Enhancing and developing the use of OneNote Class Notebook beyond the Covid-19 pandemic

26 February 202426 February 2024 By michaelkilmister Comment Closed

By: Rita Balestrini, Department of Languages and Cultures, r.balestrini@reading.ac.uk

Overview

The project built on T&L innovation embraced in the Department of Languages and Cultures (DLC), where Microsoft’s OneNote Class Notebook (CN) was trialled during the Covid-19 pandemic to overcome the constraints of teaching languages remotely. The outcomes provided knowledge of DLC students’ experience of CN and understanding of the type of support needed by CN users to staff users of CN, and to colleagues in Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) and Digital Technology Services (DTS), and informed the development of technical and pedagogical support and guidance for CN users.

Objectives

The project aimed to enhance student learning by improving the use of CN, and had the objective to facilitate sharing of knowledge and expertise, gain insights into students’ experience of CN and inform TEL and DTS decision-making on the tool.

Context

CN is a digital T&L tool to store materials (e.g. text, images, handwritten notes, links, recorded voice, videos), where students and teachers can work interactively in and outside the classroom. It is organised into three parts:

‘Content Library’ – where only the teacher can add, edit, and delete materials.
‘Collaboration Space’ – a place to collaborate in groups open to everyone in the class, where multiple users can work on a page simultaneously or asynchronously.
‘Teacher Only’ – a private space invisible to students.
‘Student Notebook’ – a private area that only a student and their teacher can see and use, where they can interact directly on a page.

CN continues to be used in some language modules as it proved to be effective beyond a remote teaching environment and offered features that supported accessibility and inclusivity in language learning.

screenshot of the classroom notebook — Screenshot of a Class Notebook © Rita Balestrini

Implementation

In 2022–2023, I held three sessions with DLC staff users to share practice and ideas on using CN, and record information on what support would enhance teaching with CN. I also held in-person, small group meetings with DLC CN student users from all year groups to gain insights into their experience of CN. The feedback gathered informed the development of a branched MS Forms survey, which was completed by 28 (of 50) student CN users.
I facilitated a cross-School (DLC, Institute of Education, Law) ‘teaching conversation’ to reflect critically on the pedagogical value of CN.
I wrote a project report for DTS and TEL and shared with them the findings from the needs analysis.

Impact

The project created a ‘space’ for the sharing of practices, knowledge, experience and expertise, which in turn, enabled the enhancement of the use of CN.
It enhanced students’ learning and increased their engagement with CN learning activities – as evidenced by the students’ survey.
As part of ‘internal monitoring and review’ practice, the outcomes of the ‘teaching conversation’, informed the School of Literature and Languages (SLL) T&L enhancement process.
The project should inform the integration of CN with other applications (e.g. Teams), and the provision of technical and pedagogical support for CN users.

Reflections

CN offers a paperless learning environment and facilitates the organisation of T&L materials in a clear and, ‘potentially’ visually intuitive, hierarchical structure. Students evaluated CN positively as a useful ‘digital binder’ and ‘learning tool’ (Average Rating [AR] 4.15 and 4:00 respectively, on a scale of 1 to 5). Most of them felt that materials and resources were easy to access (AR 3.89), and it was easy to take notes within CN (AR 3.74).

CN users generally agreed that navigation in CN is quite ‘fluid’ compared to Blackboard. However, I think that for this fluidity to be fully meaningful pedagogically CN requires a thoroughly thought-out structure, with reasoned and transparent ‘labelling’ throughout the learning environment.

There can be issues in meeting current assessment policies when using CN for summative assessment. However, CN greatly facilitates the provision of feedback with a digital pen or by audio-recording on a page. Staff value the possibility of monitoring individual and group activities and providing private, individualised feedback in different formats; students appreciate highly receiving feedback directly in their personal notebook, which stands out as a noteworthy result of the survey (AR 4.26), especially considering that feedback in general ‘is often framed as the dimension of students’ experience with which they are least satisfied’ (Winstone & Carless, 2020, p. 5).

The ‘Collaboration Space’ can be used for class activities, collaborative projects, sharing resources, and a channel for students’ voice – additional uses of this area depend on the subject taught. CN allows students to take ownership of a shared area and use it for independently chosen purposes, which helps create a sense of ‘community’ and a feeling of ‘online connectedness’ (Hehir et al., 2021).

Regarding technical issues, 68% of respondents did not report any. The others mentioned a variety of problems (e.g. syncing issues, ‘handwriting’ and ‘highlighting’ not anchored to text). Many reported difficulties were linked to using different CN versions, devices, or operating systems, which suggests that improvements could come with advice from technical support specialists.

Follow up

In future, students’ experience of using CN could greatly benefit from:

staff sharing and discussing practices across different subjects to facilitate pedagogical enhancements (e.g., communities of practice, special interest groups, TEL forums);
making access to CN easier and facilitating its integration with Teams and Blackboard;
the availability of expert support from DTS and TEL (e.g. technical assistance, TEL resources and sessions for users).

References

Hehir, H., Zeller M., Luckhurst, J., & Chandler T. (2021) Developing student connectedness under remote learning using digital resources: a systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 6531-6548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10577-1
Winstone, N., & Carless, D. (2020) Designing effective feedback processes in higher education. Routledge.

Adapting a carousel technique from face to face to remote teaching on Blackboard Collaborate

7 September 202320 September 2023 By michaelkilmister Comment Closed

By: Anjali Mehta Chandar, Charlie Waller Institute, School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences (SPCLS), a.m.chandar@reading.ac.uk

Decorative image — Photo by Jhon Paul Dela Cruz on Unsplash

Overview

Our vocational postgraduate courses in Low Intensity Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Children and Young People include a mix of face to face, and remote teaching on Blackboard, at an almost 50/50 split since the COVID-19 pandemic. It is important that trainees engage well with digital methods of learning, and a carousel technique was adapted for Blackboard Collaborate, with hugely positive feedback from the trainees.

Objectives

My objectives for this project were as follows:

adapt the carousel activity from face to face teaching to remote teaching,
gain feedback from trainees about the effectiveness of this strategy and,
make changes as necessary for future implement with other cohorts.

Context

The Educational Mental Health Practitioner (EMHP) programme is a one-year vocational postgraduate course. The trainees are employed by an NHS trust, local authority or charity, and study in the Charlie Waller Institute (within SPCLS) to become qualified mental health practitioners working in primary and secondary schools.

Since the pandemic, trainees have half of their teaching face to face on campus, and half of it via Blackboard Collaborate. Teaching days are 9:30-4:30pm. It has been important, and a learning curve, to ensure online teaching remains as engaging as face to face teaching. It is suggested that a lack of engagement with digitally enhanced learning leads to students being academically disadvantaged (Francis & Shannon, 2013). It is also important that group work is still utilised despite a larger amount of remote teaching than before, as it is an effective method for fostering wider knowledge, clarification on a topic and evaluation of peers’ ideas (Hassanien, 2006).

Carousel activities are an engaging teaching method, and are commonly used in face to face teaching. With this technique, trainees work in small groups to complete an assigned task. Half of the trainees then stay with their projects to explain them, whilst the other half circulate around the room to hear about the other projects. The trainees then switch around, enabling everyone to have a chance to present to their peers, and hear about all the other projects and outcomes too. It was therefore important to try to emulate this for online teaching, as it was a well-received method in face to face teaching.

Implementation

I designed the teaching activity to be 30 minutes of small group work in breakout rooms, and then wanted some trainees to be able to move themselves to three different breakout groups (one every 5 minutes), before moving back to their own original group. Meanwhile the other half would stay in their own group for the first 15 minutes, explaining to their peers about their project ideas, before then moving around 3 groups for the last 15 minutes.

I was able to research how to adapt settings on Blackboard Collaborate to allow this to happen. By clicking ‘allow attendees to switch groups’ when setting up breakout rooms, trainees can move themselves.

Trainees were given strict instructions about the task, including what their project was about based on what group number they were, how to make notes of their project for presenting to their peers after, and how/when to switch groups to hear about other’s ideas. See slides below, which are also available for download as a PowerPoint file:

I was then able to use the chat function to let everyone know to move to the next group (every 5 minutes).

I then closed all breakout rooms after all switches had been made, and we discussed the projects as a whole class.

Impact

Shortly after the carousel task was completed, trainees completed their usual feedback for the teaching day using Menti.

Below is the quantitative feedback about how satisfying, informative and engaging, the day was: (Note: this included other teaching techniques for three quarters of the day, and not just the carousel task in the final quarter.)

I was also able to see qualitative comments about the carousel task in particular, and noted how so many of the comments were specifically about this task. See below:

It seems that trainees appreciated the real-life aspect of the group task, which is in line with research by O’Neill and Short (2023) who found that ”real-world relevant” group tasks in higher education tend to engage students more.

There were only three pieces of feedback about the carousel activity when trainees were asked what could be improved in the day:

“Carousel was a bit chaotic but enjoyed it more than I expected”
“The carousel was not so much fun”
“Felt rushed creating poster and then needing to share”

Whilst the first two are hard to make adjustments for as it is unclear what was not fun and what was chaotic, the third point can be solved by allowing more time for the task itself. However, I am also mindful that the majority of trainees completing the feedback did not state that this felt rushed. To balance this, I can check with trainees on the day if 30 minutes feels like enough time, and go with a majority vote for timing.

Overall, this activity was therefore able to meet its first two objectives:

adapt the carousel activity from face to face teaching to remote teaching, and
gain feedback from trainees about the effectiveness of this strategy.

The third objective was “to make changes as necessary for future implementation with other cohorts.” This has yet to be carried out due to the fact this teaching day resumed to face to face teaching the following year, but a similar technique can be utilised for other teaching days and content.

Reflections

Overall, I feel that the carousel technique was well implemented and only minor changes need to be taken forward. Specifically, this is about ensuring all trainees feel they have enough time for the initial project creation element.

From the feedback, I think trainees enjoyed the task. Clear instructions made this task work well, and trainees enjoyed being able to move themselves around breakout groups. This was perhaps more novel than usual, which may have sparked interest. Similarly, Meng et al. (2019) found that novel techniques in the pharmacy field led to improved learning and communication abilities, and improved academic performance.

Furthermore, the creativity was acknowledged in another section of the Menti feedback –“this was night and day compared to some of the other less creatively organised sessions” – which is in line with research about the importance of creativity in successful and effective teaching in higher education (Bidabadi et al., 2016).

Follow up

Since this teaching, I have noticed how it has not been implemented with other teaching days. For my upcoming allocated teaching, I have mapped out remote teaching days where I can implement this strategy again.

I plan to use the same format for structuring the activities and slides, with the added element of elicited feedback from trainees before the task about whether they feel they have enough time to complete it. I could also enter the different breakout groups and check that they feel they have finished.

I also hope that by disseminating this technique more widely and in more detail than previously – I shared it in the Charlie Waller Institute Teaching and Learning Significant Interest Group – more lecturers will feel able to implement this strategy and gain feedback on future changes to make.

References

Bidabadi, N. S., Isfahani, A. N., Rouhollahi, A., & Khalili, R. (2016). Effective teaching methods in higher education: requirements and barriers. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism, 4(4), 170-178.

Francis, R., & Shannon, S. J. (2013). Engaging with blended learning to improve students’ learning outcomes. European Journal of Engineering Education, 38(4), 359-369.

Hassanien, A. (2006). Student experience of group work and group assessment in higher education. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 6(1), 17-39.

Meng, X., Yang, L., Sun, H., Du, X., Yang, B., & Guo, H. (2019). Using a novel student-centered teaching method to improve pharmacy student learning. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 83(2), 171-179.

O’Neill, G., & Short, A. (2023). Relevant, practical and connected to the real world: what higher education students say engages them in the curriculum. Irish Educational Studies, 1-18.

DIGITAL EDUCATION & ACCESSIBLE LEARNING

26 July 2022 By aaroncooper Comment Closed

Prof Suzanne Graham: s.j.graham@reading.ac.uk;

Prof Richard Mitchell: r.j.mitchell@reading.ac.uk

Dr Yota Dimitriadi: y.dimitriadi@reading.ac.uk

Schools: MPCS and Institute of Education

Overview

This article reports on the joint Institute of Education / Department of Computer Science Leverhulme funded project concerned with improving online learning for three groups of students. Various recommendations are made, some relating to the Yuja lecture capture system. More details are on our DEAL site https://blogs.reading.ac.uk/deal/.

Objectives

To identify optimal conditions for presenting learning information for students in HE, specifically across three student groups: – deaf/hearing impaired (DHH); with dyslexia (DYS), those with English as a second language (L2)
To establish a platform for developing an agile system responsive to different user needs
To use this evidence base to inform the development of guidance to providers of online learning

Context

Although the prime focus of the project was on Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH) learners, research suggests that students with literacy and language difficulties also benefit from captioning and visual materials. We used material from two of the University’s well established MOOCS on FutureLearn Begin Robotics and Understanding Anxiety, Depression and CBT which had material in various formats.

Implementation

We created two versions of online learning materials across these content areas. One version of the materials was ‘unenhanced’ – termed MOOC. The other version was ‘enhanced’ to offer greater support to learners (for example, through British Sign Language, BSL), termed DEAL.

Participants (109, randomly allocated to conditions) viewed the materials in an online interview after completing tests of literacy and prior knowledge. After viewing they completed quizzes to assess learning, and questionnaires and an interview to gauge their views on and attention to various features of the materials. Additional participants (26) viewed the Robotics materials while their eye-movements were tracked.

The University’s lecture capture system Yuja stores information from the lecturn computer and an optional camera. Students can view any result on the YuJa server, controlling captions and the two streams from the computer and camera. The camera can be used to record a signer live, but a video of a signer done elsewhere can be merged with that from the lecturn.

Impact

The project recommends

Adding Advance Organisers (signposts given to students before they undertake an activity to help them structure the information they are about to learn and to direct their attention to key points).
Pre-viewing explanations of key subject specific terminology.
Breaking some of the information down into smaller segments with summaries.
Adding British Sign Language to video clips.
Drawing participants’ attention to how to modify and use captions.

The overriding message for online learning is that personalisation of modifications is key, and that can be achieved by systems such as

Ally, where students can access material in different formats
YuJa, where students can personalise captions and signing.

Reflection

For both content areas, post-viewing quiz scores for MOOC and DEAL were very similar.
For Robotics, DHH DEAL participants had higher average post-viewing scores than DHH MOOC participants, giving some indication that the DEAL modifications helped.
Across all groups, DEAL modifications were found helpful by many participants. There was however a lot of individual variation regarding what was helpful/unhelpful. Participants wanted to be able to personalise their viewing: for example, by moving the BSL to a certain area of the screen, to lessen cognitive overload.

Specifically for the DHH students, we recommend

Provide a BSL version that can be turned on or off. Not all DHH students find BSL helpful or use it as their first and preferred language so the option to select BSL is likely to be helpful.
The option to move the interpreter to other parts of the screen was also favoured, which can be achieved for instance by Yuja, see link below.

Follow Up

Currently, relevant videos in the Begin Robotics MOOC are being enhanced to incorporate relevant findings from the project. These will be available in future runs, which will also be taken by the first year Computer Science students.

Overview

The case study will describe a TLEP (Teaching and Learning Enhancement Project) to develop STEM teaching and learning. Over 400 Reading Partnership student teachers (RPTs) have received some training, which was well received in university sessions. This case study will also describe how the programmable Lego kits were used successfully with 60 children who visited the university during their science week, as well as discussing future plans.

Objectives

The aims for the TLEP were:

To provide the students the skills, resources and confidence within university to deliver cross-curricular STEM activities whilst on their school placement, either in lessons and / or as an after-school club.
To promote and model cross-curricular working within a module and collaborative working within the community.
To maximise the use of expensive resources and to demonstrate ‘proof-of-concept’ that lending of resources to partnership schools is viable.

Context

The majority of the incoming primary teaching ITT (Initial Teacher Training) students do not take STEM A-levels and lack confidence teaching STEM in schools. Over the course of the teacher training programme, knowledge in the individual subjects improves. However, due to the siloed nature of university module teaching, students do not always see the cross-curricular opportunities to teach the subjects, nor have the confidence to deliver STEM initiatives, especially design and engineering challenges to children. With an ever-increasing shortage of a skilled STEM workforce, promoting STEM skills in children from a primary age is important for the future of Britain’s economy (ASPIRES project, 2013). One major barrier to achieving this goal is schools having the finances to purchase equipment. Even if schools have access to the necessary resources, they can often be used once and then lost in the back of the store cupboard. Further barriers include teachers having the necessary skills and confidence to deliver these sessions.

Implementation

By modelling working in a cross-curricular fashion and exposing students to carrying out the activity experientially, the aim was to upskill the RPTs (Reading Partnership student teachers) in their skills and confidence to deliver these types of STEM projects in their training placements and in their future schools.

Funding from the TLEP was used to purchase 10 Lego Spike Prime kits which provided sufficient resources for a class set both for use in university science teaching sessions, and with schools, where class numbers are approximately 30 children. By the university purchasing the resources and making them available for lending through the Learning Hub at London Road, the barrier in terms of resource cost to schools using these kits (~£300 per box new) was therefore eliminated.

The ambition was that after the workshop session as part of their university course, the Reading Partnership Teachers (student teachers) would then be inspired to borrow the kits and use with their own classes. However, the use of practical resources was severely hampered by covid-19, so the anticipated impact was reduced, and the timescale delayed.

But as part of a ‘Science Week’ in May 2022, a partnership school was invited to the science teaching labs on the London Road Campus. The children from a years 5 and 6, took part in a session to build 2 different motorizable grabber arms, and evaluated which was the best grabber to pick up different plastics in a plastic recycling sorting facility.

Impact

Aim 1: The university session provided the students the skills, resources and confidence, as evidenced by module reviews and overhearing many of the university students saying, “that was really fun!”. It also gave them the chance to work together and problem-solve groups, developing relationships amongst the cohort.

Aim 2: By inviting a school into the university’s science teaching lab, we met the aim of working collaboratively with the local community, meeting the aims of the Community, Engagement and Sustainability strands of the University Strategy. The children very much enjoyed this with them rating the session 9 or 10, out of 10.

Aim 3: This aim was to maximise the use of expensive resources and demonstrate that this is an option when working in partnership with schools. The fact that this work has already been used by 400 university children and 50 children, the means that the cost per participant is now down to approximately £5, based on the purchase cost of £2500. As further students and children, use these resources this cost per participant will further reduce.

Reflection

This was a good first good start to supporting delivery of these cross-curricular STEM sessions with a physical computing component. Part of this aim was also to model cross-curricular working within a module with the computing training happening in computing sessions. Due to covid-19 disrupting the delivery of both the science and computing sessions, this was not as well implemented as initially hoped.

Further confidence and awareness in how these kits can be used would be beneficial to support increased implementation in schools, both for the trainee teachers and for experienced teachers mentoring them.

Follow Up

I am aiming to train experienced teachers in using the kits, to ensure even greater impact and support for our RPTs on school placements.

Using more low-tech hybrid/hyflex teaching methods in English Literature modules – benefits and limitations.

1 July 2022 By aaroncooper Comment Closed

Professor Cindy Becker: l.m.becker@reading.ac.uk

Literature and Languages

Overview

During the pandemic, hybrid learning was used in two modules I taught – one at Foundation Level and one at Part One. I found it worked well for discussion-based sessions. I recognize that there are potential gains and losses to continuing this practice post-pandemic and I hope this case study might contribute to our institutional conversation.

Objectives

The objectives were to:

Include as many students as possible in live teaching sessions.
Maintain the energy of a group learning setting for all students.
Reassure students that they were still part of their learning cohort, even off campus.
Ensure good attendance and engagement on key modules at Foundation Level and Part 1, which might be seen as ‘at risk’ stages for student retention and attainment.

Context

Seminars in Arts and Humanities offer a specific type of learning experience, based upon developing ideas through discussion in a group setting. Students did not respond well to the idea of one-to-one (or two/three) sessions as a replacement if they were off campus. They struggled to attend or to engage in sessions which could become ‘information-giving’ tutorials rather than ‘knowledge-sharing’ seminars.

Implementation

Hybrid learning, in my case through a Blackboard Collaborate session running simultaneously with a campus seminar, was used for some modules in my department to include students who were unable to come onto campus due to the pandemic. I used the desktop computer in the teaching room, and I had the camera facing me (the online students preferred this to looking at their fellow students). The sessions were low tech, so I did no more than share my screen for visual material used in the seminar. I put the handouts in my Blackboard module and shared them in the Blackboard Collaborate chat. At the end of each seminar the online students stayed in the session so that I could check in with them once the on-campus students had left the room

For the Part 1 module, the module convenor alerted me to those students to whom I would need to send the Blackboard session link. No students other than these were offered the option of attending online

Impact

The first three objectives were achieved with the Part 1 module. An unplanned outcome was that we opened the hybrid sessions to a student whose mental health precluded on-campus attendance for two weeks, so the impact was wider than expected.

I then introduced hybrid learning in a Foundation module on which there had been poor attendance, for seminars in which I was offering important information about assessment.

I sent the online link to all students on the Foundation module. An unexpected outcome was that this did not significantly reduce the number of students who attended the on-campus seminar, but it did draw in the students on the module who had been regular nonattenders.

Reflection

I think hybrid teaching and learning worked well because our subject lends itself to relatively low-tech, conversation-based seminar learning. It worked for me as a seminar leader surprisingly well; this might in part have been because students were happy to give me leeway as I drifted off camera or took a few moments to catch up with their chat contributions.

On reflection I wish I had explored the option of students in the room interacting on their laptops with the online-only students. Responses would be passed to me from students online via students in the room on WhatsApp during general discussions, and I would have liked to facilitate that more formally. I wonder if we are underestimating our students’ abilities to multi-task in this way when we offer them campus-only sessions and I am keen to see whether the blended learning landscape of our future might also allow for more hybrid learning opportunities.

Follow Up

I led a professional conversation on this topic in my department to share our experiences and, perhaps, to consider what we might lose if we abandon hybrid teaching next year, weighing this against the potential risks that might be associated with its continuance. I would be pleased to hear from any colleagues who would like to become involved in a wider conversation.

Links

Note: this entry is submitted in conjunction with Gemma Peacock’s T&L Exchange entry in which she shares her experiences of hybrid/hyflex learning in language learning and academic skills development courses in ISLI (add link to that blog here).

Hybrid Teaching and Learning Network (on Teams) for sharing good practice: https://tinyurl.com/ye6awyuz

General survey on hybrid teaching and learning practice at the University of Reading: https://forms.office.com/r/bF9k3amY3d

Using more high-tech hybrid/hyflex teaching methods in language and academic skills learning contexts – benefits and limitations.

1 July 20225 August 2022 By aaroncooper Comment Closed

Gemma Peacock: g.peacock@reading.ac.uk

ISLI (International Study and Language Institute)

Overview

This case study reports on a successful pilot of hybrid/hyflex teaching in the International Study and Language Institute (ISLI) where one class contained fully online remote students and blended on-campus students together. There are both benefits and limitations to using this approach for language and skills learning contexts.

Objectives

The objectives of the pilot were:

To investigate and refine the technical aspects of running hybrid lessons.
To develop guidance for teachers.
To ascertain whether hybrid/hyflex teaching and learning methods can be used in contexts where more complex interaction patterns are required.
To gather feedback from teachers and students on their experiences.

Context

The hybrid/hyflex pilot was run initially because small cohort numbers for ISLI’s autumn 2021 Pre-sessional English course precluded the running of two separate classes: one online and one on-campus. While evidence existed in other institutions of the successful adoption of hybrid in lecture-style classes, it was not known if hybrid would work in ISLI’s context as it specialises in English language teaching and academic skills development for international students. These fields require complex interaction patterns between students themselves and with their teachers.

Implementation

During the pilot we refined the technology and processes necessary to deliver hybrid successfully as follows:

A Teams meeting runs during the lesson, displayed on a smart board. Remote students attend this meeting and on-campus students can also do the same using their own devices to receive documents or links easily in the chat during the lesson.
A device called a Meeting Owl Pro takes a constant 360 degree panoramic shot of the whole classroom and also shares video and audio of the speaker as they speak and move around the room.
Two monitors on the teacher desk means they can interact with the Teams meeting functionality (such as displaying slides or documents) and they can use the other screen for other purposes (such as teacher notes).
Teachers are thus able to speak to all students and remote students can speak to and see on-campus students via the Owl and vice versa for the implementation of a wide variety of interactive tasks.
Focus groups were held with teachers and students on the pilot to gather data on their experiences.

NB: Hybrid/hyflex is possible without a Meeting Owl so long as a reasonable quality microphone and camera exists in the classroom.

Impact

ISLI’s hybrid/hyflex pilot achieved its outcomes. We investigated and refined the technical aspects of running hybrid lessons through trial and error. This resulted in the production of:

a Meeting Owl Pro set-up guide for teachers.
a guidance document for teaching and learning via hybrid/hyflex methods.
a Teaching and Learning Sub-committee report on the pilot.
future recommendations for hybrid/hyflex delivery in ISLI.

The feedback gathered from teachers and students on their experiences was generally positive. When combined with the feedback from ISLI’s TEL team, it was agreed that while it is possible to use hybrid/hyflex in language learning or skills development contexts it may not be desirable. Some recommendations include:

Comprehensive teacher training in hybrid technology and pedagogy.
Lesson design and staging must enable both remote and on-campus students to participate equally and to receive equal attention from the teacher.
Where there is a small cohort (<5) these should be integrated into an online/F2F class to form a hybrid cohort to improve the student experience.

Reflection

The pilot study was successful as it allowed for on-the-job teacher-training through action research, and a more granular understanding of how hybrid/hyflex can work in terms of both technology and pedagogy. I believe ISLI’s expertise of hybrid/hyflex teaching and learning methods could be called on more widely across the university as the blended learning landscape of the future takes shape.

Hybrid/hyflex teaching and learning has been hailed as a more inclusive and accessible mode of study since it gives students agency to choose whether to study from home or on campus according to their immediate needs. This has proved beneficial in other teaching contexts (add link to Cindy Becker’s T&L blog post). Current visa regulations, however, do not permit international students on Pre-sessional English courses to switch between online and face-to-face delivery within a course, as students receive an offer for one mode of delivery only. This means that some of the potential benefits of hybrid/hyflex delivery are not available to them at this time.

Follow Up

Since the pilot, professional conversations about hybrid/hyflex have taken place with schools across the university to include the Department of English Literature and Henley Business School. In May 2022, presentations on hybrid were delivered to HE colleagues at the JISC Change Agent’s conference, and with English Language Teaching professionals at the IATEFL conference in Belfast. Data on hybrid methodology usage is currently being gathered from a survey Gemma Peacock and Cindy Becker have circulated with the aim of writing a journal article in the near future.

Links

Note: this entry is submitted alongside Cindy Becker’s T&L Exchange entry in which she shares her experiences of low tech hybrid/hyflex learning in English Literature seminars (add link to that blog here).

Hybrid Teaching and Learning Network (on Teams) for sharing good practice: https://tinyurl.com/ye6awyuz

General survey on hybrid teaching and learning practice at the University of Reading: https://forms.office.com/r/bF9k3amY3d

Using OneDrive to Address the Challenges of Online Groupwork

28 October 2021 By aaroncooper Comment Closed

Natalie Drake, Gemma Peacock, Rachel Rushton – ISLI

n.drake@reading.ac.uk; g.peacock@reading.ac.uk; r.rushton@reading.ac.uk

Overview

Moving two ISLI academic skills modules (IF0ACA and IF0RAS) to online delivery presented certain challenges for group interaction. In online learning environments building interpersonal relationships, and dealing with both connectivity issues and different time-zones can prove problematic for international students and their tutors. To address this, group OneDrive folders were set up as a repository for collaborative documents, such as research findings or presentation slides. Students interacted with these during online workshops and asynchronously, while tutors monitored group engagement and provided instantaneous feedback to students. It resulted in a positive student response and recognition of its transferability as a study skill and to face-to-face learning.

Objectives

The aims of this activity were:

To facilitate online group work by providing collaborative spaces through OneDrive
To develop transferable IT literacy skills
To improve communication and interpersonal skills
To develop independent study skills and transferable IT literacy skills
To improve student engagement
To improve the time efficiency of online activities

Context

Both skills modules are compulsory 20-credit modules for home Foundation students and focus on developing group work skills. In term two, in both modules, students are required to complete summative assessments that rely heavily on group work, which forced tutors to reconsider how to facilitate this online.

Implementation

The theory underpinning the use of OneDrive to facilitate groupwork is the Community of Inquiry model (Garrison, Anderson and Archer, 2001) where knowledge is formed and embedded within a social context. Since classes moved online it has become more important for us as educators to find ways to encourage interpersonal relationships online, not only between students and peers but also between students and their teachers. Using OneDrive addresses some of these social issues and helps students to build relationships while developing knowledge and skills online. Lipman applied the Community of Inquiry model to education and stated that ‘education is the outcome of participation in a teacher-guided community of inquiry’ (2003, pp.18–19). Using OneDrive allows teachers to scaffold tasks and to clearly direct students, offering an alternative to knowledge transmission whereby students can arrive at more higher ordered thinking critical for Higher Education. Using OneDrive synchronously or asynchronously in online learning satisfies the three essential elements of the Community of Inquiry model: social presence (how participants identify with their community), cognitive presence (how much learners can construct meaning through reflection together) and teaching presence (how we design and facilitate processes for realising learning outcomes).

Setting up OneDrive for activities requires several steps. Firstly, module folders are set at the top level of the OneDrive folders, then within those class folders are created.

The next level contains specific assignment folders and within those folders are group folders which contain any necessary files or folders from teachers, course directors or students themselves.

Once students are added to groups within their class for a particular assignment, a link is generated for the relevant folder. Students are introduced to their group OneDrive repository and link via an email and encouraged to save the link as a bookmark for ease of access.

There are three main ways in which we implemented OneDrive in our courses. Firstly, we used it in asynchronous group tasks through Blackboard. Tutors could check student engagement and prepare feedback before the live session after the task deadline. This worked well when students needed to prepare information or brainstorm ideas before a synchronous task in the live session.

The second way was through synchronous group tasks in the live sessions themselves. Students accessed their OneDrive group document during the live session and worked collaboratively on documents. The tutor could monitor the students’ work and comment live.

The final way was through asynchronous group tasks and weekly group meetings for assignments such as a group presentation, where students continued to collaborate on group OneDrive documents such as a PowerPoint file and the tutor monitored and commented on the documents as appropriate.

Impact

The use of OneDrive documents and folders achieved our main objective of facilitating groupwork while satisfying the essential elements of the Community of Inquiry model. Students were able to construct social presence and cognitive presence by working collaboratively on, for example, a group ground rules document (see snip 7) and a research repository document.

Being able to synchronously edit the ground rules document meant that students could hold a faster discussion on the relative merits of rules, along with agreement on the day/time of a weekly group meeting. Tasks where students added to a collaborative document, such as in the research of key terms, enhanced the sense of group identity and also served to highlight levels of participation. This often negated the need for tutor intervention in the early stages. The third essential element of teaching presence was realised in synchronous sessions, through immediate tutor input on documents which gave advice to help the group work towards the learning outcomes in a friendly, non-judgmental way.

This, and asynchronous tutor input, also provided a permanent record of tutor feedback which the group could revisit. This is perhaps more effective than the usual tutor comments given orally, useful in the moment but unrecorded. One outcome which we had not anticipated was that for many students this was the first time they had worked simultaneously on one document. This led to students viewing groupwork in a more positive light as an opportunity to develop communication and IT skills which was reported in end-of-course student feedback. Furthermore, the pass rate for the assignment was high and most students achieved the learning outcomes, which indicates impact and effectiveness.

Reflection

Using OneDrive is not without challenges, notably the initial set-up procedure, implementing live sessions with large classes, and filling the digital gap for tutors and students. Also, the current practice is for a member of staff to host the OneDrive folders. We believe, however, that the benefits far outweigh these primary hurdles.

These benefits included improved IT skills and increased familiarity with UoR tools which is transferable to other modules, as well as building confidence for Foundation students by providing a scaffolded approach to groupwork. Using OneDrive made collaboration online easier and tutor comments were still available after the live sessions so students could reflect on these. Students reported feeling supported with groupwork and commented on how using OneDrive developed group communication skills as well as editing and computer skills.

Benefits for tutors in the asynchronous learning environment include that it was easier to monitor student engagement in tasks as it was clear to see which group members had participated.

Likewise, in the synchronous learning space, tutors were able to monitor student participation in live sessions and it allowed tutors to be ‘present’ in collaborative documents (see snips 9 – 10 above). We believe this emulated the F2F classroom in terms of when teachers monitor students and move from desk to desk checking students’ work. One downside of teacher presence in online student documents could be potential inhibition of less confident students, however we saw all student names participating so believe this may just be a necessary learning curve students need to make.

Follow up

Since trialling the use of OneDrive, these ideas have been disseminated to colleagues at the ISLI-based Learning & Teaching Research Forum via a presentation and Q&A session. In this academic year (2021-22) IFP plan to introduce OneDrive earlier and be more explicit on its transferability to other modules and assessments, thus encouraging students to become more autonomous. OneDrive may also be used in Pre-sessional year-round English courses this academic year to support online students’ participation in Academic Reading Circle activities and to share their Independent Reading Records with both peers and tutors.

References

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1).

Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in Education. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.18-19

Blended Learning – Exploring the Experience of Disabled Law Students

26 July 2021 By aaroncooper Comment Closed

Amanda Millmore, Sharon Sinclair-Graham, Dr. Rachel Horton, Darlene Sherwood, Sheldon Allen, Lauren Fuller, Konstanina Nouka, Will Page & Jessica Lane

a.millmore@reading.ac.uk

School of Law (& Disability Advisory Service)

Overview

This student-staff partnership included students with disabilities and long-term conditions, academics in the School of Law and a Disability Advisor. Student partners ran a cohort-wide questionnaire and facilitated focus groups with disabled students to discover what has worked well this academic year with blended learning and where things could be improved. This work has provided a blueprint for those hoping to use blended learning to deliver accessible education for all.

Objectives

To magnify the voice of our disabled students
To understand the positives and negatives of blended learning from their various viewpoints
To improve current teaching, as well as planning for future teaching and learning activities.

Context

The move to blended learning during the Covid-19 pandemic led to many changes to of the way that Law was taught in the 20/21 academic year. Student-Staff Partnership Group (SSP) feedback indicated that disabled students were affected more than most by this change. This project was an opportunity to understand more about the impact on these students and to amplify their voices.

Implementation

Given the constraints of working during the pandemic, our partnership worked virtually throughout, using only MS Teams meetings and sharing documents. Students designed a cohort-wide questionnaire to find out about the wider student experience with different aspects of blended learning.

This was followed-up by student partners facilitating smaller focus groups of students with disabilities and long-term conditions.

The partnership then assimilated all of the evidence they had gathered to produce short term and long term recommendations as well as highlighting what has worked well with blended learning.

Together we prepared a report with our evidence and recommendations and this has been shared not only within the School of Law but widely across the University, including with the University’s Blended Learning Project, the Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) team and the Committee on Student Experience and Development (COSED), as well as with colleagues in different functions and departments.

Impact

Positives from blended learning were highlighted including the flexibility of pre-recorded lecture videos, which enabled students to stop, pause and revisit lecture materials and work at their own pace and in their own time. Students preferred lecture recordings to be in the region of 20 minutes, as longer than that could pose a barrier for some students.

In the short term the partnership recommended the scheduling of lecture release days across core modules, so that lectures were made available on set days. 194 students were put into 46 study groups and a video to demystify the ECF process was recorded and shared widely (https://web.microsoftstream.com/video/714b6fa4-83f3-457c-a37b-3f4904e63691). These recommendations were all adopted.

Longer term the partnership recommended the consistent use of meaningful weekly plans (now part of the Teaching & Learning Framework for 2021/22) and improvements to Blackboard, notably a uniform layout across modules for Law students, including a single menu location for joining links to online classes.

The project and its recommendations have been shared within the School of Law, across the University and more widely at national conferences, all with students co-presenting the work.

Students were invited to the School of Law’s Blackboard Working Group and have been instrumental in driving forwards their recommendation for a consistent cross-module Blackboard layout for the next academic year. Students are also working with the TEL team to produce best practice videos for staff.

Reflections

This has been a hugely successful partnership project, not merely for the clear recommendations and tangible outcomes which are aimed to improve the experience of all students with blended learning this academic year and moving into the future, but also in the way that it has amplified the voices of students with disabilities and long-term conditions at School and University level.

As a partnership it has been influential, and the recommendations have been heard across the university and many have been adopted within the School of Law, but the positives for the individual student partners cannot be underestimated. They have gained valuable employability skills and experience in project work, presenting at conferences and advocating within meetings with staff. Moreover, as a project in which clear recommendations were given which have been heeded, it has improved the sense of community for all students, emphasising that the School of Law is a space where student views are important and they can contribute to their studies and make a difference.

Focus group participants with disabilities and long-term conditions have been empowered, with 2 first year participants subsequently volunteering for a new partnership project being run in the School of Law, as they can see the impact that their involvement can have.

Links and References

Amanda Millmore – “A Student-Staff Partnership exploring the experience of disabled Law students with blended learning at University of Reading, UK “ in Healey, R. & Healey, M. (2021) Socially-just pedagogic practices in HE: Including equity, diversity, inclusion, anti-racism, decolonising, indigenisation, well-being, and disability.mickhealey.co.uk/resources
Abstract for Advance HE Teaching & Learning Conference session: Teaching and learning conference – on demand abstracts_0.pdf (advance-he.ac.uk)
To follow – links to CQSD TEL videos & guidance (in progress).
We are happy to share the project report upon request – please get in touch if you would like a copy.

Xerte: engaging asynchronous learning tasks with automated feedback

9 June 2021 By aaroncooper Comment Closed

Overview

Jonathan Smith: j.p.smith@reading.ac.uk

International Study and Language Institute (ISLI)

This article describes a response to the need to convert paper-based learning materials, designed for use on our predominantly face-to-face summer Pre-sessional programme, to an online format, so that students could work independently and receive automated feedback on tasks, where that is appropriate. A rationale for our approach is given, followed by a discussion of the challenges we faced, the solutions we found and reflections on what we learned from the process.

Objectives

The objectives of the project were broadly to;

rethink ways in which learning content and tasks could be presented to students in online learning formats
convert paper-based learning materials intended for 80 – 120 hours of learning to online formats
make the new online content available to students through Blackboard and monitor usage
elicit feedback from students and teaching staff on the impacts of the online content on learning.

It must be emphasized that due to the need to develop a fully online course in approximately 8 weeks, we focused mainly on the first 3 of these objectives.

Context

The move from a predominantly face-to-face summer Pre-sessional programme, with 20 hours/week contact time and some blended-learning elements, to fully-online provision in Summer 2020 presented both threats and opportunities to ISLI. We realised very early on that it would not be prudent to attempt 20 hours/week of live online teaching and learning, particularly since most of that teaching would be provided by sessional staff, working from home, with some working from outside the UK, where it would be difficult to provide IT support. In addition, almost all students would be working from outside the UK, and we knew there would be connectivity issues that would impact on the effectiveness of live online sessions. In the end, there were 4 – 5 hours/week of live online classes, which meant that a lot of the core course content had to be covered asynchronously, with students working independently.

We had been working with Xerte, an open-source tool for authoring online learning materials, for about 3 years, creating independent study materials for consolidation and extension of learning based round print materials. This was an opportunity to put engaging, interactive online learning materials at the heart of the programme. Here are some of the reasons why we chose Xerte;

It allows for inputs (text, audio, video, images), interactive tasks and feedback to be co-located on the same webpage
There is a very wide range of interactive task types, including drag-and-drop ordering, categorising and matching tasks, and “hotspot” tasks in which clicking on part of a text or image produces customisable responses.
It offers considerable flexibility in planning navigation through learning materials, and in the ways feedback can be presented to learners.
Learning materials could be created by academic staff without the need for much training or support.

Xerte was only one of the tools for asynchronous learning that we used on the programme. We also used stand-alone videos, Discussion Board tasks in Blackboard, asynchronous speaking skills tasks in Flipgrid, and written tasks submitted for formative or summative feedback through Turnitin. We also included a relatively small number of tasks presented as Word docs or PDFs, with a self-check answer key.

Implementation

We knew that we only had time to convert the paper-based learning materials into an online format, rather than start with a blank canvas, but it very quickly became clear that the highly interactive classroom methodology underlying the paper-based materials would be difficult to translate into a fully-online format with greater emphasis on asynchronous learning and automated feedback. As much as possible we took a flipped learning approach to maximise efficient use of time in live lessons, but it meant that a lot of content that would normally have been covered in a live lesson had to be repackaged for asynchronous learning.

In April 2020, when we started to plan the fully-online programme, we had a limited number of staff who were able to author in Xerte. Fortunately, we had developed a self-access training resource which meant that new authors were able to learn how to author with minimal support from ISLI’s TEL staff. A number of sessional staff with experience in online teaching or materials development were redeployed from teaching on the summer programme to materials development. We provided them with a lot of support in the early stages of materials development; providing models and templates, storyboarding, reviewing drafts together. We also produced a style guide so that we had consistent formatting conventions and presentation standards.

The Xerte lessons were accessed via links in Blackboard, and in the end-of-course evaluations we asked students and teaching staff a number of open and closed questions about their response to Xerte.

Impact

We were not in a position to assess the impact of the Xerte lessons on learning outcomes, as we were unable to differentiate between this and the impacts of other aspects of the programme (e.g. live lessons, teacher feedback on written work). Students are assessed on the basis of a combination of coursework and formal examinations (discussed by Fiona Orel in other posts to the T&L Exchange), and overall grades at different levels of performance were broadly in line with those in previous years, when the online component of the programme was minimal.

In the end-of-course evaluation, students were asked “How useful did you find the Xerte lessons in helping you improve your skills and knowledge?” 245 students responded to this question: 137 (56%) answered “Very useful”, 105 (43%) “Quite useful” and 3 (1%) “Not useful”. The open questions provided a lot of useful information that we are taking into account in revising the programme for 2021. There were technical issues round playing video for some students, and bugs in some of the tasks; most of these issues were resolved after they were flagged up by students during the course. In other comments, students said that feedback needed to be improved for some tasks, that some of the Xerte lessons were too long, and that we needed to develop a way in which students could quickly return to specific Xerte lessons for review later in the course.

Reflections

We learned a lot, very quickly, about instructional design for online learning.

Instructions for asynchronous online tasks need to be very explicit and unambiguous, because at the time students are using Xerte lessons they are not in a position to check their understanding either with peers or with tutors. We produced a video and a Xerte lesson aimed at helping students understand how to work with Xerte lessons to exploit their maximum potential for learning.

The same applies to feedback. In addition, to have value, automated feedback generally (but not always) needs to be detailed, with explanations why specific answers are correct or wrong. We found, occasionally, that short videos embedded in the feedback were more effective than written feedback.

Theoretically, Xerte will track individual student use and performance, if uploaded as SCORM packages into Blackboard, with grades feeding into Grade Centre. In practice, this only works well for a limited range of task types. The most effective way to track engagement was to follow up on Xerte lessons with short Blackboard tests. This is not an ideal solution, and we are looking at other tracking options (e.g. xAPI).

Over the 4 years we have been working with Xerte, we had occasionally heard suggestions that Xerte was too complex for academics to learn to use. This emphatically was not our experience over Summer 2020. A number of new authors were able to develop pedagogically-sound Xerte lessons, using a range of task types, to high presentation standards, with almost no 1-to-1 support from the ISLI TEL team. We estimate that, on average, new authors need to spend 5 hours learning how to use Xerte before they are able to develop materials at an efficient speed, with minimal support.

Another suggestion was that developing engaging interactive learning materials in Xerte is so time-consuming that it is not cost-effective. It is time-consuming, but put in a situation in which we felt we had no alternative, we managed to achieve all we set out to achieve. Covid and the need to develop a fully-online course under pressure of time really focused our minds. The Xerte lessons will need reviewing, and some will definitely need revision, but we face summer 2021 in a far more resilient, sustainable position than at this time last year. We learned that it makes sense to plan for a minimum 5-year shelf life for online learning materials, with regular review and updating.

Finally, converting the paper-based materials for online learning forced us to critically assess them in forensic detail, particularly in the ways students would work with those materials. In the end we did create some new content, particularly in response to changes in the ways that students work online or use technological tools on degree programmes.

Follow up

We are now revising the Xerte lessons, on the basis of what we learned from authoring in Xerte, and the feedback we received from colleagues and students. In particular, we are working on;

ways to better track student usage and performance
ways to better integrate learning in Xerte lessons with tasks in live lessons
improvements to feedback.

For further information, or if you would like to try out Xerte as an author and with students, please contact j.p.smith@reading.ac.uk, and we can set up a trial account for you on the ISLI installation. If you are already authoring with Xerte, you can also join the UoR Xerte community by asking to be added to the Xerte Users Team.

Links and References

The ISLI authoring website provides advice on instructional design with Xerte, user guides on a range of page types, and showcases a range of Xerte lessons.

The international Xerte community website provides Xerte downloads, news on updates and other developments, and a forum for discussion and advice.

Finally, authored in Xerte, this website provides the most comprehensive showcase of all the different page type available in Xerte, showing its potential functionality across a broad range of disciplines.

Organising a Peer Review Event of Synchronous Online Teaching

26 February 202126 February 2021 By aaroncooper Comment Closed

Vicky Collins

v.collins@reading.ac.uk

International Study and Language Institute, ISLI

Overview

Each year tutors on the Academic English Programme [AEP] run by ISLI participate in an internal show case of tips and best practices as a Peer Review event. This year we chose the theme of ‘Managing synchronous online teaching’ given the level of challenge it presents and creative solutions emerging to these. The event included a pre task, live demos and talks throughs, an external list of resources for participants, and a final compendium of curated videos (recorded from the live delivery) for wider dissemination in ISLI.

Objectives

The main aims of the annual Peer review event are:

To draw out good practice and reflect on experiences of teaching on the Academic English Programme [AEP] from the previous year or term
To foster a team environment by providing for a network to exchange ideas and experiences

Whilst acknowledging that there are many tutorials and training videos available widely to support online teaching, for this peer review on ‘Managing synchronous online teaching’ we were keen to draw out tips and practices developed in situ.

Context

Since September 2020, the whole AEP team has been involved in regular live online teaching. This includes all aspects of the Academic English Programme from discipline specific courses to webinars on particular aspects of academic language and literacy. Prior to this most of our experience and training for the transition to online T & L  was around asynchronous delivery, so we thought a review and reflection of online synchronous teaching was timely

Implementation

I started by researching sub themes within ‘managing online synchronous teaching’ and developed a list from which to solicit ideas for tips and practices from the teaching team:

Opening and closing a session
Spaces for collaboration
Tools for live interactivity
Multitasking during sessions
Working with longer texts online
Teaching to the void: finding ways of connecting to students
Staging & organising of activities

Soliciting, categorising and developing initial ideas in advance with colleagues helped avoid duplication and also meant I could allocate suitable timings to presentations/demos . The event was scheduled for 3 hours with rest breaks and question times and held on Teams. Given the commitment of time required, this peer review event takes place in January each year- before the Spring term gets underway and also to boost morale on return from the festive break.

Prior to the event I set a pre task on the topic of ‘What does live online learning look like for our discipline?’ . A discussion thread was set up and colleagues contributed voluntarily .

I also developed a list of external resources on the topic of online synchronous learning to share with participants after the event.

The Peer review event itself was recorded, with permission, and I then curated the individual presentations into 18 bite sized videos.

Impact

A feedback survey was issued once all resources had been released. This was completed by 8 out of 12 participants.

The aim of the feedback survey was to gauge satisfaction with the event and impact it had on participants preparedness for live online teaching this term [Spring 2021]

In terms of satisfaction, all participants strongly agreed that the event was effectively organized.

All participants strongly agreed [5] or agreed [3] that the event and resources helped them to feel more prepared. Varying levels of confidence in live online scenarios are reflected in participants’ familiarity with ideas presented by their peers. Most reported that between 25-50% of the activities were new to them, and two reported a greater percentage.

Participants listed a range of the tips and practices presented by peers that they would like to try out this term [Spring 2021]

Reflections

One of the most significant outcomes of this was that despite the plethora of tutorials and training vignettes on you tube for example, which teaching staff can consult, a genuine account of these tips and practices in situ is still much valued. My colleagues were able to discuss with sincerity the pros and cons of practices they had tried in the past term, and how they hoped to continue building on these. Comments to the pre task discussion question were insightful and I feel I learnt much from these as I compiled them into a summary. I felt this approach to peer learning was particularly conducive i.e giving peers a space to contribute to a thread, time to read through other contributions, and then for the facilitator to summarise this so we have a meaningful record of our thoughts and ideas. Not everybody in the team had the confidence to present or demo tips and practices, and indeed there was no pressure to do so, but the pre task allowed for them to contribute to the event in a another form

Follow up

The feedback form included an area for participants to share what ideas from the event they would like to put into practice this term. I will informally review this at the end of the term[Spring 2021] and have set up a discussion thread for peers to comment on these
Participants have given permission for their videos to be used more widely in ISLI for teacher development purposes.