Take5 #126 Step into teaching

Welcome – this #Take5 is brought to you from Jen Hayes from London Metropolitan University as she reflects on the planning and implementation of a new ‘Introduction to Teaching’ short course. Hopefully providing ideas and inspiration for similar courses. 

Jamming with Jen (and team)

Working for the Centre for Teaching Enhancement (CTE) at London Met as a Senior Learning and Teaching Development Manager, an exciting opportunity arose to lead the creation of a short introduction to teaching course. The PGCert course leader and I had identified a gap in our provision that affected three distinct groups; 

• Our Postgraduate researchers before they progress onto formal teaching qualifications such as the PGCert, 
• Our transnational educational partners who had requested this type of provision during an earlier consultation and,
• Our learning support teams including learning developers, librarians, academic mentors, particularly those who did not meet the teaching requirements for the full PGCert. 

Predicated on a belief in active, creative and dialogic learning (James & Nerantzi, 2019; 101 Creative Ideas, n.d.; 100 Ideas for Active Learning) the course was collaboratively designed by the 10 members of the centre and collaboratively delivered by four of us this project was a joy to work on from start to finish and this blog shares some of what made this course so magical.   

Timing is everything

At the heart of our work is the belief that the opportunity to learn from and with a diverse range of people is a strength of any course and so we made an early commitment to finding a way to get these groups together to capitalise on that opportunity. 

Our solution to getting three, arguably disparate, groups together was to get innovative. I proposed a two day course chopped into 2-hour chunks further broken down into 30 minute collaborative synchronous seminars followed by 1.5 hours of asynchronous activities, based on a similar experience I had studying for my PhD as part of an international cohort. 

Two consecutive days in non-teaching weeks ensured availability and enabled us to immerse participants in the world of teaching and learning (T&L) without distractions. To cater for colleagues across multiple time zones we would offer alternative start and end times in 2-hour intervals. 

Participants joined us from 0700-1330, 0900-1530 or 1100-1730. With six units in total and three units in each day, this did mean repeating two of them and accepting that the full cohort would only be together for one 2-hour slot in the middle of the day.

Acknowledging this might present some challenges we gave ourselves permission to trial these ideas with the view that we would have a full evaluation including student input following the first delivery of the course. 

Image * – Sample Day 1 timetable

Participants were given the freedom to choose their own breaks during the 1.5 hour asynchronous activities. In reality, this approach made it inclusive not just for our TNE partners but also enabled working parents the flexibility to attend sessions around their needs. 

Also, rather than being a sleepy hollow, the start and end sessions to the day delivered an amazing opportunity to make connections and engage with participants, with the asynchronous activities providing opportunity for the cohort to stay connected with each other by other means. 

Content, content, content

With an idea of how we might structure the course we worked on content in parallel. Our planning took three distinct phases

Phase 1 – Playful workshop. In our first planning session we played two games. The first used storytelling to write fictional student bio’s in the 1st person for students we expected would take this course. We then played a word association game to create a list of adjectives to describe learners once they had completed the course.  Some of the group had experience designing and delivering our PGCert, others had knowledge and experience of the needs and expectations of partners or our learning support teams so this enabled us to find the commonalities and synergies between the groups. We used these bios and list of words as a reference throughout the planning process to check our thinking and help with decision making

Phase 2 – Speed dating. With a clear understanding of the students we were aiming the course at and what we hoped them to gain from the course the groups made suggestions for potential unit titles.  We then split into groups of 2-3 and had five minutes to ‘speed date’ each idea in break out rooms before moving onto the next idea. The groups populated collaborative documents for each theme with ideas, activities, and suggestions for resources. We explored nine ideas for units in this way. We then used the activities from phase 1 and our student success plan to choose the six units that aligned best to these needs : 

• How Learning happens
• Bonding and Belonging
• Responding to a range of student needs
• Assessment, marking and feedback
• Creative Learning and teaching practices
• Techniques for designing learning

Units on ‘Technology enhanced learning’ and ‘education for social justice’ were discussed and the decision was made that the principles of each should be embedded throughout the other activities

Colleagues were then able to volunteer to finalise the content and resources for units they had a particular interest or expertise in. 

Phase 3 – Curation and finalisation. We created the online framework, using our WebLearn platform and then populated it with the activities and resources that had been developed during phase 2. Those with learning technology expertise worked with the content designers, with a final check for consistency and clarity. 

Image * – Sample Unit plan – Bonding and Belonging

Seminar

Introduction – Three words to describe how you are feeling about the coursePicture Activity – Pick from six which picture aligns most to your sense of Bonding and Belonging. Which photo least aligns. Share via chat or verbally.Activities – Describe the activities for the asynchronous part. Any questions.

Activities

Can be done in any order. Your experiences of bonding and belonging – Discussion group. Create 3 posts based on three questions. Respond to at least one other person’s post.Pedagogies of Mattering Guided reading activity. Read the full article or AI summary of the same article (based on confidence or preference). A glossary of key terms is included. Karen Gravett, Carol A. Taylor & Nikki Fairchild (2024) Pedagogies of mattering: re-conceptualising relational pedagogies in higher education, Teaching in Higher Education, 29:2, 388-403, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2021.1989580 Answer reflective questions and share your thoughts with the group via WebLearn.

Variety is the spice of life

We discovered during our planning that two days is both a really short timeframe to deliver this type of course and longer that you anticipate. It provides enough time to enthuse and inspire but not enough time to cover everything in depth. Thankfully with so many fantastic colleagues to collaborate with we weren’t short of ideas to fill the time. 

With a few ‘old friends’ in the form of  discussion forums and guided reading activities we also create opportunities to add some more sparkle. There were intentionally a mixture of activities. In some cases they worked on something individual and then shared with the group for peer feedback, some were fully individual and submitted to the forum – for possible peer feedback or discussion. 

Some highlights were:

• Picture Rubric from Assessment, marking and feedback unit. Eight random, different photos were presented to participants. Participants then had to mark them according to different learning objectives and different marking systems. We aimed this activity to be accessible regardless of the level of expertise in the area so LOs were picked to be simple and easy to understand by a lay-person. We then reflected in online discussion forums on the impact these different systems might have on students.

Image * – Example from the picture round exercise. 

• Student helpdesk simulation exercise from assessment, marking and feedback unit – An email with a request for support arrives in participant’s inbox. A student is asking for help with understanding and moving forward after feedback on an assignment. Included in the email the student has sent
  • Assignment Brief 1
  • Students’ submission for Assignment 1
  • The tutor feedback for Assignment 1
  • Assignment Brief 2

Participants then email them advice and support which the ‘student’ continues to respond to. I won’t lie, pretending to be a student was fun and provided more opportunities to develop participants based on their individual strengths. 

• AI chat bot from responding to a range of student needs unit. Using WebLearn we programmed 4 AI bots to pretend to be students with a variety of needs and get colleagues to ask them questions. We also set these as mini assignment in order to use the feedback function. They could be programmed with different personalities which led to some fun encounters. As well as providing something different, it helped to challenge any reticence to use AI as a pedagogical tool. This had been noticed through the work we had previously done during the development of our AI guidance and AI workshop we had done with colleagues. 
• Image * – Examples of the AI student programming. 

Image * – Example of a conversation with an AI student

No comment left behind.

With such a packed, high paced course, providing meaningful and consistent feedback was always going to be tricky. Focusing on short tasks rather than long pieces allowed us to engage in discursive feedback throughout the course and we followed a philosophy that set out to ensure that every contribution and every comment would get a response. In the examples above this meant that every comment in a discussion forum was responded to, every email sent to the simulation student was responded to with feedback from the ‘student’ and the feedback function was used for any work submitted to the assessment portal in WebLearn. 

The asynchronous learning activities freed the facilitator to focus on feedback rather than delivery which had the knock on of being able to push students and develop their ideas and thinking in real time and support those who needed additional support. This approach did however mean that the course was as intense for the facilitator as direct delivery as there was little to no respite.  

The real win though was that in the course feedback forms most students cited the feedback as a real strength of the course and a standout element, not something you always hear about feedback.

‘Overall, I found the variety and consistency of feedback mechanisms to be one of the strengths of the course.’

‘The feedback was excellent and made you reflect on the angles to your answers.’

We want to be together

We wanted our course to have a collaborative soul, which is not easy with so much activity being asynchronous. We worked hard to create a group feel and a sense of belonging through dialogue and playful activities during the seminars. There was a variety in these activities including picture rounds, provocations to design a course or module Learning Outcomes, and an inspirational and powerful guest speaker, who shared their experience of having a learning difference. This fed into creating lively follow on asynchronous group chats powered by our ‘no comment left behind’ philosophy which helped create conversation with and between participants throughout the day. 

A real bonus was that other colleagues from the Centre for Teaching Enhancement came and joined in both synchronous and asynchronous activities. This created a hybrid participant/facilitator role where they did the activities alongside the ‘full’ participants and were able to join the conversation in a less hierarchical way. This created a fabulous opportunity to learn from the participants as well as them learn from us. 

The proof is in the pudding 

At the end of the course the team was confident that this course fulfilled its purpose, but the truth really lay in feedback we received from participants:

‘I hoped to gain deeper insights into effective teaching and learning strategies. The course exceeded these expectations.’

‘It was an enjoyable experience, and I would love to continue to teach in the near future.’

‘I enjoyed the structure as it gave me time to interact with others, time to reflect and time to do activities.’

My final thoughts (and recommendations)

As we plan for the next cohort of this course in the summer term we reflected on the strengths and opportunities to improve. The power of diversity was a key takeaway from this course which could be used in the development of similar courses in the future. The diverse group created rich conversations and opportunities to learn from each other. The diversity of activity provided a trove of pedagogical approaches which both maintained engagement throughout the course but also equipped those on the course with ideas, resources and strategies for their own teaching. Diverse start and end points created access and inclusion. Diversity of feedback created a discursive space where it was safe to explore ideas and ask questions.

We had a couple of activities that we felt did not work well as others and we are making planning to swap these for other creative and playful activities and we would also like to change the structure slightly so that at the end of the 2 hour block there is a clearer opportunity to discuss the unit as a group before moving on to the next. 

Was it exhausting? – Yes, this was too much to do alone but fortunately I had a team of fabulous colleagues to support. 

Did colleagues think I was crazy for starting a course at 0700? – Absolutely, but the benefits that arose from it were worth it.

Did it create a rewarding fly by the seat of your pants experience enjoyed by facilitators and participants? – Definitely, and if anyone is wishing to create something similar please reach out to Jen and the team.

References

• 101 Creative Ideas (n.d.) https://101creativeideas.wordpress.com/category/creative-ideas/
• Active Learning Network: 100 Ideas for Active Learning (n.d.)  https://openpress.sussex.ac.uk/ideasforactivelearning/ 
• James, A., & Nerantzi, C. (Eds.). (2019). The power of play in higher education: Creativity in tertiary learning. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

BIO: