Trialling and Evaluation
As part of a new course, this learning experience will be trialled as it is implemented with the first cohort of students beginning in 2014. This will require a commitment to regular and effective evaluation throughout. This will take place in a number of ways: mapping of individual learning experiences into subject/course outcomes, use of peer and professional association feedback via the Smart Learning Process, lecturer reflection on actual learning outcomes, and subject-based feedback processes with students.
Biggs and Tang (2007), discuss the importance of constructive alignment in the design of courses and subjects. The framework of constructive alignment refers firstly to the alignment of outcomes with assessment and learning experiences, and also the use of constructivist approaches to teaching and learning in which students are provided with opportunity for 'constructing' their knowledge and skills through the use of realistic assessment. This framework is evident the Smart Learning process that is being used to construct this course, the assessments, and the subjects and learning experiences. The Smart Learning process not only allows for constant mapping during the development of subjects and learning experiences, but further, it facilitates peer feedback. This process will be used among the members of the speech pathology team and other academic staff involved in the development process (e.g. educational designers). Further, this process will be made available to the accreditation board of Speech Pathology Australia. While they are unlikely to focus on individual learning experiences, they will be able to access this information.
Additional checklists and tools can be used along Smart Learn to focus on particular aspects of subject development. For example, the OULDI activity planner considers 'types of learning' that are in a particular subject/course. Based on Conole (2007), it asks you to categorise the learning activities by type. This can be used by both staff and students to evaluate how the expectations of times allocated to types of learning equate with actual time spent. The 'types of learning' in learning task discussed here have been inputted to this OULDI worksheet as an example.
Focussing more directly on this learning experience, it will be part of a constant feedback process with students that considers actual learning outcomes for students and the impact of these on student engagement in future learning experiences. This will result in a constantly evolving teaching and learning environment, as I (as lecturer) seek to assess the effectiveness of the learning experience on student outcomes. This cycle can be seen in Laurrillard's (2012) graphical depiction of teaching and learning, which I have have adapted here for this subject and learning experience. For this students, this process will be a process of formative feedback and monitoring, through which they can enhance their learning by developing an understanding of their own learning and developing their own learning goals (Irons, 2007).
Critical to the trialing and the evaluation of this learning experience, and the course in general, is evaluation of the technologies used. As a course that will be taught predominantly online (with the exception of two residential schools for refining clinical before going on placement), the use of technologies that are appropriate to the learning outcomes and accessible to the students is important. Bates and Poole (2003) provide a framework for assessing the the use of teaching technology in Higher Education. The process of defining the outcomes, assessing the actual student learning, implementing the plan and then refining the plan, provides a clear framework for the process of feedback described above.
As part of a new course, this learning experience will be trialled as it is implemented with the first cohort of students beginning in 2014. This will require a commitment to regular and effective evaluation throughout. This will take place in a number of ways: mapping of individual learning experiences into subject/course outcomes, use of peer and professional association feedback via the Smart Learning Process, lecturer reflection on actual learning outcomes, and subject-based feedback processes with students.
Biggs and Tang (2007), discuss the importance of constructive alignment in the design of courses and subjects. The framework of constructive alignment refers firstly to the alignment of outcomes with assessment and learning experiences, and also the use of constructivist approaches to teaching and learning in which students are provided with opportunity for 'constructing' their knowledge and skills through the use of realistic assessment. This framework is evident the Smart Learning process that is being used to construct this course, the assessments, and the subjects and learning experiences. The Smart Learning process not only allows for constant mapping during the development of subjects and learning experiences, but further, it facilitates peer feedback. This process will be used among the members of the speech pathology team and other academic staff involved in the development process (e.g. educational designers). Further, this process will be made available to the accreditation board of Speech Pathology Australia. While they are unlikely to focus on individual learning experiences, they will be able to access this information.
Additional checklists and tools can be used along Smart Learn to focus on particular aspects of subject development. For example, the OULDI activity planner considers 'types of learning' that are in a particular subject/course. Based on Conole (2007), it asks you to categorise the learning activities by type. This can be used by both staff and students to evaluate how the expectations of times allocated to types of learning equate with actual time spent. The 'types of learning' in learning task discussed here have been inputted to this OULDI worksheet as an example.
Focussing more directly on this learning experience, it will be part of a constant feedback process with students that considers actual learning outcomes for students and the impact of these on student engagement in future learning experiences. This will result in a constantly evolving teaching and learning environment, as I (as lecturer) seek to assess the effectiveness of the learning experience on student outcomes. This cycle can be seen in Laurrillard's (2012) graphical depiction of teaching and learning, which I have have adapted here for this subject and learning experience. For this students, this process will be a process of formative feedback and monitoring, through which they can enhance their learning by developing an understanding of their own learning and developing their own learning goals (Irons, 2007).
Critical to the trialing and the evaluation of this learning experience, and the course in general, is evaluation of the technologies used. As a course that will be taught predominantly online (with the exception of two residential schools for refining clinical before going on placement), the use of technologies that are appropriate to the learning outcomes and accessible to the students is important. Bates and Poole (2003) provide a framework for assessing the the use of teaching technology in Higher Education. The process of defining the outcomes, assessing the actual student learning, implementing the plan and then refining the plan, provides a clear framework for the process of feedback described above.