requirements. When this happens, the task is to give feedback that both informs the student that the product is not good enough, and motivates the student to do better. This gives the greatest chance of students delivering a product that lives up to the requirements. Students will generally react most productively to feedback that does not threaten their self-esteem (Hattie & Timperley 2007). Even for students approaching the end of their studies, self-esteem can be a very real problem (Ferguson 2011). There are different ways to provide feedback on poor performances. We recommend formulations such as: “You should do…”, rather than “You haven’t done…”. According to your assessment of what your student needs, you may want to: • Explain why the product cannot be accepted in its current form. What is missing? Focus on specific things the student must do so the product becomes good enough. • Find out what the student has done in connection with constructing the product and why. Focus on which processes must be changed for the product to become good enough. • Find out what the student has done to check whether the product is good enough. Offer tips for how the student can check whether the product or parts of the product are good enough. These three steps must be seen as a progression towards students that are capable of learning new material independently. A student is not necessarily ready to check his or her own products in the given field, but learning-oriented feedback should have the independent student as the end goal. After feedback

Do ask for a short evaluation of which part of the feedback the recipient has proceeded with, and how. This corresponds to the way researchers feedback on their article revisions. Many supervisors ask for short decision summaries of thesis and other larger project supervisions. Some meta-communicate about feedback “Do we do it in a way so that my

268

feedback is useful to you?” Not to force a response from the recipients, because it is always the feedback recipient’s privilege to determine whether (s)he wishes to take other’s reactions and suggestions on board, but if you do not receive feedback on your feedback, it is like giving feedback in a vacuum, and you can easily come to doubt whether you spend your time constructively. If you have set goals for your feedback, you can, by asking for feedback on your feedback, find out whether you reached your goals (see chapter 5.1 about Process management and communication). Peer-feedback

Instruct your students in the content, criteria, form and tone of feedback and the roles of the feedback giver and recipient. As fellow students are not teachers or examiners, they must not assume the role of assessor. They can give feedback with a different instruction, i.e., they can ask and suggest, but not criticise. It may prove necessary to renegotiate the feedback criteria several times throughout the process. A feedback game (particularly useful for first-year students) can be downloaded for free from (Wirenfeld Jensen 2011, AU http://tdm.au.dk/ en/resources/text-feedback-game). It is used in many programmes at AU to familiarise students with peer-feedback (see Resources below). We recommend that you instruct and also observe at least some rounds of feedback in your class, and comment on the feedback and correct when needed. You should also articulate how the feedback must be utilised by the recipient. Feedback is challenging for the recipient, and both giving and receiving feedback has to be learned.

Automated feedback in an online environment – quizzes and academic games When a piece of software is used to give learning-oriented feedback to a student, it usually has to be connected to a certain answer or a certain sequence of answers. In different subjects and fields, you can connect certain answers to certain ways of thinking. The idea is that it can help students know how a given answer would normally be interpreted within the disciplinary frame in which the question was asked. This section is a manual for finding questions, answers and feedback that fit together.

269

We have opted for the quiz because of the abundance of tools for making quizzes. Below is one model of how you can construct an online-quiz with meaningful feedback for students: What the student experiences Quiz assignments Learning objectives

Automatic feedback

Options

Learning activities

Dialogue

Students’ actions

Imagined feedback

What the teacher designs

Figure 5. A schematic illustration of how you can design an online quiz.

As a rule, you must go through the following steps when making a quiz: Learning objectives and learning activities. Define the quiz’s learning objectives and the activities students must carry out to meet the learning objectives. In the end, learning objectives will dictate which criteria you base your feedback on, and you must give feedback on the results of the activities. Two guiding questions are: Which learning objectives must the quiz support? Which activities support these objectives? Questions and answer format. Set an assignment that encourages students to do relevant learning activities. The format for responses can encourage different actions from the person answering. You must consider whether you wish to set a multiple-choice assignment, whether students can answer using words, sentences or numbers, or whether to include interactive elements in the response. (See Resources below for an introduction to different options). Two guiding questions: Which quiz assignments (and formulation) will encourage the learning activities you want? How are students to use the quiz? Options and feedback. Map out possible options. Students’ work with the learning activity must result in an answer to your question. When you design options that are to be used to automatically select feedback, it is your task to predict actions/mind-sets on the basis of a specific answer. For each option, write feedback that can be used by a student to reach the learning objectives. This can lead to you connecting feedback to both 270

right answers, wrong answers, and answers where the student has gotten stuck. We recommend formulating feedback with humility. You should write: “It looks like you have done… You would normally interpret this as… and this should result in…” rather than: “You have made these mistakes”. The guiding questions are here: Which types of answers would you receive if you set a more open assignment (e.g., not as an online quiz)? How will you give feedback to students who handed in responses of the type xx? Dialogue. It takes time to find good “wrong” options and create meaningful automated feedback for these. We suggest using students’ experience with the quiz and colleagues’ ideas and research in teaching within your field to change the quiz. Never consider the quiz a finished product, but rather as a dynamic tool you can use in your teaching. The task is to go back to the guiding questions and see whether your answers still hold up, or whether you need to change the purpose, activities, formulations, formats, options and feedback. Quizzes in teaching

When you have a version of the quiz, you must determine how you will use answers and feedback in teaching later on. You can view students’ answers to the quiz as a form of collective feedback to yourself. You may, for example, use the answers to make students argue for and against answers, without having to provide them with the right answer. Alternatively, you can assess whether you must address certain understandings in your later teaching. The student will only see the quiz assignments, answer formats, options and feedback the teacher designs. That design is underpinned by the teacher’s interpretation of the student’s actions, and of which feedback that promotes the fulfilment of the learning objectives. Underlying the quiz are learning objectives and activities that must support the learning outcomes. Finally, the quiz can be used actively in teaching and be changed throughout to fit the students’ and teachers’ needs. This requires dialogue between teacher and students, and can in some cases become a shared project for a teacher and a class of students. One of the advantages of automated feedback is that the teacher can target his personal feedback and help to students. A quiz can also be a way of giving someone feedback in teaching, when feedback is not scheduled or planned. In addition to the economics of scale, meaningful automated 271

feedback can also tell students that giving the wrong answer does not mean they are ignorant. There may be an underlying mind-set which the teacher is aware of and is prepared to change. You can even use research to help identify options and target feedback. It is possible to define which mind-set an option represents and the good and bad things about this mind-set. However, there are also disadvantages, and it is difficult to imagine that automated feedback can completely replace a teacher’s good advice and supervision. The danger of automated feedback is that you cannot frame the thought processes and actions you want students to address. Therefore it is important to use the quiz actively in teaching and be prepared to make changes. Example: Quizzes in History at Aarhus University. The History programme at AU has produced, and its students have authored, the first online game about Danish history, aimed primarily at primary school pupils. Following this, teachers, the head of studies and a number of students have together produced a game for students for revision to train historical knowledge and to be played during student bar nights. The games and the creators’ instructions for asking good quiz questions can be found at: http://undervisermetro.au.dk/en/teaching/activities-between-sessions/academic-quiz.

Experiment with feedback We recommend experimenting with feedback. You can, for example, experiment in class or in supervision where you change criteria, form and feedback givers from session to session. Obvious pedagogical experiments include: • To limit feedback to praise and nothing else. • To feedback on a very short, exemplary extract. • To limit feedback to a question, a comment of praise and a criticism or to three useful suggestions. • To ask the student to write his or her own feedback and use it as a starting point in supervision and revision. • To make and use a criterion-based feedback table on the basis of the curriculum (analytic, aligned feedback – known as a scoring rubric).

272

• To swap with a colleague and give feedback to each others’ students (this will require you to focus more on form, which is educational). • To arrange peer-feedback in and between sessions. • To give feedback in an audio file and then in oral dialogue (example available at the Faculty Metro). • To make a quiz – or get students to set the quiz questions in or between sessions. There are many pedagogical ways to experiment with feedback and many occasions to test them out in practice. Rationales behind the pedagogical recommendations in feedback research

Since the 1980’s, research in feedback on students’ work at universities has become comprehensive and has been predominantly empirical and Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian. No specifically Danish research on feedback has been published so far. The typical research design has been to ask students exactly which feedback elements “were useful to them” or which elements they have “acted/revised on the basis of”. In the following, we refer to meta-studies of feedback research (Burke & Pieterick 2010, Dysthe 2009, Hattie & Timperley 2007) and highlight some of the notable results with pedagogical perspectives. The first wave of empirical articles on feedback was critical of the type of feedback that was written in the margin of assignments (Burke & Pieterick 2010). The answers from students suggested that much (in some programmes up to a third) of the feedback was not used at all, because it was esoteric, incomprehensible or illegible. Thus, the message was that much of the vast amount of resources spent in education on reading and giving feedback on drafts was wasted. A big effort was made, but too much text was given sloppy rather than focused and criteria-based feedback. Studies also showed that much feedback that is given at the same time as assignment marks (summative) is not read by students – at this point it is too late for the student to use the feedback for the exam assignment in question – while formative feedback which can still be included for revision is read and used to a much greater extent. Thus, the results of feedback research in the USA contributed to the process-oriented writing pedagogy in upper secondary education, which Scandinavia soon adopt-

273

ed. The process-oriented writing pedagogy entails feedback on drafts, as well as feedback between peers. Many educational institutions and individuals changed their supervision and correction practice, so that the resources are moved from summative to formative feedback. In this way the likelihood of learning from feedback is increased. The important thing to take from this research is: Better a little carefully thought-out and prioritised feedback than loads of comments that are not presented in any particular order. Therefore, it has now almost become a dogma of articles about feedback that it should be limited and prioritised, expressed as for example: “What are the three most important things that could improve your work?” But this dogma is refuted by the fact that many cultures, perhaps especially the ‘hard’ sciences, tend to correct all mistakes in a student’s text at all academic levels – for it will not do if a PhD in medicine has misunderstood facts. Research into the importance of feedback

More recent research has established the significance of feedback for students’ learning. In the UK, large-scale national studies of students’ wants in relation to feedback have shown that feedback must: • Be formative, learning-oriented. • Be continuous. • Be applied in a timely fashion for the results to be useful. • Be based on explicit criteria. • Be constructive and concrete, clear and explicit. • Include self-assessment and peer-feedback. • Be flexible and adapted to the recipient’s needs. (Based on data from 3,000 students in the UK. Porter 2009, from Burke & Pieterick 2010: 82-83). Studies of students’ experience of teaching quality are frequently carried out in the UK, and these quality studies have brought into focus the strong student desire for universities to prioritise feedback, as well as the fact that studies from the past decades have shown that many students have been dissatisfied with both the amount and quality of feedback in their first years of study. If feedback is to have an effect on drop-out rates, it cannot be (too) disqualifying in relation to the individual students’ prerequisites or learning. Studies always show that feedback is significant whether it is pedagog274

ically designed or not. However, many teachers and supervisors seem to doubt whether their time is well spent on feedback, especially on drafts of papers and theses. In a questionnaire handed out throughout 2011 about feedback on MA thesis drafts in supervision, Rienecker, Stray and Skov asked 238 students in the humanities at the University of Copenhagen about the feedback they received from their supervisor on their drafts for their thesis. How important was the feedback you received on your thesis? Respondents

Percentage

Very important

160

67.2 %

Somewhat important

67

28.2 %

Less important

10

4.2 %

Insignificant/meaningless

1

0.4 %

Total

238

100.0 %

How much did you revise your thesis as a consequence of your supervisor’s feedback? Respondents

Percentage

Very much

102

43.0 %

Much

104

43.9 %

Not much

22

9.3 %

Very little

9

3.8 %

Total

237

100.0 %

Much is thus changed in thesis drafts as a result of feedback. It is possible that the students who have not revised their drafts as thoroughly following feedback did not receive feedback that suggested changes. This questionnaire indicates that formative feedback is in fact used.

Peer-feedback research Only by applying criteria actively do we learn them. Studies and experiments in university teaching and learning indicate that feedback teaches the giver more than the recipient. Learning is facilitated by the teacher or 275

another representative of the institution initiating peer-feedback and defining criteria. These can be negotiated and discussed with students. One interesting pedagogical design and accompanying research was developed by the Americans Cho and Schunn in the form of an essay feedback software in which students are given essay feedback by five other students, a teacher and a writing consultant, without knowing which feedback is given by whom. The results from comprehensive empirical studies of learning a subject as well as written communication through long-term use of the programme where marks are also given for “useful feedback” for peers (while 20 % of the mark is given for the quality of the peer-feedback), have shown that this form of analytical, criteria-based, computer-assisted feedback provides a steep learning curve in relation to being able to apply essay writing criteria on one’s own and others’ essays. In an analysis of 1,400 feedback comments, the researchers found that students’, teachers’ and writing consultants’ comments were very similar, except for one crucial difference: students give more praise than teachers do. Peer-feedback is emphasised as being more sympathetic, encouraging, applicable and specifically helpful than teacher feedback. In the concluding comments to the studies, the researchers discuss the implications for university teachers of the fact that students often appreciate peer feedback more than supervisor feedback because peers give more praise: […] there is evidence that students strongly appreciate praise. For example, Cho et al. (2006) found that students were significantly more likely to rate the feedback that they received as helpful if some praise was included in the comments. This appreciation of praise by students may thus be the best explanation why they are especially likely to include praise when they provide feedback to their peers. 4.3 Implications for practice […] Disciplinary instructors […] are much less likely than those of writing instructors to propose and explain solutions. Therefore, faculty development workshops should suggest to faculty that they spend a greater amount of attention to solutions, as well as perhaps more use of praise. (Cho & Schunn 2009: 143)

While faculty, according to Cho and Schunn’s year-long, comprehensive empirical studies, often have to learn to praise and provide instructive, 276

solution-oriented feedback, the challenge for peers is to be able to give feedback on the content and reach a suitable academic level, from detailed comments to the texts’ and studies’ general levels. If you are not used to giving feedback, begin with isolated comments about language and formalities, as this is safe ground in terms of validity. Feedback must be learned, and moreover constantly re-contextualised to the people involved in feedback – both givers and recipients. It is not enough to arrange peer-feedback, it must also be directed, framed and supervised.

Online feedback research The model for designing an online quiz (figure 5, p. 270) builds on a certain view of online feedback. The student is seen as part of a course where physical presence is required at least some of the time. The question is how students use online feedback in a course in which they also have physical access to the teacher/supervisor and other students, and also what they gain from online feedback. This section presents rationales behind the model and relates them to research in the area. In the report Computerassisteret Undervisning [Computer-assisted teaching] (Bruun & Holm 2009), we find several examples of the usefulness of online natural- and medical science quizzes in different university contexts. Often, there are no significant differences between normal teaching and pure online feedback in terms of right and wrong. Naturally there are exceptions. If the teacher is more involved in feedback, students gain more from it. Using an online system can have a negative effect on students’ outcome compared to using pen and paper. This may be because students are not used to the online format, which will then obstruct actual learning. Therefore, the teacher should have a strategy for familiarising students with the specific online-format framing the exercise. In relation to the outlined model for quiz design (figure 5), this means that you must focus on how the quiz is presented to students. This also means that it is important to engage in dialogue during and after the quiz. Some programmes have focused on the way different types of students use the automated feedback. Pascarella & Falls (2004) studied an introductory physics course in the United States, and on the basis of analyses of video recordings, they divided students into online-guessers and thinkers and paper-guessers and thinkers. 277

In a web assignment, an online-thinker works in depth until the result is typed into the space provided. If the result is correct, the online thinker will immediately move on to the next task. If the result is incorrect, they will attempt to change their strategy. A paper-thinker will not move on to the next task immediately, but rather try to evaluate the answer’s validity. In contrast, an online-guesser will use a surface strategy (see chapter 1.2, p. 45) to select a formula that looks right. If the answer is wrong, the guesser will be informed of this and can either continue using surface strategies or try to change his or her learning strategy. Through an iterative design and through dialogue with students, the teacher can use online quizzes to get students to reroute their learning strategy. However, the teacher should at the same time plan the learning situation so that as many students as possible evaluate themselves the way paper thinkers do. These thoughts are the basis of the lower part of figure 5 about the teacher’s design. One of the great strengths of online automated feedback is that it can save time for the feedback giver (Bruun & Holm 2009). If the student can gain meaningful feedback on typical answers from a computer, the teacher does not need to spend time on this. This can help the teacher focus the feedback that cannot be automated.

Resources Burke, D. & J. Pieterick (2010). Giving Students Effective Written Feedback. Maidenhead: Open University Press. – Very specific and instructive – and based on empirical research. Faculty Metro – Feedback. – A number of contributions from teachers to teachers – the web resource demonstrates feedback practices that have worked well for teachers, also about the use of the Text Feedback Game. http://www.enhancingfeedback.ed.ac.uk – Very comprehensive portal of research articles and resources for both teachers and students, only about feedback, collected and maintained by Dai Hounsell, professor of pedagogy and a specialist in feedback.

278

Literature Bruun, J. & C. Holm (2009).Computerassisteret Undervisning. Downloaded from: http://www.ind.ku.dk/udvikling/projekter/dasg2009/computerUndervisning. pdf/. Cole, R.S. & J.B. Todd (2003). Effects of web-based multimedia homework with immediate rich feedback on student learning in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(11): 1338-1343. Hattie, J. & H. Timperley (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1): 81-112. Hounsell, D. et al. (2008). The Quality of Guidance and Feedback to Students. Higher Education Research and Development (0729-4360), 27(1): 55-67. Jensen, T.K. (2011). Studiemiljø 2011. Arhus: Aarhus Universitet, Report no. 1. Nicol, D.J. & D. Macfarlane-Dick (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2): 199-218. Pascarella, A.M. & C. Falls (2004). The influence of web-based homework on quantitative problem-solving in a university physics class. Proc. NARST Annual Meeting. Patchan, M. (2011). Peer review of writing: learning from revision using peer feedback and reviewing peers’ texts, PhD.-thesis. Pittsburg: University of Pittsburg. Patchan, M.M., D. Charney & C.D. Schunn (2009). A validation study of students’ end comments: Comparing comments by students, a writing instructor, and a content instructor. Journal of Writing Research, 1(2): 124-152. Rienecker, L., P. Stray Jørgensen & S. Skov (2011). Undersøgelse af specialeskriveres brug af feedback på specialeudkast. Unpublished study. Copenhagen: Faculty of Humanities, Copenhagen University. Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness online: what the research tells us. In: J. Bourne og J. C. Moore (eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education, Practice and Direction. Needham: Sloan Center for Online Education: 13-46.

279

280

4.6.2 Clickers HELLE MATHIASEN

What is a clicker? The literature mentions a range of different names for this voting tool. In addition to the term “clickers”, terms such as “Electronic Voting Systems”, “Audience Paced Feedback”, “Classroom Communication”, “Student Response Systems”, “voting-machines”, “zappers”, “Classroom Response Systems and “voting-bricks” are used (Mathiasen 2011). In the following we will use the term “clickers”. In principle, there are two different types of clickers. One type can cast votes by choosing between six buttons. The other type resembles a mobile phone. It has a small screen and a keypad with both letters and numbers, so that a “vote” can be an actual comment from the voter and not just a vote for one of the listed options. In addition to a certain number of clickers, a computer running special software to collect the responses as well as a screen to show the questions, the votes and a graphic representation of the vote are required. In recent years, it has become possible to vote from one’s computer, iPad or phone. All that is required is a programme that can be downloaded online either for free or for a small fee. Clickers have been used extensively in certain disciplines at Danish universities, often in the contexts of large groups of students who were taught by lectures. This section will focus on specific issues related to the use of clickers in teaching regardless of discipline. The theoretical and didactic perspective will not be elaborated here. It should be mentioned that the use of clickers is viewed from a system-theoretical perspective, in which communication, teaching, learning and knowledge-construction are core concepts. The conditions for students’ activities, including students’ opportunities to test their understanding of the subject matter in both a knowledge, skill and competence perspective, is paid special attention (Mathiasen 2011, Mathiasen 2012).

281

Clickers in teaching Naturally, there is no single answer to how clickers are used in teaching. However, the question leads to a number of didactic questions, such as “what is the purpose of this lecture?” In light of the Bologna Process and the Danish Qualification Framework from 2008, it is reasonable to ask whether the aim is development of knowledge and/or skills and/or competences? More specifically, how clickers are used may prove crucial to answer to the following questions: How can questions be asked so that they are not simply factual? How should the teacher provide feedback to the answer patterns that appear visually on the screen? How can students be activated with more than a click? What can you do as a teacher if, for example, one in three fails to answer factual questions correctly? Would you want to know who has not attained the expected level of academic insight, and why would you want to know? What would you use the information you can get via the voting activities for? The following four perspectives on clicker use in teaching below address the many didactic challenges that the use of clickers cause. The four perspectives are 1. Question types, 2. Feedback options, 3. Pace of teaching and 4. The question of anonymity. 1. Question types

Depending on the purpose of teaching, it may be useful to consider which of the following question types are relevant and when they are relevant. Which question types will best support the intended teaching, for example, in a lecture of three sessions? Could it be: • Repetition questions? • Factual questions? • Questions that draw on intuition? • Questions that invite to discussion? • Appetiser-questions? As an introduction to the topic of the day, you might use repetition questions followed by factual questions related to the day’s lecture. Following this, students could be introduced to questions that call for intuition, which might encourage them to use their academic intuition when voting. Later in the lecture you could use discussion questions and end with 282

questions that whet students’ appetite for the readings for next lecture. I call these ‘appetiser-questions’. The purpose of this type of question is to awaken students’ curiosity so students will plunge into literature, exercises and other activities that can help support their active participation in the following lecture. For example, a lecture in a language subject could draw on grammatical skills and subsequently activate these skills in connection with questions that invite the use of intuition and encourage discussion. This could be a way to qualify the disciplinary communication and students’ reflections on their specific choice or vote by arguing individually, among themselves, and/or with the teacher. The students’ knowledge and competences could thus be developed in the shape of increased understanding of academic material. Having to explain oneself to fellow students develops students’ cooperative skills and the ability to take responsibility of others’ learning as well, cf. The Qualification Frameworks’ concept definition). Clicker questions can be devised by teachers as well as by students. To increase students’ levels of activity, students may be required to take turns to make up clicker questions in one or more of the question categories, depending on the purpose of teaching’s and students’ disciplinary competences. It can be a hard but meaningful exercise to come up with credible alternatives to the correct answer. Another way to use clicker questions could be to ask the students which of three listed options is the least wrong or most right, and ask them to list the academic arguments in a discussion with the person next to them. Here are some options: 2. Feedback options

The following options can be viewed as the basic response types for students with clickers that can be varied as needed. Obviously, the choice of feedback activity depends on the learning objectives. • Individual answers to clicker-questions without dialogue with fellow students. • Individual answers to clicker questions before/after dialogue with fellow students. • Vote results and subsequent elaboration of the material by the teacher or the students.

283

• Vote results and subsequent individual supervision. • Vote result as information to teacher and students, but without follow-up from teacher: simple feedback. If the aim is to test the individual student, the first option may be a good choice. The second option may prove a good one if the goal is for students to discover and qualify their vote (not a consensus requirement) through dialogue with each other, before they cast their individual votes. This allows for discussion of the vote result before a second voting round. The third option, where the vote result is shown to the students, provides students with an opportunity for explanation and elaboration of the topic. In principle, the fourth option can be connected to the three previous options. The difference is that the teacher, when voting is not anonymous, can identify which of the students have which academic problems and thus address the individual student’s problem directly, for example by informing him or her of alternative learning resources, encourage specific study activities and by putting students with the same problems in one group. It is difficult to claim that the fifth option supports students’ learning processes. However, the competent student will be able to confirm that he or she is competent and the weak students may view the result as an eye-opener. For the teacher, this can likewise be an eye-opener and thus an invitation to reflection and action. 3. Pace of teaching

Clicker voting takes time, regardless of how it is used. Several researchers, practitioners and students have noted the importance of ‘flow’ in teaching. The following comprises specific advice for the use of clickers, only keep in mind that communication must be coherent and yet provide students sufficient time to reflect on the questions: • The individual vote must not be too long – nor must response time be too short, or students may resort to guesswork. Obviously, the amount of allocated time should depend on the question types. Typically, one minute for skill questions or 1-5 minutes for discussions before votes will be adequate. • A lecture should include no more than two sets of clicker questions, and each set should include at most 6 questions with 3-5 options. 284

• Clickers slow down the pace and involve more students, but not all students need this. As with all choices of teaching methods, organisation and media, the use of clickers cannot address all students’ academic needs. A Danish case study found that students distinguish between “the elite” and “the broad majority” of students in relation to clicker use as a learning-supporting activity. They believe that “the elite” does not benefit as much from the use of clickers as the “broad majority”, but if “the elite can be bothered” to join in the discussions between votes, both “the elite” and “the broad majority” will gain academic benefit from these activities (Mathiasen 2011). 4. Questions of anonymity

As mentioned, the question of anonymity or not depends on the teacher’s reasons for wanting to identify students. • Identifiable clicker answers are useful: – as a communication/learning resource and didactic reflection resource – and thus with focus on communication and possibilities for elaboration between students and teacher. – as control, test, and for awarding credit. • Anonymous clicker answers are: – primarily useful as a resource for didactic development and reflection, and thus particularly for the teacher’s own further development of the teaching. The question of anonymity still draws on two different rationales and cultures in a communication- and didactical perspective and in a control perspective. The specific aims and reasons must be negotiated when clickers are introduced into teaching.

Studies of clickers in teaching Most publications address the use of clickers in connection with lectures and therefore larger groups of students, and primarily within natural disciplines (e.g., Fies et al. 2006, MacArthur et al. 2008, Caldwell 2007, 285

Barber et al. 2007). One study (where the author, researcher and teacher was one and the same person) shows that classes where clickers were used did better on standardised physics tests than the control group that did not use clickers (Mazur et al. 2001). The literature speaks of learning potentials, but so far lacks research-based evidence that clickers have a positive effect on the learning (Caldwell 2007). For example, Lasry concludes that there is no difference between the learning outcomes of students who used clickers and students who used flash cards (Lasry 2008). Test, control and credits are themes that often appear in the literature (e.g., MacArthur 2008, Fies 2006). In these discussions, the opportunities for registering whom answers what, and individual answer frequency are considered key. One of the discussions in the literature is therefore how many credits students should be given if they report the wrong answer. Another topic of discussion is whether anonymity in voting affects students’ vote and communication. One study shows that students become more active and engaged and less reserved when their answers are anonymous. Students have no problems discussing in smaller groups; however, they are not keen to express themselves in larger classes. Students seek anonymity from both fellow students and teachers (e.g., Fies 2006), and thus find clickers “enjoyable” (Bode 2009), just as several articles note that clickers help students to stay focused (e.g., Caldwell 2007). A case study of Danish physics students’ experience with the use of clickers showed increased motivation, confidence and level of activity. The study furthermore showed that a good teacher can improve his or her teaching, while a poor teacher cannot automatically become a better teacher from using clickers. Moreover, students consider it a benefit for both themselves and the teacher if the teacher can identify the individual answers, and students expect the teacher to use this information to help them (Mathiasen 2011). The technology in itself does not make a difference, but the pedagogical and didactical approach and the notion of engaged and communicating students are key factors for efficient teaching environments.

Resources The following texts all touch on the challenges of teaching innovation and the concept of teaching itself. The concepts ‘learning’ and ‘knowledge 286

construction’ are central in this respect. Furthermore, the use of IT is discussed, and technology use is discussed in connection with empirical studies of different courses of teaching. Mathiasen, H. (2012). Time to Rethink Concepts of Knowledge Dissemination and Transfer in the Educational System. European Review, 20(2): 153-163. Mathiasen, H. & L Schrum (2010). New Technologies, Learning Systems and Communication: Reducing Complexity in the Educational System. In: Myint Swe Khine & Issa M. Saleh (eds.), New Science of Learning: Cognition, Computer and Collaboration in Education. New York: Springer Publishing Company. Mathiasen, H. (2004). Expectations of Technology: When the Intensive Application and IT in Teaching Becomes a Possibility. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3): 273-295.

Literature Bode, M. et al. (2009). A Clicker Approach to Teaching Calculus. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 56(2): 253-256. Caldwell, J.E. (2007). Clickers in the Large Classroom: Current Research and Best-Practice Tips. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(1): 9-20. Fies, C. et al. (2006). Classroom Response System: A Review of the literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1): 101-109. Lasry, N. (2008). Clickers or flashcards: Is there really a difference? The Physics Teacher, 46: 242-244. MacArthur, J.R. et al (2008). A review of literature reports of clickers applicable to college chemistry classrooms. Chemistry Education Research and Practice. 9: 187-195 Mathiasen, H. (2011). Clickers, en læringsunderstøttende ressource? Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidskrift, 6(11): 26-31. Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction: A user’s Manual. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall. Mazur, E. et al. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9): 970-977. Ministry of Higher Education and Science, Agency for Universities and Internationalisation (2013). http://www.iu.dk/dokumentation/kvalifikationsrammer.

287

288

4.7 Discussions and argumentation in teaching MADS THORKILD HAUGSTED AND GITTE HOLTEN INGERSLEV

Intro The facilitation of students’ discussions of academic points and discourses is an important aspect of university teaching. Any teacher must be able to teach the student to focus on the material, formulate academic arguments and defend his or her position. Only when the student can do this can we say that a student has acquired the material.

Challenges Students and teachers alike tend to expect university teaching to be a monologue-based forum in which the teacher must communicate research findings and explain causality, and where only very little effort is made to ensure that the disseminated material interacts with the individual student’s pre-established knowledge. However, much learning research indicates that the individual student’s active engagement in university work and participation in dialogue with the teachers and fellow students is crucial for the acquisition of the material and for building up competences to put it into perspective. (For further elaboration see chapter 2.1.)

Instructions/options After spending many years in the educational system, most students have learnt that discussions in a teaching space are supposed to lead to a correct explanation and an unequivocal conclusion. Students expect the teacher to lead the discussion towards the already established goal routinely and 289

on a sound academic basis; on the way to this final goal, contributions that support reaching the goal are welcome. Everyone knows these implicit rules for targeted discussions. This teaching method has certain useful elements, such as the teacher explaining models followed by discussion. This is not an either-or situation, but if the teacher wants to establish what you could call an “exploring discussion” (See Baird & Northfield 1995) as opposed to a “targeted discussion”, the rules are different, and students will often oppose and make demands of the teacher and require definitive answers. Exploring discussions

An exploring discussion requires a number of relatively simple guidelines for the teacher: • Do not present own evaluations and conclusions too early. • As a rule, accept all suggestions with the same gratitude and curiosity. • Ask as many students as possible to account for their views, the reason behind their opinions, and for the differences between their and other students’ opinion? You can start an exploring discussion by asking a complicated question that triggers reflection, or by addressing a statement or question from a student and asking the rest of the class to evaluate and comment, e.g.: What is the difference between pedagogy, general didactics and disciplinary didactics? Exploring discussions require a good work environment, and the teacher’s role as chairman is crucial. It is important that each student feels that his or her contribution is meaningful and is heard. This does not mean that everything is equally correct, but it does mean that everyone by default will be heard, and that the teacher’s ability and intention to frame the discussion (for example, by summing up and contrasting different points of view, or by asking new questions that move the discussion forward) is crucial. This requires that the teacher has a fair share of skills and the ability to make quick decisions: Should I end the debate, should it be summarised, should I ask new elaborating questions? Should I correct (and what and how)?

290

The following list comprises suggestions for teachers to establish and manage examining discussions.

When you want to ensure that students organise the material During discussions, keep track of important points by writing them on the blackboard as they are presented, and conclude by asking students to organise these points – for example in a concept map (see chapter 4.5.1 for more on working with concept maps). When you want to keep the discussion within a defined framework …

If Then

questions arise that fall outside the designated topic. ask the student to wait while the discussion is concluded, and remember to bring up the topic afterwards.

When you want to support and focus …

If

Then If Then

a student makes an important statement – for example, expresses a misconception, which the teacher has reason to believe is shared by many, or the student makes an important point, but the other students do not recognise its importance. repeat the statement and ask the students to consider it carefully. clear but contradictory statements appear in the discussion. stop the discussion, and ask all students to discuss the statements in pairs and to choose, evaluate and argue for one of the viewpoints.

When you wish to conclude a discussion …

At this time the teacher should make his/her own views clear. Summarise what has been said and give students a clear sense of the differences. For example, give students a brief time to discuss these contrasts in pairs – you can then ask them to list these contrasts in a table, and subsequently finish the discussion with a short recapitulation.

Below is an example of the structure of a discussion of the concept ‘disciplinary didactics’, in which students are required to argue for their own opinion based on their reading of research articles. This constitutes the introduction to a module about the disciplinary didactics of the subject of Danish at the Department of Education at Aarhus University. 291

1. Students have been sent a number of different definitions of didactics via the module’s learning platform, and have been asked to formulate their own definition of the concept. The teacher will read and sort through the definitions before the next teaching session. 2. In the following session, the class is divided into groups of three, where each student presents his or her definitions to the two other students. The groups have been formed so that each group member brings a different definition to the table. The primary task is to discuss the concept of disciplinary didactics and argue for one’s own views. Secondary tasks include to clarify which interpretation of knowledge underlies the different definitions of disciplinary didactics, and in conclusion draw up a model that reflects the elements the group agreed on and those they disagreed about. The three group members may also draw a concept map (excellent tools for this can be found online). See also Learning How to Learn (Novak 1984). Negotiating the construction of a concept map draws students deeply into the academic discussion and clarifies agreements and disagreements in the group. 3. To conclude, each group presents their figure or concept, and the concept of disciplinary didactics is discussed on the basis of these presentations. The teacher serves as the chairman and facilitator. This procedure ensures that students discuss on the basis of their own pre-conceptions and questions, and not primarily on the basis of questions or opinions formulated by the teacher. The above requires the teacher to act as a dialogue partner. The teacher as a dialogue partner

Inspired by Nystrand & Gamoran’s terminology and results from studies of interaction patterns in school classes in America, the education researcher Olga Dysthe called for a greater recognition of the teacher’s ability and intention to ask “authentic questions”, i.e., questions without a foregone answer. As Dysthe notes, asking authentic questions means that the teacher does not merely want to control whether students have learned something they were given in advance. Authentic questions are the opposite of controlling or focused questions, where the person asking expects a contex292

tually correct answer. In other words, authentic questions can help the teacher challenge students’ opinions and forcing them to reflect rather than reproduce. It is also a way in which the teacher can support students’ active acquisition process through inquiring into lacking and superficial knowledge, rather than reject it as such. In continuation of this, teachers are encouraged to follow up on students’ questions by building on the student’s formulations (uptake) and clearly formulating high valuations (see next section). By using students’ answers directly or indirectly in the next question, the student is encouraged “to further reflect on what he or she has said”, and teaching can build on students’ “dialogue between them” (Dysthe 1997: 227). “A good evaluation” is not general, vapid praise, but rather a targeted recognition of the significance of what the student says by letting it form part of the continued conversation: “The concept ‘good evaluation’ signals a changed attitude in the teacher. From assessing whether answers are right or wrong, the teacher moves towards identifying important thoughts and ideas in the content of what is said” (ibid.: 228). In this way, the teacher can support the students’ path to knowledge. As a teacher, you can also support students’ path to knowledge by introducing them to the rules of good argumentation so that both brief and extensive contributions in a teaching situation follow these rules. Good argumentation

A university student must be able to argue for his/her claims in disciplinary contexts. This applies to both semester assignments and students’ oral contributions in teaching sessions. It is important that the teacher makes it clear to students that simply having an opinion is not enough. The students must be able to cite academically acceptable reasons for his/ her claim(s). Toulmin’s model of argumentation can help students structure their arguments. The Study Metro (http://studiemetro.au.dk/en/standardsforacademicpapers/argumentation/) holds some interactive exercises that students can try out. The exercises are based on Toulmin’s model which consists of three basic elements: claim, ground and warrant. Together these form the three elements of an argument. • Claim: The view you make a case for, e.g.: Didactics is the theory of teaching’s objectives and content. 293

• Ground: The specific reason why your claim should be accepted: Professor X says so. • Warrant: The implicit, general rule which underpins the acceptance of the ground. i.e., education experts agree with professor X. Argumentation also encompass some optional elements: The qualifier, the backing and the rebuttal. • Rebuttal: The reservations you can use to contend the warrant’s general validity: I know that professor Y also believes that teaching method is part of the concept of didactics. • Backing: Documentation that supports the warrant: Professor X is recognised for his research throughout the world. • Qualifier: The degree of assurance with which you wish to support/ underpin your claim taking into consideration the rebuttal and backing: I am completely sure, I have worked in this area for years. Good argumentation

Good argumentation can be assessed on the basis of whether or not it is: • Correct • Efficient • Interesting • Trustworthy Efficient communication is not necessarily good communication. Throughout the ages, political propaganda has often been both eye-catching and effective without insisting on an overly zealous distinction between fact and fiction. Thus, a political movement, for instance, can gain popular support without it being based (entirely) on fact. Efficient, certainly, but not truthful or academically honest. It is important for a university student to realise that it is not possible to argue or communicate knowledge about a topic one has not fully understood. The novice must try to understand fundamental aspects and relations about the topic. Only then can (s)he argue and communicate the topic. For more about teaching in argumentation technique (in Danish), see for instance Hegelund 2000 and Onsberg & Jørgensen 2008, chapter 8. 294

Rationales Oral communication is a crucial element in all teaching. If the oral dimension does not function as it should, students will not acquire material as they should. Any new knowledge that has not been integrated in a person’s basic knowledge structures, will be stored in parallel knowledge structures, which means that the newly acquired knowledge can easily be distorted or forgotten. Non-integrated knowledge can not form the basis for valid argumentation and communication. It is therefore important to teach students argumentation as an integrated part of their university education. Despite this, there is still a lack of precise guidelines for an oral pedagogy. Teachers often lack knowledge of what the oral dimension of teaching actually involves. The oral dimension plays a major role in university teaching, but there is very little (if any at all) teaching in oral communication (Haugsted 2004). In the comprehensive updated version of Fremtidens danskfag [Lit: “The Future of Danish”] (2002) it is stated: “[…], it is our impression that in this particular area, the scattered attempts throughout the systems and in the subject Rhetoric provide a good starting point for further development. What is missing is the framework for doing so, not least at the universities. The universities in particular lack a framework for research into orality and oral pedagogy” (Sub-report 2, Section 5 point 9 F. Oral Communication – our translation). This is an important area, which is, however, insufficiently explored in universities and other in research contexts. Therefore, the university teacher must, on his/her own, learn both the theory and practice of oral communication as well as elementary linguistic conditions and knowledge about the didactic possibilities of orality. One central function is the teacher as oral supervisor. The teacher’s role as supervisor within the didactics of orality calls for academic insight into argumentation and rhetoric. As this chapter demonstrates, there is in the Nordic countries an increasing interest for this subject (Dysthe 1993 et seq., Haugsted 2004), but the same can be said for international research as well (Mitchell, J. in Baird, J. & J. Northfield (eds.) (1995), often in conjunction with classroom research. So change is on the way.

295

Resources Dysthe, M. (1993). Writing and talking to learn: a theory-based, interpretive study in three classrooms in the USA and Norway/Olga Dysthe. Doctoral dissertation. Haugsted, M. Th. (2004). Taletid, mundtlighed, kommunikation og undervisning. Copenhagen: Alinea. – A book that summarises experience from research and development projects about orality and teaching. On the basis of data, the relationship between teaching in orality and orality in teaching is discussed and framed, just as relevant theory puts these conditions into perspective. Haugsted, M. Th. (2009). Læreren som mundtlig vejleder. Mundtlighed, Teori og Praksis p. 224, Kvan 92. Haugsted, M. Th. (2012). Alt er jo relativt… Om lærernes sproglige relationskompetence. Sproget i skolen, Kvan 94. – Both articles describe and discuss the teacher’s supervisor role in the field of tension between learning, control and empathy. Hegelund, S. (2000). Akademisk argumentation. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. – an introduction to the basic elements of argumentation. Mitchell, J. in Baird, J. & J. Northfield (eds.) (1995). Learning from the PEEL Experience. Aarhus: Klim. – Experiences from a long-running Australian, action-based research project. Here you can find a multitude of practice experience and precepts for actions in teaching in all fields and at all levels of education – including ideas for developing the oral dimension in teaching. http://studiemetro.au.dk/krav/argumentation – a collection of links and study resources for university students. One link is about argumentation.

Literature Dysthe, O. (1997). Det flerstemmige klasserum – skrivning og samtale for at lære. Århus: Klim. Haugsted, M.Th. (1999). Handlende mundtlighed. Copenhagen: DLH. Hegelund, S. (2000). Akademisk argumentation. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Jørgensen, P.S. (2001). Talegaver – mundtlig fremstilling for studerende. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Lund, A.K. (1997). Mundtlig formidling. Copenhagen: Frydenlund.

296

Nordenbo, S.E. et al. (2008). Lærerkompetanser og elevers læring i førskole og skole. Et systematisk review utført for Kunnskapsdepartementet, Oslo. Copenhagen: Dansk Clearinghouse for uddannelsesforskning. Novak, J.D. & B. Gowin (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Onsberg, M. & C. Jørgensen (2008). Praktisk argumentation. Copenhagen: Nyt Tek­ nisk Forlag. Undervisningsministeriet (2003). Fremtidens Danskfag. http://pub.uvm.dk/2003/ dansk­fag/.

297

298

4.8 E-learning NINA BONDERUP DOHN, MARIANNE THORSEN AND SØREN LARSEN

Intro: What is e-learning? The term ‘e-learning’ refers to ICT-mediated teaching and learning activities. This encompasses a vast range of activities from face-to-face teaching in the classroom over activities that take place between classroom sessions to online teaching which is fully online (henceforth ‘fully online teaching’). Examples include: • Use of clickers or online voting tools for interaction with students during lectures. • Self-tests for students in the form of multiple choice tests or “fill in the blank”-surveys. • Use of grammar training programmes as part of language teaching. • Synchronous online teaching, where participants in different locations communicate online via programmes that enable conversation, file sharing, writing in shared documents etc. Adobe Connect, which Danish universities have access to via ‘forskningsnettet.dk’, is one option. Webcams can also be used to allow participants to see each other while they collaborate. • Digital portfolios, that allow students to see and comment on each other’s papers, and to include images, audio, video and links in their assignments. • Blog discussions or discussion forums in addition to face-to-face sessions. • Student-formulated wikis of concepts and problems. • Learning objects used by students, for example as preparation for practical exercises. Learning objects are individual units of digital learning content designed to be used again and again. Examples include online videos or PowerPoint presentations designed as stand alone-products. Fully online teaching, where all teaching takes place 299

online in a combination of synchronised meetings (written or spoken) and asynchronous communication, e.g., discussions of academic texts and/or assignments with feedback. • Fully online teaching may include one or more of the e-learning activities mentioned above. In this chapter, we will discuss the forms of e-learning that take place outside of face-to-face teaching, both in a combination with face-to-face learning (which we call ‘blended learning’), and as fully online teaching. Most forms of e-learning are based on e-learning platforms or learning management systems (LMS). Examples of e-learning platforms include Blackboard, It’s Learning, Fronter and Moodle. Some institutions use conference systems like FirstClass, either as a supplement to, or in place of, an actual e-learning platform. Some teachers also use other media for e-learning, such as free blog services, Facebook and the virtual world Second Life or even MineCraft.1 We discuss e-learning outside of face-to-face teaching, partly because some of the e-learning activities intended for face-to-face teaching have been described elsewhere in this book (e.g., clickers in chapter 4.6.2), and partly because of the special challenges and opportunities inherent in learning activities with students who are not physically present.

Pedagogical challenges E-learning means that teachers and students’ collaboration is not restricted in the same way by time or place, and that their output can be retrieved from anywhere and at any later time. This represents a dramatic shift from face-to-face teaching, even though many of the same basic elements seem to be in play (teacher, students and content as well as the need for interaction between these elements, cf. the Didactic Triangle chapter 2.2). Among other things, the difference in framework conditions affects the roles students and teacher can or should assume, the participants’ expectations, motivation and the possibility of understanding and misunderstanding each other. Therefore, it is important that teachers understand that e-learning is more than digitized face-to-face teaching. E-learning is 1 When the Danish edition was written, MineCraft had not yet grown to the size and popularity it enjoys today (2014).

300

not second rate face-to-face teaching or face-to-face teaching that lacks the teacher’s presence. Instead, good e-learning exploits the different framework conditions in a constructive way, i.e. the conditions of geographical and temporal flexibility, of availability of content across contexts, and of the focus on the content, which the lack of physical proximity naturally leads to. Good e-learning also takes into account the challenges that arise from limited physical contact. Among these challenges, the following are particularly important: • It can be a lonely experience to participate in e-learning activities on your own, especially if no one responds to your contributions. As a result, motivation may suffer. • E-learning activities can be experienced as more voluntary than faceto-face teaching. Because of the lack of definite deadlines, e-learning must continuously compete with the many other activities the student could engage in at any given time. • Misunderstandings occur much easier when people cannot see or hear each other. • Many students feel uncomfortable at expressing themselves in writing to a larger audience and therefore hesitate to engage in the many e-learning activities that require writing posts that will be visible to, for instance, the entire cohort. • The lack of immediate feedback on one’s posts can lead to insecurity. • The notion that posts are stored and saved “forever” can be daunting. • Teachers may find it hard to strike a balance between participating too much (getting in the way of students’ ownership of the activity) and not participating enough (signalling lack of interest). Teachers must be prepared to take students’ input from e-learning activities seriously, and include the input in teaching in the way students expect. E-learning may therefore challenge established student and teacher roles. E-learning changes the teacher’s traditional role as “lecturing expert”. However, the greatest challenge in planning and carrying out e-learning is to adapt to the changed framework without letting the technology dominate the agenda. As with all other teaching and learning activities, the pedagogical aims must govern the choice of (ICT-based) learning ac-

301

tivities and (technological) tools. At the risk of sounding glib: In e-learning, learning is the important part, not the ‘e’.

Options In this section, we will begin by examining some overall reasons for using e-learning in spite of the challenges. Following this, we will take a look at how you can address some of the challenges. Then we will present three examples that illustrate different ways of using e-learning. The three examples differ as regards subject matter, student group, and pedagogical and technological methods used. Between them, the examples therefore exemplify e-learning’s many possibilities. Each example is concluded with options in bullet form. Why use e-learning?

For fully online teaching, the geographical and temporal flexibility means that it is possible to complete courses, subjects and whole programmes that might not otherwise have been established, because they could not attract enough physically present participants. In comparison to distance learning of the past, flexibility also means that significant interaction between students and between students and teacher is possible during a course instead of only meeting each other at a couple of weekend seminars and/or being sent course material via post. The possibility for interaction between physical sessions also makes e-learning an interesting supplementary activity between teaching sessions based on attendance. We would mention the following general reasons for using e-learning as a supplement to, or replacement of, face-toface teaching: • Students’ individual work with texts and assignments can be supported more immediately, for example through online discussions with fellow students and teacher, or through the preparation of interactive learning objects and/or self-tests. • The teacher can get students’ input in the shape of questions to the texts. This input can be used for structuring face-to-face teaching. • A space for reflection can be formed with room for questions and

302

discussions in addition to what is dealt with in class, and with more time for students to reflect on their answers. • Students who dislike to speak in front of fellow students can express themselves in a different medium. • A course can be organised so necessary presentation of material takes place before face-to-face teaching, which leaves more time for the teacher to interact with students. • Students’ collaboration on assignments can be eased by students not having to meet physically. • Dialogues and material can be stored and retrieved later in the course. • Material from students’ own lives – e.g., newspaper articles, case descriptions from study-related jobs, video recordings from internships – can be made available in a “resource bank” with annotated links to external web resources, keeping in mind rules of confidentiality and copyright. • Execution of assignments and project work in relation to external collaborators (e.g., businesses, organisations or institutions) can be made more flexible. International student projects with partner/affiliate universities become a viable option. General suggestions for meeting the challenges of e-learning

In e-learning, it is important that the teacher is aware that the geographical and temporal flexibility is not absolute. In practice, a number of conditions apply, and these must be taken into account in the planning of e-learning activities. E-learning requires access to a computer or a mobile device and time to participate in the activity. Not all times of day are socially acceptable for students to go online. On the other hand, in the view of non-students, students often study at “odd times” outside “normal working hours”, such as in the evening or the weekend. Teachers’ opinions about this may differ, but if they do not take this into account in the planning of e-learning activities, the risk is great that the activities will fail because of insufficient participation. If the e-learning activities involve interaction between students, the teacher must consider students’ study-time management. If students are expected to reply to each other’s posts, there have to be posts to reply to when they sit down to write. It may be necessary to set deadlines in

303

advance to regulate expectations as to when students can be expected to have read previous posts. On the other hand, the temporal flexibility of e-learning can lead to the expectation that learning is available 24/7. This expectation can go both ways –students to teacher and teacher to students – and is an inappropriate expectation for both parties. Before you start an e-learning activity, we recommend that you come to an agreement with your students about how often and how much you and they are expected to contribute. Some of the challenges mentioned in the previous section can likewise be met by explicating in advance who is expected to contribute when and in which way. Outlining “netiquette”-rules for the tone of posts and comments decreases the risk of misunderstandings. The teacher may choose to outline “netiquette”-rules or construct them in collaboration with students, depending on what he or she feels most comfortable with, on the size of the class, and on how much experience students have with online learning communication. In large classes with students who are inexperienced in e-learning and online teaching, it is usually an advantage that the teacher defines the rules. Furthermore, agreements as to the frequency and form of posts can reduce the risk of students finding it de-motivational and anxiety-inducing if their posts are not responded to immediately. These agreements can also make e-learning activities more committing. As a teacher you can vary your participation over time, so you begin by participating a great deal to help students get past their anxiety about the unfamiliar written form of communication and permanence of posts. However, with time you can participate less and let students assume ownership of their e-learning. Changing degrees of teacher participation should be made clear to students either before e-learning or at the latest before you start to withdraw. This also allows you to create a balance between being overly controlling versus signalling a lack of interest.

Example: Qualification of preparation for practical exercises through online learning resources Søren Larsen and Rikke Langebæk

Practical exercises pose a special challenge, whether in the lab, the clinic or in the field: On one hand it is (as with much teaching) completely crucial for the student’s learning outcome that he or she shows up well 304

prepared. On the other hand it can be very hard to prepare yourself for a practical task that takes place in a completely different physical setting than your preparation setting, which may not include the specific tools needed for the exercise. The case presented here shows how different online resources can promote students’ preparation for practical exercises. Furthermore it shows how e-learning can be used to optimise teaching time so this time can be spent interacting with students. In the case below, the information that students needed in advance of the exercises was made available through learning objects, that, once developed, can be reused in the course, field or programme for a number of years. The learning objects comprise online videos, multiple choice tests and PowerPoint presentations with speak. The context

Master-level veterinary students at the University of Copenhagen take the mandatory courses “Clinical research methodology in smaller domestic animals” and “Surgical technique” at the Department of Veterinary and Clinical Animal Sciences. The courses are designed to provide competences in basic clinical skills. Until 2006, the teaching comprised theoretical lectures and practical clinical exercises. This teaching was repeated several times over the course of a year, which both teachers and students viewed as a waste of time and found rather boring (Langebæk et al. 2008). This led to a redesign of the course, with the aim to free more of the teachers time for the practical part. The result was a blended learning course based on a combination of learning objects which presented the content and multiple-choice tests that students had to take online. The learning objects consisted of preparatory video cases and PowerPoint presentations with speak. The teacher’s time was spent on practical exercises in the clinic. The development of the courses, including the preparatory learning resources, was financed by the department’s teaching budget. A senior veterinarian was hired to this end. Case: Clinical examination methodology of smaller domestic animals

Teaching in this course is based on modules, so that each module treats one organ in one day. The topic is how and why a clinical examination such as eye examination must be conducted. Prior to each module, the student prepares to perform a clinical examination of a living cat or dog 305

by watching a video and a PowerPoint presentation with speak. One such a video is available at www.bit.ly/elearn-kum. Following the practical clinical examinations, students are divided into groups and view and discuss a number of videos related to the organ in question. Previously, cases depended on which animals happened to be in veterinary care at the time. Today, the videos comprise a treasure trove of key examples. The time saved by refraining from having theoretical lectures is now spent on discussing client communication and written journals. Together, the entire class views a number of recordings of practical examples that illustrate client diversity and potential problems in relation to keeping a journal. The examples are discussed in plenum, and key aspects, such as ethical, financial or empathy-related issues that may arise when veterinarians meet clients, are discussed. The course is concluded with a role play, where students assume the role of vets and teachers the role of clients.

Clinical examination – general • General condition • State of nutrition • Position and posture • Movement • TPR • Lnn • Mucous membrane • Hydration • Superficial organ examination

Figure 1. PowerPoint with speak produced with the Adobe Presenter software. The table of contents on the right enable navigation between individual slides.

Case: Surgical technique

This course aims at developing basic surgical and surgery-related skills such as endotracheal intubation. Again, students’ preparation is done on306

line in a combination of video demonstrations and mandatory multiple choice-tests. One example of a PowerPoint presentation with speak can be found at: www.bit.ly/elearn-kt. To begin with, the practical exercises are carried out on models of cats and dogs using inserted pipes, condoms, mayonnaise etc. After this, students carry out the surgical procedures on cadavers. The experiences from working on stuffed animals and cadavers combined with online videos allow students to acquire sufficient skills to operate on living animals. The students’ operations on living animals are recorded, and on the following day the recordings are uploaded to a restricted-access online forum. These videos are analysed to help students identify their own strengths and weaknesses. The videos also function as a mental exercise that enables students to identify with the role as a surgeon.

Figure 2. Video demonstrations and PowerPoint presentations with speak are available to students via the e-learning platform.

307

Results

The teachers found that the use of videos, multiple-choice tests and PowerPoint presentations with speak made the material more accessible than traditional lectures and texts. The videos appeared well suited for teaching both theoretical and practical material. For students, the video format meant they could see, repeat and train clinical and surgical procedures before they had to do it for real. Also, students appreciated to be able to return to the material later in the learning process. The course evaluations showed that students were very satisfied with the teaching (Langebæk et al. 2008). The option to witness the practical procedures before having to perform them in practice increased students’ understanding. This experience from the course is supported by research, e.g., by studies carried out by Ayres et al. (2009). Furthermore, blended learning enabled more varied teaching, which improved students’ engagement and motivation (Illeris 2006, Wlodkowski 1999). Likewise, blended learning allows the teacher to adapt to the individual student’s learning preferences: To some degree, blended learning enables students to individually adapt how, when and in which order he/she reads, sees, listens, revises and trains in practice. On the other hand, this freedom entails the potential risk of students not using the preparatory learning resources enough in practice, cf. our introductory comment about e-leaning being viewed as non-binding. However, the experience of this case was that an obvious connection between the preparatory learning resources and what took place in sessions (the practical training in clinics and discussions of cases) and the responsibility students felt towards clients and their animals, had a committing effect on students. It was simply too obvious and too embarrassing to show up unprepared. At the same time, the questions in the mandatory multiple-choice tests were expressed in such a way that students were required to read the literature before the exercises.

Some advice and suggestions Some advice and suggestions for online videos and PowerPoint with speak

• Videos should be planned based on a storyboard, in which the learning objectives are the guiding element.

308

• Videos should be brief and to the point, i.e., both recording and editing must be thorough and take into account how students will see and experience them. • PowerPoint presentations with speak should be brief and to the point, i.e., 10-20 minutes at most. • Use the same PowerPoint design template for all presentation to create recognisability, structure and coherence. • Use a manuscript to record the videos, and be precise in terms of time/image/speak. • Use the animation tool in PowerPoint to construct your presentation step by step to make it come alive. • Use a high quality microphone or headset to ensure a good audio recording. • Speak clearly and at a pace students can keep up with, but without speaking so slowly that students fall asleep. • A video of a procedure can be included in the PowerPoint with speak. However, you should also link to the video as an independent element on the e-learning platform, so students have direct access allowing them to review the procedure in question. Some advice and suggestions for multiple-choice tests

• Specify which learning objectives you wish to test. • Make it clear to both yourself and your students whether a test is a self-test or a control-test. The self-test might focus on clarifying knowledge or terminology for the student, while control or exam tests primarily focus on whether students have achieved the expected learning objectives. • Ask questions about the literature and textbooks so that students do not merely watch the video and PowerPoint with speak. • You can make the test obligatory if you want to ensure that students have completed it before class. • To motivate students to complete a self-test, you can make it more interesting and challenging by varying the types of questions so these are not just multiple-choice questions. • If you want to use the test as a control test, you must determine which scale you want to use and how many correct answers are needed to pass.

309

The applied technologies The videos were filmed and subsequently edited and speak added by means of an editing programme. Finally they were uploaded to the university’s e-learning platform in Flash or HTML5 format along with a Flash player. The Flash or HTML5 format make videos directly available on the learning platform, whilst only making moderate demands on the students’ Internet connections. Video editing was done using the programmes Adobe Premiere or Pinnacle. The PowerPoint presentations with speak were processed and edited with Adobe Presenter and Camtasia Studio. The format is once again Flash or HTML5, so they could be published on e-learning platforms. The multiple-choice tests were constructed and completed using the e-learning platform’s integrated test tool. In this case, the e-learning platform used was itslearning, which is called Absalon at the University of Copenhagen.

Example: Creating coherence between students’ learning contexts through the use of blogs and wikis Nina Bonderup Dohn

Many students in the humanities struggle to spend the required 25-30 hours of weekly self-study in a constructive way. It can be lonely and non-committal to have that many hours at your disposal for learning on your own. Face-to-face teaching easily becomes a series of discrete “islands” without obvious connections to each other or to the texts students read at home. With this case, we describe how wikis and blogs can be included to create coherence between students’ learning contexts, and thereby qualify the activities that take place in each context. The case is a compilation of experiences from several courses on the BA in Humanistic Information Science and the MSc in Web Communication, both at the University of Southern Denmark. The context

The Master in Web Communication is one of several MSc in information technology degrees that provide bachelors with a degree from the hu310

manities with a graduate degree in IT. The students therefore have highly disparate backgrounds and competences. For some, the programme’s academic focus is very different from what they have studied earlier, while for others there is a certain overlap as well as a certain risk of repetition. The teachers on this programme therefore face a great challenge in using the students’ different starting points as a resource rather than targeting “the lowest common denominator”. This does not apply to the BA in Humanistic Information Science, although there is more diversity here than on BA programmes in general. About half of the students who choose this programme start immediately after completing upper secondary school, while the other half already has an education and have held jobs for several years. Both programmes revolve around ICT, which makes e-learning academically relevant, and students are therefore often motivated to use e-learning. In practice, however, they often face the same challenges as other students, such as loneliness, isolation, insecurity, lack of motivation etc. The number of students (in both programmes) has not exceeded 30 in recent years. However, it should be noted that you could carry out similar activities in much larger classes, if you ask students to create their posts and contributions in groups and take turns, so that not everyone replies to everything. Case: Blog and wiki in support of coherence and deeper understanding

A blog is a web-based log, where posts are uploaded in reverse chronological order and where it is possible to comment on each post. A wiki is a website with an encyclopaedic structure, where each page describes a topic, and where the users create the posts. Wikipedia is perhaps the best known example. Many e-learning platforms allow registered users to create blogs and wikis. Blogs and wikis are examples of so-called ‘Web 2.0 media’ characterised by supporting activities based on user-produced content and a high degree of user interaction (Dohn & Johnsen 2009). Blog

Blogs have been used in both the programmes mentioned above: Before each session, students had to formulate a subject-focused question in a blog and/or comment on another student’s question. This served several purposes:

311

• It encouraged students to read actively, i.e. to be inquisitive, critical of the text and put it into perspective. Thus, students developed a deeper understanding of the text than they would through a passive reading. • Students’ different backgrounds were used as a resource for the whole class, as the students who had worked with the subject before could answer the questions of students who had not. This freed time during face-to-face teaching for questions that no students could answer and for discussions that ranged beyond the immediate material. • It established a connection between the self-study activity and the face-to-face teaching, both specifically in relation to the subjects treated and more generally when students felt their input in teaching was taken seriously. • It made students co-responsible for making sure sessions were interesting for them and for getting answers to their questions. • It improved the teacher’s planning of face-to-face teaching, because she was given clear indication of what students found difficult and interesting about the texts in advance. Examples of subject-focused questions asked by students on the blogs: • “I struggle to understand the difference between Norman’s and Gibson’s approaches to affordances? Could this difference briefly be outlined?” • On page 69, D&P describe four important principles for knowledge codification. Among other things, a knowledge manager must evaluate the knowledge found to determine its usefulness and importance for the organisation. This determines whether and how to treat the knowledge in question. But how can a knowledge manager […] determine whether knowledge is relevant? Surely only the people who apply this knowledge in practice can determine its relevance? Would a knowledge manager not be given disproportionate power if he can determine what is considered relevant and important knowledge?” • “It is my impression that Kolb’s theory is highly acknowledged. How can this be, when Illeris believes that Kolb’s interpretation of learning is undocumented?” Some questions are obviously of a clarifying nature, while others lead to discussion and elaboration, both in terms of content and on a more gener312

al, academic level. The questions all led to comments of the type requested. The first question was answered by a student who pointed out relevant differences and provided a reference. Following this, another student contributed by providing more differences and an additional reference. The second question received two dialogical comments, while the last gave rise to three comments that discussed the “lacking documentation”. Wiki

To process the topics taught in face-to-face teaching, the students had to create a wiki of concepts and topics from the subject during the semester. Each student had to contribute 3-5 posts and revise the same number of posts. In one subject, students also had to create posts with annotated links to resources of relevance to the subject. This could be additional literature, or an illustrative or critical article. For this exercise, the teacher functioned as a disciplinary “minimum-guarantee” in the sense that students were made aware of – and expected to correct – mistakes or misunderstandings in their posts. The academic quality assurance beyond correction of mistakes was handed over to peer-feedback in correspondence with the focus on user-production and interaction that characterizes Web 2.0-media. The wiki activities served the following purposes: • By expressing themselves in writing about the subject’s content, students developed a better understanding of content. (Dysthe & Engelsen 2005). • Together, students created an academically focused encyclopaedia. • Students chose which topics and concepts to present in the wiki. This led to reflection on what was central to the subject. • The teacher received feedback on students’ academic understanding and had the opportunity to discuss misunderstandings with individual students or the entire class. • The activity helped create coherence between teaching sessions and qualified students’ further treatment of the sessions’ topics. • The requirement of annotated links to resources outside of teaching revealed the field’s relevance for other topics to students, and put the topics treated in teaching into perspective. This supported the creation of connection between the programme’s learning contexts and students’ other life contexts.

313

In some of the courses, a couple of face-to-face sessions were assigned to discuss the wiki posts students had made. This allowed for further treatment of potential misunderstandings and also provided students another occasion to reflect on each other’s posts. Results and discussion

Based on student and teacher evaluations and the total number of posts per student, the combined blog and wiki activity worked best in courses that were evaluated based on attendance. Similar results have been reported for blogs in Singer (2008). The wiki part has only been used in courses that applied this type of evaluation. In such courses, a certain amount of blog and wiki posts was required to pass. The requirements for passing was a rather direct way of committing students to participate in e-learning despite the feeling of loneliness and lack of commitment that may characterise ICT-mediated activities at the outset. At the same time, the blog activity led to many more students being well-prepared for the face-to-face sessions: Since they had to ask subject-specific questions to the texts in advance, it was not possible to attend sessions without being prepared. In these programmes, the collected blog and wiki activities counteracted face-to-face teaching’s discrete nature. Both the blog and, to a lesser degree, the wiki, demonstrated a snowball effect, in that many students wrote more posts than required for passing the course. This indicates that at least some students appreciated the opportunity of having co-responsibility for the teaching. This interpretation is supported by the generally positive student evaluations of the blog and wiki activities. The blog part of the activity has also been implemented as an optional offer in courses with other forms of evaluation. Generally speaking, students appreciate the offer, but only a minority make use of it. This is partly due to the challenges mentioned earlier in this chapter. More often than not, it is specifically connected to the fact that e-learning is not as flexible, timewise, as it may appear. The teacher needs students’ input some time before teaching to incorporate the input in the teaching. Conversely, students typically read texts just prior to the session to keep them present. This problem can partly be counteracted through careful planning of sessions, or by devising a detailed plan of who must hand in questions/comments when and for which texts. However, in regards to the latter, it must be noted that there is an 314

inherent tension between the teacher’s control of blog and wiki activities and the student-centeredness which the activities afford qua being Web 2.0-media. This tension and its consequences for teaching and learning are treated comprehensively in Dohn & Johnsen (2009), Dohn (2009) and Dohn (2010). In the example, the tension shows up in the need for detailed planning as opposed to the aim of giving students co-ownership over the teaching.

Some advice and suggestions • Decide whether you want the blog and wiki to be hosted on your university’s e-learning platform or whether you want to use one of the free online tools. The latter is typically to be preferred for collaboration between students, however, it gives you and your students another virtual “space” to check frequently. • Blog and wiki activities are highly useful for courses where the evaluation includes some form of “active participation”. When used in courses with other forms of evaluation, you can commit students to contribute by agreeing with them on the division of responsibility for posting at the start of the course. • Explain which learning objectives the blog and wiki activities support and how. • Talk to students about blog and wiki as forms of communication in relation to other assignment genres that they will encounter in their studies. Explain your expectations concerning form and content of the posts and negotiate expectations with students. • Engage students in commenting on each others’ blog and wiki posts. This is especially beneficial when teaching students with diverse academic backgrounds, but also promotes students’ learning in classes with more homogeneous backgrounds. • Consider whether students should write their posts in groups or individually or whether to leave it up to them to decide. • Keep in mind that the more guidelines you define as a teacher, the more you contradict the implicit philosophy of Web 2.0, which students may know and expect from other contexts. This can confuse and demotivate students. Talk to students about this and negotiate your expectations with them.

315

Some advice for the blog activity

• Consider the logistics well in advance of the first session. Make deadlines that are realistic for both students and yourself: Students cannot be expected to read a text several days before a session, and you need time to incorporate their questions and comments in your teaching. The activity is therefore not well suited to sessions on a Monday morning. • It is a good idea to have a rough outline of the session’s learning objectives prepared well in advance of the fixed deadline and then adapt this to the questions that students ask. • If you know the material well, you can design the entire session on the basis of students’ questions. In this way you can incorporate students’ actual understanding and misunderstandings, as these manifest themselves in students’ question, and also include the key elements that students did not ask any questions about. Make it clear to students what you mean by “subject-specific questions”. Provide examples. Some advice for the wiki activity

• Decide on beforehand whether you want to give students a list of disciplinary concepts for them to write wiki posts about, or whether they should select what to write about themselves. The former makes the task easier and more transparent for students and ensures that the field’s central concepts are represented. The latter prepares the ground for students to reflect on what is central to the field and to assume ownership over the wiki. • Determine from the start how many posts each student should write and which requirements you set. Determine whether there should be fixed deadlines for posts over the course of teaching, or if students should simply submit their posts at the end. The former allows for discussions of posts in face-to-face teaching and allows the teacher to prepare the sessions on the basis of the posts. The latter corresponds better to the Web 2.0 philosophy. • Consider whether or not students should revise each other’s posts. Revisions ensure that students reflect on other terms and concepts than the ones they write about themselves. However, it can also be intimidating to many students. One option is to allow students to comment each other’s posts (online or in sessions), but to let the original author make the changes. 316

• Consider whether or not you will use the wiki to “open” the field to students’ other life contexts, so students can write posts about topics outside of teaching as part of putting this into perspective. This “opening” can be written as a post in the form of annotated links.

Example: Learning through social construction of knowledge. Use of discussion forums in fully online teaching Marianne Thorsen, Ib Michael Skovgard and Bo Markussen

The most significant challenges of fully online teaching are, cf. the section above, to design a course where students do not feel isolated or insecure; to maintain their motivation throughout the course and to retain them in the course. These challenges can be met by using discussion forums to support the establishment of an online community between students. As Wlodkowski (1999) among others have pointed out, motivation is strengthened by the feeling of community with others. At the same time, the discussion forums support students’ learning by their exchange of knowledge and discussions. (See for example chapter 4.7 Discussions/ argumentation in teaching). This case shows how The Faculty of Science has successfully applied a specific pedagogical method for working with discussion forums in online teaching. The results are a high retention rate, a high academic level and high levels of satisfaction among students. The context

The Faculty of Science at the University of Copenhagen began offering fully online courses in 2002. From the beginning, the aim was to use discussion forums to enable as much interaction between students as possible. The teachers set up discussion forums on the university’s e-learning platform for students to ask questions and discuss the literature. However, only a minority of the students used the forums. It became evident that the optional form was insufficient to motivate all students to participate. Therefore it was necessary to change the teaching method to encourage students to participate in discussions. From 2005, much has been done to support discussion in forums through “the Five Stage Model” developed by Gilly Salmon (Salmon 317

2000). The core idea of this method is to provide a “scaffold” for learning, so students are constantly encouraged to build upon the learning that has taken place during earlier steps. The method has been tested, adapted and further developed at the faculty since the beginning of 2005, and demonstrably ensures that all students participate more in the discussion-based online teaching than previously. The pedagogical success seems to stem from a combination of a safe learning environment, the establishment of an online community and fixed deadlines and mandatory participation for the students. As mentioned earlier, such requirements, in practice, limit the time-related flexibility that fully online teaching seems to have, but helps retain students in the programme. The pedagogical method is used in a large number of programmes in the Faculty of Science. In most of these, students use the discussion forums to discuss theories, compare, find differences and argue for and against. These activities may resemble the ones described in the blog example. To present a larger range of examples and to illustrate how the discussion forums can be used to exchange knowledge and to establish academic understanding in mathematical programmes as well, we choose the case “Applied Statistics for Researchers and Developers”. This course differs from other fully online courses at the faculty in that students learn to master and use complex statistical software, and at the same time have to apply highly advanced statistical models and methods. This sparks a particular use of discussion forums as students present solutions to each other, comment on each other’s solutions, help each other and discuss models and methods. Case: Applied statistics

The course “Applied Statistics for Researchers and Developers” is a 12week international, online course in applied statistics. The aims of the course are that students learn to use the statistical programme system R, and to select and apply a number of statistical models and methods for practical analysis. The course is intended as post-vocational training for people who occasionally use statistical methods in their work. The course was developed as a fully online course to reach more students, both nationally and abroad, and to enable students to fit the course into their working lives. The course is based on six modules that each takes place over two weeks. The cornerstone of the course is the academic discussions between 318

the students with the teacher acting as moderator. The discussions take place in groups of eight. The course capacity is limited to 32 students, because four groups typically represent a reasonable workload for an individual teacher per module. In comparison, other online courses at the faculty enrol up to 90 students in groups of 15. This requires more teacher hours, which is often handled by involving teaching assistants in collaboration with the responsible teacher. The pedagogical method

The five-stage model on which the course’s teaching method is based originates from social constructivist learning theories (cf. chapter 2.1). The basic idea is that people create learning through active participation and interaction with others, and need supportive surroundings to learn as much as possible. Therefore, the model was developed to meet the challenges that students encounter in fully online courses. In addition to the previously described challenges of e-learning that, as mentioned, appear in strengthened form here, students in fully online courses often find that they must learn to use the e-learning platform on which the course takes place at the same time as they learn the course’s academic content. The five-stage model addresses this issue by requiring that the teacher gives students time to overcome any technical difficulties at the beginning of the course, and that (s)he plays an active role in establishing a trusting and informal learning environment where students feel they can safely participate in discussions. There are two key elements: 1) The teacher’s role as moderator in the discussions, and 2) The specific design of the online learning activities (“e-tivities”, Salmon 2000), that students must participate in. With regards to the former, the teacher’s role as moderator in discussions makes him/her explicitly and academically responsible for the students reaching the learning objectives through individual discussions. The teacher guides the discussions, encourages interaction, corrects misunderstandings, illustrates with examples, summarizes, qualifies, puts into perspective and makes sense of that which is discussed. The teacher’s visibility in discussions contributes to the establishment of a safe learning environment and a sufficient academic standard. As regards the latter, the learning activities are designed so that the academic content is examined through discussions among the students and with the teacher as moderator. An activity is initiated by a brief and clear 319

description of the learning objective. After this follows the assignment description including links to electronic learning resources (articles, video, audio, recorded presentations etc.). The students’ active participation is the primary concern at this stage. A consistent and precise description of the learning activities at this point will help students understand the purpose of the activity and what is expected of them. Below is an example of a learning activity in the course.

Learning activity. Source: The online course “Applied Statistics for Researchers and Developers” Is there a relation between happiness and income taxes?

Objective: To develop the ability to discuss the relation between different variables, the importance of the different variables and what you can tell from data about cause and effect. Case description: Happiness economics

On Wikipedia you can find reports on the phenomenon “happiness economics” the study of a country’s quality of life that combines economists’ and psychologists’ techniques. Although its usefulness is yet to be determined, it has become a subject of interest and often a measure of comparison with the traditional forms of measuring market health such as GNP (Gross National Product). Task 1

Look at the Wikipedia-article “Happiness economics” about worldwide happiness and subsequently the homepage “Tax rates around the world”. Extract the relevant data from the two homepages and merge the data into a single data frame in R. You can use the merge () command to merge data frames. Task 2

Investigate the relationship between happiness and income taxes, e.g., graphically, plotting the data in a way you find suitable. Do the two quantities seem to be related and, if so, how? Task 3

Discuss the following questions in the discussion forum: • Is there a relationship between happiness and income taxes? • What is your interpretation?

320

Go to the discussion forum and comment on posts from your fellow group members that you either agree or disagree with, and respond to further questions from your teacher. Start: Monday March 22.

Deadline for contributions to the discussion is Saturday, March 27. Resources: 1. Lecture 3.2: Linear regression gives technical information. 2. Lecture 3.3: demonstrates R-programming steps for regression.

The five stages of the model

The first stage of the five stage model is called Access and Motivation. The objective at this point is to motivate students to active participation. This is the teacher’s responsibility, and (s)he must help students overcome any technical challenges, e.g., logging in to the learning platform and posting the first reply in the online discussion forum. 5 Development Supporting responding Providing links outside closed conferences 4 Knowledge construction

A

RN

Conferencing

LE

3 Information exchange Facilitating tasks and supporting use of learning material Searching, personalising software 2 Online socialisation Familiarising and providing bridges between cultural, social and learning environments Sending and receiving messages

Amount of interactivity

IN

G

Facilitation process

1 Access and motivation Welcoming and encouraging Setting up system and accessing E-Moderating

Technical support

Figure 3. The five stage model (Salmon 2011).

321

Stage 2 is Online Socialization. At this stage, the teacher plans activities for students to get to know each other so sense of community can emerge among the group. Following stages 1 and 2, students will typically have adjusted to the form, feel relatively secure and have begun to view the online class as a living network with real people. At stage 3 – Information Exchange – the learning activities develop into information exchange with the aim that students begin to see each other as useful resources they can learn from. Stages 1-3 in the five stage model must be completed before students can reach stage 4, Knowledge Construction, during which they can use discussions to develop their academic understanding and knowledge. The first three stages need not last long. In the statistics course, stages 1-3 are completed in an introductory module that runs over five days. The introductory module consists of a number of activities, where students have the opportunity to test the discussion tools, and to introduce themselves and their academic background. Students are also encouraged to talk about their life in general, in order to establish an informal and friendly environment. The major part of an e-learning course plays out at stage 4, Knowledge Construction, during which students construct knowledge together. Experience from the Faculty of Science suggests that students learn as much from each other as from the learning material and teachers. This learning method develops other competences too, such as the ability to create ideas, to accept constructive criticism and not least the ability to reshape and recreate ideas in light of the discussions that have taken place. It is recommended that the teacher gradually withdraws from the discussions at this stage. In the statistics course, different students take turns at being “frontrunners”, who are responsible for presenting suggested solutions to fellow students. The teacher’s role is primarily to comment on suggested solutions and lift the discussions to a higher level by introducing new questions and perspectives. In other courses, the teachers re-organise the students’ discussions into a coherent summary. To save teacher hours, part of this task can be handed over to students, provided the teacher comments on students’ summaries and ensures that the academic quality is satisfactory. At stage 5 – Development – the goal is that students begin to see the course in a broader perspective, and that they learn to be self-critical and 322

transfer the acquired principles to other relevant contexts. In the statistics course, this happens when students implement the course contents in their own projects at the end of the course, and begin to participate in other groups’ discussions to find inspiration for solving academic problems. Results

The course teachers agree that students have been better at helping each other and learn more together than students on similar courses with usual face-to-face teaching. Some likely explanations include: • That students like to help each other. • That it is immediately evident how active you are in an online discussion, which may promote interaction. • That students spend more time solving problems instead of asking for help immediately. • That, once the general feeling of lack of commitment related to e-learning has been overcome, the written communication is more committing, because it is permanent and prompts greater care and reflection. The Faculty of Science has examined the outcome of a number of similar online courses (IT Learning Centre 2010). The findings indicate that the pedagogical model is very efficient and results in a high rate of completion while the academic level is on a par with traditional courses. There is a high level of activity and great satisfaction among students. The same applies to the statistics course.

Some advice and suggestions Some advice and suggestions for online discussions

• Divide students into groups of 8-10. • Demand active participation in discussions. • Set criteria for active participation. • Define how discussions are assessed. • Announce fixed deadlines for posts in discussions. • Define clear learning objectives for each individual discussion. • Make discussion guides for students. • The teacher must be visible in discussion. 323

• Write posts that prompt activity and interaction before you provide an answer. • Raise the academic level by correcting misunderstandings, asking questions, including new angles, qualifying, concluding and putting into perspective. Some advice and suggestions for fully online teaching

• Design a clear and consistent course structure. • Negotiate expectations with students at the start of the course and throughout. • Plan activities that create a safe learning environment, cf. above. • Plan activities that facilitate commitment among students. • Combine teaching methods and activity types, e.g., discussions and self-tests.

Research-based evidence ICT-mediated learning has been subject to extensive research for the past 30 years. Among the important research substantiating this chapter are studies in the fields of Networked Learning and Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, as represented in the conference series: • International Conference on Networked Learning • International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning • E-learning groupings under European Association of Learning and Instruction Important articles in the two fields are available in the following journals: • Journal of Computer Assisted Learning • International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning • Computers and Education • Computers and Human Behaviour • Learning and Instruction

324

And in the book series: • Advances in Learning and Instruction Series, Pergamon • Technology Enhanced Learning, Sense Publishers • Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Book Series, first at Kluewer Academic Publishers, since at Springer Verlag Specifically, the present chapters’ various sections are treated in research in the following sources: The points at the beginning of this chapter about general challenges and possibilities are based on, among others, Salmon 2009, Goodyear et al. 2004, Dohn 2007 and Dirckinck-Holmfeld et al. 2009. The application of online-learning resources as preparation for practical exercises has been researched by e.g., Ayres et al. 2009. To substantiate research into the use of Web 2.0 in teaching contexts we can mention, in addition to the references mentioned earlier, articles in a special issue of Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 25 (2009) about Web 2.0-mediated teaching. Finally, the pedagogical method is based on a communal construction of knowledge in discussion forums founded on Salmon’s research into the design of e-learning activities and online courses.

Resources E-learning is a field in rapid growth, partly because the technological possibilities are constantly changing, partly because more and more teachers recognise the educational potential of ICT. Apart from the specific examples and references given above, we recommend the Danish journal Tidsskriftet Læring og Medier, which deal with the use of ICT and digital media in learning contexts, especially at universities, and no. 11 of Danish Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (2011), with the theme “IT, learning resources and new teaching environments”. For a comprehensive presentation of guidelines for teachers who want to use e-learning in blended learning or fully online teaching, we refer to Goodyear 2001. See also this book’s website samfundslitteratur.dk/utl for links to relevant e-learning examples [in Danish].

325

Literature Ayres, P. et al. (2009). Learning hand manipulative tasks: When instructional animations are superior to equivalent static representations. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2): 348-353. Bonderup Dohn, N. (2007). IT-baserede læreprocesser – nogle muligheder og nogle begrænsninger. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 2(4): 41-49. Bonderup Dohn, N. (2009). Web 2.0: Inherent tensions and evident challenges for education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3): 343-363. Bonderup Dohn, N. (2010). Wikis og blogs i undervisningen: Teoretiske perspektiver og praktiske erfaringer. Læring og medier, 4: 1-31. Bonderup Dohn, N. & L. Johnsen (2009). E-læring på web 2.0. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., C. Jones & B. Lindström (ed.) (2009). Analysing networked learning practices in higher education and continuing professional development. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Dysthe, O. & K.S. Engelsen (2005). Mapper som pædagogisk redskab. Aarhus: Klim. Goodyear, P. (2001). Effective networked learning in higher education: Notes and guidelines. Lancaster: CSALT, Lancaster University. Tilgængelig på www. csalt.lancs.ac.uk/jisc. Goodyear, P. et al. (ed.) (2004). Advances in research on networked learning. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Illeris, K. (2006). Læring. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag. IT Learning Center (2010). Analyse af udbyttet af onlinekurser på Det Biovidenskabelige Fakultet – iLIFE: Copenhagen: Københavns Universitet. Langebæk, R. et al. (2008). Basic Clinical Skills – E-learning in the Veterinary Curriculum. Eunis 2008, 2008: 6. Presented at the VISION IT – Visions for use of IT in higher education. Aarhus: Aarhus University: EUNIS. Salmon, G. (2002). E-tivities. New York & London: Routledge. Salmon, G. (2011). E-moderating. 3rd ed. New York & London: Routledge. Singer, J. (2008). Posting for points: Edublogs in the JMC Curriculum. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 63(1): 10-27. Skovgaard, I., B. Markussen, M. Thorsen & D. Carlsen (2010). I did it – Om ph.d.- og efteruddannelseskurset, “Applied Statistics for Researchers and Developers”. carried out as interactive e-learning, article in Læring og Medier, 3(6). Wlodkowski, R.J. (1999). Enhancing adult motivation to learn: A comprehensive guide for teaching all adults. The Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

326

5.1 Supervision: Process management and communication GITTE WICHMANN-HANSEN AND TINE WIRENFELDT JENSEN

In this chapter, we offer specific ideas on how to prepare and carry out qualified supervision. We present different ways of viewing relationships in supervision, define the meaning of meta-communication and present a model that may inspire supervisors to strengthen the dialogue in supervision.

Common challenges for supervision One of the key challenges in supervision is the allocation of responsibility and roles in the collaborative relationship, including finding a suitable balance between support and management in students’ work process. Thus, supervisors often ask questions such as: • Should I act as an expert and give advice, or should I be a facilitator and let students discover the answers for themselves? • If the student and I have different expectations and wishes for the collaboration, working process, level of ambition or something else, how do I bring this up as a theme in supervision? • How much independence can I expect from students? And how do I manage students’ demand for clear-cut solutions? • How do I manage the personal dimension in conflictual supervision? In addition to this, there is the question of how Bachelor supervision and Master/PhD supervision are related to one another. Can you have the same expectations to and apply the same tools and method for supervising? Whereas the requirements to the specific academic text are relatively well-defined at different educational levels, there is a broad scope for interpretation of the rules concerning long-term supervision such as PhD supervision. 327

Supervisors often express frustration over students who do not assume responsibility for their own role in supervision, i.e., students who shop around for a project topic, and leave it to the supervisor to come up with something that might be of interest to them; students who show up completely unprepared, or who fail to take notes during supervision. It is important to keep in mind that one point of supervision is that students must learn to participate in, and contribute to, supervision. Thus it is not necessarily a prerequisite of supervision that students know how to do this, but rather an objective of supervision. How best to act as a supervisor will depend on the student’s academic level and personality, the complexity of the project, the juncture of the process, etc. It obviously plays a role whether the supervisor is facing a single supervision session or a long-term supervision (see the list below). Thus, the starting point of this chapter will be to demonstrate some ways that you, as a supervisor, can make use of a broad range of strategies and options, and act as flexibly as possible, and how you must also be conscious of and reflected about your own supervision practice so that practice can become the object of an open discussion with students – and ideally with colleagues too.

Which strategies for action do supervisors have? Below, we provide an overview of the specific strategies that we have chosen to discuss in this chapter, strategies that supervisors have at their disposal and which may help them to be flexible in their supervision.

Central points and advice • Make specific agreements about the framework of supervision: meeting times and forms, availability and time allotted for supervision. • Make sure students are informed about the department’s framework for supervision. • Start each supervision session by defining the objectives of the session with the student(s). You may, for example, ask the student to send an email about this before the session. • In supervision, attempt to acquaint yourself thoroughly with the student’s way of thinking, reasons and evaluations before you contribute your own views and advice. • Take time-outs during supervision: stop and examine whether what you

328

are talking about is the objective of the talk and whether you are on time. Ask again and again: Do both parties understand concepts, procedures and more in the same way? • Conclude the session by inviting the student to summarise and evaluate the outcome of the meeting. Practice different question types (aimed to facilitate progress in the sessions) by preparing a couple of questions from each part of the model before each supervision session. • Ask a colleague to provide feedback on your supervision (see chapter 7.2 Collegial supervision). Particularly for long-term supervision

• Spend time on and pay attention to the collaborative relationship. Speak to the student about how you both experience the relationship and how you would like the supervision to transpire. • Negotiate expectations and decide on a schedule and progression for the the supervision as early as possible. Students who complete their studies (and complete them successfully) often started out their studies well. • Negotiate expectations with students as well as any co-supervisors. If possible, you might base the negotiation on written proposals such as memorandums of understanding, contracts or the like. • Ask students in advance to send a short text about what has transpired since the previous meeting, and write an agenda for each supervision meeting. • Ask students to send you minutes after each supervision. • Keep in mind that expectations and needs can change in the course of supervision. Be prepared to make adjustments as the situation changes.

This list is not exhaustive, nor is it a list of specific things that supervisors always need to do. The list is based on central arguments, themes and points from educational research about supervision and the theoretical literature in the field. We will elaborate on a number of these arguments and themes below.

The importance of good cooperative relationships and negotiation of expectations Research into university supervision has shown that successful supervi329

sion first and foremost depends on the student and supervisor establishing a good cooperative relationship early on (Wichmann-Hansen et al. 2007). However, it is well-documented that establishing and maintaining good relationships is complicated by the fact that students and supervisor often have differing expectations to each other, to the process and to the product (Kiley 2008). This is usually the result of diverging interpretations of roles, of a good work process, of independence, and of the desired academic level of the project. The recurrent advice from the supervision literature is to regularly match expectations between student and supervisor. In long-term supervision, the supervisors must pay thorough attention to, and spend time on – the work relationship by establishing unambiguous – and preferably written – agreements, especially during the first phase of supervision. Such an agreement – in whatever form – is vital for good and fruitful supervision. Supervisors can make use of different tools to describe, communicate and negotiate expectations both early on and later in the course of supervision. We would mention three central tools: 1. Memorandums of understandings, 2. Supervisor contracts and 3. Expectation forms. Memorandums of understanding

A so called Memorandum of understanding (MoU) or just a written understanding (cf. The Oxford Learning Institute) comprises the individual supervisor’s description of what (s)he typically provides in connection with supervision on each academic level, BA, MA or PhD, and what the supervisor expects of students. In Danish the concept is called a Supervisor letter, and is thoroughly described by Rienecker, Harboe and Stray Jørgensen (2005). The purpose of a memorandum of understanding is to clarify expectations and practices of both an institutional and individual nature. Such a memorandum of understanding can have any shape or form, but it is typically 1-5 pages long. It can be handed out before the first supervision meeting, at the first meeting or be made accessible online. Regardless of how it is presented to students, the idea is not to present the MoU as set in stone or to tell students: “This is what you get – take it or leave it”. The MoU is rather a suggestion, a current version of a continuously negotiable agreement between the student and supervisor.

330

What can a memorandum of understanding include? The list below offers suggestions for themes you may want to include in your memorandum of understanding. Consider it a source of inspiration and use only the points you find necessary in any given supervision context. Try to formulate your input in the form of an answer to a specific question from a student. 1. Academic content and text feedback [Textual competences]

• How do you normally supervise? What stage of readiness do you require of the texts you read? • How much of the paper will you read (drafts of)? • Do you offer feedback on drafts? • How close to the text is your supervision? • Can you describe the criteria (for a paper, thesis, dissertation), on which you base your supervision and eventually base your assessment? • Which written material do you offer supervision on – in advance, during and concluding: e.g., synopsis, structure, preliminary/provisional bibliographies, working papers, drafts? • Do you prefer printed or digital text? 2. Resources and progress [Project management competences]

• How do you expect to collaborate with students on dissertations/assignments/research? How do you define “independence”? • How many hours of supervision do you typically offer? • Do you require preparation for (and follow up on) meetings? • Do you expect to be informed about the writer’s plans, resources, progress (or lack thereof)? • What else do you expect the writer to do and contribute – before, during and at the end: for example, do you want a competence profile of the student with descriptions of study-related prerequisites and which methods the student has previously worked with before supervision? 3. Agreements and meetings/discussions about supervision [Communication competences]

• How are supervision agreements made and potentially broken with you? • When can supervision start and end? • Which types of mutual evaluations of supervision do you expect to take place?

331

• How many work days will you expect/use for preparation/response? What are your views on cancellations, deadlines etc.? Are there any procedures? Will it have consequences? • How do you end supervision? • How can you be contacted? • Do you have an email codex? • Which written material would you like to receive in regards to agreements you make with students? Contracts? Minutes of meetings? Some model examples of memorandum of understandings are available in:

• For assignment/project and dissertation supervisors: Rienecker, L., T. Harboe & P. Stray Jørgensen 2005: 62-66. • For PhD-supervisors: Handal, G. & P. Lauvås 2006: 182-84. Figure 1. Template for a memorandum of understanding. (Source: Rienecker, Stray Jørgensen & Harboe 2005).

Supervisor contracts

Another option is to draw up a supervisor contract, which is more or less an expanded memorandum of understanding (Hockey 1996). In a supervisor contract, the supervisor and student together write down an agreement they have made about the content and form of supervision. (Supervisor contracts are thus different from and, in some ways, more detailed than the so called Thesis contract, that is used as a way to meet the requirements in The Danish Act on Universities (The University Act), that states that the director of studies is responsible for approving a “plan for the student’s supervision” (section 18, subsection 5). The supervisor contracts outline a consensus, which the parties have reached after discussing the supervisor’s proposal in his or her memorandum of understanding. For some supervisors, this may sound extremely formal and time consuming. Therefore, each supervisor must assess whether and when the tool seems meaningful to use. The strength of a contract is that it is a shared document and therefore binding. Supervisory expectations questionnaire

A third useful tool for negotiating expectations is what we could call an “Supervisory expectations questionnaire”. These questionnaires typically 332

include a number of central questions or statements that the supervisor may request the student to answer or consider. The supervisor may also choose to answer the questions and use the different answers as a basis for a joint discussion. There are many excellent examples of this type of expectation matching, and supervisors can apply them directly or adapt them to suit their own preferences (see Resources at the end of this chapter.) The following is an example adapted from Moses (1985) Directions

Read each pair of statements on this sheet. Each expresses a standpoint supervisors and students may take. Please estimate your position and mark it on the scale. For example with statement 1, if you believe very strongly that it is the supervisor’s responsibility to select a good topic you would put a ring round ‘1’. If you think that both the supervisor and the student should equally be involved you put a ring round ‘3’ and if you think it is definitely the student’s responsibility to select a topic, put a ring round ‘5’. Student name: Supervisor/s names: Date: 1. It is the supervisors’ responsibility to select a research topic.

12345

The student is responsible for selecting her/his own topic.

2. It is the supervisor/s who decide which theoretical framework and/or methodology is most appropriate.

12345

Students should decide theoretical framework and/or methodology they wish to use.

3. The supervisor/s should develop an appropriate program and timetable of research and study for the student.

12345

The supervisor/s should leave the development of the program and timetable of research and study to the student.

4. The supervisor/s are responsible for ensuring that the student has access to the appropriate services and facilities of the element and the University.

12345

It is the student’s responsibility to ensure that she/he has located and accessed all relevant services and facilities for the research.

5. It is the supervisors’ responsibility to advise the student of the relevant policies, procedures and requirements relating to their candidature.

12345

The student is responsible for being familiar with the relevant policies, procedures and requirements relating to their candidature.

6. Student-supervisor relationships are purely professional and personal relationships should not develop.

12345

Close personal relationships are essential for successful supervision.

7. The supervisor/s should insist on regular meetings with the student.

12345

The student should decide when she/ he wants to meet with the supervisor/s.

333

8. The principal supervisor is responsible for coordinating all communication between the supervisors and the student.

12345

The student should coordinate all communication between the members of the supervisory team.

9. The supervisor/s should check regularly that the student is working consistently and on task.

12345

The student should work independently and not have to account for how and where time is spent.

10. The supervisor/s should ensure that the thesis is finished by the maximum submission date.

12345

As long as a student works steadily she/he can take as long as she/he needs to finish the work.

11. Supervisor/s should insist on seeing all drafts of work to ensure that the student is on the right track.

12345

Students should submit drafts of work only when they want constructive criticism from the supervisor/s.

12. Supervisor/s should assist in the writing of the thesis if necessary and should ensure that the presentation is flawless.

12345

The writing of the thesis should only ever be the student’s own work and the student must take full responsibility for presentation of the thesis.

13. Supervisor/s are responsible for decisions regarding the standard of the thesis.

12345

The student is responsible for decisions concerning the standard of the thesis.

14. Supervisor/s are responsible for deciding on the recognition received for the student’s and supervisor/s contributions to publications that arise during and after candidature.

12345

The student should decide on the recognition received for joint contribution to publications that arise during and after candidature.

Figure 1. A supervisory expectations questionnaire.

Teaching model, apprenticeship model or partnership model? In this section, we introduce different views of the relationship between supervisor and student, and we base the presentation on an interesting study based on extensive interviews with supervisors and students (Dysthe & Samara 2006). We start by describing three different models developed at by Dysthe & Samara on the basis of their study: the teaching model, the apprentice model and the partnership model. Following this, we focus on the last model, the partnership model, and argue that it has a number of advantages that make it highly useful for supervision, but which also place great demands on the supervisor’s competences. The teaching model is a continuation of the traditional teacher-pupil-relationship, where the teacher has the ability and knowledge, and the pupil is there to be taught. The supervisor’s function is primarily to be the expert and control the student’s work. The strength of this position in supervision is that it ensures effective and systematic dissemination of knowledge. The weakness of such an asymmetrical relationship is that the student can easily become a co-dependent and at times submissive par334

ty. Another disadvantage is that supervision will predominantly consist of monologues, where the supervisor not only speaks the most but also “owns” the initiative to speak and control communication. In the apprenticeship model, supervision is organised and practised according to the same training principles known from traditional apprenticeship in craftsmanship trades. The student learns through osmosis – by being part of a practice community, i.e., by observing practice, then carrying out simple tasks and gradually attending to more complex tasks with increasing experience. Supervision is often brief and specific, and characterised by advice and correction. When this form of supervision works, it is extremes efficient. However, it can also prove risky. Supervision easily risks being overly ad hoc and problem-solving, just as there is a risk of it becoming unclear who is responsible for the outcome of the supervision. In the partnership model, the relationship is fairly symmetrical, and the task is considered a shared responsibility. Supervision is characterised by conversations, where both parties ask and answer and explore options and interpretations together. Naturally, the supervisor contributes with his or her assessments, but these are more in the shape of dialogue and discussion than corrections. The supervisor considers it an important task to help the student become critical and inquiring, and to make the student argue for her/his choices and decisions. The major advantage is that the student is invited to assume an active and co-responsible role, for example by setting the agenda for what to talk about and how. The disadvantage of the model is that it depends on students’ willingness and ability to assume this position. Presumably, it therefore requires more precision and negotiation of the roles than the two other models.

The partnership model – why and how? The above clearly shows that there is no ‘one size fits all’-type of supervision for all levels and all fields. It is no coincidence that Dysthe and Samara find that the apprenticeship model often crops up in natural scientific and health scientific disciplines, whereas laboratory subjects are based on an instructive form of supervision and close daily contact in communities of practice. It may also prove difficult, even inappropriate, to use a partnership model in brief runs of supervision at the Bachelor level, because the relationship between teacher and student is highly asymmetrical. It 335

is also possible that many supervisors tend to practice a teacher model in the early phases of supervision – even in PhD-supervision – because they think that the student has not yet shown or developed sufficient independence. One central point in Dysthe and Samara’s study is that most supervisors, regardless of level and field, have a tendency to act as “teachers” and speak and advise most of the time, even though they believe themselves to (and want to) act according to the partnership model and to facilitate a dialogue-based supervision. According to the authors, just as many students accept this teacher model, and indirectly request it, because it is a familiar pattern known from previous schooling. Our (and Dysthe and Samara’s) recommendation is therefore that the supervisor must, as a minimum, be aware of which models they use, when and why, if they want to avoid stepping into a familiar role pattern. We wish to take this one step further and recommend using the partnership model in contexts where the supervisor deliberately attempts to encourage students’ active contributions in supervision, their independence, responsibility, ownership, critical thinking and reflection. In the remainder of this chapter, we shall provide inspiration and tools for doing this: Which frameworks are needed to make both parties take responsibility and contribute actively to the supervision meeting? Which tools can you use to make supervision dialogue-based? How can the conversation contribute to a joint exploration of choices and options?

Meta-communication One prerequisite for supervision – particularly in the partnership model – is that supervisors are not only able to talk to students in supervision, but also about supervision, i.e., they must be able to meta-communicate (Lauvås & Handal 2001). Meta-communication denotes conversation about the conversation, i.e.: • Conversations about the way in which you talk together in supervision (E.g., “What I’m saying now is controversial”, “Let me give you an example”). • Conversations about the way supervision is carried out/conversations about the relationship between supervisor and student. (E.g., “So far

336

I have praised your drafts. In the next part of the conversation, I plan to play the devil’s advocate and I will be very critical of your draft”). Meta-communication can help clear up misunderstandings, make supervision more comprehensible to students, improve the outcome of supervision and allow you to address and deal with potential conflicts (Baltzersen 2013). If the relationship or form of conversation is unclear to students, they will focus on understanding this aspect rather than the academic content. One staple situation of supervision is when students seek specific advice, and the supervisor would rather avoid giving specific advice. The student might feel cheated and suspect that the supervisor is holding something back or is unprepared; perhaps even incompetent. The supervisor might feel pressured to supply solutions – “I’ll lose all credibility if I don’t give some good advice soon”. To build a bridge across seemingly conflicting positions, the supervisor can meta-communicate about the way supervision is carried out. The supervisor might for example say something like: It is my impression that you would like some good advice. I will give you some along the way, but first you must explain to me your question, so I can look into it. Then I would like to hear what answers you have considered yourself, and how you assess these answers. Your question is so important that I do not want to give you a rushed answer.

It is important that not only supervisors, but also students, get used to meta-communicating and taking initiative to meta-communicate – which in itself is an objective of supervision.

Framing the student’s responsibility Supervision is in many ways an ambitious endeavour, during which you have only a limited time to reach a number of academic and process-related goals. Therefore, it is necessary that a supervisor assumes the general responsibility for supervision. However, this is not the same as stripping the student of all responsibility – on the contrary. As mentioned previously, one goal of supervision is that the student must learn to participate. To achieve this goal, we recommend that the supervisor invite the student to take part actively in supervision from the very start of supervision. 337

In connection with short or one-off supervisions, you may for example: • Make sure students are aware of what they can expect of supervision (e.g. refer to a MoU). • Invite students to help frame and summarise the discussion. • Make sure students are aware of what is expected of them (in terms of preparation, submission and possible questions to the supervisor in advance). • Organise preparatory activities for supervision, for example by asking students to use the research question guide Scribo (http://www.scribo. dk/) and then discuss their drafts in groups (other models or tools are available too. See chapter 5.2 on text supervision).

In connection with long-term supervision, you can make agreements with the student that (s)he: • Is responsible for sending a short text before the meeting about what has happened since the last meeting and with some suggestions for the agenda. • During the meeting contributes to framing and evaluating supervision. • After meetings sends minutes of the supervision.

Dialogue-based supervision In partnership-oriented supervision, the dialogue is typically the principal form of communication. However, carrying out a qualified dialogue requires a number of competences related to both listening and questioning technique. We will start by considering the classic distinction between open and closed questions, and then we will present a model for creating dialogue in supervision. Open and closed questions

One simple way to distinguish between different types of questions is to distinguish between closed and open questions. Closed questions are typically used to obtain factual information. The answer will often be specific, simple and short. Closed question typically produce what is called 338

surface learning (Biggs 2011), i.e., learning that primarily has to do with reproducing knowledge, for example to identify a certain literary movement, provide a definition of classic liberalism, list typical medication against cardiac insufficiency etc. As opposed to closed questions, open questions lead to elaborate and more comprehensive answers. They invite the respondent to freely unfold, elaborate, describe and explain his or her thoughts and considerations. At the same time, open questions indicate that you are interested in the student’s ideas. Open questions are therefore well suited to promote deep learning, i.e., thinking that entails analysis and reflection. The fact that closed questions sharply delimit the possible response does not mean that they are not useful. Their use is perfectly legitimate when the supervisor needs specific answers to concrete questions. However, too many closed questions is counter-productive, and can turn the supervision into an interrogation or examination. Qualifying open questions – a conversation model

While it is relatively easy to distinguish between closed and open questions, it is harder to differentiate between different types of open questions. It is important to be aware of the kinds of open questions that you ask and what your purpose of doing so is. Higher order learning

Examining questions Uncover Clarifying questions

Challenging questions 2

3

1

4

Change Evaluating questions

Lower order learning

Figure 2. A conversation model for supervision, inspired by Karl Tomm’s four question types (Rosenkvist & Hansen-Skovmoes 2002).

339

We therefore present this model (figure 2) that shows that supervision must ideally include this number of phases and that certain question types are connected to each phase. The model should not be considered a “recipe” but rather a mental model that supervisors can keep in mind to ensure progression in supervision and to ensure that supervision provides and supports a sufficient academic level of discussion. The basic principle of the model is the distinction between two dimensions. The horizontal dimension shows whether the supervisor’s intention of asking questions is to uncover or to transform. When the supervisor’s intention is to explore the student’s ideas and actions, we say that the supervisor is trying to uncover. The supervisor may try to determine how the student has searched for literature, which ideas the student may have about the research question or which concepts and theories the student is working from. When the supervisor’s intention is to challenge the student to see new perspectives and to test the student’s willingness to think on the basis of other methods or theories, we say that the supervisor is trying to transform the student’s thinking. Put simply, the difference is between asking questions to understand what the student understands or asking questions to increase the student’s understanding. The vertical dimension depicts the supervisor’s intention with asking questions that promote lower or higher-order learning. There is a difference between whether a supervisor asks questions on a lower-order learning level, e.g., to ensure that the student’s fundamental knowledge and understanding is sufficient (which can be an important and relevant part of supervision), or whether the supervisor asks questions on higher-order learning levels, e.g., so the student learns to synthesise a number of factors, make a decision and perhaps predict the consequences of making the decision. When the two dimensions intersect, four phases occur in a supervision conversation. However, although it is useful to divide supervision into phases, we are not dealing with chronologically fixed sequences. We are, rather, dealing with different elements that must be covered in the conversation, and which require different dialogical competences. The core principle in the order of the phases is that the supervisor carefully familiarises him-/herself with the student’s ideas, reasons and evaluations, before the supervisor attempts to contribute his/her own views and advice.

340

The conversation model used in supervision – a case In the following, we apply the model on an imaginary case and provide examples of the different types of questions that the supervisor could use in the specific situation.

Case A Anne is a PhD-student in Social Science, and is about to carry out a study of the psychological study environment at Aarhus University based on a questionnaire. She has spent the first two months reading literature, partly to improve her hypotheses, and partly to identify relevant topics for the questionnaire. In preparation for her next round of supervision, Anne has sent her supervisor the first draft of hypotheses and topics for the questionnaire. She has attached a cover letter in which she writes: “As you can see, I have decided that the questionnaire will cover seven topics: 1. Well-being, 2. Contact with fellow students and teachers, 3. The organisation of teaching, 4. Social life at university, 5. Workload, 6. Effort, 7. Stress. And for each topic I have formulated a hypothesis. I am uncertain about how to proceed with the questionnaire. I have – as you know – conducted a thorough search for literature, and I have also tried formulating specific questions in the questionnaire. However, I find it difficult to assess whether it is ‘tenable’.”

Phase 1 – Clarifying questions

Ideally, a supervision conversation starts in phase 1, in which the supervisor listens to the ideas, questions or problems that the student presents. One important part of the conversation’s first phase is the definition of the objective of the supervision. The supervisor must therefore ask about the student’s needs and expectations, and clarifying questions are particularly useful at this stage. It is also valuable for the supervisor to ask the student to elaborate and exemplify his/her ideas, actions and choices early on in the conversation. This provides both supervisor and student with a shared insight into and knowledge of the student’s situation, which ensures that the factual aspects are clarified, plus it often has a calming effect on the student. Clarifying questions are relatively easy to answer, 341

and they demonstrate the supervisor’s ability and desire to understand the specific case and whatever problems the student may have encountered.

Examples of clarifying questions • What is the most important thing to cover in this meeting, or: Which questions or problems would you prefer we discuss? • What literature have you studied to narrow down “well-being”? • How did you search for that literature? Which search terms did you use? • How do you define “well-being”? • When do you expect to distribute the pilot questionnaire? • Who will you send the questionnaire to the first time round? And to how many? • What, how, who, where, when, which, how many?

Phase 2 – Examining questions

In the second phase of the conversations, the supervisor is no longer just interested in uncovering factual information about the problem, but is now concerned with “reaching a deeper level” and attempts to uncover the student’s knowledge, understanding and argumentation. Therefore, it is important that the supervisor asks about the reasons as well as the considerations that drive the student’s decisions and actions. Examining questions are well suited to this purpose. We tend to formulate examining questions as why-questions, e.g. “Why did you choose to use those search engines?”, “Why do you want to analyse data in that way?” However, supervisors should limit the use of why-questions. The problem with why-questions is that they are often interpreted as critical or reproachful; as an indication of something being wrong – or even as a kind of accusation. When we ask why, we place our conversation partner in a defensive position and appeal to rationalisation (Lindh & Lisper 1990). This is why you may want to ask how, what, which etc. instead.

Examples of examining questions • What is your argument for interpreting well-being as “satisfaction”?

342

• Which possible connections between stress and well-being have you considered? • What is the basis for your hypothesis that students’ personal “baggage” is significant to their well-being? • How did you determine that gender should be the independent variable? • What do you think about…? What are your reasons for…?

Phase 3 – Challenging questions

To bolster the student’s learning and create greater insight, the supervisor must at some point transcend the examining position and be more critical. This is phase 3. The supervisor can do this by asking challenging questions. These are questions that are aimed to motivate the student to reflect critically on his/her own understanding, and to question his or her own assumptions. Among other things, the supervisor can inspire the student to view the situation from new angles and consider alternative courses of action. The supervisor might choose to introduce new knowledge, new perspectives or new opportunities for analysis that require the student to reconsider his or her choices and conclusions. The supervisor may also ask the student to apply the specific case to other situations to support the student in carefully considering the implications of the choices (s)he has made and evaluate possible alternatives.

Examples of challenging questions • If you had used the search term “learning environment” in your search instead of “study environment”, what results do you think your search would have had? • The topics you have chosen for the questionnaire are primarily drawn from work environment research conducted in workplaces. What risks are involved in the transferal of concepts and findings from that field of research to the learning and teaching environment? • What are the possible consequences of a singular focus on the psychological study environment? • Might it be relevant to include institution-specific conditions? • What could or would the consequences be if we were to…? What might happen if…?

343

Phase 4 – Evaluating questions

The fourth and last phase primarily concerns making the conversation’s most important learning elements evident. That may include underlying theory, ways of thinking, methods for analysis or other things the student has become more aware of during supervision. In this phase, the supervisor’s task is therefore to ask evaluating questions that help the student summarise what he/she has learned and what needs further work. If the supervisor cannot make the student express these things, (s)he can choose to state what (s)he considers an important outcome of supervision, and ask for the student’s response to this. Evaluating questions are good for concluding a supervision conversation. They are used to conclude all – or parts of – the conversation, and simultaneously to establish a direction for the next phase of the student’s work. At the same time, the questions can serve another important purpose in that the supervisor can get feedback on his/her supervision, i.e., a conversation about the conversation (what was particularly useful in (this) supervision? How did the relationship work? Did the student get the help he/she wanted?).

Examples of evaluating questions • Just to summarise, I would like to know what you take with you from today’s meeting? • Has anything been confirmed or reminded you of anything? • What do you think of … now? • Did we talk about everything we planned to? Did we reach the goals we had set for this meeting? • When is the next meeting? What should we follow-up on next time?

The conversation model applied to process management

The above case exemplified a methodological problem, but the conversation model can also profitably be applied to process-related problems. In the following, we describe an imaginary case with the same student, Anne, who approaches her supervisor a year into her studies because she has problems prioritising and finishing her assignments. She starts off the supervision session by saying?

344

Case B “I am going to a conference in Melbourne, and I haven’t even started on my abstract even though the deadline is just one week away. I feel stuck in my analysis, and can’t really find any uninterrupted time to work on my data. The institute has asked me to teach quite a few classes this semester. I find it hard to say no to other interesting tasks. I’ve agreed to be in charge of a lot of the practical work in connection with planning and carrying out the department’s project day next month, and at the last teaching committee meeting, I was encouraged to sign up as the project coordinator for the department’s evaluation project. And if that wasn’t enough, we still haven’t found a day nursery for our youngest. So I have no idea where to find the time to do anything. What do you think I should do?”

If you as a supervisor are presented with a problem of this type, it will seem obvious to immediately “diagnose” the problem and “treat” it with good advice. She has expressed her problems in the form of a question: “What do you think I should do?”, and thus, consciously or unconsciously, asked for a reply that will help her get out of the situation she finds herself in. Most experienced supervisors have encountered many similar dilemmas before and learned from experience and developed his or hers own strategies. The normal reaction is to give answers based on one’s own experiences, opinions and values. However, as a supervisor, the most important task is to get the student’s own ideas into play and clarify her reasons and evaluate the options she sees. This does not exclude the supervisor from presenting his/her views and insight, as long as these are not presented as definite answers, but rather as a contribution to the student’s own considerations. The following examples are questions that could be relevant to ask in this kind of supervision situation:

Clarifying questions • What does your work plan look like at the moment? • How much of your analysis have you completed? • You talk about extra teaching assignments. What are they? • Who asked you to take charge of the project day next month?

345

Examining questions • How serious is your situation? • Why do you think you take on the other tasks? • You say that you find the other tasks interesting. How so? • Why do you find it hard to say no? • Do you have ideas of how you will get your private life and work life to fit together?

Challenging questions • What do you think are your options for solving this problem? • How do you think your best colleague would deal with the situation? Is that a strategy you could use? • How do you think the institute would react if you declined some of the extra tasks? • It sounds to me like the teaching assignments bring you more satisfaction than the research. What do you think about that interpretation? • It sounds like you need more “protected” research time. What keeps you from taking it or asking for it?

Evaluating questions • Next time we meet what would you like to have achieved? • What will you do if it does not go as planned? • How can I help you in that process? • What should we follow up on next time?

The personal dimension and the difficult conversation The sessions where the personal relationship is brought into focus as a result of emotional reactions are often considered particularly difficult by supervisors. In these situations, we recommend that supervisors use different strategies such as:

Prepare the course of the conversation – if possible You can prepare yourself for some difficult conversations, others simply happen. However, if extensive criticism of a student’s work is called for, it is possible to plan both how to present this criticism in advance, how

346

you can respond to any emotional reactions, and how you ensure that the student leaves the meeting with a clear idea for how to solve the problems.

Set boundaries and refer to other resource persons In other situations, it may be necessary to set boundaries for your supervision’s scope and/or content, which can make the student feel rejected and cause him/her to react with anger or tears. It will be useful to specify in advance what you cannot or will not provide help with, and to know whom you can refer to (e.g., the Student Counselling Service, study guidance office, library courses, literature and web resources about academic study skills).

Discuss the situation with a colleague Sometimes, events beyond the walls of the university cause an emotional outburst, e.g., grief at the loss of a parent. For a supervisor, it can be a shock to have a student suddenly burst into tears (whether or not it is the first time this happens), and regardless of how you handle the situation, it can be useful and therapeutic to discuss the incident with a colleague afterwards.

Creating a learning space in supervision Supervisors normally enjoy helping students they are responsible for supervising, and it may be tempting to let supervision consist purely of solutions and good advice. Both strong subject knowledge and social norms encourage that the supervisor should provide clear answers and specific solutions that clear away any obstacles so that the student can get on with his/her work. However, if you, as a supervisor, wish to encourage students’ independence and capacity for critical reflection, you must lay the groundwork in your supervision. In this chapter, we have suggested different methods and tools for the creation of a learning space in supervision. A learning space where the student is invited to be an active part of supervision, where supervision is not reduced to quick problem-solving, and where there is room for and language available for the supervisor and student to reflect on the process together and learn from it. It must be emphasised that the complexity of supervision means that supervision is a task that you can never put to formula and consider complete. The

347

complexity means you will continue to be challenged, and that the task of supervision contains great potential for exploring all your didactic creativity – in the sense that you will have to continuously discover and create didactic tools and methods to address themes and challenges in specific supervision situations.

Resources • http://researchsuper.cedam.anu.edu.au/ • http://www.uwo.ca/tsc/faculty_programs/graduate_supervision.html • http://researchsuper.cedam.anu.edu.au/stages-candidature/clarifying-expectations • http://researchsuper.chelt.anu.edu.au/sites/researchsuper.chelt.anu. edu.au/files/expectations_rating_o.pdf • http://www.learning.ox.ac.uk/supervision/supervisor/relationships/ • http://ki.se/content/1/c6/02/Successful%20Supervision%20-%20a %20dialogue%20Facilitator.pdf Handal, G. & P. Lauvås (2006). Forskerveilederen. Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag. – The most well-written, thorough and up-to-date book covering all aspects of PhD-supervision. Rienecker, L., T. Harboe & P. Stray Jørgensen (2005). Vejledning – en brugsbog for opgave- og specialevejledere på videregående uddannelser. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. – A solid and applicable all-round book about supervision in all phases of project and thesis work. Andersen, H.L. & T.W. Jensen (2007). Specialevejledning – rammer og roller. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. – Provides insight into thesis supervisors’ and students’ experiences with and reflections on supervision in the humanities.

Literature Baltzersen, R K. (2013). The Importance of Metacommunication in Supervision Processes. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(2): 128-140. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 2nd ed. New York: Open University Press. Brown, G. & M. Atkins (1988). Effective teaching in higher education. London: Methuen.

348

Dyste, O. & A. Samara (2006). Forskningsveiledning på master- og doktorgradsnivå. Oslo: Abstrakt Forlag. Hockey, J. (1996). A Contractual Solution to Problems in the Supervision of PhD Degrees in the UK. Studies in Higher Education, 21(3): 359-71. Kiley, M. (2003). Conserver, Strategist or Transformer: The experiences of postgraduate student Sojourners. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(3): 345-356. Laustsen, S. et al. (2012). Brugen af vejlederbreve til universitetsstuderende – en diskussion af dets betydning i vejledningsprocessen. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 7(12): 46-57. Lauvås, P. & G. Handal (2001). Vejledning og praktisk fagteori. Aarhus: Forlaget Klim. Lindh, G. & H.-O. Lisper (1990). Samtal för förandring. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Moses, I. (1985). Supervising postgraduates. HERDSA Green Guide No 3. Kensington: Higher Education Research & Development Society of Australia. Rosenkvist, G. & P. Hansen-Skovmoes (2002). Coaching som udviklingsværktøj. I R. Stelter (ed.), Coaching – læring og udvikling. Copenhagen: Psykologisk Forlag: 107-28. Tomm, K. (1998). Interventive Interviewing: Part III. Intending to Ask Lineal, Circular, Reflexive or Strategic Questions? Family Process, 27: 1-15. Wichmann-Hansen, G., B. Eika & A.M. Mørcke (2007). Hvad findes der af litteratur om vejledning? – Litteratursøgning med fokus på publicerede, evidensbaserede studier. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 2(3): 11-9.

349

350

5.2 Text in supervision – supervising on texts PETER STRAY JØRGENSEN AND LOTTE RIENECKER

This chapter comprises suggestions on how to base supervision on students’ texts, and we describe the genre that students must produce. The chapter can profitably be read with chapter 4.6.1 Feedback.

The supervisor’s challenges Supervision is a learning process, and the theses’ (supervision is mostly given to thesis-writers) learning outcomes govern supervision (cf., the Qualifications Framework 2011). If supervision is aimed towards producing good texts – i.e., texts that provide qualification and competence – it is useful for supervisors and students to not only focus on academic content and relationships and the process in general, but also on the textual requirements and quality criteria that the theses and research papers must live up to. On courses primarily aimed at experienced thesis supervisors held at the University of Copenhagen’s Faculty of Humanities between 2007 and 2011, supervisors reported that the most prominent and general problems they saw were that students struggled to: • Understand the problem-oriented research genre and its elements; the students often struggle to do more than merely repeating and summarising existing knowledge. • Gain an overview of their text (here: their thesis) and establish a goal-oriented argumentation structure where the elements of the texts all have a clear function in the text’s development towards the conclusion. • Integrate theory, methods and data in analyses; subject knowledge (theory and methods) and the material being examined (data) may be too far apart. 351

In addition, there are other practical problems, such as inappropriate use of sources, incoherent language and lack of grammatical skills. These problems appear in the texts the supervisor sees, but can be hard to conceptualise. If supervision does not (also) focus on genre and its requirements and criteria, it can be hard to observe, analyse, evaluate – and supervise e.g., • The research question • The reasoning • The integration of theories and methods in analyses • Argumentation • Disciplinary discourse and academic conventions • Structure and formats • Use of sources • Textual coherence These are all formats and skills which are important academic qualifications and must therefore be respected when performing any research or academic inquiry. All of these skills are demonstrated in texts. Supervision without texts therefore cannot be considered more than half a supervision. This section concerns supervision of research papers, i.e., final academic papers, Bachelor’s theses or -projects, Master’s papers, theses, dissertations involving a research inquiry, but also indirectly about smaller assignments that relate to and/or train skills that are necessary in the research genre.

The central recommendations of this section are: • The student’s text is the concrete starting point for supervision. • The product and genre is the aim – also of the process. • Research criteria are the driving criteria for both text and work process. Text supervision must take into account the relevant conventions and formats. • The paper’s basic elements (e.g., represented in the research paper’s pentagon (see below) provides a basis for evaluation of the scientific nature of the paper’s inquiry.

352

• The genre requirements and textual quality criteria in the supervision must be communicated to the student, and gradually developed through working with the text in supervision.

The framework for text supervision

The programme management define the criteria for good papers and for preparing a writing syllabus with learning outcomes for each programme on the basis of the course descriptions of the study programmes and relevant legislation. Supervision is (also) a reflection of which text genre the writer works with, and is a reflection of the writer’s, the supervisor’s and the examiner’s textual community. This is the framework within which supervisor and student work. The genre

We would suggest that the supervisor keeps both the end product and the academic content in mind in supervision. The research paper is written in a specific genre, which represents the written form of scientific inquiry. You should not necessarily introduce students to this genre on the very first day, but it must be included in supervision along the way and form the criteria for the finished paper. Supervision must be aimed at content, literature and data as well as the research process and the documentation of inquiry that a research paper demonstrates. The definition of the research genre includes these elements:

The research genre involves: • Documenting • Research • Of a subject-specific problem • In a given field (“state of the art”) • By means of the theories, concepts and methods of the field • With the purpose of convincing • Peers • Of the accuracy of the results and conclusions of the research • Presented in a way that is acceptable to the field’s discursive community

353

The supervisor’s options In the following, we will examine suggestions for different options in textbased supervision. The suggestions are to: • Supervise from the top, down into the layers of the text: The overall and general before the details. • Use the research paper pentagon (which describes the research’s fundamental basis) in both product and process supervision. • Use existing text formats and templates in supervision. • Use observations in the text as a basis for supervision. • (Only) supervise topics that are relevant in view of the writer’s time frame. The purpose of text supervision

Supervision can have many purposes. We recommend that the supervisor explicates and substantiates the purposes of the supervision in question. The purpose of text supervision is primarily to enable the student to improve his or her text (presentation of academic content). Through dialogue with the student, the supervisor can support and encourage, prompt reflection and provide advice for the next paper or project, process and product, empower the student in relation to criteria and giving feedback. However, supervision in general also means familiarising students with the field’s content (knowledge), research methods (skills) and forms of expression (discourses). Top-down supervision

Studies (e.g., Dysthe 2008, Burke & Pieterick 2010) indicate that students prefer feedback from global (evaluation) to local (documentation), or topdown: 1.  The basis, i.e., content (evaluation and observations that support the evaluation). 2.  The form, i.e., elements and their structure (evaluation and observations that support the evaluation). 3.  The wording, i.e., specific information, text on sentence and word level (evaluation and observations that support the evaluation). 354

We suggest that the supervisor begins by supervising and commenting on the text’s basis and content level, and does not concern himself/herself with details of structure and linguistic correctness – if the supervisor offers more than one supervision meeting. If only a little supervision has been allocated, we suggest that the supervisor focuses on the paper’s basis and on exemplary sections:

The minimal model for text supervision of… 1.  T he basis of the text (can be done on one page!). Be particularly observant of: operational research question, method(s), possibilities for raising the level of analysis or reaching a higher level on Bloom’s taxonomy. 2.  An exemplary draft extract (can be done on a few pages of the student’s text). Especially look for: knowledge transforming (versus knowledge telling) and treatment of sources (know, use (analyse), evaluate).

Here is a schematic suggestion of where to focus your specific supervision. Phases in text supervision:

Which parts of the text should you focus on, and when?

Before writing

During writing

• Prior knowledge about product, process and quality criteria. • General skills, e.g., information search. • Knowledge of the framework of supervision. • Writing process, when to start writing.

At the beginning

During

At the end

Global topics: • Research question. Research design. • Content, data, material. • Sources. • Theories, methods, central concepts. • Observations. • The project’s idea and concept. • Overall argumentation.

Process: • Information search. • Form, structure and presentation. • Tone, style. • Significant pieces of text (e.g., analyses, detailed argumentation, evaluations, discussion). • Specific use of theories, concepts and methods.

Local topics: • Linguistic errors. • Formalities. • Blunders. • Details.

What sets the shared ground rules for cooperation

What constitutes the research design

After writing

What may help propel writing

Comments on the basis of explicit quality criteria, useful advice.

General: • Checking the text as a whole: Is it coherent?

What needs to be checked in revision

What lessons should be learned for future writing

Source: Rienecker, Harboe & Stray Jørgensen 2005.

355

This also means that there is a difference between which text elements are best suited for supervision at different times in the students’ writing process. Good texts for supervision At the beginning: • Regular presentations and paper proposals. • Research questions. • Preliminary introductions and conclusions (hypotheses). • Substantiated suggestions for data, theories, methods. • Concept definitions. • The first data and calculations, models, visualisations. • Suggestions for sources.

While writing is underway: • Analyses, evaluations, reflections, reasoning, argumentation. • Interpretation of data and calculations. • Structure outline. • Inclusion and use of materials and sources (knowledge transforming text (Bereither & Scardamalia 1987). • Method and method discussion sections.

In the final phase: • Edited sections. • Formalities. • Abstract.

The tables above represent an ideal, and writing and supervision are far from linear activities. Supervision must be tailored to the specific student and his/her writing process. Incomplete and exemplary texts

Furthermore, it is a good idea to review students’ texts while they are still drafts that can be improved. Drafts must naturally be legible and make some sense to the supervisor. However, it is best that you do not ask for drafts that are linguistically polished until the end, or focus can easily shift from substance to form before form is important. Drafts for supervision should be exemplary, so the supervisor does not, for example, have to look at all the analyses for a paper/project, but to supervise on one chapter or section, and leave it to the student to transfer the relevant suggestions to other similar analyses, chapters etcetera. Cover letter

The supervisor can (should?) also ask that submitted texts be accompanied by a cover letter in which the student identifies the topics, problems, or challenges he or she is unsure about, or which has caused him or her to come to a standstill and wants supervision for.

356

Early supervision on the idea for a paper

Early supervision on a proposal for a paper/project may focus on: • The writer’s observations and curiosity. • The original interest and fascination – can it be used? • Possible claims and conclusions as the starting point for research questions, i.e., overall argumentation. • Possible sources. • Opportunities for analyses: what (material, data) may be analysed, with what (concepts, theories and methods) and how (methods and methodologies)? Especially: how theories/methods are combined into an analytical approach. • Linguistic precision and disciplinary terminology in the research question. The research design: The pentagon model as a tool for supervision

Supervisors may use the pentagon model below as a point of departure. At some point supervision should be substantiated by the genre definition (p. 354), i.e., the problem-based research that the research paper is supposed to document. The fundamental basis of the research consists of the corners of this pentagon model: 1. The question researched in your paper (research question) What is your question?

5. Your research procedure How do you ask your question? Which steps will you undertake?

4. The tools of your research: Theories, concepts, scientific methods Which tools do you use when asking your question?

2. The academic purpose(s) and possible use of your research Why do you ask this question?

3. The data, material and phenomena of your research What is your question about?

X

FigureX1. The pentagon model of the research design.

357

The pentagon model and its use is elaborated in Rienecker & Stray Jørgensen 2012; Stray Jørgensen, Rienecker & Skov 2011. You may introduce students to the pentagon model, and in supervision you may use it to check that research design is appropriate, operational and sufficiently developed, i.e., whether the corners have been addressed sufficiently. The pentagon model may be filled out as an agenda for discussing whether the necessary elements of the research, i.e., the research paper design, is “sound”, or whether any corners need more work. The examples in the following are drawn from courses in academic writing from Bachelor- to PhD-level. Pentagon to be filled out 2. Research question 1. Research design

5. Concepts, theories, methods

3. Purpose

4. Data, material, phenomena

Figure 2. Before and after pictures of the pentagon model applied to ongoing student research. After picture in Danish.

Use templates for research paper elements

Across faculties and disciplines, the research paper genre has a fairly uniform structure, which includes certain conventions for text structure and presentation (e.g., Swales 1990, Hyland 2000, Booth et al. 2008). There are conventions and templates for elements and text types such as

358

• Standard structures • Argumentation • Introduction • Conclusion • Literature review • Analysis • Discussion • Method section and method discussions These templates can be downloaded in Danish from www.sos.samfunds­ litteratur.dk (The website of Specielt om specialer (2011)). Here are some examples:

Figure 3. Examples of templates for a standard structure and for the paper as one overall argument.

Drafting in a template format should not be viewed as mandatory. Templates serve best as starting points, and will almost always require discussion, adjustment and adaptation to the specific paper.

359

The supervisors pedagogical use of templates

Templates for research paper elements and text types may be used in supervision to zero in on students’ specific challenges: On the basis of a problem or a challenge, which the student presents in supervision, the student can, individually or with the supervisor’s help, diagnose the problem and identify ways to move on. Templates may also provide a mutual, structured basis and language (terminology) for the student and supervisor’s dialogue about research paper elements.

Guidelines

1. Introduction to analysis - explain the purpose of your analysis, i.e. basis for interpretation, discussion, answering your research question. - make explicit your tools for analysis: concepts, methods, theoriesthe theories. - lay out the structure of your analysis.

Write in your paper

x “I analyse the following… focusing on …”. x “I use this analysis for …”. x ”The following analysis enables me to answer the part of the assignment that …”. x “I use the following concepts/theories/categories /dimensions/methods/models/ in order to…”. x “The analysis is structured …first I am going to…. Then…”. 2. Analysis x “Using category/dimension - closely connect your object of X, material Y can be analysis and your tools for observed to…” analysis. x “In data X, I observe concept/category Y through…and document my observation with…” 3. Results, interpretation x “This may be interpreted as - structure the results/ …” interpretation as an argumentation x “On the background of the with your conclusion as a claim evidence from m analysis I and the results of your analysis as conclude that…” evidence, Quote and ex exemplify from your analysis results. 4. Concluding the analysis x “In answer to my initial - connect the results of your question, the results of my analysis to your research question. analysis points to…”.

AKADEMISK SKRIVECENTER x Københavns Universitet Amager x Njalsgade 126 x 2300 København S x 35 32 91 26

AKADEMISK SKRIVECENTER x Københavns Universitet Amager x Njalsgade 126 x 2300 København S x 35 32 91 26

How to write an analysis

In your paper’s introduction include x Topic, problem area/definition, possible context and example x Research question (-substantiate) x The purpose of the research x Concept definitions

x Possible hypotheses

x Method(s) (substantiate your choices) x Theory(ies) (substantiate your choices) x Data (substantiate your choices) x Delimitation x The paper’s structure

Based on Signe Skov: Bundne opgaver, p. 35

AKADEMISK SKRIVECENTERS HANDOUTS

AKADEMISK SKRIVECENTERS HANDOUTS

Figure 4. Examples of templates for analysis sections and for an introduction to a research paper.

Academic text types

Certain specific text types form the central building blocks in academic texts. Academic texts will always include one or more academic text types. Text types have standardised formats, i.e., elements they must include. Central academic text types include analysis, discussion, and evaluation. The following section includes brief definitions of the typical text types in university papers. For more detailed descriptions (in Danish), see Rienecker & Stray Jørgensen 2012. 360

Supervision on academic text types • Design outlines how something must be done, carried out or used. • Perspective shows how something has significance and consequences for other – especially future – contexts. • Evaluation or assessment assesses the value of something on the basis of academically acceptable criteria. • Argumentation specifies academically acceptable reasons for conclusions, evaluations, perceptions, and views. • Reflection relates conceptually to observations, experiences, often with the purpose of developing practice. • Discussion presents different views to reach a new view, a combination, a synthesis. • Interpretation presents an overall understanding, meaning, explanation in a conclusion to an analysis of a topic’s, a text’s, an object’s components. • Comparison shows the similarities and differences of two topics, conditions, objects etc. • Categorisation organises information according to categories. • Analysis divides a topic, a text, an object into its constituent parts. • Summary repeats the significant, the core of other’s texts. • Paraphrase repeats content, meaning for meaning, from other’s texts. • Quote repeats the text word by word.

Good text supervision is based on criteria

For supervision to progress without major problems, student and supervisor must share a set of explicit criteria for the paper (genre requirements), and must agree how these requirements are best met (quality criteria). These criteria must be clarified from the start of supervision and can be communicated to students, e.g., in a written memorandum (see p. 332) or in an introductory negotiation of expectations. Collect examples of good papers

One way to exemplify requirements and criteria to students is to collect examples of good papers that demonstrate not only quality, but also variation in the design and administration of genre requirements and criteria. 361

Language as a symptom of the good or bad research paper

Language is a specific means to observe how the student writes academically. As a supervisor, you can look out for what should or should not be in a text as a starting point for text supervision. In a text that documents research using the field’s concepts, theories and methods, you should look for words that express research, knowledge transformation and documentation: Which words should be in the text? Research-words • Show that material has been processed and analysed. • Encompass scientific speech acts: “analyse”, “interpret”, “combine”, “categorise”, “evaluate”, and more (and criteria for appropriate speech acts are academic, i.e. not subjective). • Reflect the writer as an active researcher in the text, either through an explicit “I” (choose/ delimit/conclude/etc.), or implicitly by using corresponding nominal: “choice”/”framing”/”conclusion” (which require an active subject).

Knowledge-application words • Show that the field’s concepts, theories and methods are used to investigate and how they are used. • Are concepts from the field’s theories and me­ thods: terminology, “tool words”. • Are scientific meta-communication that shows how the writer chooses theories and methods purposefully, and how the writer practices the investigative phrases: “use… to”, “choose… to”, “substantiated with”, “explained on the basis of”, “analyse… to” etc.

Documenting words • Are exact and unequivocal, and clearly show what is being researched, with what and how. • Define and specify, for example “i.e.”. • Relate information by means of conjunctives and show reasoning and argumentation, e.g., “so that”, “therefore”, “the argument for this is…” (textual meta-communication) • Allocate responsibility for statements in texts with words that ascribe statements to either the writer or author, e.g., with references that clearly mark statements’ sources.

Supervision must be timed

Some students complain that their supervisors focus on aspects in their texts that are not relevant to the students at that exact time in their writing process: Supervisors may for example comment on spelling or other linguistic aspects, commas or precise referencing, while the student is in a phase where his or her focus is to establish an analytical framework from the theory, or where (s)he is struggling with discussion and evaluation. We suggest the following general prioritisation of supervision levels: Students’ struggle to adjust to academic language use is to some degree due to the fact that the universities accept more students. However, it can also be due to the fact that the academic discourse is increasingly in competition with other discourses (mass media, Internet, text messages,

362

Facebook etc.). In these genres and discourses other, not least linguistic and argumentative, practices dominate.

Comment on language on these four levels and in this order – also time-wise: First: The scientific, academic (including too simple, juvenile, complicated, communicating, literary, marked by contagion, plagiarised). Early: The formalities (“the craftsmanship”, including summarising, evaluating, introducing sources etc. in the text, using academic terminology). When the above is in place: The clarity and comprehensibility of the pre­ sentation. Last: Linguistic correctness, correct language, spelling, punctuation. The supervisor’s task is to protest and point out problems with these aspects, but hardly to actually teach them. (Source: Rienecker, Harboe & Stray Jørgensen 2005: 127).

Weak texts are revealed in the language

Linguistic danger signals in texts include:

Danger signals in students’ texts • The research question, theory, concepts, methods, data, or purpose are missing or are unclear. • Absence of academic terminology, technical terms, disciplinary concepts. • Absence of analysis, too much summary, (too) little analysis, (too) little discussion. • “Forbidden” speech acts, unscientific text types, e.g., to praise, postulate, lecture to, demean. • Biased words with evaluating connotations without documentation and argumentation, e.g., “claim”, “well-executed”, “excellent”, private “I” in place of sources and arguments, i.e., subjective evaluating presentation e.g., “I think/believe/assume/claim etc.”. • Imprecise language, e.g., generalising expressions without specification, context or exemplification e.g., “all”, “some”, “certain”, “one”, figura-

363

tive language and metaphors that are ill defined, “e.g., “crazy about”, “dancing style”, attributing words, i.e., words that attribute an opinion or position to the reader, e.g., “naturally”, “of course”. • No introductions or summaries before/after sections (meta-communication). • Sources (e.g., quotes) that are not used in the paper. • Sources (literature) are generally the subjects of statements in the text (and not the writer). • Source language or close resemblance (contagion).

These are danger signals in academic writing (but may, however, be perfectly acceptable in an essay, text book, or debate contribution). For the inexperienced or inattentive writer, the occurrence of this can be due to contagion or even direct lack of understanding of the research genre’s characteristics. In such problematic cases, the supervisor can inform the writer that he or she “must go back to the beginning” and learn to master the genre, e.g., by consulting textbooks about writing papers or taking courses on writing papers. As written earlier, examples of good papers can demonstrate the genre in practice: This is how you can do it. It is not fair to expect a supervisor to consider all kinds of linguistic problems in (time-constrained) supervision. However, if the supervisor observes some of these features (s)he must specifically point them out in the student’s text, preferably with suggestions of how to write instead. It is not enough to say: “Your writing is imprecise”. The supervisor must show how to write precisely. Most of the danger signals above can be turned into instruction for the student, e.g., “You must use technical terms, and not just everyday words” and “You must use your sources, no source can stand alone without you writing what you use it for” etc. Poor language – what can the supervisor say and do during supervision?

One problem that many teachers complain about is poor, simple, juvenile, vernacular, incoherent language. We do not believe that it is the supervisor’s task to teach correct language at university level, however, this is what you can do as a supervisor:

364

• Point out examples of poor language, and refer to guides, reference books, websites, language tests, courses etc., which the student must consult. • Prioritise the severity of mistakes (e.g., catastrophic, bad, trivial). • Call attention to consequences in assessment. • Call attention to extenuating circumstances, possibilities for dispensation and help, for example if students are dyslectic.

Rationales The suggestions above are primarily based on these three views: 1. Scientific genre understanding

The paper is fundamentally viewed as scientific research (e.g., Swales 1990, Rienecker & Stray Jørgensen 2003, 2012, Booth, Colomb & Williams 2008). The genre includes elements and formats that span faculties and subjects, but within which special subject-specific variations can unfold. 2. Alignment

The topic of the assessment is the academic research in the scientific documentation (Biggs & Tang 2007). The product, the finished paper, will define the themes of supervision in combination with the requirements in the curriculum and the Qualification Framework 2011, which determine the learning objectives for programmes. See a thorough examination of alignment in chapters 2.2 and 6.1. 3. Writer development

The purpose of text supervision in higher education is to introduce and instruct students in academic, scientific discourses and conventions (genres) as part of their development as academic writers. Torsten Steinhoff (2007), a German linguist and researcher in scientific discourse, divides the development of the academic writer into three stages:

365

• Pre-conventional (i.e., novices’ lacking knowledge of and skills in scientific writing). • Conventional (i.e., knowledge of and practice of scientific linguistic practice, norms and genre criteria). • Post-conventional (“professor writing” that goes beyond the convention). The point is that students have to know the conventions before they can transcend them. Thaiss & Zawacki (2006), two American researchers in academic writing, have also conducted a number of studies of college students’ writing development and found three stages in students’ academic writing development: • At the first stage, students notice templates, conventions and rules. • At the next stage, students notice differences, teachers’ idiosyncrasies, coincidences, inconsistencies and injustices. • And lastly, at the third stage, the writer/student develops an understanding of discipline’s and discursive communities’ significance for writing practices. For Thaiss and Zawacki, students’ writer development is also dependent on the knowledge of conventions as a basis. Common to the two studies is thus an understanding that the conventional stage is a requirement for students to reach rhetorical understanding that can address the conventions in relation to given writing task and thus exceed the conventional stage.

Resources Rienecker, L., T. Harboe & P. Stray Jørgensen (2006) Vejledning – en brugsbog for opgave- og specialevejledere på videregående uddannelser. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. – The fundamental message of this book is that supervision must be based on students’ papers. The book provides supervisors with sound advice and suggestions for addressing specific problems, both in normal supervision and in especially problematic cases.

366

Rienecker, L. & P. Stray Jørgensen (with contributions from S. Skov) (2013) The Good Paper – A handbook for writing papers in higher education. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. – A textbook on writing research papers and other academic genres. Many suggestions for activities for the student to use in his or her writing process. The supervisor can refer students to The Good Paper as general textbook, but also to the individual activities. Studiemetro.au.dk and undervisermetro.au.dk – Both are web resources that address student and teacher respectively. Studiemetro includes advice and supervision for students writing papers. Undervisermetro (Faculty Metro) includes teachers’ own suggestions for pedagogical practices, including supervising students’ papers. The Undervisermetro includes a page with suggestions for supervisor activities.

Literature Bereiter, C. & M. Scardamalia (1987). The Psychology of Written Composition. New Jersey and London: LEA. Biggs, J.B. & C. Tang (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. London: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill Education. Booth, W., G.C. Colombo & J.M. Williams (2008). The Craft of Research. 3rd ed. The University of Chicago Press. Ministry of Higher Education and Science (2011). Danish Qualifications Framework for Higher Education. Ministry of Higher Education and Science (website). Rienecker, L. & P. Stray Jørgensen (1999). Opgaveskrivning på videregående uddannelser – en lærerbog. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Rienecker, L. & P. Stray Jørgensen (2003). The Genre in Focus, not the Writer: Using Model Examples en Large-Class Workshops. In: Björk, L., G. Bräuer, L. Rienecker & P. Stray Jørgensen, Teaching Academic Writing in European Higher Education. Studies in Writing, Vol. 12. Holland: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Steinhoff, T. (2007). Wissenschaftliche Textkompetenz. Sprachgebrauch und Schreibentwicklung in wissenschaftlichen Texten von Studenten und Experten. Reihe Germanistische Linguistik 280. Stray Jørgensen, P. (2003). Klart sprog i opgaver på videregående uddannelser. 3rd ed. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Stray Jørgensen, P. (2004). Videnskabelige ord – sproglig rådgivning i viden­ skabelighed. In: Jørgensen, H. & P. Stray Jørgensen (eds.), På godt dansk. Fest-

367

skrift til Henrik Galberg Jacobsen i anledning af hans 60 års fødselsdag 4. februar 2004. Aarhus: Wessel & Huitfeldt: 181-190. Stray Jørgensen, P. (2007). Teksten i vejledning – modeller for vejledning i videnskabelig opgaveskrivning. In: S. Matre & T.L. Hoel (eds.), Skrive for nåtid og framtid. Skriving og rettleiing i høgreutdanning. Trondheim: Tapir Akademisk Forlag. Stray Jørgensen, P., L. Rienecker & S. Skov. (2011). Specielt om specialer. En akti­ vitetsbog. 4th ed. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre Analysis. English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thaiss, C.J. & T.M. Zawacki (2006). Engaged Writers and Dynamic Disciplines: Research on the Academic Writing Life. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook. Wichmann-Hansen, G., A.M. Mørcke & B. Eika (2007). Hvad findes der af litteratur om vejledning? – Litteratursøgning med fokus på publicerede, evidensbaserede studier. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 3: 11-19.

368

6.1 Assessment and exams HANNE LETH ANDERSEN, BETTINA DAHL AND JENS TOFTESKOV1

You are teaching a class of 60 students. One student asks you an interesting, but complex and, in relation to the day’s programme, slightly off-topic question. You begin to answer, but are quickly interrupted by another student who asks: Excuse me me, but do we need to know this for the exam? – You reply: No, and the student asks: Why are we spending time on it then?

This example has been used in several university teacher courses about exams and assessment. It typically gives rise to heated discussions. The reason is that the example demonstrates the university’s (and thus the teacher’s) dilemma between the humboldtian principle about the student’s and teacher’s shared search for knowledge (the first student) and, over the past 20 years, the increasingly dominant principle of alignment, i.e., complete correspondence between learning objectives, teaching and the exam (the second student). When we start a chapter about exams by describing a teaching situation, it is because it is impossible to overestimate the exam’s importance for teaching. This importance varies from university to university, from field to field, from student to student and from teacher to teacher. Some teachers observe the principle of alignment (which is based on correspondence between the content of teaching and the method used for examining students, see chapter 2.2) so strictly that when they digress even a little from the curriculum, they emphasize that students do not have to know this specific information at the exam. Others are loyal to the humboldtian principle and claim that everything that takes place in their teaching is useful for the exam. Many students view the teaching as nothing more than a means to pass the exam, while others view the exam as a necessary conclusion of a rewarding course of teaching. Thus, the students both disagree on, and are uncertain of, the relative importance of 1 The authors would like to thank Lone Krogh for valuable feedback.

369

teaching and exams, which the teacher must take into account both when planning and when carrying out teaching and exams. There is no doubt that universities – with the Ministerial Order on University Examinations of 2006 and with the extensive state accreditation concerns – through our teaching and exams, must ensure alignment. Therefore it is extremely important that the individual teacher becomes aware of the significance the exam must have for teaching, and that the teacher negotiates own and students’ expectations to which role the exam plays for teaching. This is of vital importance, both to how the students experience teaching and (not least) to the quality of their learning process.

Examining and assessing: Focus on the students’ performance To be an examiner, assigner or external examiner bestows a lot of responsibility on the teacher. At oral exams, students depend completely on the examiner’s ability to establish a situation that allows the student to demonstrate a learning outcome that corresponds to the expectations created in teaching and laid out in the programme regulations. In written exams, the assigner must similarly consider which assignments or questions will enable students to show what they know and are capable of, but the questions must also help identify the students’ uncertainties and shortcomings. The formulation of assignments and questions is a delicate matter, both because students cannot ask for clarification of questions in written on-campus exams, and also because all students must compete on equal terms in exams (reliability). Therefore a profound understanding of the chosen type of exam is important, so that the exam can be used in the best possible way. Even more than during teaching, the teacher must focus on individual students during the examination: While it is often expedient to ask questions and stay in the background in teaching, this is an absolute necessity in exams. Examinations and assessments call for a focus on the student’s performance, but also for: • Thorough planning that take into account the specific type of exam. • An understanding of why the particular type of exam was deemed appropriate for the learning objectives of that particular class, and of

370

the strengths and weaknesses of this type of exam in that particular context. • An ability to assess performances and to substantiate one’s assessment. Although we mentioned exams’ close connection to teaching, we will only return to teaching sporadically and instead focus on exam and assessment practices and the formalities that frame these practices. Subsequently, we will discuss the most frequent types of exams (oral, written and project-oriented with group exams), particularly in relation to the challenges these pose for an examiner in preparing and carrying out an exam, and we address the issue of how best to handle these challenges. Following this, we will discuss assessment and marking (p. 393), and lastly we will discuss cheating and plagiarism and the different exam types’ validity and reliability, which constitute the fundamental criteria for choosing exam types (p. 400).

TYPES OF EXAMS Challenge: Insight into chosen types of exams The first condition for being a good examiner is understanding the chosen exam type’s special characteristics and the reason for using it to assess whether students live up to the academic requirements described in the programme regulation. Therefore, we start by going through some general types of exams. We describe how the exam takes place, how assessment is carried out, and which elements must be part of the assessment. On the basis of the general types, there are endless opportunities for disciplinary adaptations, combinations, levelling and genres, which are laid out in the programme regulations for each study. Systematisation takes place on the basis of two criteria: 1. Product type: Is the student’s performance expressed in writing, orally or as a combination. 2. Place of production: Is the performance prepared or carried out at home, at the university (sit-down exam on campus) or as a combination?

371

Product type

Written

Written + oral

Oral

Place of production Home

Written product carried out at home Dissertation, project, case-response, portfolio

Home + on campus

Written on-campus exam based on written preparatory work at home (rare type)

On campus

Written on campus exam Assignment set, case assignment, multiple choice, essay With or without aids permitted

Oral campus exam based on written paper/synopsis Dissertation, project, case-response, portfolio Oral on campus exam With or without preparation With preparation: With or without aids permitted

Figure 1. Categorisation of exam types (by Thomas W. Hansen, CBS).

Furthermore, the exam type “class attendance” has gained ground in the past years – apparently as an attempt to introduce a form of compulsory attendance to teaching. However, class attendance is typically not interpreted as “being present”, but as the activity and quality of students’ presence. The activity must either be stated in the programme regulations, or be defined by the teacher at the start of the semester. Activities often include presentations, presentation seminars, feedback seminars, written products, and/or case work. Fulfilling this sort of requirements is therefore not part of assessment, but rather a prerequisite for getting to participate in the exam. The use of “class attendance” can also be the result of steadily increasing international influence on Danish examination types, where class attendance and performance in teaching constitutes a significant part of marking. This seems odd to Danes in our strictly regulated exam system. For instance the following example where a teacher threatens a student, who fails to cooperate, would never happen in Denmark: In the past a very few students have not cooperated with me in the administering of the course. To minimize such occurrences, I may, at 372

my discretion, penalize students by subtracting points from their marks for certain occurrences. (Course description from McCombs School of Business, Austin, Texas) When we discuss the prevalent types of exams below, we will describe the fundamental conditions of each exam type and how it is carried out, i.e., how the basis for assessment is produced. In the section Assessment and Marking (p. 393), we will discuss assessment and marking in further detail.

Oral exams As shown above, the oral exam exists both in a pure form and in combination with written products. However, the significant challenges when conducting oral exams apply to all forms of oral exams. An examiner in oral exams will always meet the individual student face to face. This type of exam requires practice, and most people need a certain degree of experience before they sense whether or not they have developed their examination strategy and questioning technique sufficiently. Challenges for the examiner

The examiner must: • Ensure that students know what is required of them in the exam. • Be able to give students the optimal framework for doing their best (validity). • Be conscious of the different roles each participant plays in the exam. • Be able to ask understandable and precise questions. • Be able to manage the time. • Ensure that students are given equal treatment (reliability). An exam is not a guessing competition. Students must be clearly informed about what is required at the exam. This both applies on a macro level: What forms the basis of the assessment of the students; What should they have mastered? And it applies on a micro level, which often means to understand: What is being asked in this question?

373

Suggestions In the following, we will review some challenges that the teacher will encounter, and suggest how to deal with them. 1. Create clarity and overview for students

As a teacher, you must first familiarize yourself with the programme and all of its sub-elements; understand the position of your course in relation to the whole and specify how the learning objectives of the course will come to fruition through exam requirements and assessment criteria. Goal descriptions and exam requirements must be precise, and requirements must be explicated, exemplified and discussed with students in teaching. Good exam management starts in teaching, where students from the very beginning are introduced to the learning objectives, the exam type, and not least the particular subject’s connection to the programme as a whole and preferably also to the reality outside the walls of the university. This helps students understand what must be performed at exams and why. Waiting until the last course session to discuss this with your students is not wise. You should preferably discuss this continuously throughout the course and show how content and working methods are connected to the learning objectives and exam requirements. 2. Create a safe exam situation for the student

The exam is of crucial importance to the student, both in the specific situation and later in life. The student can lose face, and future dreams may be crushed. This is why some students over-prepare and lose their focus, and some become so nervous that they cannot perform, but many students are also fundamentally uncertain of what is expected of them. It is the task of the examiner to provide students with the optimal conditions for their performance. Therefore, a peaceful and quiet environment is needed for the exam, also outside the exam room which is why it is tradition to put up signs saying “Exam – quiet please”. The time plan must be adhered to, any material and aids the students are allowed to use during preparation or the exam itself must be available, and the exam must be conducted in a pleasant and friendly atmosphere. You should supply drinking water and there must be time for the student to calm his/her nerves, start over or anything else the student may need. Some examiners provide an especially 374

comfortable chair for the student; others buy chocolate and fruit, all to counteract the feeling of being interrogated. It is important to make the student understand that the strongest possible foundation for an objective, fair and valid assessment has been laid. You can use humour to soften the atmosphere, however do so with care. A green tablecloth is used in exams at many institutions, because green supposedly has a calming effect. 3. Be conscious of the roles in an exam situation

To ensure the exam is a success, the distribution of roles between the student, the examiner and the external examiner must be agreed upon beforehand. It is the examiner’s task to control the examination. The examiner must ensure that the student can demonstrate how well he/she can fulfil the learning objectives, but the examiner must also try to uncover the students’ weaknesses or misunderstandings (cf. the Grading Order). Usually, the examiner asks the majority of questions, while the external examiner is there to ensure a fair and thorough examination, which means he or she may ask questions and suggest themes that he/she believes ought to be brought up. The external examiner is an observer, and is not there to take over the examination. If exams are scheduled to take place over several days (typically the case with courses with many students), it may be tempting to let the external examiner take over the questioning role for some of the students. However, we strongly advise against this. If a student is predominantly questioned by the external examiner and complains about this, it is quite likely that the complaint will be accepted unless there are important and academically valid reasons why the external examiner had to take over the examination. Because of the examiner’s role as questioner, the external examiner will likely take the most notes during the exam. Please note: it is not the examiner’s role to only draw the best out of the student, nor is it the external examiner’s role is to find gaps and/or weaknesses. Both examiner and external examiner are there to ensure that students perform the best they can as well as to identify any weaknesses students may have. The external examiner is also there to protect the students and must intervene if the examiner is anything but fair and well-balanced in the examination. Many teachers believe that students perform best when they have some measure of control over the exam. Therefore, these teachers tell their stu375

dents that to achieve a high mark, they must show they are capable of taking control of the exam. However, if this is to result in a higher mark, it should be reflected in the course’s learning objectives. Unless this is the case, a controlling student may not be agreeable to the examiner. It is the examiner’s role to ensure that students are tested in all learning objectives. It is the student’s role to perform as well as possible. If students control the exam, you risk that only one learning objective is tested. The examiner can, through neglect, hinder a student in showing what (s)he can or knows within one or more learning objectives, which is a valid reason for the student to complain about the examination afterwards. 4. Be on top of questions, changes of topic and general questioning technique

Questions are the cornerstones of oral examinations. A good questioning technique involves more than the questions’ formulation, it also involves each question’s organisation into overarching themes and progression in the exam. Good questions are asked at the right time. To be able to formulate follow-up of questions is an important tool for an examiner, not least when it is clear that the student has not understood the question, is nervous or simply cannot answer. Continuous adaptation of questions to the individual student can allow for a precise assessment of the student’s competences within the themes he/she are examined in. Change of topic

During the exam, the examiner may need to change the theme or topic. It is a great help to the student if the examiner announces this change. When the examiner needs to change the topic, it is a good idea to use prepared questions to introduce the different topics of the examination. However, it is very difficult to prepare elaborating questions. Many teachers do so anyway, but you must be careful not to let the questions you have prepared in advance stand in the way of more relevant and necessary questions that become apparent during the exam. Lucid questions

The student must be able to understand the questions asked. The questions must be clear, simple and precise. The formulation of questions must be lucid, logical, and unambiguous, so that the student does not

376

waste time and energy pondering why the question is formulated the way it is, or what was meant by the question. In everyday conversation, it is only natural to ask for elaboration or clarification when you do not understand a question. However, in an exam it may require a great deal of courage to request clarification of a question and thereby reveal a lack of understanding. The examiner should be careful to ask a nervous student whether a given question was understood or whether (s)he should reformulate or elaborate. Finally, it is important to be aware that the definition of good questions is also that they lead to good answers, not necessarily “right answers”, but a response that documents the range and limits of the student’s knowledge and skills. Certain questions are almost always useful (and easy) to ask during an exam, and that is questions that encourage the student to continue along the same track, such as: • Do you have more to say about that? • Can you elaborate on that? Or: Can this be simplified? • Have any other authors written the same? Is this technique used elsewhere? Or if the exam concerns a certain text: • Which themes are central in the text? All of these questions are open, easily accessible and help the student demonstrate a deeper understanding or broader knowledge along a particular track. Open and closed questions

It is useful to distinguish between open and closed questions. Open questions require elaborating answers, further explanation or substantiation, whereas closed questions have a specific number of correct answers. Open questions are neutral and therefore not leading, but shift focus and reflection to the answer and do not provide the conversation partner with a fixed number of options. Closed questions turn the exam into an oral form of multiple-choice tests, or, especially in the case of yes-no-questions, a direct interrogation. In terms of identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the student, open questions are generally better than closed questions. However, this does not mean you should always avoid closed questions. They 377

can prove especially useful in follow-up phases when the framework for a theme or a problem has been clearly established. It can be a good idea to use open questions to uncover what the student is capable of on his/ her own, but the examiner should use closed questions to clarify whether basic understanding has been reached – e.g. if a student is close to failing. Abstract and concrete questions

Another relevant distinction can be drawn between abstract and concrete questions. Abstract and concrete questions can be either open or closed. Abstract questions inquire into abstract phenomena, such as underlying principles or theoretical regularities and the like. Abstract questions will usually be more academically demanding. Concrete questions can only be answered if you have the concrete knowledge or are able to reflect and argue your way to the correct answer. The following is an example of how an examiner in EU-Law asks gradually more concrete questions, as the student cannot answer the abstract questions satisfactorily: You mentioned the Grogan-verdict about abortion. Can you tell me why the Irish prohibition against advertising for abortion clinics is not against EU-law? The student hesitates and mumbles a little. – Please take your time! However, time does not help, as there is still no answer from the student. The examiner therefore tries a more concrete question: In the light of which provisions should you view the Irish prohibition? When the student is still unable to answer satisfactorily, the examiner becomes wholly concrete as well as application-oriented: I’ll ask you a different question: What would the European Court of Justice say about English abortion clinics advertising in Ireland? We consider this a good examination technique, because the questions become less demanding as the student fails to answer (or answers poorly). The first question allows the student to present all the aspects that are in play and explain the principles that underlie Ireland’s prohibition of advertising abortion clinics. The why-question directly calls for an explanation. The second question is significantly more concrete, and the student is asked to mention the provisions at play. The examiner is not asking for explanations but for (trivial) knowledge. As there are several provisions at play, the student is free to choose the starting point for the response and develop the answer to a more abstract level by mentioning how the provisions do not all point in the same direction. The third question, however, inquires into the determining provisions in the case (which calls on trivia knowledge more than the previous question did). The move from 378

the second to the third question is also partially a move from an open to a closed question. It is also important to note that a good questioning technique includes body language and tone of voice, and create a trustful and appreciative space for dialogue, where the student’s knowledge and ability is not overlooked or ruined by insecurity, nerves or mis-communication. 5. Remember to manage the time

In some disciplines, the programme regulations divide the oral exam into phases with the aim to test several different competences. This includes certain language disciplines, communication disciplines or skill tests, where the exam may include reading aloud, dialogue about texts or translation, or exams where different sub-areas are examined separately. Remember that, in a 20-minute oral exam, time must be deducted for marking, feedback and for the student to enter and exit the exam room, which means the actual time for examination amounts to some 15 minutes. These may be organised as follows: Opening: three minutes, middle phase: nine minutes, and closing phase: three minutes. Opening

At the beginning, the most important thing is to make the student feel comfortable. One may help a nervous student by offering him/her a glass of water or with friendly comments or a joke. It is often a good idea to start by asking broad, general questions or, through either questions or encouragement, let the student start the exam. Some exam descriptions or programme regulations state that students must begin with a presentation of a certain duration. Students have a tendency to consider specific questions to be tough questions, which they risk answering incorrectly, and general question to be soft questions, which they can talk their way out of by skirting the question. However, answers to general questions are just as useful for revealing what students know and do not know as specific, narrow questions. Middle

In the middle phase, the examination should be based on what the student would like to talk about or perform/demonstrate and bordering topics. The examiner must help move the student from “home ground” to “away ground”. To make this a fluent move, the examiner should prepare 379

questions in advance. However, the prepared questions must not cause the examiner to ask the prepared questions at the expense of elaborating questions. The elaborating questions are crucial for discovering the limits of the students’ knowledge, skills and competences. However, elaborating questions are often used in a different capacity; i.e., to underline the student’s performance. If elaborating questions are to serve as a tool for assessment (and they should), the following principle must apply: If you get good answers, you should increase the level of complexity in your questions. If you get poor answers, you must reduce the complexity. Experience shows, unfortunately, that many examiners do the opposite. Closing

At the end you can obtain the best conditions for assessment by asking the student whether there are any themes the exam did not touch upon which the student considers central. If so, these should be briefly explored to allow the student to show that he/she has a good grasp of the subject area. 6. Ensure that students are given equal treatment (reliability)

Oral exams are often (not least by students) considered an exam type where coincidences, mitigating circumstances, personality and the power of speech can all play a crucial role. Therefore it is important that the examiner both explores the subject comprehensively, and make room for discussions on taxonomical levels, keeps the defined objectives in mind, listens intensely, takes notes, asks good questions and generally tries to make sure that the students are treated as equally as possible, not least by the external examiner. It is important that the student’s personality does not affect the assessment. Some students are quiet or introvert, while others are more forward or charismatic – it is important that examiner and external examiner do not interpret the former as an insecure student and the latter as a self-confident student, but rather listen carefully and conscientiously to what each student actually says.

Written on-campus exam In the following, we will describe the types of written exams carried out as on-campus exams. All over the world, the on-campus exam predominantly involve set assignments. However, this is not the case at (most) Danish 380

universities. In America and Asia, this is considered the prototype of an exam. This is a very understandable choice from a financial point of view, particularly for large populations and governmental exams. Written exams are usually cheaper than oral exams, and the reliability is higher. Oral exams are considered to have a higher validity. Written exams in the form of on-campus exams without resources are considered inauthentic, as this working method does not exist anywhere outside of the education system. However, it does test some knowledge, skills and competences that can have relevance in certain contexts. Sometimes there is in fact a need for basic trivial knowledge and for being able to produce a response under pressure and within a short time frame (however rarely without resources or tools). The written take-home assignments allow for greater immersion, while the work method’s authenticity depends on the specific kinds of job the graduates get. Challenges for the examiner

The examiner must: • Ensure that students know what is required (assignment type). • Create good assignments. • Ensure that the assignment can be successfully completed within the set time frame. • Ensure that students’ exam behaviour is good/appropriate. • Ensure validity in the particularly challenging written exam type: multiple choice. • Ensure uniform assessment both in standardised and open questions.

Suggestions In the following, we will present some the challenges an examiner may encounter when preparing the exam, as well as some suggestions for how to deal with these challenges. 1. Ensure that students know what is required

A written exam can be a collection of assignments, a number of questions 381

that must be answered, equations or cases that must be solved, examples that must be commented, texts that must be analysed, works that must be compared or court rulings that need to be substantiated or evaluated. No matter what the exam is about, it is important that the student know what type of exam they are dealing with and what a good exam paper looks like in terms of genre, length, language, target group, degree of detail, references etc. Students spend much energy on deciphering the assignment type, and it is a great help for them to see and complete old assignments, go through and assess old exam papers and discuss them in relation to assessment criteria and learning objectives. For a home written exam, the examiner is not present at the exam, but the examiner can prepare the exam both by designing the specific paper so it is clear and enables students to demonstrate knowledge, skills and competences in relation to the learning objectives, and by preparing students so they do not misunderstand the assignment. 2. Good exam assignments

Regardless of whether we are dealing with textual analysis, cases or assignment collections, questions that steer the students’ responses almost always need to be formulated in advance. It is no less important in written exams than in oral exams that the questions are clear and comprehensible and cannot be misunderstood or misinterpreted. The way questions are posed is central to the quality of written exams, both in regards to free exams and set assignments, particularly multiple choice. Unlike in oral exams, the student cannot ask for questions to be clarified in written exams, and it can be fatal for the student if a fundamental question is misunderstood. Studies of students’ interpretations of exam questions show that the questions are often easily misunderstood – and thus lead to incorrect answers (Race 2011). This means that it is very important how questions are formulated for written exams, and it may be a good idea to ask colleagues to check them. Before the questions for written exams are formulated, it must be defined what type of question is needed. The questions must, if at all possible, allow all students to show what they are capable of in relation to the learning objectives formulated for the course being tested. At the same time, the question types are characteristic of the expectations and the taxonomical levels students are expected to master. Closed questions will usually have to be answered at a certain level, whereas open questions al382

low for answers at different levels. Finally, a taxonomical progression can be developed through a series of questions, for example by starting with a descriptive question followed by an understanding question and finishing off with an evaluating question. 3. Ensure that the assignment can be successfully completed within the set time frame

Time plays a role in written on-campus exams, in which not only knowledge and understanding are tested, but also the student’s ability to deal with a strict time frame. The temporal challenges may include a large amount of assignments in a short amount of time, or it may not be possible to answer all assignments in full within the allocated time. In order for the students to successfully manage their time, it is crucial that the assignment is clear and realistic in relation to the learning objectives. The external examiner plays a vital role in this respect, and it is important to discuss the assignment formulation carefully with the external examiner well in advance. If there is no external examiner, we recommend that the examiner test the assignment on a colleague, and ensure that students are relatively familiar with the assignment type. 4. Good exam behaviour

It is important that students know that they have to reflect on the questions before they answer. They must learn to not become nervous and answer before they have fully understood the entire question. They must also learn to manage their time. The important thing is to have practiced that particular exam type in teaching, and to be convinced that the exam type makes sense. 5. A particularly challenging written exam type: Multiple choice

In multiple-choice tests, students must choose their answer from among several options. Typically, only one option is correct. This form is used because multiple choice tests do not normally operate with follow-up questions. Digital tests have, however, been developed that allow for follow-up questions that are based on the student’s answers. The primary advantage of multiple-choice tests is that they are cheap to conduct. Digital responses and assessment mean that resources must 383

be allocated to design of the questions and answers and to develop and maintain the software. Another advantage is a high reliability. Assessment of the responses can be carried out without an assessor’s interpretation. This means that the design must be flawless, i.e., the questions asked, the options chosen as well as the points given for different answers. The big challenge for the examiner is to ask unambiguous questions and to present possible answers that seem plausible. If it is obvious that the wrong options are wrong, the test is pointless. Therefore multiple choice tests must be prepared with great care, and test drafts must be controlled and quality checked by one or more colleagues. Multiple choice tests are typically used to test trivial knowledge and elementary skills. This is (presumably) what multiple choice tests are best at assessing. However, this does not mean that multiple choice tests should be limited to testing these learning objectives. The financial aspect alone makes it likely that this evaluation form will gain ground. Furthermore, the technological advances will allow the tests to evolve further – e.g., by including follow-up questions. Several different types of Computer Adaptive Testing-systems in which the next question’s difficulty depends on whether you answered the previous question correctly already exist. Therefore it is necessary to gain experience in using tests to measure higher cognitive levels, such as understanding, application and evaluation. Apparently, the higher the taxonomical level you wish to test, the harder it is to formulate questions to test the desired level. It is a problem that students can answer questions correctly, without knowing anything. This means that multiple choice tests are not 100 % reliable. Reliability depends on the likelihood of students giving a certain number of correct answers to questions they do not know the answer to. The student’s chance of guessing the correct answer is obviously higher when there are fewer options to choose from. Therefore, multiple choice tests with only three options for each question are less reliable than tests with five options. It is, obviously, harder to make good tests with five options than with three, because all wrong answers must appear valid. 6. Assessment can be prepared

The more set and standardised the assignments, the easier it is to assess them. Thus, it could be argued that external examination can be done away with in certain types of written exams. To increase the quality, you could instead call in external examination or set up teamwork for the 384

design phase of written exams. Or you could suggest that external examination should be included in the preparatory phase and merely control the assessment.

Written take-home exams In this section, we will focus on the most important types of written takehome exams, which include cases, projects and dissertations, while the next section will focus on how these assignment types can be combined with an oral exam. Challenges for the examiner

The examiner must: • Ensure clarity about assignment type and genre. Ensure individual assessment in group exams. • Conduct group exams. • Ensure individual assessment in group exams. • Be able to correctly assess sub-elements in combined tests.

Suggestions In the following, we will go through the challenges the teacher will encounter and suggest how these can be dealt with. 1. Ensure that the assignment type and genre are clear

Both students’ written products and the exam frameworks can vary greatly. Case analysis is entirely different from an MA dissertation. The examination must be attuned to these differences. In some exams, the written product only fulfils part of the exam requirements, or the written product can be connected to one or several courses, and the exam must also cover these courses’ content. If so, an oral examination can/should move beyond the written product and the themes treated herein and focus on other disciplinary themes. In the oral defence of a dissertation, focus will

385

primarily be on the dissertation itself, and only in special cases will the committee focus on the bibliographic content. The terms dissertation, thesis, project, essay and research paper are often defined differently in different fields. The assignment requirements can be problem-oriented or oriented towards theoretical understanding, research-oriented overview or be about the text type itself. The important thing is therefore to make the description in the programme regulation clear, and to communicate exam form and genre requirements plainly to students. Case assignment

Case-based assignments need not be an evaluation of case-teaching. Case assignments are possibly more widespread than case teaching, because they are especially well-suited to evaluate students’ competences in applying theories and methods of one or more fields and thus to test students’ problem-solving abilities within more or less fixed academic contexts. (See section 4.3: Case-based teaching). The contents and scope of an assignment can be varied. The examiner must both select the right case and ask the right questions. The material can both be a constructed case designed for the occasion, or a collection of authentic material, e.g., adverts, newspaper articles, strategy papers, court rulings or annual accounts. The questions can vary from strictly closed to completely open. The question type must be carefully attuned to the learning objectives being tested in the given exam. Projects and dissertations

Students’ project work is meant to develop their competences in two different dimensions. One of these concern disciplinary content knowledge and skills: Students’ understanding of their discipline is evaluated based on how they apply their field-specific knowledge to solve a specific problem. The second dimension is purely methodological. Here, students’ competences as project-designers/visionaries are evaluated. In preparation and framing of specific courses of project work, you will typically have to consider how the two parts should be valued in relation to each other, and whether certain parts of a course’s learning objectives should be applied. An exact description of the project’s framework is important for a reliable assessment. This framework management is also a prerequisite for using project work as part of the planning of students’ progression. One 386

important part of framework management is a description of the content-based requirements of the project. This description must naturally correspond to the goal description for the project work, although they do not have to be identical. There is a difference between describing content-related requirements for a project and the result of a learning process. Furthermore, the goal description both covers what students must perform in the project and in a potential oral exam based on the project. The content-related part of framework management is based on the two dimensions mentioned above: the disciplinary and the methodological. The disciplinary dimension involves describing disciplinary elements (including complexity, e.g., the degree of interdisciplinarity) that may be included in the project, as well as which taxonomic levels the disciplinary content is expected to treat. It is important that the methodological requirements to the project correspond to the level of study, and that the content-related requirements reflect the academic standards students have mastered by following the offered teaching and supervision in connection with the project work. Bachelor’s and Master’s dissertations are problem-oriented and normally less bound by content than “normal” projects. With oral exam: Weighting

Written take-home assignments combined with an oral exam is an exam type with a high validity: it makes multifarious demands on students and therefore enables the assessors to evaluate a student’s knowledge, skills and competences in a number of areas. At the same time it is a complex type of exam, and both exam as well as assessment are practiced in very different ways. The strictly rule-bound themes connected with assessment (e.g., grading acts and scale) are treated in a later section – see p. 395. Both in regards to the examination and assessment, it is important to remember that it is an overall assessment, where the examination is based on the assignment, and where a total mark is given for the academic performance. This applies both when examining a single student and a project group. If a student’s written and oral performance differ greatly from one another, determining a mark for the overall performance may be quite difficult. Without oral exam: How to prevent cheating

Setting take-home assignments without a subsequent oral examination 387

is a great challenge, because it is next to impossible to prevent cheating. A paper could be written entirely or in part by someone other than the student, and it can be difficult to discover and harder to prove. Therefore, it is important that the supervisor monitors the process, and (for example) includes mandatory formative (learning-developing) evaluations with feedback along the way, e.g., in relation to the research question, a synopsis or a sub-analysis. 2. The group exam with individual assessment

In group exams, several students are examined at the same time, but each student is assessed individually. Major written take-home assignments can be written individually or in groups. If a group assignment is to be assessed without an oral exam, it must be clear what each student has contributed to the assignment. If there is to be an oral exam based on the written product, an overall assessment must be made. Overall assessment

At universities, group exams are mainly practiced in connection with a written problem-oriented project work report produced by the group. The following assessment is therefore based on an overall assessment of the individual student’s written part of the group work and oral performance. This is a particularly challenging exam type both in terms of the examination and assessment, because the assessors have to assess the overall performance of each individual group member. First of all, it is not easy to make an overall assessment. This would be simpler if the written and oral performances were assessed separately, and if the final mark were determined according to a predefined weighting of the two performances. However, indicating weighting in advance is not permitted. The philosophy of the assessments is that work with the written product should develop competences that the student should be able to communicate in the oral exam. This means that determining the level of the individual student’s understanding of the written work is central to the examination. This interpretation is related to the question of why students have done what they have done as well as how – i.e., how they have carried out the work and which challenges they have faced. In addition to the challenge of making an overall assessment, one assessment must be made for each individual student. The examiner (and external examiner) inevitably faces a dilemma. The students’ written 388

product is procedurally based on the students collectively drawing on each other’s strengths. Now the examiner faces the task of measuring the individual student’s knowledge, skills and competences (and lack thereof) in relation to the indicated learning objectives. The assessors’ dilemma consists in whether they should mainly take into consideration an alignment-perspective where the working method is fully reflected in the method of examination, or whether they should take into consideration the requirement of individual assessment which will be reflected as an opposite movement in the examination method. The goal is that the assessment is actually capable of balancing these perspectives. The more students in a group, the harder and more important this balance becomes. When the oral performance is not as expected

In connection with written group work, there will often be cases where one or more students’ oral performance differs greatly from the written performance. A student may, for example, show a lack of basic knowledge or understanding of important problems within the project’s theme, whereas the project itself may appear convincing. However, the reverse may also be the case. You can experience remarkably good academic performances from the individual student on the basis of less convincing project. In such cases it will make sense to let the oral performance have a greater impact on the mark for the overall performance than what was previously expressed. 3. Questioning techniques in oral group exams

The alignment principle refers to alignment of teaching, learning objectives and exam. In working on the written product, students have contributed with their individual, unique strengths and, through mutual inspiration, they have expanded their knowledge, skills and competences. If the principle of alignment is observed, the examination should bring to light the group synergy and its joint strength(s) – or lack thereof. When the principle of individual assessment must be taken into account, the examiner must do his/her best to ensure that the individual student’s performance can be measured as precisely as possible. In terms of questioning technique, these principles indicate a marked difference. Where the alignment principle means that the examiner must attempt to keep the conversation flowing and let students elaborate on each other’s answers and contributions, one consequence of the individual assessment is that 389

the examiner must also ask the individual student questions along to way to uncover potential gaps or uncertainties. The examiner and external examiner must balance the two concerns, not least in relation to the assessment criteria set for the individual exam: Social competences are not necessarily part of the criteria. Strive for balance between group and individual

The most practicable way of balancing group synergy and individual assessment is to focus on the group at the beginning of and well into the exam. The examiner asks questions, the students decide who answers, the examiner lets students comment on and discuss each other’s answers, and the examination can progress as a many-to-many dialogue. Students rarely contribute equally and with the same quality. The former can pose the greatest problem. Some students are introvert and need to feel secure before they answer anything, so they let others answer, just as extrovert students can block the introvert students’ from the dialogue. It can therefore be useful for the examiner to change his/her strategy. It is important that this change is indicated to the students. Examples of marking the balance between group and individual: • At the beginning of the exam, the examiner can say: “The exam will take place in the following way: I will start by primarily examining you as a group. This means you may decide who answers, and you can elaborate on and discuss each other’s answers. When we get further into the exam, I will control the process more and examine you as individuals.” • When the examination has reached the point where the examiner will focus more on individual students, the examiner may say: “Up until now I have heard what each of you have contributed in a group context. Not everyone has spoken as much as others, and it is important that everyone gets a chance to speak. Therefore I will now start asking individual students. You can still comment and discuss each other’s answers, but you may find that I’ll interrupt you faster than before to ask new questions.” It is important that the examiner not just address students that have not spoken out voluntarily or joined in the discussion, but that he/she also addresses the more active students. The active students may be very forth-

390

coming at the beginning, potentially to avoid having to answer questions in certain areas later in the exam. Some group exam begins with a general conversation with all the group members. After this, all group members exit the room and are called back individually for further examination. Elsewhere, the individual examination takes place with the remaining group members in the room. There are advantages and disadvantages in both methods. For example, the individual model enables students to present the correct answer and relevant reflection, which can be hard for some if there are other students present. If all students are examined simultaneously, the same point can only be presented by one student, and it requires elaboration to develop the point further. Specific requirement will usually be stated in the programme regulations. 4. Assessment and assessment criteria for complex tests/exams

As mentioned above, making an overall assessment of a written assignment and a subsequent oral exam performance is no simple matter. There is no unequivocal quantitative answer as to how you should weight the written performance in comparison to the oral, because, according to the exam act, there cannot be set stipulations about the written and oral element respectively being included in the final mark with fixed weighting or percentage. The written product is not given a separate mark, but it will determine the level of the exam. It must be noted that the examiner’s (and external examiner’s) preparation of the exam is crucial for the quality of the examination and assessment. By carefully reading students’ written product, and by preparing exam questions and themes, the examiner can gain a sense of how the exam will develop in advance. From a purely practical perspective it can also be an advantage if the external examiner and the examiner each have a form for taking notes about each student during the exam. It may be difficult to remember who said what, especially in examinations of large groups. Read the programme and exam regulations carefully

When deciding on a mark following the oral performance, the assessors must be independent and not fixated on certain “sample results” beforehand, for example if the exam regulations state that an oral performance can only change the mark from the written assignment by one point up or down. 391

On the other hand, in assessment supervision, it is permitted to indicate that the written work under normal circumstances must constitute the basis for assessment. To increase reliability in assessment (see below), it is therefore necessary to formulate how written and oral performances in this type of exam typically are weighted. One general consideration must here be that the more extensive the written paper, the greater weight the written performance should be given in the overall assessment. Speak to the external examiner about level and criteria before the exam

In the assessment of a dissertation before an oral exam, it is recommended that the assessors exchange views about their evaluation of the written assignment. How to include and assess social competences?

If the learning objectives include requirement of social competences, a significant advantage of group exams is that it here becomes possible to observe the principle of alignment, i.e., that the examination can reflect the shared academic production process and thus actually test the social competences that employers may require. With the group exam it becomes possible to some extent to measure the effect of the social and methodological competences that should have affected the quality of the written work. However, making reliable individual assessments can be quite difficult. This means that the examiner must formulate clear, challenging questions, which the students as a group can elaborate on, and on the other hand also control a balanced process by ensuring that all students are included equally in the discussion and response to questions. Likewise the process can be questioned as well as the group’s division of labour, personalities and assessment of both challenges and synergy in the work. If this takes place in an appropriate way, all group members will have equal opportunity to answer adequately, and feel they have been treated and assessed fairly. Therefore it is important that the examiner is equipped to examine and assess, and that the assessment criteria are clear to both students, examiner and external examiner. It requires great professional and personal intuition to see through and assess not just individual student’s academic level and ability, but also the social competences that students must be assessed by according to exam regulations. Seek peer learning

Examination competences are developed through experience. Inexpe392

rienced examiners will often struggle to conduct this complex type of exam. Therefore assistant professors should work with and learn from experienced examiners, e.g., as internal external examiners, before they conduct group examinations alone.

ASSESSMENT AND MARKING One aspect of examination competences is the examination itself, another is marking. An external examiner often takes part, and therefore it is important to know his/her role as well as to use the marking scale and the boundary between a pass and a fail. The examiner must: • Understand the use of internal and external examiners. • Cooperate with the external examiner on the basis of insight into his/ her role, tasks and affiliation. • Understand and use the marking scale. 1. Marking: Why an external examiner is present at exams

In Denmark, the teacher does not determine an exam mark on his or her own. Also, it is only what happens at the day of the exam that counts towards the mark. However, the teacher always determines whether any requirements such as ‘active and satisfactory class participation’ have been met. This differs from many other countries. In the US, for example, the university teacher typically both designs the exam and gives the mark within certain frameworks. However, in final exams, such as the Master’s Comprehensive Exam, a committee is often behind the assessment. Such a system has advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that third parties with no knowledge of what took place in the course and who do not know students (for good or bad) do not interfere; another is that it is cheaper, and that the teacher is shown a high degree of trust as a professional with great integrity. The disadvantages include the opposite of the above, i.e. there is no external control of the quality of teaching and assessment, and it is difficult to counter and defend against criticism of your own teaching and assessment as a teacher, as you have been the sole assessor. In Denmark, external examination is therefore widely used to ensure fair assessment. 393

Internal and external exams

In internal exams and tests, one or more of the university’s teachers can take part as co-examiners/internal second examiner (in the Examination Act for University Education, in-house examiners are simply referred to as ‘examiners’). These are appointed by the university itself. In external exams, the assessment is carried out by one or more examiners, and one or more external examiners from the relevant body of external examiners. It is important that examiners not carry out external examination tasks for each other (mutual external examination). According to the Examination Act, a department decides which exam type a given course will have. At present, the rules state that the assessment pass/fail or similar can only be used for exams covering up to one third of the programme’s total ECTS-points, and that at least one third of a programme’s total ECTS-points must be awarded via external exams. These rules are made to ensure impartial assessment of students. However, it also contributes to protect the teacher against complaints and to ensure the future employer’s confidence in the student’s diploma. 2. The tasks of the external examiner

It is the duty of the examiner’s department to inform the external examiner about the programme regulations, course descriptions et al., so (s)he can live up to the requirements in the orders. The external examiner must secure that: • The requirements to the content of the programme’s exams correspond to the objectives and additional requirements set for the programme. • The exams are conducted in line with the current regulations. • The students are treated equally and fairly. • The students receive a reliable assessment in line with the regulations for marking. During marking, both the external examiner and examiner must take notes about performance and the final mark for use in a potential complaint case. However, it is formally expected that the external examiner take the most detailed notes. These notes must be kept for a least a year or until a potential complaint case has been finalised. Furthermore, an

394

external examiner should advise about the exam system, report on the examination to the university and chairmanship and contribute to treating complaints and appeals about exams. If there is disagreement about a mark, the external examiner has the final word if the average of the marks suggested by the examiner and external examiner fall between two marks. The body of external examiners

A national body of external examiners was established in Denmark in 1993. One body of external examiners was established for each higher education programme. A body of external examiners can serve several programmes, and the national body covers all fields of a given programme. At least 1/3 of the external examiners must be professionals, i.e., people whose main occupation is outside of higher education institutions. A field’s body of external examiners is formally appointed for a 4-year period by the ministry in charge of higher education. In 2006, the then Ministry of Research suggested abolishing this system, partly because it was expensive, and partly because it differed from international practices. However, both the universities and the Confederation of Danish Employers protested intensely, because they feared that a return to the previous state of affairs where each university had its own body of external examiners, would hurt the quality of assessment. It must be noted that the body of external examiners comprise a range of different profiles, and that professional development is part of external examination work. It is stimulating to experience a fresh take one’s field of expertise, encounter new ideas for own courses and meet new and old colleagues at other universities. It provides further opportunities for cooperation, both in teaching and research. 3. Marking scale and assessment criteria

The 7-point scale known as the “12-scale” was designed to be compatible with the European ECTS-scale, to enable the translation of marks, and to express different degrees of goal-fulfilment. The scale is shown below. The act promotes an absolute use of the 7-point scale, which means that a student’s marks are independent of other students’ performance, but is solely based on the standards and criteria for learning defined in the learning objectives.

395

ECTS

Mark and explanation

A

The mark 12 is awarded for an excellent performance, which completely meets the course objectives, with no or only a few insignificant weaknesses.

B

The mark 10 is awarded for a very good performance, which meets the course objectives with only minor weaknesses.

C

The mark 7 is awarded for a good performance which meets the course objectives, but also displays some weaknesses.

D

The mark 4 is awarded for the fair performance which adequately meets the course objectives but also displays several major weaknesses.

E

The mark 02 is awarded for a sufficient performance, which barely meets the course objectives.

Fx

The mark 00 is awarded for an insufficient performance which does not meet the course objectives.

F

The mark -3 is awarded for a performance which is unacceptable in all respects.

Figure 2. Literal translation of the 7-point scale, also known as the 12-scale (Brabrand & Dahl 2009).

In comparison, the official translation reads 12

For an excellent performance displaying a high level of command of all aspects of the relevant material, with no or only a few minor weaknesses.

10

For a very good performance displaying a high level of command of most aspects of the relevant material, with only minor weaknesses.

7

For a good performance displaying good command of the relevant material but also some weaknesses.

4

For a fair performance displaying some command of the relevant material but also some major weaknesses.

02

For a performance meeting only the minimum requirements for acceptance.

00

For a performance which does not meet the minimum requirements for acceptance.

- 3

For a performance which is unacceptable in all respects.

Figure 2b. Official translation of the 7-point scale.

The English translation creates problems

Please note that the official English translation will give rise to a problem for teachers who teach in English. The official translation of 12/A states that the student must display “a high level of command of all aspects of the relevant material”, which does not relate to fulfilling the course’s learning objectives, but rather to the curriculum as a whole. This contradicts the 396

philosophy of the 7-point scale and ECTS. Instead, Brabrand & Dahl (2009) suggest the alternative translation: “completely meets the course objectives”. This specifically mentions these objectives and is therefore a better reflection of the point of the 7-point scale. The official translation can be misleading and this must be kept in mind in the supervision and assessment of international students. The ECTS-scale in Denmark

The ECTS provides detailed instructions to ensure that exam marks are useful internationally – or at least in Europe. However, there is also an inherent problem in mixing relative and absolute marking scales. In the ECTS-system, students who have passed, are marked in the following way: A is awarded to the top 10 %; B to the next 25 %; C to the next 30 %; D to the following 25 % and E to the last 10 %. This means that if 20 % of students on a programme are awarded the grade 12, only half of them can obtain/achieve the mark A in ECTS – according to the original meaning of ECTS. The problem has been “solved” by attaching an ECTS-letter to each mark in the 7-point scale, which is a pragmatic solution. However, there is still a desire that the national distribution of marks roughly fall within the percentage rates indicated in ECTS. This does not mean that you, as a university teacher, should strive for this distribution of marks on your course. This would be against the stipulation that the scale must be used in an absolute sense. In practice, it means that university teachers and external examiners need not worry about percentage-division of marks, but give marks according to the stated learning objectives. Therefore it is essential that both external examiner and examiner familiarise themselves with the learning objectives of the course, and during the examination and the subsequent marking refer to these objectives (i.e., not what the examinators would want the objectives to be), and evaluate whether students meet these, and what mistakes and weaknesses the students demonstrate. A certain amount of estimation is obviously called for: one might ask how many mistakes “some mistakes” are (cf. mark 10). This will be a professional assessment, and therefore it is useful to have both an external examiner and examiner present for this. Why the 7-point scale?

Many find it strange that the jumps between the scales numbers are not the same. The jumps are meant to reflect that, based on the ECTS-scale’s relative distribution of pass-marks, more students should be awarded C 397

(7) than B (10) and D (4). Note that in Norway, for example, where an ECTS-like scale has also been introduced, they use the numbers 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 to indicate the marks A, B, C, D, E respectively (Dahl et al. 2009). Some parts of the Danish mark reform bears a certain resemblance to “outcome-based education” (OBE), which believes that outcomes are an effective means to secure quality improvement and monitoring (Steiner-Khamsi 2006, in: Dahl 2008). In fact, OBE is not a new idea. Similar notions were discussed in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, and these discussions drew on works from the 1930’s. In those works, it was argued that exams should emphasise precise and explicit learning objectives to measure whether students had met these objectives. This discussion is very similar to Biggs’ idea of “constructive alignment” (see chapter 2.2, p. 97f.). Whether this applies in practice depends on the quality of these learning objectives and the implementation of this mindset. In Denmark, many are sceptical of the fact that there is no longer a mark for the exceptional students, and that independence of thought is no longer taken into account in the marking scale, as it was in the previous scale. Conversely, nothing prevents inclusion of independence as a learning objective when this is relevant. The philosophy behind the 7-point scale is that it is important to work carefully on formulating specific and measurable objectives for the individual programme-elements to ensure valid and relevant assessment.

Qualification frameworks and level descriptions The national qualification framework for higher education determines levels and standards for programmes and provides a systematic description of which types of degrees/certificates can be obtained. Each level in the Danish qualification framework and international qualification frameworks are connected to a level in the European qualification framework (EQF) to ensure transparency and comparability. What is the qualification framework for?

Teachers (and study boards) are obliged to ensure that programme regulations and learning objectives and assessments match the requirements of the qualification framework. Thus, you may not ignore the qualification framework and use your own or your peers’ views of what students should be able to do at a given level. 398

The requirements in the qualification framework are divided into knowledge, skills and competences, and the levels are described on the basis of which learning outcome a student will attain; i.e., focus is on what knowledge, skills and competences the student has acquired rather than on the curriculum, methods of teaching and time spent. The qualification framework includes eight levels. Degrees and certificates belong on one of these levels on the basis of which learning outcome students receive in shape of knowledge, skills and competences. Higher education comprises four levels: professional Bachelor, Bachelor, Master’s and PhD. For the Master’s-level, for example, the qualification framework states that: Master’s level graduates: Knowledge

• Must have knowledge within one or more subject areas which in selected areas is based on leading international research within a subject area. • Must understand and, on a scientific basis, reflect on the subject area’s/areas’ knowledge as well as identify scientific problems.

Skills

• Must master the subject area’s/areas’ scientific methods and tools and master general skills connected to occupation within the subject area. • Be able to evaluate and choose from the subject area’s/areas’ scientific theories, methods, tools and general skills as well as construct new analysis models and solutions on a scientific basis. • Be able to communicate research-based knowledge and discuss professional and scientific problems with both peers and non-specialists.

Competences

• Must be able to manage complex, unpredictable work and development situations that require new solutions. • Must be able to independently initiate and complete disciplinary and interdisciplinary collaboration and take on professional responsibility. • Must be able to independently take responsibility for own academic development and specialisation.

Figure 3. The Qualification Framework’s description of the knowledge, skills and competences students must acquire at MA level. (Unofficial translation).

Thus, students in an MA programme must encounter knowledge based on the leading international research. This does not mean that all these things must be included in every course of an MA programme, but that on the whole, an MA programme must provide students the opportunity to attain these things. The local study board must ensure that the entire MA programme corresponds to this description, including learning objectives and exam types. As a teacher, you may suggest changes in e.g., exam type if you find a certain type to be suited to the qualification framework. Consider, for example, the skill requirements “be able to communicate 399

research-based knowledge to non-specialists”; there are many ways to examine students in this. One would be a written exam, where students must write a feature article, or with an oral exam where students must make a presentation to an imagined target group. However, the multiple choice exam will probably not be a viable option. Choice of exam type must be aligned with the qualification framework. It is your duty as examiner or external examiner to follow these descriptions when you assess and mark students. One of the tasks of an external examiner is (as mentioned above) to see to it that the requirements to the content of the programme’s exams are in line with the objectives and additional requirements set for the programme. I.e., if you are an external examiner on a MA course, you must also consider whether the course is at the MA level, which is to say that it aims to develop knowledge, skills and competences that correspond to the qualification framework’s requirements. If this is unclear, it is your duty to comment on this in the external examination report that must always be submitted to the institution after marking. Thus, it is not enough to examine the course description itself, you must also evaluate whether the course’s content and exam type are suited to the purpose. The qualification framework can also be used in connection with specific assessment and marking. If you must assess a dissertation for example – which by definition is the culmination of an MA programme – a top mark must (only) be awarded if the student has shown that he or she has mastered the subject area’s methods and tools, has made substantiated choices in regards to the subject area’s theories, and has communicated research-based knowledge with no or only few, insignificant weaknesses.

EXAM CONDITIONS AND CRITERIA Cheating and plagiarism The increasing amount of cheating and plagiarism among students represents a new challenge for teachers, both in connection with teaching and exams. Danish students experience a strong incentive for cheating when writing papers in upper secondary education, because the student’s grade point average is crucial to students’ futures. The quality of take home assignments is often counted towards marks for the year’s work, which carry a lot of weight in the grade point average. The opportunities for cheating on take-home papers have never been greater: Website af400

ter website offering “homework assistance” or “tutoring” appear online, and the risk of being caught is slim. Finally, the taximeter system means that it is in the interest of the headmasters, who are supposed to punish cheating, to be lenient in their punishment. Students are then enrolled in universities that also receives students from other cultures, who may also have acquired some form of plagiarism skills. In Roman countries, the most important thing is that students are able to recite course content and learning outcomes, and they have not been trained to work with sources before MA and PhD-level. In Asian cultures, focus is likewise on giving the correct answer, not how the individual student has reached this answer and thus not whether he or she found it online or through independent reflection and critical analysis of other’s texts. Cheating and plagiarism are no longer peripheral issues. According to a study conducted by the journal Gymnasieskolen in 2001, everyone has encountered cheating, and about 1/3 of students have cheated. Many do not consider cheating to be “truly illegal”. It may be considered “wrong”, but at the same time it involves great opportunities in stressful situations. This leads to great challenges for teachers, examiners and heads of studies: • What can you do to reduce cheating as a teacher/examiner? • What should you do when you discover cheating?

Options It is important to know that different types of exams result in different types of cheating: In oral exams without preparation time, it is nearly impossible to cheat. In take-home assignments that are not followed by an oral exam, there is a high risk that students will cheat in one of numerous ways: They may persuade others to write the assignment or contribute in some way or another. In exams without resources (oral exams with preparation time and written sit-down exams) gaining internet access or downloading texts is cheating. However, it is extremely difficult for educational institutions to ensure that this does not happen. Notice incoherent performances and a change in language or style

Detecting cheating is often about a matter of common academic sense. If you observe that the style abruptly changes in a paper, you should not 401

attempt to curb your suspicion. A change in style and language may be coincidental; but a student who, for example, writes with ease and fluency is hardly going to start writing poorly of his or her own accord. A student who writes in an incomprehensible, partially incorrect and fragmented language rarely gets up the following morning and masters fluent, correct and comprehensible writing. The suspicion can be tested in a subsequent oral exam, or – if there is no oral exam – by testing the paper for plagiarism using Google’s search function or special anti-plagiarism software. However, it is not possible to discover whether students have received help from others through these tools, just as the programmes can only search available databases and only in the language the programme was made for. The programmes cannot search for plagiarism through translation either (where students translate a source directly). Furthermore, a specific paper can be written by another person than the student. If you choose to use exam types that entails a high risk of cheating, it is important to take the typical options into account

Take-home assignments should always be carried out in connection with a specific project that is supervised, so that the supervisor can follow the process and evaluate progress along the way. Thus hand-ins and partial examinations can be included along the way, where the student works on the research question, method reviews, sub-analyses or other sub-elements of the final exam. In this way, the supervisor can ensure that the student is actually working on the project. Students, who do not want feedback on texts or analyses in the process, or who do not show up for supervision and suddenly hand in a finished paper, are often insecure students who struggle to do what is required, and who may panic and download parts of or whole papers, either from fellow students or from a database. Clear guidelines reduces cheating

Cheating and plagiarism are often caused by unclear guidelines or misunderstood objectives and means. In teaching and supervision, ensure that there are clear guidelines and formalities for papers, clear limits for quotations and use of resources and references in academic texts. Follow the protocol

Cheating and plagiarism can and will happen, and it is important that each teacher and examiner knows the rules and can help students avoid 402

cheating. The protocols are set in the regulations and vary from university to university. When suspicion of cheating arises, it must be followed up by correct case handling procedures. If procedural mistakes occur in the treatment of this case, students can respond to these procedural mistakes and thus avoid being sanctioned. And this is neither in the interest of students nor the university.

Validity and reliability: Criteria for choosing exam types The exam is a guarantee for would-be employers and society that students learn something and that graduates are capable of something. Therefore the exam must be as reliable and valid as possible. Correspondingly, students must feel confident that they are treated both true and fair. Therefore, the exam must meet some fundamental requirements. Relevance and validity

In the Ministerial Order on University Examinations (the Examination Order), § 2 states that: The objective of the examination is to assess whether, and to what extent, the students’ qualifications comply with the objectives, competences and academic requirements stipulated for the programme in the programme order, curriculum, etc.

To live up to this requirement it is necessary to fulfil the two criteria, relevance and validity. • Relevance means that the exam measures and evaluates knowledge, skills and competences that are relevant to both the given discipline as well as the programme as a whole. The criterion results in the formulation of a competence profile, which serves as the aim of all study elements of a programme, and the formulation of clear and precise objectives for each discipline. The objectives formulated for disciplines, projects and other courses of study must be relevant to the programme’s competence profile.

403

• Validity denotes a correspondence between the formulated objectives and the measurable, operational exam requirements and assessment criteria. The requirement of validity is in line with § 7 of the Examination Order, according to which the external examiner must ensure: “that the content of examinations held as part of a particular programme complies with the objectives and other requirements stipulated for the programme, for example in the University Programme Order and in the curriculum”. The exam type is crucial, because it determines whether it is possible to measure how well students live up to the exam requirements. If students, for example, must be able to explain differences between a field’s different theoretical schools, a multiple choice exam is not a suitable exam type because it – regardless of which questions it asks – cannot test whether students are capable of explaining anything. Being able to choose between different (good and bad) explanations of a phenomenon or solution does not prove that the students themselves can explain the phenomenon or solve the problem. In general, all other exam types will be more suitable, e.g., a written exam with resources or an oral exam based on a synopsis. If you wish to assess students’ ability to evaluate the applicability of theories and concepts, a case exam or an oral exam based on a project will be more suitable than the above-mentioned types. When measuring and assessing students’ ability to apply and evaluate, a problem-oriented context is most suitable. Reliability

Reliability requires that the exam type enables precise and uniform assessment. According to the above-mentioned § 7, the external examiner must ensure that: Students receive uniform and fair treatment and their achievements are assessed in a reliable manner that complies with the rules in the executive order on grading scales and other forms of assessment (the grading scale order).

If an exam type is to be reliable, it must be possible to define assessment criteria that are so precise that the assessment itself can be read from a chart. Some exam types are very reliable, e.g., multiple-choice tests or 404

worksheets where all questions can be answered correctly or incorrectly. With these, there is a high certainty of a uniform and fair assessment, because the assessors’ own interpretations do not come into play. In exams where the assessors must interpret students’ performance in relation to the stated learning objectives, reliability is reduced. Interpretations can be more or less manifest, depending on how complex the student’s performance must be in a given exam. Combining written products and oral exams calls for a complex assessment of different products and text types, which may provide validity, but for the exam to be reliable, assessment criteria must be clearly defined in alignment with the stated objectives. The complexity is increased if you combine written participation in a group project with individual oral defence. Oral exams are generally less reliable than written. Oral exams place great demands on the assessors’ memory and immediate impressions. Therefore, both examiner and external examiner must document oral exams through notes. Some oral exams are particularly unreliable, such as the standard type where students draw a random question from the curriculum, and where the exam is limited to the question’s subject area. Many students consider this type of exam a matter of luck. The reliability criterion means that it should be possible to achieve the same result when assessment is repeated, which cannot be guaranteed in this exam type. Thus, an oral curricular exam on the basis of a synopsis (that is not part of the assessment) is preferable. In this type of exam, students start out in their comfort zone, and the examination can then explore their knowledge of other parts of the curriculum. Coincidences play less of a role in this type of exam than in luck-of-the-draw exams. The relationship between criteria: Exam types in context

It is extremely difficult to create exams that are cheap, reliable and valid. One way to achieve this is to consider the choice of exam type in relation to programmes as a whole and not in relation to each subject or discipline individually. It is an advantage that the institution selects the exam types. In this way, it becomes possible to combine exams, so that the various types’ strengths and weaknesses balance each other out. Fundamental skills and knowledge can be tested in individual courses through multiple-choice tests and similar, and portfolio and project exams can be used to sum up students’ understanding, learning and competences in using the field’s theories and methods for specific problem solving. Such 405

a holistic view also adds validity, because it ensures that the competences outlined for the programme as a whole are actually tested. If the choice of exam type is left to each individual teacher in the individual course, it can be difficult to guarantee the actual application of working methods and text types that promote the wanted competences at a given educational level.

Resources The current rules are described in the Ministerial Order on University Examinations (the Examination Order). The Qualification Framework is available on the The Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation website. Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange (ASKe). A UK project, which aims to contribute to students’ right to a fair and transparent assessment. The purpose of the manifesto is to stimulate a debate about assessment across sectors. It is viewed as a first step towards a necessary change in politics and practice within assessment in higher education. The manifesto corresponds to the initiatives of David Boud (2010), Sydney University. The ASKe-group believes that is an urgent necessity that assessment is carried out in a way that acknowledges the diversity and complexity in interconnected subjects and areas. http://www. brookes.ac.uk/aske/Manifesto/ and http://www.brookes.ac.uk/aske/ documents/OGG%20agenda%20for%20change.pdf. Andersen, H.L. & J. Tofteskov (2008). Eksamen og eksamensformer – betydning og bedømmelse. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. – This is a Danish textbook on assessing students and preparing and conducting exams. The authors review central concepts and taxonomies about formulating objectives as well as how different quality criteria can be put into play in the assessment of different exam types. Furthermore, it examines the most common exam types, and finally comments on some of the most important themes surrounding the exam, such as grading and plagiarism. Dahl, B. E. Lien & Å. Lindberg-Sand (2009). Conformity or Confusion? Changing higher education marking scales as a part of the Bologna Process: The cases of Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Learning and Teaching: The International Journal of Higher Education in the Social Sciences, 2 (1): 39-79. – This article outlines how Scandinavian coun406

tries have sought to implement a new marking scale based on the recommendations of the Bologna Process. The scales, and the philosophies behind them differ, but the resoning behind the Danish scale is thoroughly explained. Krogh, L. & A.A. Jensen (2010). Problem-based learning in Higher Education: New approaches to Assessment. In: C. Rust (ed.), Improving Student Learning: For the Twenty-First Century Learner. Oxford: Brookes University: 83-95. – Contains a study of the handling of group exams in Humanities and Social Sciences at Aalborg University. Lauvås, P. & A. Jakobsen (2002). Exit eksamen – eller? Former for summativ evaluering i høgre utdanning. 2nd print. Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag. – A fundamental Norwegian textbook about exam research within higher education. The book includes a number of examples of universities all over the world that have experimented with different exam types. It is based on extensive research and literature reviews.

Literature Boud, D. (1995). Ensuring the assessment contributes to learning. Proceedings from PBL international conference. Linköbing: Linköbing Universitet. Boud, D. et al. (2010). Assessment 2020. Seven propositions for assessment reform in higher education. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Brabrand, C. & B. Dahl (2009). Using the SOLO-Taxonomy to Analyze Competence Progression of University Science Curricula. Higher Education, 58(4): 531-549. Dahl, B. (2008). Improving the Danish university education system: A comparison of policy borrowing from an outcome-based framework in 1973 and 2003. In: C. Rust (ed.), Proceedings of 2007 15th International Symposium on Improving Student Learning in Ireland. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development: 255-266. Gibbs, G. (1999). Using Assessment strategically to Change the Way Students Learn. In: S. Brown & A. Glasner (eds.), Assessment matters in Higher Education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press: 41-54. Johnson, R., J. Penny & B. Gordon (2009). Developing, scoring, and validating performance tasks. New York: Guilford Publications. Kolmos, A., S.H. Clemmesen & J.E. Holgaard (2008). Delrapport 4: Individuel og gruppebaseret projekteksamen sommer 2006 og vinter 2008 ved det Humanistiske Fakultet. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitet. Centre for Engineering Educa-

407

tion Research and Development. Online publication: http://vbn.aau.dk/ws/ files/14555975/ProjektGruppeEksamen_delrapport4_HUM_1_.pdf. Sadler, D.R. (2008). Critiques on the use of assessment criteria in higher Education. Presentation, 29 May 2008 at Leeds Metropolitan.

408

6.2 Teaching evaluation SEBASTIAN HORST, BJØRN FRIIS JOHANNSEN, JAN ALEXIS NIELSEN AND CAMILLA ØSTERBERG RUMP

Good teachers use continuous evaluation to develop their teaching and thus improve students’ learning. This chapter concerns the evaluation of teaching – including potential pedagogical challenges connected to this as well as the options available to the teacher.

Pedagogical challenges According to the current University Act (Consolidation Act no. 357, 25 March 2013), the head of studies and study board are responsible for the quality of teaching: § 18 (sub-section 4). […] the board of studies is charged with the organisation, completion and development of programme and teaching activities including: 1) Assuring and developing the quality of programmes and teaching and ensuring follow-up on programme and teaching evaluations. […]

Traditionally, this legal requirement is met through summative evaluations of teaching that often include student evaluations, i.e., evaluations where students in groups or individually, anonymously or not, orally or written, assess different aspects of teaching, such as content, teaching methods, own performance, teacher etc. Many universities/faculties/ departments use anonymous standardised written student evaluations (questionnaires). However, although such questionnaires can be reliable (all students answer the same questions across subjects), they are disconnected from the context and therefore do not provide enough information about individual courses to form a sound basis for development. This type of questionnaire is therefore generally well-suited for controlling minimum standards, but very poorly suited as basis for development. In fact, 409

a sufficiently generalised questionnaire may impede educational development, because its results obscure the actual problems. If students give the academic level of the course’s teaching material an average mark in a questionnaire, this may actually mean that some material is at too high a level while some is at too low a level. However, if you want to know what matters in terms of students’ outcome for the purpose of development of the teaching, you have to approach the problem from a different direction. In this chapter, we shall provide ideas for evaluation as a means to identify the key issues in this respect. Although the control of minimum standards is important (and mandatory), our outset is a desire to contribute to the further development of teaching. We have no reason to assume that teaching is the “best it could possibly be” just because it has been done in the same way for years. Our knowledge changes and students and their competences change as well (see chapter 3.1). In principle, all aspects of a course can be evaluated, but teachers often have limited time and opportunity to reorganise a course. Therefore it is important that the teacher prioritises the focus of the evaluation. Our advice to teachers is to view teaching evaluations as an ordinary element of teaching – as part of the daily work of being in dialogue with students about the field, why they must learn what is in the curriculum and how teacher and students together can create the best possible conditions for students’ learning. At the same time – and this is just as important! – you must make it clear to yourself and students, what you, as a teacher, can and cannot change. All teaching happens in an institutional context which limits the possibilities. Often, students will make proposals that cannot all simultaneously be fulfilled. However, this does not change the fact that we consider knowledge (about teaching’s qualities or shortcomings) preferable to no knowledge – despite the fact that not all wishes can be fulfilled. Difference between formative and summative evaluation

In evaluation contexts a general distinction is made between formative and summative evaluations. The difference is based on the aim or the use of the evaluation:

410

• Formative evaluations are made to improve the process or the product. A formative evaluation is internal, and has no external consequences for the evaluated party/parties. • Summative evaluations are made to indicate a status, a value or to “brand” the product or result of the process. It is external and has external consequences for the evaluated party/parties. In connection with teaching, we therefore distinguish between evaluation for learning, such as comments on students’ papers (formative), or evaluation of teaching, e.g., the exam (summative). Formative evaluation is inherently acknowledging, and guides further learning and development, while a summative evaluation is retrospective. It must be emphasised that it is not the evaluation’s form or the way it is reported that determines whether an evaluation is summative or formative. It is rather its intention and use. Sometimes an evaluation is used differently than intended, which is unfortunate. Intention and use should of course always be in alignment. A teacher evaluating his or her own teaching constitutes formative evaluation. It is less obvious whether it is formative or summative evaluation when the study board evaluates a teacher’s teaching by using a standardised questionnaire which can be answered anonymously by students. It will depend on whether the study board conduct the evaluation for control: Is teaching good enough? In such cases, evaluation is summative. Or whether the study board evaluates with the intention of dialogue: The answers are given to the teacher, and focus is on further development of the course. In such cases the evaluation is formative. In light of this, summative evaluation can have a formative function – for example, students sometimes learn during an exam. The student can also learn much by asking the teacher for feedback on his/her exam paper/response and guidance on how to better meet the objectives (and thus achieve a better mark) after the exam. Furthermore, a teacher’s summative evaluation of his/her students can be used as a formative evaluation for the teacher’s teaching – as the marks and distribution of marks can indicate to how and how much teaching has helped students in their learning process.

411

Options In the following, we shall give a brief description of the different techniques for evaluating teaching. The techniques can of course be adapted to the specific contexts they are applied to. The starting point is that the individual teacher or a group of teachers are interested in developing a course or just their own teaching practice. Therefore the examples are aimed at these levels. We distinguish between two general types of evaluation (von Müllen 20051): • Criterion-based evaluation: Based on criteria or ideals; you know how things should be, and evaluate to which degree things are as they should be. • Receiver-based evaluation: Can reveal how the receiver of teaching experienced or reacted to it. Students’ evaluation of teaching will almost always be receiver-based, and often based on their own, quite subjective, criteria. Teachers should take this into account both when preparing what and how to ask students, and when using the results. It is, for example, well known that students’ own evaluation of their academic outcome is relatively unreliable – they simply lack the academic overview to perform a valid judgement. Exam results are more reliable – or at least they ought to be. Therefore, teachers should not ask: “What was your outcome of the course: low – middle – high?” Or “How satisfied were you with your outcome from the course? Low – neutral – high?”, but should instead ask: “How did you experience your outcome from the course in relation to the course objectives: did not correspond – corresponded to some degree – corresponded completely”. Most courses have several sub-objectives, and therefore it is natural to ask about each of them individually, which will, however, still lead to a subjective and less than academically stringent evaluation. However, teachers can gauge whether there is cause for concern, for example if some of the objectives are evaluated as less fulfilled than others, which would give the teacher something specific to work on. Teachers will presumably get even more reliable results by asking students to discuss the question 1 von Müllen develops these concepts based on Peter Elbows (1981) notion of criterion-based and reader-based feedback used in writing processes.

412

in groups before answering. In this way, students can help each other interpret the course objectives and evaluate them in relation to the course’s activities. They may even learn something from this exercise. Asking about students’ satisfaction may be acceptable, because it shows interest in students’ judgement. However, if this is the only thing you ask, the unfortunate side effects may be greater than the outcome. Merely asking about satisfaction indicates that the greatest success criteria of teaching is whether students are satisfied, which is obviously not the case: The most important thing is whether students learn what they are expected to. On the other hand, students are the best witnesses for describing their own experiences, even if they do so based on subjective criteria, e.g., whether they have struggled in a particular course. It is possible to get evaluations from standardised criteria, e.g., of time consumption, however, you must always remember to be critical of whether something that appears to be a standardised criterion really is standardised. Even an evaluation of time consumption is essentially subjective, at least if the evaluation takes place at a much later time. However, one may hope that students’ errors in judgement more or less cancel each other out. In the following, we will describe some specific tools for collecting evaluation data during or as the conclusion to a course. Hereafter, we will describe how an on-going collection of a certain type of evaluation data (i.e., students’ expectations and whether or not they have been met) can be a tool for teacher and students together. Along the way, we shall discuss the purpose and outcome of teaching. In conclusion, we shall describe how teachers can improve the evaluation and quality of teaching in collaboration with colleagues. Oral evaluation

Given the interpersonal relationship of teaching, it often seems most straightforward to ask students for oral feedback on how they have experienced teaching. Even though it may seem like this form of evaluation data collection does not require much preparation, there are certain challenges related to oral feedback. Above all, students need time to reflect on the learning outcome. Therefore it can be useful to ask for oral feedback at the end of another exercise that forces students to reflect on the learning outcome (preferably individually). The oral feedback is by its very nature not anonymous. One advantage of this is that the background for students’ feedback is available 413

to the teacher. Then again there is a risk that students do not get to say everything they want to. Another challenge is that discussions in a forum can veer off in directions that individual students were not prepared to go. For this reason, individual reflection is important, because it can help students to hold on to the many facets of their reflection. Oral evaluation is often an informal forum for the exchange of experiences. However, this does not preclude oral evaluation from being a serious exchange. It is important that students understand that evaluation is not a discussion between students and teacher. However, it can be a discussion between students. One way to make sure that students feel they are being heard is by staying silent and simply take notes of the discussion and the feedback. Furthermore, it is important that the questions that form the starting point are as concrete as possible. It is better to ask how students have used the literature in their work with specific papers, revision and the like than merely asking whether the reading list was too long. Questionnaires

Particularly in large courses with many students, the teacher may want feedback from many students, which can be difficult using oral evaluation techniques. Questionnaires (whether these are with open or closed options) can be a good way to obtain input from many students. However, this often requires a significant amount of work, both in preparing questionnaires, calculating the results (unless this is done electronically) and in the subsequent analysis. If the institution already uses a standardised evaluation questionnaire, one obvious solution is to add questions about specific aspects of course that the teacher is curious about (if this is technically feasible – which it is in many places, even though it may not be advertised). There are number of things to keep in mind to ensure a useful result of the questionnaire: • You can ensure validity by pilot-testing the questionnaire. You may, for example, ask two students whether they understand the questions. Do they read the questions the way you intended them to? You should also test out your questionnaire on a colleague. • Give the students a say in the matter by asking a couple of students

414

to point out the issues they consider important to evaluate (see also the Delphi Method below). • The number of responses can usually be increased by asking few, specific and simple questions, and by including a built-in reminder procedure as well as a demonstration of how the questionnaire results will lead to changes in teaching (e.g., by referring students to last year’s evaluations and teaching development). • Use questions that refer to specific situations, papers, assignments or a topic from the course – this links the evaluation to the students’ own experiences. • Formulate questions so it is clear that you are interested in students’ own experiences (cf., the previously mentioned difference between criterion- and receiver-based evaluations), e.g., “What would you like to see more of in this course? What could you do without? How did you experience…? What do you think about…? What did you do…?” • Be sincere about your reasons for the evaluation: Share the uncertainty one may have as a teacher about their learning outcome and experience of the course with the students. • If you wish to compare the same students’ response over time while preserving students’ anonymity, you can ask students to use a self-invented code (e.g., their house number and the last three digits of their phone number) on their evaluation forms. Such a code can be used as an anonymous identity that students can remember and use each time, without the teacher knowing who is who. There are many reasons why it can be an advantage to ask students fill out the questionnaire as an online web formula. Many university websites already have the resources to create questionnaires, and there are many free alternatives, such as Google Docs Formula or www.socrative.com, where teachers can create questionnaires and polls. Send students an email with a link rather than writing down the link on the blackboard. When they read the email, they will already be by a computer. The Post-It Method

One variation of oral evaluation is to ask students to write down reactions to teaching on post-it notes and sticking them on a wall, so both students

415

and teacher can gain an easy overview of the different views. It can be very useful to ask students to write two notes each: “What was good?” and “Suggestions for improvement?”, or: “What could you have done without?”, but of course the possibilities are endless. The advantage of this method is that you can re-organise the post-it notes to develop a thematic overview of the tendencies in students’ experience of teaching. Such a visual representation can prompt good, immediate reflection on a given problem. The post-it method is very inclusive, because students can participate in this evaluation in many ways: They can contribute and see each other’s contributions, they can discuss, and they can move post-its around or create headings. The Delphi Method

It is often a good idea that not only the teacher determines what is important for students to give feedback on. Perhaps the teacher thinks that problems are caused by the difficulty of assignments, while students find the reading load to be the real problem. The point is that teachers do not always know how students experience teaching and where the problems are. One way of making sure students are given co-determination in the evaluation content is to use the Delphi Method, in which the teacher circulates a piece of paper among students, who each write a statement about the teaching or the course. After one round, the paper is circulated again, but this time they tick one statement (or perhaps three) they agree with the most. This is a fast and easy way to get an evaluation that is both quantitative and qualitative. The method can be conducted electronically by carrying out the first round in a debate forum, while the second round can be turned into an electronic poll (i.e., the statements are collected by the teacher or some students and put into a polling system). The method can be expanded with a third round, where students write statements for different categories, e.g., the form and preparation of teaching, the academic content or obviously: the categories resulting from the first round. The Delphi Method should be concluded with a discussion focusing on the most frequently ticked statements. The method ensures that students help set the agenda for the discussion and enables everyone to consider all statements. In this way, the teacher can also use the Delphi Method to uncover potential disagreements among students. 416

Reference groups

In large classes with many student groups, one efficient way to obtain input from all students is by appointing – or asking students to appoint – 2-3 representatives for each group of students the teacher will meet with throughout the course (for example at a lunch meeting) to discuss potential problems that require attention. It is practically impossible to put together a reference group that actually represents the students at the beginning of a course. Therefore, the reference group’s members must reach out and talk to their fellow students during the course. Talks with the reference group primarily serve to preserve the teacher’s and students’ sense of connection to one another in large classes. With a reference group, the teacher can maintain some form of contact to students and nip problems in the bud. The teacher can also use students’ input for planning the content and focus of teaching. With a reference group, students can gain an important degree of ownership and influence, even in large classes. One-minute evaluations

The one-minute evaluation is handy for a first-hand impression of how students experience a specific teaching situation. In the last minutes of teaching, the teacher can hand out a questionnaire to all students with, for example, these four questions: • What did you find most interesting? • What would you like more of? • What could you have done without? • Other comments? The teacher collects the questionnaires and reviews them immediately after teaching, and identifies issues to address during the next teaching session, both topical issues and issues concerning the preparation of teaching. The method can be used systematically following each session or as needed – the method is perhaps best for courses made up of long sessions. Typically, it will be necessary to do this a couple of times before students are used to filling out the questionnaire efficiently. The filled-out questionnaires can be used as material in collegial supervision (see below).

417

Negotiation of expectations

Any good learning situation is based on a successful negotiation of expectations, and the evaluation of teaching should not be overlooked in this effort. The negotiation of expectations can take place orally, e.g., by students spending a couple of minutes contemplating and noting what expectations they have to teaching, and the teacher then asking students to discuss the results in groups, if there are many students, and then in plenum. After writing expectations and input on the blackboard, the teacher can comment and relate the students’ expectations to his/her own. Normally, students’ expectations reflect standard issues, such as the course’s teaching methods and materials, requirements about preparation, the scope of assignments, academic level and purpose, opportunities for dialogue with teachers, the content’s relevance for students, including students’ competence levels, the course’s connection to other courses as well as connection to the programme and the programme’s purpose as a whole. The negotiation of expectations should of course be done with an eye to the curriculum and the learning objectives set in the course description. The result of this evaluation form can be used in the continuous quality assurance and development of teaching. If the negotiation of expectations is carried out in writing, then discussion, summary and feedback can take place in the subsequent teaching sessions, and can form the basis for midway-evaluations, concluding evaluation or one of the other evaluation types mentioned above. If the teacher is looking for feedback on a specific issue, (s)he can make an expectation form and ask students to fill it in, e.g.: • What do you expect teaching to focus on in particular? (E.g., solving assignments, going through textbooks, concepts, linking to other content matter, putting content matter into perspective). • How do you expect to work with the subject matter on your own? • Which subject areas do you expect will be difficult? At the midway evaluation or the concluding evaluation, the teacher can return to the negotiation of expectations and thus qualify the course evaluations. At the same time, uncovering expectations and prior understandings helps students understand teaching’s role in their learning as well as their own role in teaching.

418

Collegue supervision – critical friend

Collegue supervision can be relatively simple and informal: Teacher A invites Teacher B to observe A’s teaching and subsequently discuss opportunities for improvements. This way of using a “critical friend” may be for a single session or exercise, or for a course where the teacher participates several times to form a picture of the coherence between different elements. Such an arrangement could be mutual, i.e., teachers A and B could take turns to observe each other’s teaching. No matter what, it is important that the teacher and observer agree on what to pay (and not pay) attention to, and clarify how feedback should take place before the observation. Even though one teacher feels the feedback is natural and objective, another teacher may easily consider it personal criticism – especially if that teacher was surprised to be criticised in that specific area. Naturally, such feedback sessions must always be carried out in a friendly, comfortable and constructive atmosphere. To ensure that collegue supervision is carried out with mutual respect, a more formalised format can be used, in that an observer is present at the talk, and the teachers hold a pre-meeting, a so-called “pre-supervision-meeting”. The point of using an observer is to qualify and develop the talk so the involved parties can get the highest possible outcome within the least amount of invested time. The pre-supervision meeting has several functions: To give all parties an opportunity to prepare themselves, to give the teacher a chance to get input and supervision on teaching before it is carried out, to clarify the teacher’s own wants and needs in relation to the feedback as well as to provide the observations of teaching with a focus (see chapter 7.2). Peer review

Peer review of teaching is modelled on peer review of research. As there are several differences between teaching and research, not least that teaching is not written work that must be reviewed, there are several possible formats for peer review. A couple of tried and tested formats should be mentioned: In the first format, the observer is given relevant material, such as course description, examples of papers, course plan, literature etc. in advance. The observer observes a typical teaching session (e.g., one of the last ones), and then, potentially as part of the observed teaching session

419

and in collaboration with students, provides feedback to the teacher(-s) (and students). In the second format, the observer is likewise sent relevant material, and after the session (s)he conducts focus group interviews with selected students. The peer then writes a brief report to the teacher(s). Subsequently, a joint meeting is held, in which the course is discussed with focus on opportunities for for improvement. Including students in peer review may not sound particularly comfortable. However, several organisations, including the University of Gothenburg, have found that including both colleagues and students is beneficial in the on-going quality assurance. The point of this type of evaluation is to develop teaching, not to level criticism at the teacher or teaching. Therefore student inclusion, honesty and transparency are objectives in their own right.

Rationales We know that a formative evaluation has been shown to increase the quality of students’ learning. For example, Black et al. 2004: 9 asks: “Is there evidence that improving formative assessment raises standards?”, and on the basis of a review of more than 250 sources the answer is an unequivocal “yes”. Black et al. 2004 talk about formative evaluation in teaching. However, it is reasonable to assume that a formative evaluation is important for all learning and development, and therefore also for teachers who want to develop their own teaching and thus learn more about (their own) teaching in general.

Conclusion If you have decided to evaluate, you must also be prepared to respond to the results of the evaluation. You should not evaluate if you are not willing to change anything. This will give students a false experience of having influence on teaching, which is worse than if they simply have no influence, but know it. Conversely, you will normally find that students become more engaged in teaching and more conscious of their role in creating a good learning 420

environment if they are involved in a genuine on-going, formative evaluation of the teaching’s qualities and shortcomings.

Resources The University of Oslo has created a “toolbox for student evaluation”: http://www.uio.no/studier/om/kvalitet/verktoyskasse/. The evaluation page from the Department of Science Education at the University of Copenhagen: www.ind.ku.dk/online_ressourcer/evaluering.

Literature Andersen, M. (2004). Intern evaluering af undervisningen. Copenhagen: Gyld­ endal. Assessment Reform Group (2002). Assessment for Learning: 10 Principles. Available online. Bager, L.T. & H.L. Andersen (eds.) (2011). Kollegial supervision som udviklingsredskab i undervisningskulturer. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag. Balling, D. & C. Kølsen de Wit (2004). Undervisningsevaluering: En håndbog. Århus: Amtscenter for Undervisning, Århus Amt. Black, P. et al. (2004). Working Inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1): 8-21. Christensen, T. Spanget (2005). Undervisningsevaluering i praksis: En håndbog for lærere i den gymnasiale undervisning. Århus: Amtscenter for Undervisning, Århus Amt. Dahler-Larsen, P. (2006). Evalueringskultur – et begreb bliver til. Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag. Elbow, P. (1981). Writing with Power. New York: Oxford University. EVA (2003). Undervisningsevaluering: fem spørgsmål, fem råd, fem metoder. København: Danmarks Evalueringsinstitut. Available online. Lauvås, P. & C. Rump (2001). Vor fælles viden. Kollegavejledning som metode til udvikling af undervisning ved højere læreanstalter. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. von Müllen, R. (2005). Undervisningsevaluering som redskab til pædagogisk udvikling på KU. Thesis. Copenhagen: Department of Media, Cognition and Communication, Copenhagen University.

421

422

7.1 Developing your own teaching JAN SØLBERG

The reflective teacher In 1983, Donald Schön published a groundbreaking work about how professionals (teachers) can become better at their job (Schön 1983). He pointed out that technical knowledge about one’s field is not the key issue; the important thing is, rather, to be a “reflective practitioner”. By this, Schön meant that professional development is all about being able to reflect on your own practice, and thereby develop your practice. He distinguished between the ability to reflect on challenges in a given situation as it unfolded (reflection-in-action), and the ability to reflect systematically on practice following the situation (reflection-on-action). Furthermore, Schön argued that both were important. In relation to teaching, reflection-in-action refers to each teacher’s ability to reflect on how teaching is progressing in the actual teaching situation, and, through this, to improve their handling of unexpected situations. However, in this section, we will mostly discuss reflection-on-action, to show how a teacher can develop his/her own teaching with an aim to increase students’ learning outcome. The following will describe how you can develop different aspects of your teaching systematically, and how this affects students’ outcome.

Which factors are interesting for developing your teaching? To improve your teaching, you first need to know which factors affect your teaching. To get an idea of which factors to examine, and what to focus on, you can take the following model as your starting point. It divides the field into three elements:

423

Prerequisites for teaching (“Presage”) Students and their competences, abilities, experiences and more. The teaching context, e.g., practical frameworks, regulation, evaluation types and goal descriptions.

Teaching (“Process”)

The outcome of teaching (“Product”)

E.g., different methods of teaching, engagement in teaching, the teacher’s and students’ approaches to learning.

Learning outcomes for students and teachers, i.e. competences or independent work.

Figure 1. Model of factors that affect teaching. The model is adapted from the socalled 3P model after Biggs (1989). All elements can affect each other and thus also affect students’ outcome.

As figure 1 shows, you can address several different elements to develop and improve your own teaching. Before the actual teaching situation (“presage”), you can choose to focus on your students and what they bring to the teaching situation. This can be their prior knowledge, previous educational experiences, motivation, opinions, level of ambition, competences, language skills and other, which all contribute to forming their behaviour in the teaching situation and thus also the outcome of this (see chapter 3.1). We know, for example, that math students’ view of maths as a discipline influences their approach to teaching, and thus also their learning outcome (Crawford et al. 1994). Similarly, it can be relevant to examine other aspects of students’ prerequisites as part of developing your teaching. The conditions for teaching are partly defined by the teaching context. This may include the practical frameworks, such as finances, the condition of classrooms, the number of students, access to e-learning resources etc. This can also include course objectives, acts, legislation and other factors that limit the teacher’s options in teaching. Together, they constitute a number of factors, which the individual teacher can find difficult 424

to affect, but which may be crucial for teaching. Although some of these factors can be hard to change, they can still be made the object of productive analysis. There can, for example, be great development potential in improving one’s understanding of what the learning objectives actually mean to both teacher and students (see chapter 3.2). You can also choose to examine how the classroom affects students, and experiment with different table formations to promote group work or communication with and between students. It also makes sense to examine the teaching situation itself (“process”). This involves understanding the factors in the teaching situation that are significant for students’ outcome. This can include the relationship between teacher- and student-controlled activities; students’ participation; how prepared students are; how the teacher deals with particularly difficult questions; which concepts cause special challenges for the students, or which teaching methods are most suitable in a given situation. As a teacher, you must ask critical questions to sharpen your understanding of how a teaching situation works. Subsequently, you can collect your own and other’s experiences with teaching, and use the findings to develop your repertoire for handling different challenges in teaching. The last part of the figure is about “products” of teaching expressed through the learning acquired by students (and teacher). As teachers, we are used to reviewing academic outcome in different ways. This typically takes place in exams. However, there are many other ways to assess the outcome of teaching than merely examining whether the students meet the subject-specific learning objectives (even though this can be sufficiently challenging!). It is just as important to review other types of outcomes, such as whether students have improved their study competences, gained insight into scientific processes, developed their lab skills, become more independent, gained more self-confidence and more. It is important to be aware of other forms of learning outcomes than the ones stated in goal descriptions, as they can potentially mean the difference between student drop-out or retention. A positive change in teaching can affect students’ engagement in their studies without necessarily affecting their exam results. It is important to mention that although the elements can be examined separately, the connection between the three elements can also be made the object of review. One widespread and useful exercise is to review how well connected the goal-description, learning and teaching activities, and the evaluation types are in a given course. This so-called “construc425

tive alignment” (or lack thereof) can be decisive for students’ outcome of teaching (see chapter 3.2 about constructive alignment).

How can you develop your own teaching? When you have identified what you would like to examine, you must look for possible research methods. In the following, I shall present a brief overview of some of the most common methods. The different methods are only briefly outlined here, so I strongly advise that you read more thoroughly about the individual methods elsewhere (see Resources in this chapter). In the following, a few of the most common tools for developing your own teaching will be presented. It is important to understand that this is not an exhaustive review. It is intended as a starting point, and you should use your own creativity and the extensive knowledge available to you to find methods that suit your particular needs. Achievement of objectives

It is quite common to evaluate your teaching on the basis of the stated learning objectives. If the learning objectives are clear and realistic, it makes sense to use them as indicators for the quality of teaching. The most common method used for this is the exam results. There will always be reasons why you should have reservations about students’ exam results, as both the validity and reliability of exam results often can be questionable. Nonetheless, they are easily accessible and can give an indication of the quality of teaching. The same can be said of tests that will typically be aimed at focused on individual sessions rather than whole courses. One advantage of tests can be that they can be part of the feedback to students that help clarify what is expected of them. You can also arrange for students to evaluate their own or each other students’ performances (see chapter 4.6.1 about feedback). Leaving all or parts of evaluations of students’ performance to self-evaluation or peer-evaluation has proven to be remarkably effective in many cases. Both approaches serve to inform the teacher about students’ performance, and provide insight into students’ ideas about the academic level and expectations regarding any eventual final exam.

426

Interviews

One obvious way to determine the quality of your teaching is simply by asking students. There are many ways to talk to students, but the most direct way is to interview them. An interview allows you to bring up topics that go beyond students’ academic performance, such as general well-being, work load, expectations, motivation or the academic level of teaching. The disadvantage is that it can be difficult to get a representative impression of a whole group of students or to convince students to respond honestly when they are asked by one of their teachers. The way the interviews are staged is crucial, and much can be said about how to get the most out of these interviews. However, some of the important things to consider in this connection can be summarised in the following points:

Interviewing students about teaching • Choose your respondents carefully and thoughtfully – e.g., decide how many you want to include; whether there is a special group of students you would like to talk to; how you will make them participate without putting pressure on them. • Consider whether it is more suitable to conduct individual or group interviews. • Consider where you conduct the interviews – e.g., in your office, or on neutral ground such as a classroom, communal area or outside of the university. • Consider when you conduct interviews – e.g., before or after teaching/ the exam, during teaching or in students’ free time. • What do you want to ask them? Prepare an interview guide and try to be as specific as possible without getting too personal.

There is no unequivocally efficient way to conduct interviews with students, so the important thing is first and foremost to be well-prepared and clear about the purpose of the interview. It is also important that students do not feel their answers have consequences for their assessment, or it may affect the credibility of their replies. If possible, it can be useful to ask a colleague, who has nothing to do with your students, to act as the interviewer. In this way, the students can be guaranteed some measure of

427

anonymity. You might even consider “swapping” students, so both you and your colleague interview students that neither of you teach. Journals/logbooks

You can also gain insight into your teaching by following students’ progression through the use of journals or logbooks. This can be quite demanding for both teacher and students. However, you can gain a much more detailed and nuanced picture of students’ experience as you simultaneously obtain information from many students and follow students’ development over time. Logbooks and journals can also be strong tools for the students’ own reflections, which can serve as an important objective in itself. It is important to consider how much access the teacher should have to students’ materials and whether these are going to be part of the assessment of each student. If the teacher wishes to have access to students’ materials, (s)he must make it clear from the beginning what they will be used for. In addition, it is important to clearly state what students should focus on in their writing. You can, for example, hand out a special questionnaire that students can fill out in connection with specific activities such as lab work, when they do their homework, or after a lecture to limit the workload and to get more exact information. Questionnaires

One frequently used method for evaluating of teaching is questionnaires. Questionnaires are relatively quick to be developed, and easy to distribute and analyse, which makes them an attractive evaluation method. This applies in particular to online questionnaires, which have become more and more widespread. It is also common practice to conclude a course with an evaluation form for students, and this type of evaluation is used as part of universities’ quality assurance. The challenges of and possibilities for using questionnaires as midway or final evaluation are described in more detail in chapter 6.2. Direct investigation

Direct investigations are (more or less) based on the teaching situation. One option is simply to make a video or audio recording of the teaching, so you can review the teaching situation and analyse it on your own or 428

with colleagues. This method is simple and informative, but recording requires the consent of everyone present. Furthermore, certain teaching methods can be hard to capture because of noise, movement or several activities taking place at once, and it may require an assistant or specialised equipment to get useful material for your analyses. Another, and more direct, way to get information about your teaching or the students is by talking to them during teaching. If you are able to enter into a genuine dialogue with students, you can gain important insights into their academic level, misunderstandings, engagement, expectations etc. At the same time, a dialogical approach can help activate students and result in more learning. A genuine dialogue requires more than a simple conversation with or questions posed to the students. You must ask questions that you genuinely want answers to; you must work actively to understand students’ answers and include as many students’ opinions as possible. You can also get an impression of students’ understanding of academic content in teaching (or another aspect) by using “clickers” or similar methods that enable direct and often anonymous answers from students even in large classes. This type of feedback is discussed in more detail in chapter 4.8.

Development as research into teaching In recent years, a movement towards making the development of teaching more scientific has developed within the universities. This movement is known internationally as “the Scholarship of Teaching” (or “Scholarship of Teaching and Learning”) and its aim is professionalising university teaching so that it does not simply benefit the individual teacher or makes the individual teacher responsible for the quality of teaching. Drawing on academic tradition, the movement strives to make teachers approach development of teaching in the same way as they approach their research. In other words, teachers are encouraged to draw upon and contribute to the existing literature about teaching and learning. This can be done by conducting systematic examinations of teaching with the aim to increase students’ learning and by subsequently discussing these results with peers and communicating them to others through internal meetings, conferences or scientific publications (Trigwell et al. 2000). Even though the idea of placing the responsibility for the development of teaching in a kind of research community is gaining ground, urgent 429

tension arises between researching and teaching in the current organisational structures (see more in chapter 1.2). At the annual conference of the Danish Network for Educational Development in Higher Education in 2011, it was apparent that there is a need for better managerial support and incentive structures for good teaching similar to the ones for research, if more teachers are expected to invest time in developing their teaching: Thus, the question of teaching development is not seen as a lack of good will, but simply as an expression of university and funding structures strictly prioritising research and de-prioritising teaching. (Horst et al. 2011: 20 – our translation)

Therefore, improving universities as educational institutions not only requires effort from the individual teacher but also requires organisational re-prioritisation. In the meantime, everyone can contribute by developing their own teaching more systematically or by helping others teachers develop theirs. There is a particularly important potential in developing teaching with colleagues – especially for courses with many different teachers. One can achieve greater consistency and better quality of teaching by examining teaching in collaboration with others. Thus, collegial supervision, which is discussed in chapter 7.2, is also an important tool for developing your teaching.

Resources For more inspiration about research methods, the following book is recommended: Cohen, L., M. Lawrence and K. Morrison (eds.) (2011). Research Methods in Education. 7th ed. London/New York: Routledge Falmer. If you want to know more about Scholarship of Teaching and see a good example of how several Australian universities have managed to introduce a number of initiatives, which have systematically improved the quality of their teaching, the Australian scholarship of teaching project (1999) is available online and is highly recommended.

430

Literature Biggs, J.B. (1989). Approaches to the Enhancement of Tertiary Teaching. Higher Education Research & Development, 8(1): 7-25. Crawford, K. et al. (1994). Conceptions of mathematics and how it is learned: The perspectives of students entering university. Learning and Instruction, 4(4): 331-345. Horst, S. et al. (2011). Udvikling af universitetsundervisning – rammer, barrierer og muligheder. Hvidbog baseret på DUN-konferencen 30.-31. maj 2011. Copenhagen. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Netværk, København Universitet. Schön, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books. Trigwell, K. et al. (2000). Scholarship of Teaching: A Model. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(2): 155-168.

431

432

7.2 Collegial supervision HANNE LETH ANDERSEN AND LENE TORTZEN BAGER

In this chapter we will discuss collegial supervision, the implied rationales and learning concepts as means to pedagogical development. We will touch upon the frameworks, the individual teacher’s practice, three different roles involved in supervision, and the appreciative approach based on questions. We will briefly review the underlying theories and suggest resources for further study. Finally, we show how teachers can develop their own teaching through collegial dialogue.

Introduction: Pedagogical development of own and shared premises? The philosophy behind collegial supervision is that teaching can only be developed through practice and collaboration. The idea of learning behind this method is based on a number of principles about context-based learning, inner motivation, appreciative learning environments and emphasis on reflection through questions rather than through finished solutions. The outset is the individual professional as an expert in his or her field, and a genuine recognition of the fact that teachers’ practices develop better on their own terms, which also allow them to become confident and well-rounded teachers. Collegial supervision includes elements from the appreciative dialogue, while the collegial aspect is the starting point for the method and a necessary premise of its effect. Colleagues across curricular fields or within the same field have the insight and opportunity to ask questions and find answers, and thereby establish common knowledge and reflection as well as personal practice because they are familiar with the daily lives of their colleagues. One fundamental part of the supervision method is that it creates a space for teachers who aim for personal development and who wish to contribute to their colleagues’ professional development. Collegial supervision is not a pedagogical course one can follow. The 433

method is explicitly based on the individual teacher’s identification of his or her own points of interest and development. This can be based on participating in pedagogical courses aimed at implementing new knowledge, or on a desire to improve in some specific area the teacher has encountered through courses. Collegial supervision provides a framework for collaboration across fields of research, thus supporting teachers accommodate the ever-increasing number of young people with diverse social, academic and cultural backgrounds. This task is best carried out in collaboration with others.

Instructions: Frameworks, roles, inquisitive approach Granting access to your classroom and inviting colleagues to observe your teaching requires courage. Collaboration with colleagues about weaknesses in your own teaching and embracing change cannot happen be done without mutual trust. This calls for a robust framing of the work in supervision groups with well-defined agreement about processes, dialogue and roles. Collegial supervision calls for a codified form of communication, both in terms of choice of topic, focus of observation, form of dialogue and questioning technique. Exact codes of conduct allow the group members to unreservedly present their own challenges in their daily teaching practice and to give and receive observations and feedback without overstepping each other’s personal integrity. The method is based on three colleagues who take turns: 1. Selecting the topic of observation and development. 2. Observing teaching with a special eye to the focus point. 3. Having a dialogue with the aim to bring out reflection in the individual teacher. 4. Reflecting on the method and on the knowledge that is developed and established by the individual and in the group. The basis of collegial supervision is observation of actual teaching, and the focus is defined by the individual teacher who selects the elements he or she wants to work on with the colleagues. The teacher describes his or her focus in teaching; it may be based on certain challenges or particularly attention-demanding elements in teaching. The teacher’s description is shared with colleagues in the group who 434

use it as the basis for observation. The teacher’s engagement in these focus points is crucial for the outcome of dialogues and observation. Three roles

In connection with observation and dialogues, the three members of the supervision group take turns at fulfilling the following roles: • Focus person: the teacher conducting his/her teaching. • Supervisor: a teacher who observes and conducts the development dialogue with the teacher. • Mediator: the teacher who observes and gives feedback on the development dialogue.

Focus person: The person who is observed and/or is in focus in the dialogue. Specifies his/her focus point with a brief clarification or summary, e.g.: “How does my invitation to dialogue with students work?”

Supervisor/observer: The person who observes and subsequently questions the focus person in the dialogue acts as a mirror and helps clarify the focus person’s experiences so these can be processed. Active listening and open and specific questions to be asked.

Mediator: The person who observes the dialogue, gives feedback on the method and manages the time. Monitoring: That the contract is followed The topic and mode of discussion (initiative, codes of conduct) The focus person’s focus and attention The nature of the observer’s questions and contribution of specific examples from the observation Atmosphere and flow of the dialogue

Figure 1. The three roles in collegial supervision.

In one round all three participants take turns at each of the three roles. The focus person is the central person in each round. The focus person’s teaching is discussed and processed, and the focus person defines the topic for observation and dialogue. The supervisor is primarily an observer, 435

a mirror, and helps clarify the focus person’s experiences so these can be processed. This is why close and precise observations are important. In supervision, these observations are offered to the teacher for processing and reflection. The mediator observes the dialogue, ensures that the process between focus person and supervisor is carried out in the best possible way, and that the rules for the dialogue are followed. Thus, the mediator’s function is to ensure that the dialogue does not devolve into praise, criticism or well-meaning advice. At the same time, the presence of a mediator places each participant in an observing position, which generates knowledge about the function and direction of the dialogue, and about question types, including follow-up questions and questions that encourage reflection. Dialogue and active listening

Practice and training are required in order to describe and observe teaching. In a normal conversation, when one person presents a problem, the other speaker tends to express his or her opinions, present solutions with good advice based on own experience. University teachers are no exception, and are furthermore experts in analysis and evaluation, arguing for viewpoints, and in making conclusions and providing advice. These approaches are sender-oriented, and are challenged by collegial supervision, because the point of supervision is to provide the receiver an opportunity to reflect. The important thing is the intention of leading a dialogue which is first and foremost aimed at enabling the focus person to develop his or her teaching. As a supervisor you place yourself at the focus person’s disposal in order to give him or her the best opportunity to reflect on the selected problem, and to learn as much as possible. The actively listening supervisor is open, forthcoming and interested in his or her interaction with the focus person, and should indicate that he or she is listening, and contribute with questions for elaboration and specification when something is unclear. In this way, the focus person is given the best possible opportunity to reflect and develop new action competences. The dialogue should not become a discussion, and the supervisor must be impartial and must not manipulate the discussion through his or her questioning technique. Therefore, asking questions (although a good formal approach) is not the key issue; rather, it is the intention of working with the other person on his or her terms. 436

Time outs and the role of the mediator

The group can use time outs to empower all three roles and the agreed focus. A time out is a brief, interruption used to talk about the dialogue and to bring it back on track. Time outs can be used if roles, allotted time or other aspects are not adhered to, or when there are other calls for meta-communication. A time out can be called by either of the three parties at any time, and can serve different purposes: the supervisor may ensure that the dialogue remains focused on what is most important for the focus person. The mediator may be invited to reintroduce an angle or perspective that was abandoned earlier in the dialogue, and the focus person can indicate what he or she would like to be considered. You may choose to force the mediator to call a fixed time out to give this role a definite function, even during the dialogue. Supervision basically comprises two components: Dialogue between focus person and observer/supervisor about teaching (about 30 minutes). The mediator’s feedback on this dialogue (about 15 minutes). The mediator is a kind of chairman and contract-monitor, who must also observe the time frame. As the reflecting party of the dialogue, the mediator must be aware of what is being discussed and how (initiative, code of conduct), whether the supervisor is specific and precise, and how the dialogue’s atmosphere and structure progresses. Finally the mediator must listen to the dialogue and draw out the most important points and progressions. The focus point and questions in the dialogue

Dialogues in collegial supervision differ from the type of dialogue we usually have with colleagues: This dialogue does not play out as an academic, critical dialogue, nor is it a dialogue between close friends or family. This dialogue differs from the other types in that it follows a different logic and its intention can appear unfamiliar and slightly artificial, at least until you have tried it and seen its effect. This form of dialogue is also special because it is based on pre-defined and active speaker/listener positions, and on the intention of enriching each other through reflection and study of his or her practices. The dialogue is not based on actual questioning technique, but its focus point – to study and develop perspective and reflection – draws on dialogue traditions aimed at creating development and insight. The collegial supervision dialogue is not meant to be therapeutic, but rather an appreciative basis for creating insight and enable development. 437

Phases of collegial supervision

A supervision session begins with the focus person describing his or her focus point. It is crucial for the subsequent dialogue and for the effect of supervision that the topic is important to the focus person. Pragmatic or “practical” topics lack the necessary importance for the focus person to ensure that the focus person genuinely reflects on his or her practice, which is crucial for the outcome. Therefore, the preliminary work of describing the focus point is an important phase, and calls for much deliberation. The description of the focus point could be anywhere from 10 lines to one page; it presents the topic in general and provides a short description of where and how the focus person experiences a dilemma in connection with teaching. The focus person can also narrow down what he or she especially wants feedback on. The aim of this preparation is to specify the description of the focus point, to increase the focus on the observation and the dialogue. The description of the focus point is used as a tool in the next phase of supervision. Many find that describing a focus point is in itself a cause for reflection, which provides a better understanding of the problem. To agree on observation of teaching and subsequent collegial supervision works best when the observation and the dialogue are carried out with little or no delay, preferably on the same day or within a couple of days, to ensure that the teaching is fresh in the mind of all parties. The observer/supervisor uses the focus point actively in the observation of teaching and takes notes to be able to describe specific situations or reactions from teaching. When the observation is close to the focus point, the focus person is given an additional perspective on his or her teaching through the observer’s observations. Peace and quiet is important for the dialogue, and it is important that the group conducts this supervision in a place where they will not be disturbed. How to get started

If you want to use collegial supervision, we recommend that you contact the local university teaching and learning unit, which most universities have already established. They can help you get started and put you in touch with other teachers with an interest in collegial supervision. However, it is important that the work involves your head of department, who may need suggestions for how to develop teaching and education. We know of teachers who completed a course of collegial supervision, 438

and want to carry out another round after a couple of years in order to become even better at the dialogical and appreciative approach, and to focus their pedagogical-didactical development. The second time around, these experienced teachers wanted more external input to shed light on problems they had worked on since their first collegial supervision. In such cases, the institutional knowledge and reflection is improved by the specialised knowledge of pedagogical experts without the teachers losing ownership of the application of this knowledge in their own way and in their own teaching. Collegial supervision can be used to great effect by an entire institution, a field, a department or organisation. It is a joint process, where new approaches are shared by all teachers, and easily become widely used tools in daily communication, meeting conduct and feedback/dialogue. The method was used at a number of upper secondary schools in the 1990s, and in recent years we have seen management using the method as a strategic tool for development of their entire institution. By applying the method for an entire organisation, we reduce the risk that only passionate individuals and teaching-enthusiasts adopt it, and it ensures that all teachers will be involved in the program. This may give rise to opposition from teachers, and questions of conditions for participation and non-participation should be addressed straight away (see for example Larsen, in Andersen & Bager 2011).

Rationales and evidence The rationales behind collegial supervision are that a) the best learning occurs in the specific context in which it is to be used, b) practice contains knowledge and experience, which can be identified and thereby improved, c) learning best occurs when the learners themselves define objectives and focus, d) you learn best when you are motivated by appreciative and respectful recognition by your colleagues, consultants, teachers or leaders, and when access creates reflection and research rather than instruction. Learning in a context

It is widely agreed that competence development gained in off-site courses does not last long. Partly because it is hard to change your practice regardless of how inspiring a course has been – old habits die hard – and 439

partly because the reality of the course can seem far from real life practice once you return to teaching. Therefore, developmental projects that involve colleagues and your own teaching context is an excellent foundation for genuine development. Furthermore, it is important that the individual teacher gets a chance to identify areas for development, and that the course can be adapted to the time and needs of the teachers and take place directly in teaching where genuine and professionally relevant situations are shared with colleagues, who can aid with analysis and reflection. Practice learning

The notion of collegial supervision is based on the assumption that our understanding and thought patterns are closely tied to our practice (Schön 1987). Practice is not only a sequence of actions, but also a sequence of reasons for our actions. The reasons can both be handed down from the profession in which we work – i.e. based on formal knowledge and informal practical experience – an experience-based and hinge on personal opinion, feeling, values and ethical views. Each teacher develops his or her individual professional theory, which governs our actions through knowledge, experiences and values which in each person can be more or less conscious (Handal & Lauvås 2000). Therefore we cannot simply assume that we know the other person’s reasons for his or her practice – we have to study them, just as we have to support the other person in becoming conscious of his or her own practice theory. When we acknowledge this basis for understanding practice, we can research and take into account the individual’s reasons, and through this create development and possibilities for the individual person. Collegial supervision is based on practice as a gateway to the individual teacher’s specific interplay of knowledge, experience and value as expressed through actions. We become conscious of our actions through reflection on practice, and this allows us to discuss the reasons for our actions and thus make our practice the cornerstone of deliberation of alternative forms of practice. Dialogue and observation between colleagues not only support the individual teacher, but enable mutual development between the colleagues, who may develop together through teaching. Defining the next step yourself

Collegial supervision is intended to develop your individual teaching in 440

collaboration with colleagues, as you integrate knowledge and develop abilities within the personal and academic frameworks that a teacher experiences and possesses. There are many ways to improve the quality of teaching. One way promoted by this method, is dialogue about teaching based on a self-defined focus point. As we have previously stated, it is important that the teacher identifies an area of interest and invests in the collaboration with colleagues. Although collegial supervision is a useful method for individual competence development, it also gives rise to collegial discussions and creates an environment for constructive discussions of teaching that reaches beyond the individual. In this way, collegial supervision is a model of competence development not governed by policy, where the political aim may actually be that educational institutions prioritise individual development of the teacher through collaboration. The appreciative approach

The appreciative approach and the appreciative dialogue are based on the idea that perceived reality is a social construction. Language and the way we talk about reality define our reality. This means that language in itself can be a tool that creates changes in reality. The appreciative approach is basically a matter of seeing all actions as meaningful, and examine different views underlying actions in order to expand our understandings and generate changes in practice. The appreciative approach does not replace a critical academic approach, but in contexts where processes in practice and reflection must support new insight and opportunities for development, it can improve motivation and contribute to a safe climate for dialogue. In collegial supervision, the dialogue is based on a positive view of practice and on the intention to discover the starting point for development and change within an area identified as challenging by the teacher. The supervisor can inquire about a bad experience by asking what went well anyway, what possible positive outcomes the problem might entail, whether an outcome can be identified, what cause might be and how the teacher and students can move ahead in a positive direction together. In difficult cases where the teacher has a negative view of his/her teaching, e.g., as a “problem-filled space of lazy students, who take no responsibility for their own learning” (Winther, in Andersen & Bager 2011:24), the approach to teaching becomes problematic and troublesome, and this dominates both understanding and language. Formulations and interpre441

tations contribute to a negative understanding of what takes place in the classroom and what leads to negative intervention and automatic defensive reactions. The supervisor’s role in such cases is to examine the focus person’s negative interpretation of his or her focus point, and to contribute to the construction of a new positive and development-oriented understanding of the focus person’s options within the chosen topic. Thus the focus person is given a starting point for new thought and ideas. The pre-defined framework of the dialogue and the function of the roles are crucial for collegial supervision to gain depth and effect. By further inquiry into the focus topic and observations, the supervisor maintains focus on the focus person. A good question can lead to a new perspective, and this can give rise to a re-framing of your established universe of understanding. Focused dialogue and several inquisitive and nuanced follow-up questions related to the observations of teaching in practice can form the basis for a deeper inquiry into the new areas that arise from the dialogue. Collegial supervision addresses questions based on the assumption that the focus person must experience the questions as both relevant and illuminating. In this way, the dialogue can pave the way for new approaches and demonstrate that new perspectives and actions are always available. Thus, many teachers have reported that collegial supervision made them aware of new options in specific teaching situations, where they previously would have acted from ingrained habits and without considering the existence of other options. This provides insight into teaching as a practice based on actions, which may be based on choice and reflection. The appreciative dialogue does not ask particularly difficult questions or apply a specific technique. However, the aim of this dialogue will often be to uncover the focus point as it appears in the observed teaching, followed by a dialogue where the supervisor makes the focus person consider and reflect through his or her questions and specific examples. In dialogue, it is important that the supervisor listens attentively and bases questions on the focus person’s descriptions and the focus person’s experience, and to support the focus person in exploring the rationale behind his or her actions and preconceptions to discover hidden motives and values.

442

Evaluation and outcome In all the collegial supervision we have conducted, the method has brought about changes for the individual teacher and created a sense of community with other colleagues, either within the same field or across disciplines and educations. In the evaluations, some of the most prevalent feedback we have received has been that teachers felt better about teaching, felt more confident when teaching and learned to consciously select different actions and thus to avoid the habitual, fixed patterns that many teachers carry with them as an inheritance from their own teachers. Being observed by a colleague is a good and effective way to make you reflect on your own teaching and perhaps adjust it so you can feel more secure about yourself in your teaching.

Resources Andersen, H.L. & L.T. Bager (2011). Kollegial supervision som udviklingsredskab i undervisningskulturer. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag. – The book collects experiences of collegial supervision in different educational environments, especially in relation to management. In the book, a number of specific tools are introduced for preparation of and carrying out collegial supervision. Andersen, H.L. & L. Søndergaard (ed.) (2007). Kollegial supervision på universitetet. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag. – The book reviews a pilot course of collegial supervision at Aarhus University, and includes chapters on method development, thorough evaluation of the course of supervision, participant’s experience-based review and contributions from a number of researchers within learning and dialogue-based supervision. Handal, G. & P. Lauvås (1990 and 2000). Vejledning og praksisteori. Aarhus: Klim. – The book introduces collegial counselling as a variety of collegial supervision, where emphasis is placed on a “pre-dialogue” in advance of observation of the teaching, which is described here in relation to the reflective “Vejledningssløjfe” (Lit.: “supervision loop”).

443

Literature Alrø, H. & M. Kristiansen (1998). Supervision som dialogisk læreproces. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Bager, L.T. (2008). Cafemodellen – anerkendende feedback i projektgrupper. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 6: 10-15. Larsen, I.M. (2011). Op ad bakke. Om modstand over for kollegial supervision og om behovet for ledelsesmæssig og institutionel forankring. In: H.L. And­ ersen & L.T. Bager (2011), Kollegial supervision som udviklingsredskab i undervisningskulturer. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press. Lave, J. & E. Wenger (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rogers, C. (1962). The interpersonal relationship: The core of guidance. Harvard Educational Review, 32(4): 416-429. Schön, D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Winther, S. (2011). Udvikling af samtalekompetence. In: H.L. Andersen & L.T. Bager (eds.), Kollegial supervision som udviklingsredskab i undervisningskulturer. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.

444

7.3 Teaching portfolios BETTINA DAHL AND LONE KROGH

The definition of a teaching portfolio A teaching portfolio can be compared with teaching CV but are not the same thing and should not be mistaken for one another. A teaching CV is a quantitative list of your teaching experience, and is typically a natural part of a portfolio, but in itself it is not and cannot be a substitute for competence development. A teaching CV can include the courses you have taught, list the number of students you have supervised, courses on university teaching and learning, communication activities, external examination experience, teaching languages, evaluations etc. It is thus a list of experiences without further comments or explanations. The portfolio, on the other hand, must document how you have solved and managed your teaching tasks, why you made the decision you did, as well as which results your teaching has had. It is often recommended that a teaching portfolio is about 4-8 pages long, excluding appendices. This is partly due to the fact that it will be read by an assessment committee, and partly because it is a rewarding exercise to have to be conscious about in selecting what you would like to show about your teaching and supervision. However, the length also depends on your experiences, and therefore applications for senior positions will include more extensive portfolios. The personal portfolio/the working portfolio

Producing a teaching portfolio for an assessment committee (the presentation portfolio) is typically based on the ongoing work with a personal portfolio – the working portfolio. You should keep your personal portfolio updated with examples of development and teaching activities, teaching experiments, choice of material, evaluations etc. You can also save notes with ideas or consideration about teaching. This can be used next time you teach the same course and when you write your next teaching statement. The personal portfolio is 445

therefore also a working portfolio, something which is ongoing. Typically, you collect and process such data as part of participating on a teaching and learning in higher education programme, but it is a good idea to continue to do so after the programme. You can gather these things in the same place – whether this be a physical or digital folder. Examples of data are mentioned above and in figure 2. At Aalborg University, it has proven particularly useful to create a manual with key questions, which guide participants in teaching and learning in higher education programmes in discipline-based reflection on their teaching. See Resources below. The public portfolio/the presentation portfolio

The public portfolio comprises carefully selected and analysed data from the personal/working portfolio and it is documented and substantiated theoretically and practically on the basis of your criteria and desires for development of your teaching and supervision. The public portfolio is also used when applying for an academic position, and thus a way of presenting yourself as a teacher. However, it is important to keep in mind that a teaching portfolio is never complete, and should be adjusted according to its particular requirements for the job you are applying for. At Aarhus University, for example, it is emphasised that portfolios used for applications must show scope and variation in teaching experience, including that you have developed teaching yourself, and have undergone a development and acquired experiences at several levels of teaching and teaching methods, and that you have expanded your knowledge of pedagogical and discipline-based teaching topics. It is also recommended that there is a high degree of consistency between objectives, strategy, teaching method, your own role as a teacher and expectations to students. As to results, you must be able to present student evaluations, and explain how you have interpreted and used these in later teaching.

Pedagogical challenges of the teaching portfolio What should you include in a portfolio?

One of the challenges of creating a portfolio is to determine what to include in it. I.e., what material can document that your teaching has been “good”? This gives rise to a new question: What is good university teaching actually? We will discuss this more below, but the following indicators could document some qualities about your teaching: 446

• Students’ learning outcome and marks. • Student evaluations. • Experiences from teaching committees, study boards etc. • Feedback from colleagues or superiors (including teaching awards). • Knowledge of pedagogy and didactics. • Courses in university teaching and learning. • Teaching experience. • External examiner experience. • Examples of assignments given in teaching. • Examples of teaching material etc. that you have produced. These things alone will not be sufficient for assessing whether a teacher is any good. However, when described in a context and in a way where objectives, results of processes and products can be explained and substantiated through teaching, they will be an indication of good teaching. It can be discussed how these elements should be weighted in relation to one another. However, this is where the portfolio method is useful, as it helps you to consciously choose and structure selected material about teaching that documents connections between the objectives, methods, processes and results of teaching in different contexts. What does it mean to be a good university teacher?

When applying for university jobs, the portfolio must also document that you are a good university teacher. But what does this mean? Petersen (1997) points to three levels of teaching professionalism: P1: Practice refers to a teacher’s competence in carrying out teaching and creating learning activities (practice level), which, according to the author, happens more or less sub-consciously. P2: Planning describes a teacher’s competence in constructing teaching, considering objectives and evaluating by including theory. Finally, P3: Theory and reflection concerns a teacher’s competence in communicating, discussing, substantiating, reflecting and constructing didactic theory as well as including fundamental assumptions and considerations of views of society and human nature. The model thus shows a hierarchy of levels of teachers’ competences. Other models can also be used to describe progression in teacher professionalism, for example Dreyfus & Dreyfus (1986), who developed a competence-development taxonomy from novice to expert. By using a model as the basis for characterising your teaching levels, you obtain a 447

conceptual framework for defining characteristics of the good teacher. But what should the end goal be for a university teacher, cf., Petersen’s model above? For the majority of university teachers, P2 will go a long way, but for many teachers, the moment they start working on developing their teaching by including theories and argued experiences, they will become more conscious of underlying assumptions and reasons for the choices they made in teaching and will therefore move to a level corresponding to P3.

P2

Planning: Competence to construct teaching and evaluation.

PR

AC

TIC

ET

HE

OR Y

P3

Theory and reflection: Competence to discuss, substantiate and construct didactic theory.

P1

Practice: Competence to conduct teaching.

Figure 1. Levels of teaching professionalism.

How to use the portfolio for qualifying teaching

When you collect data and material about your teaching, reflect on these and describe them, you can develop as a teacher. According to Lauvås & Handal (1997), all teachers have a personal “practice theory” about teaching, and this practice theory is the strongest determining factor in the teacher’s decision-making. The authors write that teachers typically do things in their teaching that they have personally experienced as good. The teacher’s own experience of what is good teaching influences how he/ she relates to students and which methods are preferred to use. In addition, the teacher’s understanding of teaching will naturally also be defined by the features, which are specific his/her field as well as the way teaching at educational institutions is traditionally organised (with focus on sub448

jects, disciplines, schedules and the teacher’s communication of subjects). As a teacher, you may or may not be conscious of your practice theory. Many teachers are in fact able to teach quite well without being especially conscious of their practice. However, teaching is not a ‘once defined’ thing, but comprises a complex, social situation, its conditions change with time, it is affected by societal demands, by changes in the student group, and the changed status of fields and curricula, and character of an educational area. Much pedagogical research claims that the condition for teaching – under changing conditions – is that you, in addition to your disciplinary knowledge, also have knowledge of teaching and learning processes, and that you are conscious of how these function in different contexts and under changing conditions (Handal 2002). The portfolio is a tool to support you as a teacher in your continuous reflection on and considerations of your practice theory, qualification and further development of teaching.

Instructions for making a teaching portfolio A teaching portfolio can be more or less comprehensive depending on your experience, but it should at the very least contain considerations and reasons for your teaching, including your teaching philosophy, or “teaching statement”, which is a brief account of your thoughts on how you view teaching and why. It therefore includes your understanding of teaching and learning and the context in which teaching forms part, your view of students, objectives and expectations to the relationship between teacher and students, to the teaching and evaluation methods and to the organisation (Schönwetter et al. 2002). It is not a requirement that such considerations be full of “didactic or educational terms”, but you must demonstrate your thoughts about yourself about your teaching, and that your planning and execution of teaching is not coincidental. It is important that the portfolio gives an impression of who the teacher is. One example of this could be: I chose to work in academics because I enjoy teaching. Teaching allows me to motivate and challenge tomorrow’s leaders. There is nothing more rewarding and satisfying than seeing the spark in a student’s eyes as his or her passion for a subject grows. Education is not just about teaching a particular subject, but most importantly it is about building one’s character. I think it is impor-

449

tant to cultivate confidence, independence and critical thinking in students. Having such skills enable them to learn any subjects. My classes are rarely fulltime lecturing; instead, students are frequently asked to solve case studies either individually or in a group. Instead of forcing them to accept a concept blindly, students are challenged to think and reason for themselves. (From a genuine teacher portfolio (engineering))

You can also choose to base your description on a quote. For example: “Personally I am always willing to learn, although I do not always like being taught” (Winston Churchill), and then write something based on this. The portfolio can also include: • Descriptions and evaluations of courses or exam types you have developed. • Teaching materials you have developed. • Annotated examples of teaching you have conducted. The model below (inspired by Tenhula 1996) illustrates the process of creating a portfolio. Creating a portfolio includes dynamic and complex processes where you switch between working on the personal part of the portfolio and the more public part, i.e., the part you show to others (presentation portfolio). In brief, the portfolio methodology requires that you: 1. Look back and describe your experiences with teaching and supervision from both your own education and your own teaching. 2. Acquire new knowledge about teaching and learning, and reflect on this newly acquired knowledge in relation to the experiences you gain from teaching. 3. Based on reflected knowledge, define wishes for further development and change of own practice. 4. Test, evaluate, reflect on and document new practice.

450

PORTFOLIO WORK The process of carrying out, reflecting, selecting, evaluating and documenting

Presentation portfolio VISION CONSCIOUS (EXPLICIT) TEACHING STATEMENTS FEEDBACK etc. TEACHING EXPERIMENTS

, te ng iva chi r p a (students, colleagues, supervisors) is f te O o I Documentation L n TEACHING FO atio for developmental activities T EXPERIMENTS R t PO men Newly L TEACHING Student evaluations developed NA ocu STATEMENT SOall d teaching material R E s e P in Reflections on Th nta Considerations Video, DVD, material read o of strategies c websites it for examination FEEDBACK & EVALUATION

TEACHING HISTORY IMPLICIT TEACHING STATEMENT/PRACTICE THEORY

Teaching-plans and syllabi

Logbooks, notes Articles about teaching development

Self-evaluation Reflections on feedback from supervisor

Learning results (essays, articles, working papers/drafts) Reports from teaching experiments

Textbooks Awards, scholarships (teacher of the year etc.)

Reflections on disciplinary input from others

Figure 2. Illustration of the process of creating a portfolio. The lower part exemplifies the content of a portfolio.

Rationales for a teaching portfolio Portfolios have long been used in art circles for collections of photographs, drawings, designer clothes etc. as good examples of one’s ability within a certain area. The concept of a portfolio is also used in connection with stocks you may own. The concept is thus either used when you need to show the rest of the world examples of your expertise or for investing and securing your future. The idea of a portfolio for teaching originated in Canada (Dysthe 1999) in the early 1970’s, where The Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) began a debate of how university teachers could best document their teaching and its development. The important thing was that the teachers themselves had to present and document their teaching in the same way they document their research publications, i.e., through 451

a collected presentation of teaching activities, supported by data and various documentation. This collected presentation was named a “teaching portfolio” or “teaching dossier”. Another central figure in the development of this concept is Shulman, who argues that if you want a greater appreciation of teaching, teaching has to take place in public, and not just in private. Therefore teaching had to be made visible in a way that can encompass the complexity of teaching: The scholarship of teaching, like the scholarship of discovery, requires not only time and effort, but also an artefact, some form of community property that can be shared, discussed, critiqued, exchanged, built upon. (Shulman, in: Dysthe 1999: 105)

In Denmark, universities started using teaching portfolios by the end of the 1990’s, and today it has become a requirement at several institutions to attach a teaching portfolio when applying for academic positions. Aalborg University for example, started using teaching portfolios drawing inspiration from Finland (Tenhula 1996), where the University of Oulu was the first to make teaching portfolios compulsory as an official meriting system for teachers in 1994. The argument was that “qualified teaching will be regarded as an equal merit with credited research and acknowledged in terms on career promotions within the university” (Tenhula 1996:1). The portfolio was meant to help teachers develop “professional expertise”, and to serve as a practical tool in their merit process together with the research-based career strategy. Aarhus University, for example, (see Resources in this chapter) describes the portfolio both as a personal tool for raising awareness and building competences, and as a form of documentation for performance appraisals and applications. At Lund University in Sweden, teaching portfolios are used to determine whether teachers are worthy of being accepted into the esteemed Pedagogical Academy, which also includes a monetary prize for both the individual teacher and the department. At Lund, portfolios are peer reviewed, and teachers with a clear focus on students’ learning and a developed ability to reflect on and document their own teaching practice in a scientific way are rewarded. Learning-based arguments for teaching portfolios

According to Illeris (1999), learning is a cognitive, psychodynamic as well 452

as a social and societal process. Thus, any learning process involves interaction between the learner and the surroundings, for example other students, the teacher and colleagues as well as the individual process of acquisition and awareness. These are processes that take place simultaneously and in interaction. The portfolio method can lead to improve teachers’ qualification processes, such as a teaching and learning in higher education programme, by making the teacher, but also the students, more aware of the actual, enacted learning processes. These experiences and this raising of awareness can become a fruitful backdrop for making teaching a continuous process of development and learning, continuously adapting to changing conditions and the students’ competences for learning. The portfolio method is merely one of the methods introduced in recent years to improve teaching at Danish universities. The fact that this requirement comes from outside the country can perhaps explain why some teachers view it with scepticism. However, if we follow didactic and learning-based instructions as they are presented by people like for instance Illeris, the portfolio method, in our opinion, represents a useful tool for increasing teachers’ awareness of their own teaching practice and learning-related opportunities, which can form a possible basis for becoming a professional and developing and changing one’s teaching practice when this is a valid reason to do so.

Resources Teaching portfolios are not normally available to outsiders, but you can often borrow colleagues’ portfolios. You can read more about how selected Danish universities view teaching portfolios at the websites of the following universities. As websites often change, we do not provide direct links but suggest you visit the general university link and then search for “teaching portfolio” or something similar: • Aarhus University: http://www.au.dk • Aalborg University: http://www.aau.dk/ • University of Copenhagen: http://www.ku.dk

453

We would especially recommend the following international universities: • Brown University (USA): http://www.brown.edu • Stanford University (USA): https://stanford.edu • Lund University (Sweden): http://www.lth.se

Literature Corry, A.V. & B. Dahl Søndergaard (2011). The Teaching Portfolio. Developing Good Teachers and Scientists, 1. http://cse.au.dk/videnudveksling/ressourcer/ developing-good-teachers-and-scientists/. Dreyfus, H.L. & S.E. Dreyfus (1986). Mind over machine. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Dysthe, O. (1999). Undervisning i høgare utdanning – like viktig som forskning? Undervisningsportefølgje som reiskap for å vurdere og utvikle lærerdugleik. Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift, 2: 103-114. Handal, G. (2002). Principper for en ny ordning vedtatt ved Universitetet i Oslo om et udvidet “kompetenseprofil” til brukk ved bedømmelse for tilsettting/oprykk i vitenskapelige stillinger. Paper presented at the Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Netværks (DUN) conference. Illeris, K. (1999). Læring – aktuel læringsteori i spændingsfeltet mellem Piaget, Freud og Marx. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag. Krogh, L. (2008). Undervisningsportfolien – muligheder, udfordringer og erfaringer fra adjunktpædagogikum og underviserkvalificeringsforløb med andre uddannelser. In: B. Lund (ed.), Portfolio i et lærings- og uddannelsesperspektiv. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Lauvås, P. & G. Handal (1997). Vejledning og praktisk fagteori. Aarhus: Klim. Pettersen, R.C. (1997). Problemet først: Problembasert læring som pedagogisk idé og strategi. Oslo: Tano Aschehoug. Schönwetter, D.J. et al. (2002). Teaching philosophies reconsidered: A conceptual model of the development and evaluation of teaching philosophy statements. The International Journal for Academic Development, 7(1): 83-97. Tenhula, T. (1996). Improving academic teaching practices by using teaching portfolio – The Finnish way to do it. Paper presented at the International Consortium of Educational Development (ICED) conference.

454

7.4 Information search about university teaching and learning LOTTE RIENECKER1

Challenge: Bringing new and relevant research on university teaching and learning into play It is always a good idea to search for specific material based on your interests whether you need inspiration for a new pedagogical method or exam type, need to write a paper for a university teaching and learning programme, an article for Danish Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education or a report for the study administration about, e.g., curricula or syllabi, evaluations, exams, or drop-outs. The amount of available research- and experience-based literature about university teaching and learning is rapidly growing. University teaching and learning literature describe teachers’ hard-earned experiences with good teaching and supervision and the conditions for good teaching. It also contains studies conducted by such diverse groups as educational developers from teaching and learning centres, education researchers at universities, teachers from all fields imaginable, and by study administrators. You can quickly gain a good sense of the degree and type of scholarship of teaching and learning of a given field, and you can quickly find out whether something on a particular teaching and learning topic has been written in a Scandinavian language, or within your field. The new specific university teaching and learning literature can provide input for frameworks of understanding and opportunities under the current pedagogical conditions. University teaching and learning is interdisciplinary and belongs to all fields, and its theories and concepts are drawn from pedagogy and education research, organisation and management, psychology, system theory, philosophy – and often reflect the author’s disciplinary background and 1 The article is based on collaboration with Lorna Wildgaard and Erik Schwägermann, information specialists at the Royal Library’s Department of Social Sciences.

455

frame of reference. There is a great increase in policy-documents which communicate official frameworks, national and supranational policy-documents such as the documents of The Council for Quality Assurance in Higher Education and OECD. The concepts used to describe university teaching may stem from New Public Management, especially concepts such as evaluation and accountability (cf. Chapter 1.1). The literature as a whole is extensive, and draws on different paradigms, from philosophical to economical, and only few titles – such as Biggs & Tang 2011, 4th ed.: Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does, which is read throughout the world – have canonical status. Meaningful searches and use of university teaching and learning literature therefore requires deliberate narrowing and filtering of literature using search terms and combinations.

Instructions and options The following is a compilation of advice and instructions for those see­ king research-based literature and textbooks about university teaching and learning. Always search in English too

At this point, relatively little university teaching and learning literature has been published in Danish or the other Nordic languages. Texts about university teaching and learning and education development are typically written in Anglo-Saxon countries (Great Britain, USA and Australia/ New Zealand), and even in the Nordic countries. Denmark has made a later and less systematic start on university teaching and learning programs and development of teaching competences than Sweden and Norway. Little is written in Danish and even less is translated from other languages into Danish. There are of course publications in other European languages, but not very many. For example, until 2012, France has only established eight teaching and learning centres between their roughly seventy universities (in comparison, Sweden has about twenty centres). Therefore, the amount of information from France is small compared to the wealth of information from English sources. One would expect all teaching and learning centres to publish continuously. Teaching and learning in higher education is also known as universi456

ty or (American) graduate school (we exclude college-education from this discussion). At the Danish Network for Educational Development in Higher Education’s website you can find out which sub-topics have been covered in writing. The website holds a number of articles about research-based learning and teaching, assessment, evaluation and feedback and more. You can also find links to a number of the most important international journals of university teaching and learning. Conduct searches both with and without your field as a search term

Some fields have discipline-based teaching literature, particularly vocationally oriented educations such as medicine and engineering. However, groups such as language didactics, literature-, maths-, physics didactics etc. also publish articles about university teaching in these disciplines, some in their own journals about discipline-based teaching for these specific fields. Thus, we have journals such as Engineering Education and Medical Education. Far from all fields have special discipline-based teaching, and most university educations share framework conditions and opportunities that make many teaching themes generally relevant. Therefore: Conduct searches both with and without your own field in the search term combination, as it not at all certain that discipline-based teaching exists specifically for your discipline. Common search locations: Books

If you would like to conduct a limited information search for development of your own teaching, developmental work, a scientific or disciplinary article, or you need to write a paper for a university teaching and learning programme, you can find books on your chosen subject through the Danish Network for Educational Development in Higher Education’s list of books (in Danish and the other Nordic languages as well as English) recommended by Danish education developers at dun-net.dk (site is in Danish only). Very few books have been written in Danish, and not enough books have been written on the topic in general (in English as well) for a search in the university libraries’ book catalogue Rex to yield much of a result. In a broad, preliminary search, it can be useful to check the major English publishers of university teaching and learning literature: Open 457

University Press, Palgrave MacMillan and Routledge. A quick browse through the Open University Press’ website of Higher Education-publications can give you a sense of the trends in books about university teaching and learning. Common search locations: Articles

Article searches can answer more specific questions, and you will likely find a huge and rapidly growing wealth of material. You will want to start by browsing the table of contents of the most well-known journals. We would recommend that you view the list of university teaching and learning journals published on the given topic. For instance, there are journals and conferences specifically about assessment and others about academic writing – the journals Journal of Academic Writing and Zeitschrift Schreiben – and about many other topics. Nordic journals of university teaching and learning will provide you with the Scandinavian discourse on your topic: • Danish Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (2007-) • Uniped (Norway 1978-). http://www.unipedtidsskrift.net/index.php/ uniped • Högre Utbildning. Digital (Sweden 2011-). http://høgreutbildning.se/ The journals include both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed articles. Please keep in mind that not all knowledge can be found in articles! It is a good idea to pay attention to the names in the field and take a look at their websites to find their PowerPoints, teaching material, reports etc. or to contact them directly. Search in www.google.scholar

Google Scholar will find much of the material shown on more specialised databases, and you do not even need access through a university library. You can limit your search to academic sites. Always be very critical of the sources, especially when using a generalised search engine like Google or Google.Scholar.

458

Search formula

Before you sit down in front of your computer or contact an information specialist, you should prepare your search by planning it on paper: Clarify your goals, clarify your search terms and consider how you will delimit your search. Clarifying on paper spares you the frustration when you are on your computer. Think carefully about your research question, delimitation, inclusion/exclusion criteria, language, geography, year of publication and type of document (e.g., peer-reviewed articles/conference presentations) before you start your search – it will save you a headache later.

Basic systematic search Research question and purpose

As soon as you can, you should start by writing: 1. A research question specific enough for delimiting a search – otherwise you risk thousands of hits on general university teaching and learning topics. Example of a research question: What is the connection between midterm evaluations and final evaluations for graduate students? Specify your interests, for example based on the level of study you are researching, the language of the article, region/country, time of publication, field, type of publication and specify whether you are searching for data, theory or practice. You can also specify a purpose for your research, which can help you sort through abstracts. Example: Examine whether you can do without midterm evaluations based on whether others have established that midterm evaluations are worth the trouble in a teaching and learning sense. Search terms

2. Decide which search terms you will use. Example: Midterm evaluation + course evaluation + Master + university. As you know, precise search terms are absolutely crucial. You can get help specifying university teaching and learning search terms at your

459

local teaching and learning centre and from the research libraries’ information specialists. Language

3. Decide which languages you want the literature you search for to be in, and translate your search terms accordingly. Translations between English/Danish/Swedish/Norwegian search terms can be found on www. dun-net.dk/ressourcer/universitetspaedagogik-litteratursoegning/. Use DUN’s list if you do not know the precise English term (keep in mind that British and American English may use different terms). Delimitations

4. Decide where you will narrow down and delimit, i.e., how far back you will go in your search for material, e.g., you can narrow down your search to material from 2000 and later. Consider whether university or higher education in combination with your other search terms will return the desired hits. It is often relevant to delimit e-learning and distance learning, because much material within many sub-topics concerns online teaching, supervision or assessment. This illustrates the need for delimitation or a combination of a number of search terms. Abstracts

5. Say yes to abstracts in your search. It is up to you how many abstracts you want to skim, but if your search is in English, you will often have to narrow down your search, even within a relatively small and young field such as university teaching and learning and the bigger themes within this field. The Royal Library’s information specialists recommend that you limit your search to a maximum of one hundred abstracts for a basic search and from those hundred choose no more than ten titles for closer study.

Advanced search and documentation An advanced search is necessary if you want to carry out a more extensive study or a thesis – or if you would like to move into the peripheries of topics or materials. 1. Fill out a standardised search formula. 2. Search from a university computer so you have access to your university

460

library and the databases and journals they subscribe to. It is a good idea to plan your search in good time. Often you cannot do your entire search at once. 3. Help to help yourself can be found at the research library’s information specialist – you can send/give your search formula to the information specialist and explain what you have done. Some university libraries charge a fee to do the search for you. Be prepared to discuss what you are looking for, your research question, purpose, use, search terms. Make a logbook/journal of your searches and thoughts. In this way, you can easily continue your search after a break or interruptions. It is also easier for you to account for your search terms, or change direction in your research. 4. The teaching and learning databases ERIC (and MLA International Bibliography, which is one of oldest databases in the humanities with a vast amount of teaching and learning material) is more specialised than Google Scholar and contains university teaching and learning publications. You can access ERIC via your university library, i.e., through university computers. In large databases like ERIC, you can set up searches to run automatically every fortnight and send you an email with the search results. 5. Sort abstracts and download or order, or: Repeat the search with more suitable search terms. 6. Evaluate your search, for example in relation to your research question. 7. If you have received help from an information specialist: Let them know whether the search brought you the resources you need, or ask how you can conduct a more exhaustive search. 8. Document your choices and your search in the method section of your article/dissertation/report. Describe your: • Search methods (also contact to experts, chain searches). • Inclusion- and exclusion criteria, limitations in available material. • Search terms. • Important sources, databases, search engines. • Search period: Do report the date for your last search. Doing so es- tablishes the currency and method of your search.

Use referencing programmes

If you need to manage more than ten articles, or need to create a bibliography for an article following a certain format, or need to coordinate this 461

with a co-author, we recommend the free reference management software Zotero. Do not simply read, write as well

Perhaps reading others’ articles will make you want to contribute to the scholarship of teaching and learning too – and there is much to be added. As it is a new and interdisciplinary field, which belongs to no specific discipline, it is not difficult to get an article published, and it is possible to publish disciplinary, non-peer-reviewed articles in e.g., Danish Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education even if you are a relatively new teacher without a degree in pedagogy or psychology. Everywhere (some and relevant) literature and (some and relevant) practice is expected. University teaching and learning concerns how to plan, teach, supervise, and assess in all our specific contexts, and thankfully we have a rapidly growing list of literature to build on.

Rationales Transferability: In Denmark, what can we learn from international (resources about) university teaching and learning? You must always translate and contextualise teaching data and statements – regardless of language – for your own situation, students and framework conditions. Transferability must be considered in relation to level of study, discipline and year of publication on the basis of which you can make reservations or sort material. 20-year-old sources about teaching can be of pure historical interest. Complete transferability is a rare occurrence, and if documented studies and practices are sufficiently interesting, you should ideally repeat them on your own students and colleagues! This is the challenge (not the “problem”) of using research about people in other contexts than where research is from and practices are carried out: You must transfer it to your local and contemporary context. Once you have considered the similarities and differences, there is much inspiration to be drawn from scientific articles, books and textbooks about all kinds of university teaching and learning. It is not a coincidence that British, Australian and Norwegian uni-

462

versity teaching and learning has had most resonance in Danish university teaching and learning. The primary reason is the similarities in the organisation of education and study programmes and also because most literature stem from either country. Nordic university teaching and learning literature is the easiest to transfer to Danish conditions. Material from Australian and New Zealand is copious, the continent is known to be advanced and productive within the field, and its university education resembles the Danish. However, just as in the UK and the USA, post-graduate studies are self-funded, which makes many central aspects hard to compare, including the relationship between teacher/supervisor and students, students’ motivation and drop-out etc. Much relevant material is published in the UK and in the USA, but the majority of the latter is focused on college-level rather than graduate school level teaching and learning, and especially graduate school-level is comparable to Danish teaching and learning considerations, both in terms of level and the disciplinary specialisation. American conditions differ so much from Danish in so many ways that it will often be necessary (not always as some themes are universal) to translate the conditions for a Danish context and thus also translate pedagogical implications. The demand for scientific validity and documentation

One might ask why it is necessary to work with literature and documentation in university teaching and learning in the same way as in your area of research, but it is increasingly so, because university teaching and learning and the development of teaching, assessment and supervision are growing into established international fields of research and a field shared by all teachers. Thus we have to share university teaching and learning knowledge, language, terminology etc. internationally. There is much more scholarship of teaching and learning and research-based material to be found abroad than in Denmark – which the references of this book bear witness to. Completing a substantiated and transparent literature search that identifies relevant research with minimal bias is a necessary first step in literature-based work. The methods used for collecting literature are part of the general scientific method used by any given research in collecting material. The literature on which a university teaching and learning article rests is the result of selection, which affects the results. The ideals for the basis on which you present university teaching and learning

463

statements in articles, reports, papers etc., must be scientific ideals about transparent documentation – in perfect harmony with other important ideals of contextualisation, empirical evidence, applicability etc.

Resources Fallon, H. (2008). Resources on higher education teaching and learning. In: R. Murray (ed.), The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Maidenhead: Open University Press. – An introduction to Anglo-Saxon materials, relevant journals, portals and databases written by an English information specialist. Conferences

The annual Danish conference on university teaching and learning gives insight into resources within the conference’s subject. See www.dun-net. dk. Overview of the scope of international scholarship of teaching and learning, contemporary practices and organisation of university teaching and learning as well as development of teaching can be found first at the big, international conferences, such as ICED (International Conference of Educational Development), which is visited by several hundred participants from all over the world every other year. See www.iced.org. International continuing education in university teaching and learning

Throughout the world, there are continuing education programmes for faculty following a university teaching and learning programme. These programmes are research-based and based on the scholarship of teaching and learning. The nearest example is Lund University’s Faculty of Engineering, which offers a six-week university teaching and learning programme, which leads to a certificate in Excellence in Teaching. The highly respected English organisation SEDA (Staff and Educational Development Association) offers improvement of teacher competences through a nine-month online course. SEDA also offers continuing education for educational developers, heads of study, heads of teaching and learning centres etc. You participate with your own developmental project, which is documented and supervised. 464

7.5 The role of the university teacher RIE TROELSEN AND JENS TOFTESKOV

This concluding chapter concerns the role of the teacher. How do you view yourself as a teacher, what do you need to know and be able to – in addition to your field-expertise – to work as a teacher, and how can you further your personal development as a teacher? We shall discuss the role of the teacher, regardless of whether you are a professor or a post doc., experienced or inexperienced, lecturer or supervisor. Now that the requirements for university teaching necessitate a professionalisation of the university teacher position, the purpose of this chapter is to describe the development towards professional university teachers. The role of the archetypical university teacher has undergone a profound change over the past 20 years, and the obsessive, eccentric and distinctly odd professor, who apparently paid no heed to his students, has gradually been replaced by a professional teacher. Where it used to been sufficient for a teacher to be competent in his or her field, the establishment of university teaching and learning programmes and other initiatives (e.g., teaching evaluations, alumni surveys, teaching awards) indicate that that university’s institutional frameworks for teaching require more of teachers than field-professionalism. Therefore, the universities, departments and employees must acknowledge teaching as an independent and central part of the academic staff’s work, rather than as an aside to research. This professionalisation revolves around continuous and reflected development of the faculty’s teaching competences. Since this development hinges on pedagogical education, the training of university teachers at Danish universities starts when faculty is hired as assistant professors. At Danish universities all assistant professors complete an assistant professor programme, not least because it is a requirement for tenure. And this normally involves a procedure in which the applicant’s teaching competences are considered. After reaching associate professor level, universities offer very few other options for further systematic development of employees’ teaching competences. This is not due to a deliberate decision that employees’ professionalisation process is complete at any given time: It is rather a result of the fact that the major465

ity of institutions fail to encourage development of teaching competences once faculty has attained a position as associate professor or higher. Thus, the education that takes place in the assistant professor period must be valid for a whole career and, in addition to practice qualifications, great emphasis is placed on assistant professors’ competence for working and reflecting on their own teaching with the aim to develop and adapt to new teaching situations. This does not correspond to general notions of teacher’s competences. University teachers’ teaching competences are often referred to as static. However, nothing could be more wrong. Nobody is born with the ability to teach and (almost) everyone can learn how to teach. Naturally, some find it easier to become good teachers, and of course some are better than others. Developing as a teacher, establishing professionalism is an individual project – i.e., something the individual teacher must discover alone. On one hand, there are standard practices, which are good to learn, but on the other we find ourselves in an area where generalisation can be difficult. What is right for one teacher may not work for another. For example, teachers use very different methods to make a class full of students focus. Some teachers do not mind clapping their hands and loudly shouting: Class starts now! Others prefer standing in front of the desk, showing a PowerPoint, looking at students and signalling by using their hands that students should be silent and sit down. Some put on music, and when they turn it off, it is the signal that class is about to start. The individual teacher must discover what methods suit them. Good teaching practice is based on the teacher’s personality, outlook, values and view of knowledge. The more a teacher develops his or her professional competences, the more a personal style will shine through. Therefore teaching cannot be learnt through courses alone. Developing as a teacher requires that the teacher can reflect on her-/himself as a teacher. It requires answers to questions such as: “When am I a good teacher, when am I not a good teacher, what works for me etc.?”.

Do what you can – not what your course leader tells you to… The pedagogical requirements to a university teacher do not necessarily depend on how professional the teacher is. Rather, the pedagogical requirements to different teaching tasks are often the same, regardless 466

of how experienced and competent the teacher is. Some universities, departments and programmes enforce pedagogical principles that not all teachers can live up to, such as student-centered and -activating teaching. These thoroughly valid and sound pedagogical principles can be supported and communicated by a teaching and learning centre and be promoted via university teaching and learning programmes. However, as we will show in the following, not all teachers – at any level of development – are able to perform (for example) student-centered teaching. But what teacher roles are there? Can the difference between Nicholas Nickleby’s Wackford Squeers and Mr. Keating in Dead Poets Society depict the development of the teacher role? Twenty years ago, Peter Kugel presented a 5-phase model showing how teachers develop (Kugel 1993: How Professors Develop as Teachers):

Focus on self

Focus on subject

Focus on student (as receptive)

Focus on student (as active)

Focus on student (as independent)

Figure 1. Kugel’s five phases of teacher development (Kugel 1993).

In the first phase, the teacher focuses on himself and his identity as a teacher. In this phase, you are nervous and scared of failing as a teacher and person and worried about even surviving teaching. New teachers with this approach typically know a lot about the subject, but have no knowledge of how to communicate this subject. If anything fails, this teacher will blame himself or herself. However, with time, most teachers in phase 1 become more confident and certain of their roles as teachers, and focus will imperceptibly shift from how you teach to what you teach – i.e., focus on the subject. In the second phase, the teacher worries about whether he or she knows enough about the subject. The teacher will typically learn more about the subject than he or she ever did as a student, and as (s)he improves the breadth and scope of her/his knowledge, the teacher will typically strive to relate all (s)he knows in teaching, and will therefore struggle to prioritise all this knowledge. If teaching fails in this phase, the teacher will blame the students and their lack of ability, interest or focus. The teacher will 467

typically improve his or her performance by considering whether concepts and connections are explained properly. In this phase, many teachers will find that students seem to learn very little, and the teachers will be puzzled as to why students do not find the subject as coherent and interesting as the teachers do. In other words: The teachers’ focus shifts from what you teach to who you teach. In phase 3, the teacher focuses on the students; how do I explain the subject in a way so they understand it? This change in perspective is very complicated, if only because we go from focus on one person (the teacher and his or her treatment of material) to focus on many. Therefore, the teacher may try to use teaching methods that appeal to many different students with different learning styles, interests, competences etc. The teacher narrates, illustrates and sets assignments; asks tough and easy questions; uses both inductive and deductive approaches to the subject. If anything fails, this teacher will blame the method. However, assuming all responsibility for students’ learning is a time-consuming and resource-demanding teaching approach. The three initial phases represent three different approaches to teaching; who teaches, who is being taught and what is being taught, and the progression through these phases is not necessarily linear. The teacher can focus on one approach after another or he or she can change back and forth between the approaches. Common to the three phases is that students are considered passive receivers of the teacher’s teaching. The fourth phase involves students participating in teaching more than teaching affecting students. This requires the teacher to view the student as an active participant in teaching, and to consider how to make students do something to understand – focus changes from the teacher to learning. The teacher can now see him- or herself as a coach rather than as an expert, and the teacher is concerned with setting frameworks so students discover their own learning process. Some students may protest this view of teaching, and they will typically demand that the teacher stop asking so many questions and provide more answers instead. Thus, this fourth phase (and the fifth as well) depends on both teacher and students taking on the role of respectively “coach” and “active fellow player/participant”. However, what may seem time-saving at a first glance (i.e., letting students do the work themselves), will turn out to be just as or even more time consuming: Asking good questions for group work and facilitating discussions requires great presence and overview. Therefore, according 468

to Kugel, the next and final phase naturally focuses on how students can learn from themselves and each other. Teachers in the fifth phase focus on students as independent thinking beings. In this phase, the teacher sees great value in providing a framework that enables all (not just the best) students to take responsibility for their own learning to get the best outcome. Planning teaching that produces independent students requires patience, empathy, excess of knowledge and, above all, the courage to hand over control. In Kugel’s five-phase model, development is possible both vertically and horizontally; you do not simply evolve from one phase to the next, but also improve, become more secure and more competent in each phase. At the same time, development within and through the five phases is not a one-time occurrence – it is a process that you undergo each time you teach a new subject. Teachers with years of experience may sometimes find themselves back in Kugel’s first phase, where they are suddenly insecure and academically shallow. The difference between new and experienced teachers, however, is that the experienced teacher is able to progress through the first phases faster than a novice teacher. Which, above all, is the core of Kugel’s phase model: teachers develop. Not all teachers evolve in the same way and some stay in the same phase, which they may develop to perfection. However, it is also characteristic that very few teachers skip one or more phases in their development. Teachers do not simply go from fearing for their own survival to viewing students as active partners in a shared learning process. As teachers, we therefore find ourselves in different phases according to our experience, personality, engagement and the subject we teach. Therefore, it is almost impossible for teachers to copy teaching methods or teaching styles directly from others, whether this be colleagues, text books about teaching techniques or course leaders of assistant professor programmes (hence the title of this section). Organising student-centered and -activating teaching requires you to be willing and competent enough to let go of your control of what takes place in the classroom – or at least willing to let go of the feeling of being in control. Being in charge of the summary of a complex case or role-playing session is exceptionally difficult. It requires experience, subject-specific overview, a developed questioning technique and mastery of writing on blackboards in a systematic way. If you are asked to or take on this type of teaching as a relatively new teacher, you will lack much in all four areas, and you may feel the earth disappearing from under your feet. Increased attention to Kugel’s phases 469

is increased attention to options: teachers (new as well as experienced) must do their best within the phase they believe to be in command of, and not try to do something they do not (yet) have the prerequisites for.

The role of the professional university teacher As we mentioned in the introduction, the requirements for university teaching necessitates a professionalisation of the university teacher position, and therefore it becomes interesting to consider which pedagogical professionalism the teacher aims for in professionalisation. We have recently been doing research on what it means to be a professional university teacher. However, the concept of professionalisation is – and has always been – a floating signifier, i.e., a concept whose meaning is not clearly defined, and which is therefore the object of different stakeholders’ different interpretations. To analyse different views of the professional university teacher, we have used Hjort’s three concepts, knowledge, ability and intention, to characterise the professional work (Hjort 2008). The research project, which we will briefly refer from, asks teachers to answer the question of what makes the teacher’s role something to strive for – what special knowledge (knowledge), special expertise for action (ability) and special ethical commitments (intention) the professional teacher possesses. Below, we have outlined the views on professionalism expressed by the assistant professors who were the respondents in our project (Troelsen & Tofteskov 2013). One view on professionalism can be called the non-amateur: Being a professional means being good at a paid job and taking pride in being good at what you do. Being professional means being competent and taking the job by which you make your living seriously. In this view, the professional is the opposite of his antithesis, the amateur, who drags his personal life into work and is personally affected by working life. A professional does not do this to the same degree. Unlike the con amore-driven amateur, the professional is somewhat cynical, and has and seeks control of the work situation. Control means you become more confident in the teaching situation. It is not clear what special knowledge the professional has in this interpretation, but it is crucial that the professional can manage complex situations without becoming overly personally involved. Professionalism is a means to survive – you are committed to yourself as a teacher to avoid spending too much time and energy. 470

Another interpretation can be termed the student-oriented teacher, and in this interpretation, being professional means being user (student-) oriented. This means giving students what they expect, and making sure your message is heard: A professional teacher must therefore be a good communicator and reach the intended target audience. Students are meant to be the main beneficiaries of teaching, and they are your primary concern when you plan your teaching. In this interpretation, the professional has special “people knowledge”, i.e., (s)he knows of students’ competences, expectations and learning processes. The professional teacher puts this knowledge into play, both when planning and carrying out teaching so he “reaches” his students. Professionalism is thus based on the students. A third interpretation is that a professional university teacher is a certified or educated teacher, who, by virtue of her/his education, has earned the right (and duty) to teach at university. Formally, this certification has both a professional and a pedagogical element. The ‘professional’ lies in the education as researcher, the pedagogical in the education as an assistant professor, so a professional teacher is in command of his professionalism and communication tools. Didactics, in the sense of tools for communicating content and activating students, is the special knowledge of the professional in this interpretation. It is not clear how this knowledge can be applied, but the commitment of being professional is part of the system – you enter a professionalisation process because the system requires you to. In a fourth interpretation, the practice-oriented teacher has professional knowledge of the profession for which students are being educated. Thus, the connection between theory (education) and practice (future work/professional practice) becomes crucial for acting professionally in teaching. The professional teacher is therefore required to have professional experience, in other words, be professionalised twice. The special knowledge of a professional in this interpretation is an extensive knowledge of the field of practice, and the special ability is to act as a bridge between education and practice. As a professional, you are required to prepare students for their working life, and you have a commitment to produce graduates that will be useful in their particular field. In the fifth interpretation, the researching teacher, the professional university teacher delivers research-based teaching, which entails academic authority and confidence. This teacher’s research identity precedes his/ her role as teacher, and the researching teacher brings a research approach into teaching. This “research approach” involves being updated on the newest aspects of teaching and being conscious of teaching quality 471

as a competitive parameter as you also attract and hold on to students through good teaching. A professional primarily possesses academic and research-based knowledge within the field, but also sufficient pedagogical knowledge to be able to manage the newest technology and tools in teaching. The effort towards professionalisation is based on considerations about recruitment and keeping students enrolled for the sake of both the institution and the field. None of these views is the right view of what it means to be a professional teacher – and thus none of them are wrong either. They are each aspects of the professional practice as university teachers, which can be accentuated by the teacher’s personality, the field, the students or different institutional frameworks. It is, for example, natural in programmes with a high drop-out rate, and in institutions that depend financially on many students completing on time, that the professional teacher is expected to be able to attract and retain students. Likewise, the inexperienced and insecure teacher, who fears students and their unpredictable questions, will typically view the impersonal and controlling teacher as a professional ideal. In figure 2 on the next page, we have attempted to summarise these five views of professionalisation in relation to Hjort’s three characteristics, knowledge, ability and intention. The sixth view of the professional teacher figures as the background, and that is the reflecting teacher. The reflecting professional teacher is able to evaluate his own teaching performance and change it if it is not successful. It does not clearly emerge what special knowledge and abilities are required to invoke professionalism, just as there is no obvious sender is of the requirement of and obligation to reflection. Reflection and focus on development seem instead to be expressed as superstructures on the traditional concept of profession as a basic prerequisite for becoming a professional. However, although the assistant professors we asked in our project did not describe knowledge, ability and intention in relation to the reflecting teacher, knowledge, ability and intention are obviously connected to the dimension of reflection. The reflection on own teaching (and documentation of that reflection) is one of the focal points of all assistant professor programmes in Denmark. Therefore it also requires special knowledge as well as ability. In the following section, we will discuss how the reflecting teacher uses his knowledge and ability.

472

The non-amateur • Poorly defined amount of knowledge. • Ability to act without investing too much of oneself. • Committed to oneself.

Certified • Knowledge of pedagogical tools. • Uncertain ability. • Committed to the system.

The reflecting and evolving teacher

Researching • Knowledge of disciplinary research area. • Ability to handle newest educational technology. • Committed to the field.

Student-oriented • Understanding one’s audience. • Ability to reach one’s students. • Committed to one’s students.

Practice-oriented • Knowledge of the field of practice. • Ability to connect education to practice. • Committed to the field of practice.

Figure 2. Views of professionalisation among university teachers and these views’ suggestions of the professional teacher’s knowledge, ability and intention.

The reflecting teacher As mentioned above, reflections on what it means to be a professional university teacher and the actual teaching approach are both important, because they help the teacher understand him- or herself and his or her options and opportunities for development. This both applies to the regular, life-long learning process of teachers and in relation to the offers/requirements of pedagogical competence development, which teachers are presented with. Knowing where you stand is a prerequisite for plotting a 473

course for one’s development, and in the iterative process from acknowledging/knowing one’s standpoint, giving one’s development direction, to finding a new standpoint, both action and reflection are needed. Paraphrasing Kolb (Experimental Learning, 1984), we can say that the professional’s development is a process where experience is turned into realisation. In the figure below, Kolb shows how a specific experience leads to reflection on the experience, which leads to an abstract conceptualisation of reflection and furthermore to carrying out an activity that leads to a new experience: Concrete experience (doing/having an experience)

Reflective observation (reviewing/reflecting on the experience)

Active experimentation (planning/trying out what you have learned)

Abstract conceptualisation (concluding/learning from the experience)

Figure 3. The structural dimensions that form part of the experience-based learning process (Kolb 1984).

If we apply Kolb’s figure to the development of the professional, we can view considerations about the teacher role and views of professionalism as a kind of reflective observation of oneself as a teacher, which leads to considerations of whether the observed approach is suitable or may need to be challenged. You can then try to adjust or expand this approach, gain specific experiences, which again lead to a reflective observation of teach474

ing approaches. The development can thus be viewed as a combination between understanding and transforming yourself. We would like to exemplify the development process as a transition between understanding and transforming yourself as a teacher with extracts from an assistant professor assignment (Grimpe 2012). Grimpe describes how he encountered significant opposition when he subjected students to “cold calls” – i.e., asked them to answer his questions without preceding preparation. The opposition became particularly outspoken when he commented on students’ laptops being used for Facebook rather than for taking notes of his teaching (‘Concrete Experience’ and ‘Reflective Observation’ in Kolb’s model). He concludes that his role as a teacher (which stems from the German educational system, which is far more authoritarian and hierarchical than the Danish) is not fruitful in Denmark (‘Abstract Conceptualisation’). In his assignment, he explains that instead of either trying to win over the students by using force, or to humbly accept that they are customers in a teaching situation, he decided to change his teaching to suit the rather independent Danish students and his own ideas of good teaching, in which students are active. To legitimatise cold calls he then introduced short buzz group sessions where students discussed questions in pairs before the question was answered in plenum. He also set up group assignments, where students had to use Ether Pad (a shared PC-based text editor) to answer assignments to prevent students from using their laptops for anything but teaching (‘Active Experimentation’). He found that both these initiatives improved the level of teaching, and the use of Ether Pad meant that students changed role from being customers in a knowledge transferral to being partners in a knowledge construction process (‘Concrete Experience II’). The impetus for the specific change primarily came from his intention to make teaching follow his own values (active students, who are orchestrated or directed by the teacher). But the two remaining categories are also in play here; Knowledge, both in the form of knowledge of the Ether Pad-programme and its applicability, as well as about how buzz-groups can be used in teaching large classes, and ability in the form of mastering the above-mentioned techniques. Reflections on which role you assume as a teacher are important, because they give rise to reflections about which roles students assume – or which role(s) students are prompted to assume as a reaction to the teacher’s role. We have, in a manner of speaking, the students we deserve! Naturally, it can always be discussed whether the teacher’s role influences 475

the students or vice versa, and in reality, we are likely dealing with an unspoken and unconscious negotiation of roles during the first, brief period of time when students and teachers meet. So if we as teachers find that students behave like customers who require the best commodity (delivery of knowledge) in exchange for the smallest investment possible (time consumption) – and we want to change this – the first step can be to consider whether or not the teacher’s role as a “knowledge provider” affects students. Reflection is the core of development of the professional teacher. The professional teacher can thus be viewed as a reflective practitioner – a concept drawn from the American psychologist and education theorist Donald Schön (1983). Schön studied the best professionals and their way of handling the special challenges they face in their profession, and he can account for the way the reflective practitioner deals with these situations by simultaneously drawing on and combining relevant elements within his or her command. To Schön, thinking, action, reflection and learning interact with different input, which cannot always be identified separately or even be verbalised. Nevertheless, the relevant intellectual elements used by professionals in their work can be divided into the levels knowing-in-action and reflection-in-action. The competent action demonstrated by the practitioner is very similar to the competent action shown by “common” people through recognition, assessment and qualified performance in everyday life. The similarity lies in our ability to know – more or less consciously – how to act in a certain situation, i.e., a competence we can describe as ‘knowing-in-action’. This is a close interplay of knowledge and action. In a teaching practice, the teacher may have asked a question and find that students do not answer. This situation is presumably familiar to most teachers. However, the subsequent action depends on the teacher’ assessment or evaluation of why students do not answer. Three obvious possibilities are: 1. That students do not answer because answering teachers’ questions is not in line with the culture of the classroom. 2. That the question is so basic students refuse to answer. 3. That the question is too difficult. The competent action is based on the assessment. If the teacher assesses that the question is too difficult, he or she can ask a simpler question. If we are in the realm of knowing-in-action, this assessment occurs auto476

matically without the teacher having to think about it – this assessment consists of both a classification in relation to the above-mentioned possibilities and the decision to act. This level of competence is sufficient for handing and solving many problems, both everyday and academic and professional. However, if composite, complex and unpredictable situations arise, this form of competence falls short. However, the capable and creative professional displays his or her special ability to transcend the knowing-in-action level. The professional solves complex situations by integrating reflection and action, reflection-in-action, and thus starts a process in which knowledge, experience and suggested solutions form a whole at the same time as carrying out the action. This is once again a situation where it can be hard to verbalise the reflection. However, it is one thing to reflect-in-action and another to reflect on this reflection-in-action. The example above, in which Christoph Grimpe changed his teaching as a response to challenges that arose from the less authoritarian Danish university system, is one example of reflection on reflection-in-action (his reflection on his reaction of students’ use of laptops). In connection with his lecturer training programme, it has been necessary to verbalise this reflection (assignments, supervision), and this verbalisation, wording and conceptualising the problems, challenges and solutions of teaching can contribute qualitatively to the teacher’s development process.

Teaching is both a fun and risky business A professional approach, which we have not mentioned previously, but which we would like to discuss in conclusion, is that the professional teacher has fun! Getting to teach others in subjects that you are (typically) passionate about can be fantastically rewarding and inspiring. Therefore, it is important to find yourself a teaching approach, a view of professionalism and a style you enjoy. And as with much other learning and development, this search is supported by fruitful disturbances, whether this disturbance comes from student evaluations, dialogues with colleagues, reflections, assistant professor courses, insisting questions at family dinners or simply from within. So be open, seek new ways and experiment to find out what works best for you in your situation. Just as you must be aware that teaching can give many good experienc477

es, it is also important to be aware that experienced failures in the classroom can leave emotional scars. Feeling that you have suffered a defeat as a teacher can put great strain on your self-esteem, and it is important that you process such experiences. This can, for example, be done through dialogue with good (and perhaps more experienced) colleagues. Reflection on and processing the greatest failures and successes is important for your development as a professional. Whether you develop a defensive (I’ll take care of myself) or offensive (I’d really like to try this) approach, this is crucial to how you will feel as a teacher.

Resources Light, G., Cox, R., & Calkins, S. (2009). Learning and teaching in higher education. The reflective professional. 2. Ed. London: SAGE Publications. – A textbook for teachers – it provides introduction to and inspiration for the many aspects of university teaching university teachers – new and experienced – encounter every day. The book focuses in great detail on the academic as a reflective professional, but contains also several chapters on the various genres of teaching in higher education. Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered. Priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. – A classic. Boyer insists that academia is about teaching too, which was groundbreaking at the time the book was published. Boyer argues that academic staff at universities must be competent within discovery, integration of knowledge, application and teaching – and that naturally all four aspects must include continuing education and (not least) be rewarded. Mårtensson, K., T. Roxå & T. Olsson (2011). Developing a quality culture through the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(1): 51-62. – The article focuses on what is needed to ensure that changes in the university take place. The three education developers from Lund University argue that every strategy for developing university teaching is doomed to fail if it does not take into account academic identity and academic freedom. Based on a case from Lund University, they emphasise that documentation of teaching competences, development and perspective are crucial for development and maintaining personal engagement in developing teaching.

478

Literature Grimpe, C. (2012). My development as a teacher at CBS. Frederiksberg: Copenhagen Business School. Hjort, K. (2008). Competence development in the public sector: Development, or dismantling of professionalism? Asia Pacific Educational Review, 9(1): 4049. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential Learning. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Kugel, P. (1993). How professors develop as teachers. Studies in higher education, 18(3): 315-328. Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. Troelsen, R. & J. Tofteskov (2013). Den professionelle universitetsunderviser – hvad, hvordan og hvorfor? In: S. Beck & D. Rüsselbæk Hansen (eds.), Frihed og styring. En antologi om læringskultur i forandring. Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag: 347-372.

479

480

Author Profiles Name

Profile

Anne Mette Mørcke

MD, PhD, associate professor in medical education at Centre for Medical Education at Aarhus University (AU). Is furthermore director of undergraduate medical education at AU. Has over the years worked with subjects such as curriculum planning, implementation of outcome- and competence-based education, acquisition of practical clinical skills, workplace-based learning, different teaching methods, and student drop out.

Bettina Dahl (Søndergaard)

Associate professor at Aalborg University’s UNESCO Centre for Problem Based Learning. Former associate professor at Aarhus University’s Centre for Science Education, assistant professor at Virginia Tech’s School of Education and adviser at the Norwegian Centre for Mathematics Education at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Is one of the vice chairmen in the body of external examiners for mathematical subjects at universities and has been part of the editorial team for The Journal of Danish University Education.

Bjørn Friis Johannsen

Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen. Research assistant, works with didactics of the natural sciences, primarily Physics, and with academic integration – primarily from the students’, but gradually also from the teachers’ perspective.

Camilla Østerberg Rump

PhD in Theoretical Computer Science, MSc in Engineering, associate professor at the Department of Science Education at the University of Copenhagen. Has, among other things, researched student retention, development of engineering competences, and university teachers’ approach to teaching. Has taught university teaching and learning to university teachers since 1996. Has furthermore participated in a large number of developmental projects of teaching at the University of Copenhagen and the Technical University of Denmark.

Diana Stentoft

Assistant professor at the Department of Learning and Philosophy at Aalborg University (AAU), where she teaches and researches university teaching and learning and problem-based learning in medical science education. Diana is involved in a number developmental and teaching tasks in pedagogical competence development of staff arranged by AAU Learning Lab, and serves as a member of the steering committee for AAU PBL Academy.

481

Frederik Voetmann Christiansen

Associate professor in science education at the Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences and at the Department of Science Education at the University of Copenhagen. Since 2004, Frederik Voetmann has taught continuing and further education courses in university teaching and learning for academic staff, including the teaching and learning in higher education programmes. Research interests include science education, philosophy of science, educational research and pedagogy.

Gerd Christensen

PhD, MA in Psychology and Philosophy and BA in Education. Associate professor at the Department of Media, Cognition and Communciation at the University of Copenhagen. Researches problem-oriented project work in groups, as well as how philosophy of science and methodological conditions affect humanities’ and social scientific research.

Gitte Holten Ingerslev

Associate professor emerita, PhD at IUP/DPU, Aarhus University. Also holds half an MA in General Pedagogy and has, for the past 10 years, taught at theoretical teacher training for upper-secondary school teachers and supervised on teaching and learning in higher education programmes. Co-founded the Academic Writing Centre at the then DPU and has held workshops and individual supervision sessions part time since 2009. Researches the relationship between views of learning and reading competences (in particular) in relation to social mobility.

Gitte Wichmann-Hansen

MA in Pedagogy, PhD in educational research and associate professor at the Centre for Teaching and Learning, Aarhus University. Teaches and researches supervision, holds courses on the topic across faculties and universities in Denmark and the rest of the Nordic countries. Gitte is part of local, national and international networks about research supervision, and has published several international articles, especially on the topic of research supervision.

Hanne Leth Andersen

Former pro-rector, now rector and professor of university teaching and learning at Roskilde University, PhD in French, MA in Roman philology. Former director of Copenhagen Business School Learning Lab and head of centre at the then Centre for Teaching Development at Aarhus University. Engaged in university culture and educational quality as a member of The Council for Danish Upper Secondary Education 2006-2009 and the Council for Quality Assurance in Higher Education 20072009, and serves as consultant for both the Association of European institutions of higher education and the Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education. Conducts research and development within education management, collegial competence development, evaluation and quality, exam types, supervision, dialogue, language and culture.

482

Helle Mathiasen

PhD, professor at the Department of Science Education, Copenhagen, former research programme leader at the Centre for Teaching Development and Digital Media, Aarhus University. Has, for the past 15 years, researched student learning prerequisites in relation to teaching, learning and IT in a pedagogical and didactical perspective. Has been head of the Centre for IT and Learning, Aarhus University for 8 years and has been head of the research programme Educational research – Learning and Media since 2012.

Henriette Tolstrup Holmegaard

Assistant professor in the Department of Science Education, Copenhagen University. Research areas include engineering- and science students’ transition from upper secondary education to higher education, from BA to MA level and from student to employee. Henriette’s research interests include students’ negotiations and identity development. Teaches university teaching and learning and natural science communication.

Jan Alexis Nielsen

PhD in natural Science Didactics, MA in Philosophy and Mathematics, and post doc at the Department of Science Education at the University of Copenhagen. Jan’s research interests revolve around formative evaluation of process-competences such as ‘inquiry’-competence and innovation competence. Has previously researched into upper secondary students’ application of field-specific knowledge in ethical discussions. Has taught university students communication and dissemination of natural science, and taught pedagogy to university teachers. Participant in a number of development- and evaluation projects in the field of education.

Jan Sølberg

Associate professor and deputy head of department at the Department of Science Education, Copenhagen University, where he is responsible for teaching and learning in higher education programmes and other employee development in the Faculty of Science. His research concerns establishing disciplinary cultures and organisational development processes. Most of his work has been aimed at primary school level, where he has been involved in development projects within science teaching. In recent years, he has also focused on the university and on developing its education capacity.

Jens Dolin

MA in Geography and Physics, Jens Dolin was upper secondary school teacher for a number of years and is now an external lecturer in Science Education at Roskilde University. Jens holds a PhD in Physics teaching and segued into the university sector, became course leader for upper secondary school teacher training, co-founded the MA in teaching and learning in upper secondary education, and was the research leader at the University of Southern Denmark before he became head of department for the Department of Science Education at Copenhagen University in 2007. Since then, he has participated in establishing the field of university teaching and learning at the University of Copenhagen.

483

Jens Tofteskov

MA in Communication, chief consultant in university teaching and learning, head of Academic Development and assistant professor programme at Copenhagen Business School. Has written books about project supervision and exams, and articles about a number of university teaching and learning topics. Jens has now turned his attention to the professionalisation of university teachers, the result of which can be read in this book in the chapter co-written with Rie Troelsen.

Jeppe Emmersen

Associate professor, PhD, chairman of the board of studies for Medicine at Aalborg University (AAU). Member of the planning group of Medicine at AAU. Member of the education committee for Medicine at AAU. Course organiser for continuing education in Medicinal CasePBL, AAU.

Jesper Bruun

PhD, post doc. at the Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen. Wrote his dissertation on the use of kinaesthetic exercises and computer-based exercise in upper secondary level physics, and his PhD about how to use network physics as a method, a theoretical basis and in didactic implementation in physics education. Works with network physics and teaching methods in science education at various teacher and teaching levels.

Lars Ulriksen

Professor at the Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen. Research includes students’ meeting with the university, and how this meeting affects students experience and outcome. Has taught teaching and learning in higher education at different universities since 1999.

Laura Louise Sarauw

PhD specialising in university reforms from The Education Section, Copenhagen University. Her thesis from 2011 concerned Denmark’s participation in the Bologna Process and the competence concept’s importance for education development from 2003 to today. Currently (2014) working on her post doc. at Aarhus University about the national ‘progression reform’. Her teaching comprises adult learning, didactics and curriculum theory and education management.

Lene Tortzen Bager

Associate professor, PhD at the Centre for Teaching and Digital Media at Aarhus University. Works on teaching development, teaching quality and competence development in her research and in practice, and has taught PhD-courses and teaching and learning in higher education programmes at Aarhus University. She developed the concept behind Undervisermetroen (Lit: “The Study Metro”), and has worked with collegial supervision at upper secondary schools, university colleges and universities. Has written a number of books, contributions to anthologies and articles on university teaching and learning.

484

Lone Krogh

Associate professor and head of Aalborg University’s Learning Lab at the Department for Learning and Philosophy. Has researched and practiced the development of education and teaching, training of university teachers and supported educations and heads in developing the project work form, new teaching methods as well as evaluation strategies for more than 15 years. Teaches and supervises students on several of AAU’s programmes and is a member of the Advisory Board for Assimilate Project at Leeds Metropolitan University.

Lotte Rienecker

MA in Psychology, special consultant in university teaching and learning, currently freelance. Has worked extensively with university teaching and learning, and with supervision courses, especially for thesis- and PhD supervisors in human and social science education, and was head of the Academic Writing Centre at the University of Copenhagen for 16 years. Has worked with academic writing and feedback in relation to students and supervisors for more than 20 years, and has co-authored a large number of textbooks, many of these with Peter Stray Jørgensen.

Mads Th. Haugsted

Associate professor emeritus at the Department of Education, Aarhus University. Research areas include: Oral expression and rhetorics and theatre/theatre pedagogy/ aesthetic learning processes. Has authored many articles and books about oral expression and communication and teaching as well as aesthetic learning processes.

Marianne Thorsen

MA. E-learning consultant at the IT Learning Centre, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen. Special interests include: IT-didactics, university teaching and learning, learning technologies, distance learning, blended learning, dynamics in online discussions, group dynamics, motivation.

Merete Wiberg

MA in Philosophy and Music, PhD in Educational Philosophy. Associate professor at the Department of Education, Aarhus University. Previously assistant professor in university teaching and learning at the Department of Learning and Philosophy, Aalborg University. Editor-in-chief of The Journal of Danish University Education 2009-2011. Research includes learning theory in a philosophical perspective and values and ethics related to the field of education.

485

Nina Bonderup Dohn

MA in Philosophy and Physics, PhD in Learning Theory. Associate professor of Information Science at the University of Southern Denmark (SDU), and affiliated with the Centre for Teaching and Learning at SDU. Works, from a theoretic-philosophical and practice-didactical perspective, in the intersection between epistemology and learning theory with a particular emphasis on e-learning. She has taught university teaching and learning for the past 10 years, and participated in a number of teaching development projects. In 2004, she received the Faculty of Humanities’ teaching award. She was editor-in-chief of The Journal of Danish University Education from 20112013.

Peter Musaeus

Certified MSc in Psychology and PhD in Educational Psychology. Associate professor in medical education at the Centre for Medical Education at Aarhus University. Researches medical team communication and improvement in students’ conceptual understanding through university teaching. Peter Musaeus’ research interests include simulation-based teaching- and management processes.

Peter Stray Jørgensen

MA in Danish Literature and Communication. Has worked with university teaching and learning at all levels since 1996, including areas such as academic writing, supervision, teaching development with both students, PhDs and university teachers as his target groups, primarily in human and social scientific education. Works as an external examiner at many universities and has, in collaboration with Lotte Rienecker in particular, written and edited a number of textbooks about academic writing, supervision and study skills. He is an editorial consultant at Samfundslitteratur and freelance consultant in Higher Education.

Rie Troelsen

MSc, PhD and associate professor in university teaching and learning at the University of Southern Denmark, where she works with teaching and education development, continuing education and competence development of academic staff. Research includes professionalisation of the university teacher, and the encounter between student and study programme. Has researched aspects of science education for many years, particularly young people’s interest in science and choice of education.

Rikke von Müllen

MA in Rhetoric, special consultant in university teaching and learning at the Teaching and Learning Unit of Social Sciences at the University of Copenhagen, where she has taught and supervised practical university teaching and learning for all types of social science teachers, and taught students writing, argumentation and study technique for many years. In recent years, she has been responsible for teaching and learning in higher education programmes at the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Copenhagen, and worked on projects about economics education and research-based teaching.

486

Sebastian Horst

MSc in Physics and Communication and MPA. For more than ten years, Sebastian has worked on developing university teaching as a consultant for the Department of Science Teaching at the University of Copenhagen, where he is now the department administrator doing management, organisational development, application work and project management. Teaches university teaching and learning and science communication. Editor of the journal MONA – Mathematics and Science Education. Special areas of interest include converting research into education development, evaluating learning, designing physical learning environments and use of ICT in education.

Søren Larsen

MSc in Information Technology, e-learning consultant at the IT Learning Centre, at the University of Copenhagen. Interests include: IT-pedagogy, university teaching and learning, learning, learning technologies, distance learning, motivation, facilitation, new media in teaching.

Thomas Harboe

PhD and head of the Teaching and Learning Unit of Social Sciences at the University of Copenhagen. Works with training teachers (e.g., teaching and learning in higher education programmes) and supervising students. Former chairman of the Danish Network for Educational Development in Higher Education. Academic interests include education management and university teaching and learning in general. Has written about the social scientific method and supervision (in collaboration with Lotte Rienecker and Peter Stray Jørgensen).

Tine Wirenfeldt Jensen

MA in Comparative Literature and Information Science, PhD student. She has worked with academic writing and feedback for many years at the centre for teaching and learning, Aarhus University, Humanities Department, teaching students on all levels as well as academic staff. She is the founder of the Study Metro (www.studiemetroen.au.dk) and developer of the Text Feedback Game, has co-authored a book on supervising the master’s thesis in academia.

487

488

Index 3P model, the 98, 424

A Aarhus University’s Study Environment Survey 260 abstract exam questions 378 academic language 362 accommodation 72 accreditation regulations 81 accreditation reports 52 ACE Denmark (The Danish Accreditation Institution) 47 activities 150, 171, 177 between teaching 229, 239 examples of 243 in teaching pedagogical challenges 230 in the Humanities 251 in the Medical Sciences 255 in the Natural Sciences 254 in the Social Sciences 253 planning 240 problem-solving 244 syllabus 244 the disciplines 251 the writing of papers 244 training of practical skills 244 tutelage/instruction 238 adaptation 71 aids/resources 155 alignment 84, 88, 94, 103, 111, 121, 136, 149, 161, 172, 246, 365 appreciative dialogue 433, 441 apprenticeship 78 apprenticeship model 335 argumentation 293 in the natural scientific 255 assessment 369, 391 assessment criteria 391, 395 assessment methods 125 assignment/exam types 176 exams 381, 385

assignment instructions 175 assignment work activities 237 assimilation 72 attention, gain/get 153 authentic questions 292

B bachelor programmes’ research base 52 Bakhtin, Mikhail 76 Bean, John 162 behaviouristic learning 66 Biggs, John (constructive alignment) 88, 95, 97, 121, 132, 147, 173 blended learning 305 Bligh, Donald A. 149, 153, 162, 185, 248 blogs 81, 310 Bologna Process, the 17, 33, 35, 38 buzz groups 185, 234

C case assignment 386 case descriptions 56 case method, the 201 developing competences through case-based learning 211 theoretical perspectives on casebased learning 211 case work 253 chairman of study board 26 challenges in case-based learning 204 cheat and plagiarism 400, 401 classroom hard-programmed 107 soft-programmed 107 clickers 185, 237, 281 anonymity 285 communication resource 283 feedback options 283 question types 282 research 285

489

closed questions 377 cognition 73, 75 collegial evaluation focus person 435 collegial supervision 433 active listening 435 appreciative approach 441 evaluation 443 focus point 437 mediator 435 phases 438 practice learning 440 roles 434 supervisor 435 time-out function 437 communication competences 331 competence description 141 competences 33, 136, 139, 229, 399 concept maps 75, 126, 236, 255 concrete questions 378 conditioning classic 66 operant 66 conference activities 251 with presentations 237 conflicts in group 197 congruence 121 constructive alignment 103, 172 constructivism 71 cognitive 71 conventions in paper writing 358 course description 135, 231 course planning 165, 167 in table form 170 cover letter supervision 356 creditation of education 36 criteria-based evaluation 412

D Danish Network for Educational Development in Higher Education 430, 457 data sessions 60 debate exercises 253 decentralisation 27 Delphi Method, the (evaluation) 416

490

dialogical model and process management 344 dialogical model for supervision 341 dialogue 124, 235, 253, 292 dialogue supervision 338 didactic triangle, the 49, 95 difficult supervision meetings 346 discussion/argumentation 252 discussion culture in group work 195 dissertation 385 Dysthe, Olga 77, 273, 292, 334

E ECTS-points 243, 394 ECTS-scale in Denmark 397 education, research-based 18 e-learning 299 blog 311 discussion forums 317 examples 304 framework conditions 300 learning objectives 315 managing study time 303 multiple-choice tests 309 netiquette 304 online video 308 outcomes 308, 323 pedagogical challenges 300 PowerPoint 305 reasons/rationale 302 recommendations 308 research 324 teacher role 319 wikis 310 elite university 17, 20 essay 386 evaluation formative 410 of teaching 127, 409 one-minute 417 options 412 pedagogical challenges 409 peer 419 questionnaire 414 receiver-based 412 techniques 412 exam 169, 369

making exams less stressful 379 reliability 380 exam regulations 391 exam task 382 exam types 371 criteria for choosing exam types 403 expectations 121 evaluation 418 negotiation of expectations 125, 193, 361 of students 115 of the programme, students’ 129 the supervisory expectations questionnaire 332 explicit learning 65 external assessment 393 external examiner 370, 392, 394

G

F

H

Faculty Metro, the 55 feedback 237, 247, 259 analytical 266 criteria 265, 274 form 266 formative 260 holistic 260 non-prioritised 261 not enough time 261 online 269 on poor products 268 on written and oral student presentations 264 planning 263 presentation of criteria 265 prioritised 267, 274 purpose 265 research 275 roles and relations 267 summative 260 that is not used 261 time frame 264 Fink, Dee 166 flexibility agenda 34, 37 formative evaluation 410 forms of dialogue authoritative 77 internal persuasive 77

genre in supervision 353 genre understanding 365 globalisation funds 30 good case, what characterises a 205 group exam 388 group work 189, 235 activities 234 contract 194 discussion group 189 feedback group 189 group formation 191 pedagogical challenges 190 potentials 191 project group 189 research in 197 study group 189 writing group 189 handouts 155, 159, 183 head of studies 26 Healey, Mick 48 Herskin, Bjarne 153, 183, 188 hidden curriculum 66 history of the modern university 24 Hjort’s three characteristic’s of a profession 470 Hounsell, Dai 259, 278 Hounsell’s feedback model 259 humanity/human nature, view of 90 Humboldt ideal, the 369 Humboldt University 17 Humboldt, Wilhelm von 18, 43

I Illeris, Knud 225, 452 implicit assumptions 115 implicit learning 65 implied students 115 information and communication technology 299 information search about university teaching and learning 455 advanced 460 basic 459 discipline didactics 457

491

documentation of 460 search locations 457 search terms 459 instruction 238 of an activity 238 of papers 238 interdisciplinarity 22 internal examiner 370, 373, 379, 385 internal exams 394 international examiner advise for actions/recommendations for the examiner 381 interviews with students 427

K Klafki’s erudition-centered theory of didactics of erudition 96 knowledge 136, 138, 139, 229, 399 in action 476 tacit 65 knowledge production 54 Kolb, David A. 474 abstract conceptualisation 475 active experimentation 475 concrete experience 475 experience-based learning process, the 474 reflective observation 474 Kugel, Peter 467 Kugel’s five stages of teacher development 467

L language, poor 364 late-modern university students 129, 132 Lave, Jean 78 learning analytical approach 89 behavioural regulation 65 behaviourist learning 65 deep approach 44 dialogue 76 explicit 65 inquiry-based 53 internalisation 76 mediation 76

492

peripheral participation 80 situated 78 surface approach 45 views 88 learning check 246 learning management systems (LMS) 160 learning objectives 59, 61, 136, 145, 149, 151, 159, 161, 165, 172, 231 learning outcome 132, 147, 423 learning platforms 81 learning point 153 learning process based on experience 473 learning space/environment in supervision 347 learning theory 65 cognitive 73 constructivistic 70, 73 phenomenography 87 practice learning 68 psychodynamic 68, 82 learning, view of 90 lecture 179 conducting the lecture 184 learning outcome 184 planning 181 technologies/mediums used in 182 the well-planned 181 logbooks 428 long-term memory 74

M marking/grading scale 395 Marton, Ference 88 mass university 17, 20 master programmes’ research base 52 meta-communication in supervision 336 in teaching 157 methods/modes of teaching and learning 125, 231 models of understanding 150 motivation 54 multiple choice 383

N National Union of Students in Denmark, the 22 new disciplinarity-agenda 34 New Public Management (NPM) 27 non-stop writing 233

O OECD 2004 85 Olesen, Henning Salling 22, 39 one-minute evaluation 417 online discussion Five Stage Model, the 317, 321 recommendations 323 online feedback quiz 269, 277 research in 277 online teaching 324 open questions 339, 377, 381 oral exam 373, 387 outcome-based qualification framework 17 description 136 development, practice-oriented 80 frameworks 33 goal 137 matrix 146 output management 27

P parallel-communication in teaching 155 participant activity 161, 169 participation in practice 256 partnership model 335 peer-evaluation 419 peer-instruction 392 pentagon model 168 as a supervision tool 357 performance and development review 32 Piaget, Jean 71, 76 PISA-papers 79 plagiarism 400 plan, good course 167 planning in table form 170

planning principles 171 points in learning 160 portfolio 445 portfolio method 448 Post-It Method, the (evaluation) 415 PowerPoint 182 practical experience 257 practice communities/networks 78 preconception check 246 presentation portfolio 445 prior knowledge and experiences of the participants/prerequisites 115, 116, 127 problem- and case-based learning 256 problem-based and project-organised teaching 215 problem-based learning cases (PBL) 213, 226 process competences 331 process management and communication 327 process-oriented writing pedagogy 274 progression in teaching 83 project pedagogy, group work 189 project work 21, 386 cooperation contract between students and supervisor 224 essential elements 217 exemplarity 223 feedback seminar 220 group work 217 interdisciplinarity 220 participant directed 217 phases 216 problem orientation 60, 215, 220 research question/problem statement 220 supervision 218 supervisor 220, 224 theory 222 Prosser & Trigwell's 3P-model 97

Q qualification key 137 Qualifications Framework, the Danish

493

33, 136, 152, 398 qualifications, the concept of 33 qualification types in education 225 quality criteria for text supervision 361 questioning technique in exams 376 in group exams 389 questionnaire for evaluation 414, 428 questions 376 authentic 292 challenging 343, 346 clarifying 341, 345 closed 338, 377 evaluating 344, 346 examining 342, 346 open 338, 377, 381 question and answer 235 quizzes 233, 270 answer/response format 270 assignment 270 feedback 269 in teaching 271 learning activities 270 learning objectives 270 options 270

R Race, Phil 160, 166, 188, 382 receiver-based evaluation 412 reference groups, evaluation 417 reflection-in-action 423 reflection-on-action 423 reflective practitioner, the 423, 479 reliability in exam 403 repetition in lectures 186 research-based bachelor programmes 52 different disciplines 51 master’s programmes 52 research facilities 111 research paper 386 research-teaching nexus at Oxford 46 role of students in case-based learning, the 206 role of the teacher, the 205 roles during the exam 375

494

rules for the exam 400

S scaffolding 78 scholarship of teaching and learning 429, 455 Schön, Donald 222, 423, 440, 476 sciences applied 52 empirical 52 interpretative 52 scientific genre 352 search form, information search 459 search, google 458 self-efficacy 82 self-evaluation/assessment 234 self-scoring tests 233 sequences in sessions 153, 159 session planning 149 in table form 158 session’s beginning and end 154 setting the framework for a study activity 240 short term memory short term storage 74 working memory 75 simulation projects 58 skills 136, 138, 399 social competences, assessment of 392 social constructivism 76, 78 structure of a sequence 153 student achievement 370 facilities 105 integration 121 involvement 124 learning 166 preparation 156 prerequisites/prior knowledge, experience and learning 128 presentations 236 rebellion/protests 20 repertoire 128 student types 88 study activities in teaching 229 integration of 240

outside teaching 239 study board 135 study environment group work 198 Study Metro, the 293 study programme/curriculum 130, 165, 231 exams 391 study skills 176 summative evaluation 410 supervising of text 351 supervision on the basis of the paper 357 professional discussions about 329 top-down 354 supervision dialogue 436 supervision group 434 supervision meeting 328 supervisor contracts 332 supervisor letter/memorandum of understanding 330, 361 supervisor’s, the challenges 351 options 354 surface processing student 88 Säljö, Roger 88

T tacit assumptions 115 taximeter system/model 30 taxonomy 94 Bloom’s 84, 100, 144, 152 SOLO 84, 101, 144, 152 teacher certified 471 development 467 expert 447 novice 447 practice-oriented 471 reflective 423, 472 researching 471 student-oriented 471 teaching argumentation 289 case-based 201, 386

developing 423 discussion 289, 290 examining own 423 for learning 65 interactive student involvement 85 interpretative 89 presage 424 process 425 product 425 professionalisation of 470 research in 429 research-based 18, 19, 44, 47, 49, 54, 70, 247 research-led 48 research-oriented 48 research-supported 49 transmissive 89 variation 107 teaching competences 465 teaching CV 445 teaching environment 105 emotive factors 105 feedback 109 learning theoretical starting points 110 physical 105 research environment 111 teaching evaluation, see also evaluation of teaching direct investigation 428 interview with students 427 journals/logbooks 428 questionnaires 428 teaching philosophy 449 teaching portfolio 445 pedagogical challenges 446 teaching preparation 110 development 31 teaching professionalism 447 levels 447 text competences 331 text feedback 338, 351 text supervision 351, 361 phases 355 the minimal model 355 text templates 358

495

text types, academic 360 time dimension during exams 383 Tinto’s longitudinal model of institutional departure 122 toolbox course 120 tools of understanding 158, 162 Toulmin’s model of argumentation 293 transition to university 131 Trigwell, Keith 89, 95, 429 types of take-home exams 385

U university commercial activities 27 departmental structure 27 governance 26 government finding 19 models of governance 17 study board structure 27 tuition 28 University Act 20 1993 26 2003 28 2011 43 university reforms after 2003 29 university teacher, the role of the 465, 470 university teaching and learning models 93 principles 93 research 455 unprepared students 156

V variation in sessions 159 view on professionalisation 470 virtual course spaces 243 Vygotsky, Lev S. 76

W web-mediated communication and interaction 56 Wenger, Etienne 78 wikis 81, 251, 299 work experience and professional training 257 writer development 365

496

writing in class/during the session 233 written assignments 175 written exam 380 written on-campus exam 371, 380 written take-home exam 371, 385

Z zone of proximal development 78