Teacher Trainers- The Virtual Learning Environment Community

Teacher trainers: the virtual learning environment community

Background to case-study This case-study highlights the impacts on trainers’ practice within the Leeds Trinity and All Saints (LTAS) higher education institution (HEI) which conducts both primary and secondary teacher training. Leeds Trinity received TDA funding for information and communications technology (ICT) in initial teacher training (ITT) projects each year from 2004–05 to 2007–08 (four years in total). The funding was used to provide laptops for trainees, video capture and analysis technology and, latterly, the introduction of a virtual learning environment (VLE). This funding constituted a significant resource for the ITT programmes at Leeds Trinity. The VLE was developed over quite some time, having initially being developed in their school-centred initial teacher training (SCITT) and then transferring across into the Bachelor of Education (BEd) and postgraduate certificate in education (PGCE) courses.

Impact This case description looks mainly at the way the introduction of a VLE has impacted on trainers’ practice but also looks at trainees’ practice, trainers, and the sustainability of the project in terms of depth, scope and transfer of ownership. • Scope: how do you get a critical mass of people participating in the programme and changing practice? • Depth: how do you position the projects to impact on the classroom environment and challenge different contexts, beliefs and attitudes? • Transfer of ownership: how do you encourage participants to take ownership of the technology and intervention?

View: the video case-study. Download: the full research report; the exec summary.

Impacts on trainers’ practice The main use of the virtual learning environment (VLE) was as a means of tutors extending their sessions so that they offer additional resources to trainees. This meant that trainees could learn outside – and in addition to – scheduled learning time, and that the locations for learning were extended. This resulted in a more inclusive and personalised agenda in terms of students learning. One of the main impacts was the change in how the curriculum was offered. The pedagogy of trainers became more blended and connected different learning contexts including the school, the HEI and at home. ‘I can introduce things through a podcast so that I can point them to resources and they can be opening them up as I am talking about them. It’s new to me how these students work – it’s very different to how I studied. I’m trying to make these things more accessible for them.’ The project illustrated a movement from a technology chasing a solution (in terms of improving communication) to a core piece of work within which teaching and learning found a way of developing and improving itself because of the affordances within the technology. The innovation became more effective in this case when it was more closely tied to the core business of the organisation.

There was ‘a widespread engagement with VLE as a means of extending and personalising taught sessions,’ where practitioners developed their understanding of the best ways to develop ‘blended learning’. This was done by a softly, softly approach to embedding the technology.

Impact on trainees

‘We did it a bit like osmosis. We didn’t force it on people, but in our own minds we were clear we were not going to say: “Do this because it’s good for you,” but rather: “This is what it can do for you,” and then people came to us.’

The extended materials also improved trainees’ subject specialist knowledge in literacy, PE, geography and assessment.

The VLE also allowed practitioners to develop their subject specialist teaching. For example, it allowed a tutor on a short course (geography) to provide a range of extension materials for trainees. ‘When I started it was very much documents, links, useful resources. Over the last two years I’ve been able to extend and it really is a much more integral part of my module for geography. Last week I gave them a webbased task that was linked to the VLE but also an environmental quiz to get them thinking about things, and then actually making use of that for the session, as well and feeding into things I want them to do outside the session.’ Trainers developed their existing pedagogy by using the VLE and engaging more closely with trainees. ‘I’ve been doing it for a number of years (using the VLE). It’s interesting how over the last couple of years it has taken off a lot more. Part of it is the Facebook culture… a lot of people are used to doing that sort of online interaction. They’ll get onto the VLE and talk to their friends about going out and they’ll upload a few lesson plans and moan about a certain class, all on the VLE.’ Additionally, staff could access each other’s work anonymously and then request support to do something similar, facilitating knowledge transfer and development of materials within the VLE.

The changes in programme delivery provided additional access and support to mature students for out-of-hours study, so they could fit learning into and around their domestic responsibilities.

Trainees were able to get anonymous and instantaneous feedback when they used online assessments. Tutors could identify areas that were a common problem and target these in their sessions. Using the VLE among trainees allowed additional peer and tutor support on placements in the following ways: Trainees were able to e-mail requests and the tutors could direct them to particular resources on the VLE. Pastoral – tutors can keep an eye on students’ materials and interactions, even when they are not the link tutor. Trainers can also push out new policies and overall communication can be quicker and more responsive. Trainees used threaded discussions over their placements mostly on issues around ICT usage, but linked to issues such as classroom management. They also pooled ideas and resources about specific subjects.

Impacts on schools and pupils This was limited within this project other than by exposing trainees and therefore pupils to a wider range of ICT technologies over their course. Some trainees reported being frustrated at the levels of technology within schools. Some primary schools have not invested in ICT or are too tied to the QCA scheme, which is relatively limited. This can frustrate students. ‘The students do feel a little hidebound by the structures that exist in school.’

Page 2 of 5

How it was done The key innovators had a vision of how to embed the VLE within the organisation and for use by trainers. This initially grew out of the education department’s perceived needs and was then driven forward by two entrepreneurs with clear roles. One dealt with the overall architecture and the other dealt with the more immediate problems faced by staff. A high level of institutional support was crucial and formed by the ICT experience of key leaders and managers. The development was enabled by the relative size of the education department in relation to other parts of the college. With over 25 per cent of the students in the college, the department was able to reach a critical mass of users, which led to the innovation being adopted by the institution.

Key points were: The innovators maintained control over the VLE implementation and dealt with objections by the internal ICT support team. ‘I have had strong battles with IT services, and I think that is partly because they have expertise in ICT but not expertise within ICT in education.’ A direct connection or utility was in evidence from the outset. The VLE was directed primarily at trainers and how it could benefit their practice. The concept of sharing developments was built into the ethos of the VLE design. By giving staff ‘enrolment keys’ that controlled access to their materials in their areas and then allowing them to give these to others as a means of allowing them to decide who sees what, led to a sense of ownership of the whole ‘blended learning’ development process. Different subject teams were targeted each year so that a critical mass of users grew up gradually. Page 3 of 5

The subject specific issues of tutors were targeted for development rather than more generic issues such as communication.

Impacts in terms of sustainability • Depth: how do you get it to impact on classrooms and in different contexts, beliefs and attitudes? • Scope: how do you get a critical mass of people trying this out and changing practice? • Transfer of ownership: how do you get people to own the development?

Depth There were several project characteristics associated with the ‘depth’ of the impact of the project, which were mostly positive. Staff were able to view data on the use and interaction with the different aspects of the VLE, thus they were able to monitor engagement as to the usage of their own resources and discussion groups. In turn this made them able to see why some areas were getting more engagement than others, and so practice in blended learning strategies was transferred more easily. Over time there was a movement from a repository of course materials to greater interactivity and extension materials, video clips, etc. This illustrated the versatility of the VLE and made it not only ‘worth a visit’ but also a showcase for evolving blended pedagogies. The notion of development that was both private and shared – a sort of social constructivism by proxy (without the affective factors of being seen to need help) – was effective in sharing and developing practice. For example, e-learning advisers who were not members of the teacher team could be asked for support and advice on material development. The ‘key’ idea, which enabled sharing for users, was also fundamental to this process. ‘They (trainers) don’t have to go up to someone and say: “Can I have a look at what you are doing?”’

Depth in terms of extending to schools, as mentioned above, was a little more problematic due to the lack of investment or use of ICT in schools, which sometimes frustrated trainees.

Facebook might be to keep in touch with friends or family but extra utility, depending upon personal interests, is available.

Scope

VLE implementation requires careful consideration of different stakeholder needs. A range of functionality will allow for unexpected uses to develop that complement the initial or primary purpose of the implementation. Users will shape the learning environment and bend it to their own purposes and needs, using its affordances as a tool for their own context.

The project team employed several strategies to gain a critical mass of users within the organisation. They: • targeted different subject teams each year so that a critical mass grew up gradually • encouraged students from other years to take part in the debates and they also added materials they had developed and found • used the ICT tutors as editors of materials – ‘he looks at the materials and helps remove those that are superfluous’ • developed informal mentoring arrangements where more experienced staff supported others, and • moved from a role as innovators within their own courses to expansion through incremental roll-out across teams, and • broadened the scope of use from an original 12 to 3,400 users.

Transfer of ownership The ethos of the project that started from the point of view of trainers’ needs in terms of their core business ‘teacher education delivery’ and how this could be augmented was crucial to the VLE’s adoption. In addition the incremental model, moving from developing one or two areas to others and using peer mentors, was also important. Coupled to this was the content and practicesharing facility, which allowed content to be developed and reviewed privately with recourse to expertise if required, and was really effective in transferring ownership. In addition, the encouragement of staff to select how they wanted to use the VLE was also effective, rather than presenting a preconceived model. In fact this is similar to the way in which social software is used. For example, the first motivation for using

Page 4 of 5

Thinking/discussion points

Are trainers OK with digital engagement? If there is a gap between trainers’ and trainees’ use, how will you make engagement for trainers and trainees purposeful? What kinds of assessment modes other than text should a VLE support? How important is it to: • understand the digital habits of learners before planning an ICT-based intervention, and what impact might this have on the success of your project? • focus on issues that were directly associated with trainers’ core pedagogical interests? How do you develop a climate of practice sharing and mutual trust within the development of a VLE? How far do you think that this is fundamental to its success? What is the main driving force or purpose for VLE development in your context? Should a VLE always have a primary purpose or driver for engagement? Do all users need an individualised driver? How does proximity to practice affect VLE use for different stakeholders? Can a VLE serve functions of quality assurance and trainee development?

Things to read Barnes, C, and Tynan, B, 2007, The Adventures of Miranda in the Brave New World: Learning in a Web 2.0 Millennium, ALT-J, 15:3, 189 - 200 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09687760701673568 Bayne, S, 2004, Smoothness and Striation in Digital Learning Spaces, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom, pp 302–316, doi: 10.2304/elea.2004.1.2.6. www.wwwords.co.uk/rss/abstract.asp?j=elea&aid=1784 Boyd, D, 2007, Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life, MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning – Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (ed. David Buckingham), Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Becta, 2008, Harnessing Technology: Next Generation Learning 2008–14 Becta. http://publications.becta.org.uk/display.cfm?resID=37348 Shurville, B, ICT-driven Change in Higher Education: Learning from e-Learning in Organisational Transformation and Social Change, volume 3, issue 3, July 2007, pp 245–250 Stiles, M J, 2007, Technology Supported Learning? Tensions Between Innovation, and Control and Organisational and Professional Cultures. Organisational Transformation and Social Change, volume 3, issue 3, July 2007 Stiles, M J, Death of the VLE – a Challenge to a New Orthodoxy, Serials, vol 20, no 1, 2007, pp 31–36. Available from http://serials.uksg.org/openurl.asp?genre=article&issn=0953 Traxler, J, 2008, Learners – Should We Leave Them to Their Own Devices? Becta http://emergingtechnologies.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=etr&catcode=ETRE_0001&rid=1414 8

Links TDA http://www.tda.gov.uk/ TTRB http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/ Becta http://www.becta.org.uk/nextgenerationlearning.php JISC http://www.jisc.ac.uk/ Innovation Unit http://www.innovation-unit.co.uk/education-experience/next-practice/learningfutures-next-practice-in-learning-and-teaching.html DCSFhttp://search.dcsf.gov.uk/kbroker/dcsf/dcsf/search/search.lsim?qt=ict&sr=0&nh=10&cs=iso8859-1&sc=dcsf&ha=1121 Educause http://www.educause.edu/node/720?time=1237309753 Futurelab http://www.futurelab.org.uk/

Training and Development Agency for Schools 151 Buckingham Palace Road LONDON SW1W 9SS www.tda.gov.uk Publications line 0845 6060 323 TDA switchboard 0870 4960 123 © TDA 2009

Page 5 of 5