Group Admins
Description
Session Description
In this session, two Learning Designers will share their experiences of designing and developing a fully blended BSc programme in Medical Biosciences at Imperial College London. The programme is delivered through a flipped classroom method, whereby students study assigned online materials prior to face-to-face teaching sessions and demonstrate their understanding of this bespoke pre-session content through various group application activities in class.
We will critically reflect on the collaboration between learning designers, academics and students, noting how feedback from stakeholders has influenced the design and development of the online component of the programme. Specifically, we will discuss students’ feedback on online materials, gathered throughout the first year of running the programme with the cohort of 69 students. We will show how this feedback confirms that the success of the online part of a blended course relies on the principles of constructive alignment of content, building in appropriate scaffolding and engaging learners through making content both relevant at the conceptual level and relatable at the emotional level. Based on the challenges and constraints we encountered, we will present specific examples of activities, assets and technologies we have implemented to address them.
This talk will be useful to varied audiences, including teachers, learning designers, academic developers, content developers and learning technologists, who are thinking about implementing blended or flipped scenarios in their provision and are looking for effective online solutions. It can also be useful for managers who wish to get an understanding of the resources required to develop a programme of this scale.
Session content: evaluation and reflection
This session is based on our experience of designing and developing a fully blended BSc programme, including feedback received from the students studying on the course. We will discuss how this feedback as well as the various constraints and challenges encountered have informed our practice.
References
Koehler, M. J., and Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1). Available at: http://www.citejournal.org/volume-9/issue-1-09/general/what-is-technological-pedagogicalcontent-knowledge [20 Feb 2018]
Paechter, M. and Maier, B. (2010) Online of face-to-face? Students’ experiences and preferences in e-learning. Science Direct 13(4). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.09.004 [20 Feb 2018]
Palmer, E., Lomer, S. and I. Bashliyska (2017) Overcoming barriers to student engagement with Active Blended Learning. Interim Report. Available at: https://www.northampton.ac.uk/ilt/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/05/Student-Engagement-with-ABL-Interim-Report-May-2017-v2.pdf [20 Feb 2018]
Rienties, B. and Toetenel, L. (2016) The impact of 151 learning designs on student satisfaction and performance: social learning (analytics) matters. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge – LAK ’16, pp. 339–343. Available at:
http://oro.open.ac.uk/46321/1/p339-rienties.pdf [20 Feb 2018]
Thalheimer, T. (2017) Does eLearning Work? What the Scientific Research Says! Available from: http://willthalheimer.typepad.com/files/does-elearning-work-full-research-report-final.pdf [20 Feb 2018]
Resources for participants
n/a
