Retroid Raving

You know, there I was, all happy with myself: I'd done a ten-year rolling upgrade on all my 2nd and 3rd year teaching material on the Web; I'd put together a linear version of everything as a singel Web page so they didn't have to skip about too much; I'd even PDFised a version so they could download and print it easily - with the same progression as I'd used in my lectures, and no extraneous material included.  I more or less told them what the questions would be - it's OK, Hugh, I do it every year, and the distribution of marks is still normal, and people still fail - and I sat back, secure that I had done my job and possibly enlivened the learning experience as well.

Then the students started to trickle in.  Holding old exam papers.  Papers set when there were more lectures in the course I teach.  When more material used to be included, now shifted to 3rd year.  Asking "How do we answer this question?".

"It's OK, I didn't teach that, you don't need to learn it", I said to the first batch.  "If it's not in the revision notes, you don't need to learn it", I said to the second.  "Did I teach that this year?" I asked the third - dangerous question, that; they may not know the answer as they may not have been there.  No answer from that lot - so I took pity, and said: "No, it's not in this exam".

By the fourth, I was fixing them with a steely gaze, and saying "Show that section to me in the revision notes".  They, of course, didn't have them.  I showed them the lack of same section on my computer.  They looked bemused.  They tried again: "But didn't you teach that?"  I said: "Show me in your notes".  They didn't have a set with them.  I said "It's fine, it's not in the exam".  Still looking bewildered, they left.

Fortunately, they write tonight.  I'm still wondering if someone, convinced I should have asked the question they will have spotted, will try and work the learned answer in for another question.

As I have said before: I hate exams.

From a recent newspaper article:

"Top universities are being pressured to lower their entry requirements because secondary schools are failing to produce enough academically brilliant pupils....  The government has given less money to, but set more targets for, the universities in what amounts to an attack on their academic freedom, xxx claimed yesterday.

"It does nobody any good to think that you can deal with the problems of secondary education by lowering standards in our universities," he said. "Of course universities have to be as open to talent as possible but there continue to be real challenges in secondary education.""

Sound familiar?  The heavy hand of Ms Pandor, you think?

You'd be wrong: that was the Chancellor of Oxford University in the UK, at a fund-raising occasion at Oxfordbridgeshire recently.  Again, the marvels of modern technology: got via a TinyURL link from a Twitter post, from my Esteemed Master in Viral Professional Development, AJ Cann.

The article goes on:

"Oxford was launching a £1.25bn fundraising drive to boost its student support, facilities and academic recruitment in a bid to rival the US Ivy League universities such as Harvard and Yale."

Woooo...that would be ZAR14 000 000 000.00 or so.  Don't we have alumni?  Like - ooh, let me see now - Donny Gordon, for one?  How professional a fund-raising team do WE have?  Not ZAR14x10exp9 worth, that's for sure...what DO we target?  I recall it to be somewhere in the ZAR10exp7 range or so - what has happened with that?  Do we even HAVE a halfway decent endowment?  Us, the accountant-led African-class world University?

Time the OU^TM brand got out there and did some work, chaps...!

* = 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.  Everything takes longer and costs more - and the quality goes down.

A very disturbing story today: a non-South African African who works in our group was in Shoprite-Checkers in Mowbray today, with his wife, doing their regular grocery shop.  The till operator spoke to him in isiXhosa, and he asked her to speak in English as he could not understand what she was saying.

Instead of doing so, she spoke loudly in isiXhosa across him to her colleague on another till, with the word "makwerekwere" prominent in the dialogue.

This exchange went on until the manager interevened, asking what the problem was.  Our colleague's wife said "They are more interested in talking about makwerekwere than serving us".  The manager instructed the till operator to serve them, then, as they were leaving, was seen to call the till operator into his office, presumably to tell her off.

This is blatant xenophobia in action - and not 2 km from two UCT campuses, in the heart of the southern suburbs.

Personally I think this warrants a communication to Shoprite-Checkers head office: one, to commend the manager; two, to demand that their staff be instructed to smile and greet EVERYONE who comes to be served, regardless of what they look or sound like.

We are ALL makwerekwere - or we should be prepared to be.

You know, we did a head count at our lab meeting yesterday: two Namibians, three Zimbabweans, a former Zambian...oh, and four South Africans.  Another lab meeting today: same former Zambian, a Brit-Zimbabwean-South African, a Mozambican, a Ugandan, a German and a Pakistani, ONE South African - and a missing Kenyan.

Not that it matters, but that is nine Caucasian descendants, five ethnic Africans (one a South African) and two Asian-origin folk - yet only the "black" folk were directly affected by the xenophobia.

Very, very sad.

...so some more about "Viral Professional Development", which AFAIK first saw the light of day as an enunciated concept on the blog @injenuity - written by one "jennifer".

This was a fascinating discovery, which I chanced upon virally: as in, I caught it pretty much by chance, because I have an RSS feed from AJ Cann's MicrobiologyBytes site, where he has his del.icio.us links...you get the idea.

In her words:

"I call my strategy, “Viral Professional Development,” or “VPD,” because it is based on the popular definition of “viral,” that refers to a technology, tool, or teaching strategy that is quickly spread from one person to another."

Ummmm...OK, as a virologist I must say that that would actually be contagious, as in "Transmissible by direct or indirect contact; communicable", or "Spreading or tending to spread from one to another; infectious", rather than viral, but no matter - it sounds catchier as is.

Jennifer goes on:

• The most important characteristic of VPD is that the instructors learn to use the technology largely on their own and with support from each other as the enthusiasm spreads through the institution. ...
• You do not need a large staff to implement this.
• You do need at least a few instructors who are early adopters, enthusiastic about learning and testing new technology and willing to share their knowledge, experience, and materials.
• You cannot spend time worrying about the instructors who refuse to adopt instructional technology. Just let it go. 
• You MUST build a network for your instructors. This can be developed on any platform you wish, but should have the ability for participants to create profiles, contribute to conversation and share media files. I use Ning because of the ease of use, flexibility, and stability. You could also use a blog or wiki.
• You must participate in external networking. There is absolutely no other way you can keep up with the technology and quickly find solutions for your instructors. My primary networking source is Twitter.
• Workshops are NOT the foundation of a successful VPD program. Although they may be one component, you can’t spend a great deal of time planning for workshops, scheduling resources, developing materials and dragging in folks who will just never use the technology.
• Open. Open. Open. Expect to share everything. Plan to blog, podcast, tag, post and push out useful tips you learn from your personal network. Invite outsiders to participate in your network. Collaborate!
• Celebrate every success. Spread the word. Pass it up the chain. Let the administration know what you are doing and who’s doing well.

Sound familiar, anyone?  You see all the hallmarks of the successful research-led vision of OU^TM in these points?  As in: the complete lack of any such?

Well, then, you are one of the virally-infected - meaning you are an enthusiastic spreader of the gospel according to whoever it is who infected you - and off we all go together.

Bravely and blindly on into the future.

But it should be fun...B-)

In a report on a UK Open University conference for their staff on “Making Connections”, the blog details some very interesting presentations by a number of senior UK academic figures.  In its own words:

 "Gill Nicholls, Pro Vice Chancellor [of the] University of Salford (and also the author of Challenge to Scholarship (2006)) ... identified the issues for academics and the convergence of research, learning and teaching - seeking to avoid the classic research v teaching to scholarship and its application to learning in a research-led environment, and how this can then feed in to the student experience. Her view from the literature is:

• Research is learning for academics
• Teaching is the promotion of learning to students.

...As a test of institutional commitment she suggested that a key is whether the institution plays a formative role in supporting (or blocking) the links between research and learning..."

 "At the faculty level this turns into specified staff roles and direct organisation - which then needs to be reflected in the curriculum with understanding of research-led learning (or she said she might prefer research-informed learning).  Defining research-led learning she said it will link up with:

• Learner-centred education
• Student-centred learning
• Independent learning
• Problem-based learning and case  study
• Project work or project study. "

"Independent learning" - what a concept!!  Students actually expecting not to be led??  At OU^TM??  Or, to be fair, at ANY Seffrican University?!  OK, they do problem-based learning over at Med School - but the initial implementation was apparently a disaster, and it's ended up taking MORE in facilitation/face time from the lecturing staff than they used to have to do, instead of freeing them up as it was supposed to do.  Or what they were told it would do, which may not be the same thing at all. 

"Gill also described a variation of a research-based learning environment – which applies into the programme as well as at the philosophical level (e.g.s are Dentistry and Medicine). Her argument is that making this more apparent to ourselves as teachers and our students as learners will enhance motivation and increase the participation level for learners. The implication is also that the knowledge base behind the subjects also impacts on how learning can be supported. If research can be shared we can switch from transmit to engage."

As the legendary Captain Jean-Luc Picard might have said, "Make it so...!".  I can think of nothing I'd like better in a teaching environment such as ours: as it is, despite my best efforts, my lecturing ends up being a guided tour through a catalogue of facts - we ARE a fact-rich environment Up North, you understand - which the students simply ask me to give them as a printed hand-out.  After I've authored what amounts to a full and profusely illustrated Web-based textbook, littered with links to fascinating self-educational material....  I just throw my hands up and give them what they ask for: a linear, simplified printed or PDFised path through the material so they can "learn for exams". 

 "To move to research-led she suggested:

• Design
• Underpinning by research
• Learning outcomes specified (not routine)
• Student teaching methods – bring in research to challenge
• Research methodologies in learning
• Assess research competence
• Visibility of integration of research activity and teaching
• Students integrated into research culture of learning "

Teaching: what evidence is there of "research-led" pedagogy, except possibly in the very narrow sense of exploring pedagogical methods in teacher training?   We used to have a Teaching Methods Unit: what happened to that?  No, what the bulk of us - uneducated educators - actually engage in is what has been called "Viral Professional Development" in the blog @Injenuity, which is something else entirely: methods which spread by word of mouth (or lately, via blogs...B-) at the root level, rather than being deliberately disseminated.  Particularly relevant to the Centre for Educational Technology, as it happens! 

Mr Price, I hope someone has told you of our blogs...B-)

Time for someone or several someones to go put some money where the collective mouth is: either tell us what a "research-led University" is, AND go about implementing it - or drop the slogan.