Applying an Action Research Network for Personal and Organisational Change

Slides from talks given by Gordon Doughty in September 1997 in Telford (ALT-C'97) and Glasgow

TLT Support Network Centre tltsn@elec.gla.ac.uk

Robert Clark Centre for Technological Education

66 Oakfield Avenue Glasgow G12 8LS 0141 330 4976

Terrance R. Carson University of Alberta, Canada	Gordon Doughty University of Glasgow, Scotland	Michaela Thaler University of Innsbruck, Austria
based on a study of the TLTP Institutional Project TILT "Teaching with Independent Learning Technologies "

What can change in teaching?
and resources can include IT, CAL ...

Why change to more IT for teaching in Higher Education?

Response to various opportunities & threats

The good news	technology can make teaching & learning more effective and efficient IT tools permit better human activities
The bad news	we need to invest in IT we need to invest in making organisational & personal change

Projects to make technological change

TLTP - UK "Teaching & Learning Technology Programme" Institutional Projects

TILT project - University of Glasgow's "Teaching with Independent Learning Technologies"

TILT approach
£876,750 13 RAs & 60 academics, led by teachers in 6 groups with different points of view. Departments provided support and classes to evaluate changes expected to be worthwhile.
Over 22 studies on CAL in departments:
Accountancy	Biology
Computing Science	Dentistry
Economics	Engineering
Genetics	History
Library Services	Modern Languages
Music	Psychology
Statistics	Zoology

Collaboration not common across HEI disciplines
TILT mainly located single experts in participating departments	each with different skills mix help each other as necessary in a semi-formal support network
	priority and loyalty to each host needs but can draw on a wide range of skills
	No unit incurs a large initial investment.

Initial influences on TILT approaches to technological change	Design processes for technology, software, courses Process control - cybernetic models Colleagues' work on interpersonal skills for project managers (Boddy 1992) Systems based methodology for real-world problem solving (Checkland 1990)
Influences as TILT project progressed	Research on "Leading Academics" (Middlehurst 1992) Successful educational innovation (Fullan 1991) "Rethinking University Teaching" (Laurillard 1993) Assessing IT investments (Farbey 1993) Action Research

Process control

Systems based methodology for real-world problem solving

Attitudes to Teaching & Learning and to Change adapted freely from J Willis and from T Reeves etc

TILT as an Action Research Project
TILT was interested in useful outcomes	Relate IT to teachers' perceptions of T&L and deal with difficulties in adopting IT. Also interested in processes and the theories behind them. Wanted to change the situation, understanding & the question
Mainly organised by and for teacher participants	had professional ideals wanted to change practice to be more consistent with aims felt their values not matched well enough by their realities
Improve educational practice by making knowledge public
Used the action-reflection-spiral as the basis of gaining knowledge

Planning Action Research for teaching

Role of Participation in Action Research
Researcher & participant roles are intentionally blurred
They see their AR as a collaborative endeavour with the participants in the organisation	They intend to encourage participation in the AR as a strategy for bringing about improvement & development
The more successful they are in getting participation, the more they will relinquish control over the direction and outcomes of the AR	To view participation as something that can be imposed is naive & morally suspect

Suggested strategies for participatory action research encountered in TILT	from Davydd Greenwood, William Foote Whyte & Ira Harkavy:
multi-level action research led by at least two partners (e.g. one teacher, one evaluator)
establishing critical friend partnerships
'safe' observation (e.g. of teaching) for participants only, at first
colleagues participation in analysis and interpretation of data summaries
inputs from colleagues on key theories emerging from the action research	e.g. pedagogical, gender-related behaviour different perceptions of organisational culture unintentional outcomes of teaching behaviour
interim reports, invited responses	negotiated documents for wider circulation
explicit focus on BOTH excellence in teaching and good business management	(led by individuals who meet & talk)

What kind of evidence did TILT seek?
Teacher's experience is satisfactory	Theory fits ideology or belief
Peer acceptance	Claims by authorities ? - not often
Widespread adoption by others ?
Successful learning & enthusiastic response from students
Critically conducted, analysed evaluation

TILT Evaluation of learning
Observation
Questionnaires	computer experience task experience post-task course resources used
Student confidence logs	Interviews, focus groups of students, teachers
Pre- and post-tests - learning quiz	Exam or assessment performance

A changed role for our evaluations
Started as summative evaluations of courseware	Main use became formative evaluations - teachers use them to adjust and improve their teaching
Integration	to optimise the embedding of courseware into the overall delivery of a design, a course, teaching colleagues, the institution

Examples of changes made by TILT
(partial) replacement of lectures by CAL	Scheduling of CAL use
Further development / use of CAL	Provision of additional resources
Approach to and priming of students	More use of staff skills & student study skills with IT
Assessment procedures	Formal identification of learning objectives
Quality Assessment

TILT case study of making technological change

Maths for technologists Maths learning package imported CALMAT Replaced a whole lecture course Package used for two years of study, timetabling both classes together. Saved 75 teaching hrs / year & preparation time Students' skills improved dramatically   better learning in other courses   low failure rates preserved income Improved benefit:cost ratio £550,000 so far for cost less than £1000

Factors in changing a course to use a CAL package There are many factors which must be beneficial for the Action Research spiral to succeed:

Change of staff IT use for teaching according to staff surveys

Multimedia Developers' Group formed

Issues Raised after TILT
Organisational Learning or Inevitable Adaption?	The Institutional Profile of Information Technology
Has IT Been Effectively Integrated Into Teaching?	Teaching or Technology?
How to help all staff to identify, measure & evaluate costs & benefits of investing in IT for T & L

Finally Action Research strengthened by new Teaching & Learning Service Director, and ex-TILT Teaching & Learning Consultants are helping teaching teams.

References

• Arnold S (1995), Duffy C, An integrated computing environment for music education, proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference, Banff, Canada, September 1995.
• Boddy D, Buchanan D (1992), Take the lead: interpersonal skills for project managers, Prentice Hall.
• Brown MI (1996), Doughty GF, Draper SW, Henderson FP, McAteer E, Measuring Learning Resource Use, Computers & Education 27, pp 103-113.
• Checkland, P B (1990), Scholes, J, Soft systems methodology in action, London: Wiley.
• Cook, Jean (1994) Bridge the Gap with CALMAT. Proceedings of the International Conference on Technology in Collegiate Mathematics, November 1994.
• Cook, Jean (1995) and Hornby, Jillian, CALMAT Mathematics Courseware for Access to Higher Education. Proceedings of the SMC Conference, Stirling, in press.
• Creanor L (1955), Durndell H, Henderson F P, Primrose C, Brown MI, Draper SW, McAteer E, A Hypertext Approach to Information Skills: Development and Evaluation, University of Glasgow, ISBN 0 85261 476 4.
• Dixon, M (1992), The uptake if IT as a teaching aid in Higher Education: a social science perspective, CTISS.
• Doughty, G (1995), Arnold S, Barr N, Brown M, Creanor L, Donnelly P, Draper S, Duffy C, Durndell H, Harrison M, Henderson F, Jessop A, McAteer E, Milner M, Neil D, Pflicke T, Pollock M, Primrose C, Richard S, Sclater N, Shaw R, Tickner S, Turner I, van der Zwan R, Watt H; Using Learning Technologies: Interim Conclusions from the TILT Project. TILT University of Glasgow.
• Doughty,Gordon (1997), Pollock,Maggie, McAteer,Erica, Turner,Ian, Conversion of a mathematics course to tutor-supported computer-assisted flexible learning, "Open & Distance Learning in Industry and education", ch8, 99-110, ed S Brown, ed S Brown (Kogan Page).
• Draper S (1996), Brown M I, Henderson FP, McAteer E, Integrative Evaluation: an emerging role for classroom studies of CAL, Computers Educ 26 (1-3), 17-32.
• Duffy C (1955), Arnold S, Henderson F, NetSem - electrifying undergraduate seminars, Active Learning, 2.
• Elliot, J (1991), Action Research for Educational Change, Milton Keynes:the Open University.
• Farbey B (1993), Land F, Targett D How to assess your IT investment, Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
• Fullan M (1991) The new meaning of educational change, London: Cassell.
• Giddens (1984), The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration , Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Greenwood D (1993), Whyte WF,Harkavy I: Participatory Action Research as a Process & as a Goal, Human Relations, 46, no. 2.
• Hammond N (1992), Trapp A, CAL as a Trojan Horse for educational change: the case of psychology, Computers Educ, 19, 87-95.
• Hammond N (1992) et al, Blocks to the effective use of information technology in higher education, Computers Educ, 18, 155&endash;162.
• Kemmis S (1988) McTaggart R, The Action Research Planner, 2nd edition, Geelong: Deakin University Press.
• Laurillard D (1993) Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology, Routledge: London.
• McAteer E (1996), Harland M, Sclater N, De Tudo Um Pouco - a little bit of everything, Active Learning 3, 10-15
• McNiff J, Teaching as learning - an action research approach, Routledge, 1993
• Madigan R (1996), Milner M, Tickner S, Expectations and realities in developing computer-aided software, to be published in a book, ed M Henry, Using Technology Effectively in the Social Sciences, ed Millsom Henry et al, due for publication by Taylor and Francis, Summer 96.
• Middlehurst R (1992), Leading Academics, SRHE & Open University Press.
• Mintzberg (1983)
• Neil D M (1996), Barr N S F and McAteer E, Combining Real and Virtual Experiments in Neurophysiological Practical Classes, Life Sciences Educational Computing 6, 27-28.
• Pollock, M (1996), McAteer E, Doughty G, Turner I, Rapid conversion of a mathematics course to CAL: a case study of a large-scale rapid change of resources and organisation, ALT-J, 4, 28-34.
• QUATAL, Students' attitudes to, and basic knowledge of computers questionnaire, Institute for Computer Based Learning, Queen's University, Belfast.
• Reeves T, reeves@MOE.COE.UGA.EDU, "A Hopefully Humble Paradigm Review", email to Instructional Technology Forum (ITFORUM@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU), 21 Feb 1996
• Schoen D, The Reflective Practitioner, Basic Books, 1983
• Scott R, Robinson B (1996) Managing technological change in education, - what lessons can we learn? Computers Educ 26 (1-3), 131-4.
• Somekh B, Thaler M, Doughty G, Draper S, Change Agentry, in "Action Research as a Living Practice", ed T Carson, to be published in 1997?
• Willis, J, CAL'95 Conference, Cambridge UK, 1995

Evaluation As a result of this interaction with a TLTSN Centre about Learning Technology, will there be, or has there been, any change in
Attitudes - confidence, policy ...	for you, or for your institution ?
Behaviour - planning, managing, doing ...
Capability - skills, knowledge ...
please email responses to tltsn@elec.gla.ac.uk

Copyright © University of Glasgow TILT Project

Page created 2/10/97 by Gordon Doughty
Last Modified: 23/2/01 by Gordon Doughty, G.Doughty@elec.gla.ac.uk