Report on student centered approaches in higher education launched

This morning, the report on student centred approaches in higher education was launched at a breakfast seminar. Monika Nerland (IPED/UiO) and Tine Prøitz (NIFU) presented the key results in the report. This was followed by a panel discussion with Oddrun Samdal (UiB), Ida Austgulen (NSO), Stein Erik Lid (NOKUT) og Gunn Engelsrud (NIH).

The report presents results from 8 course level case studies that employ various student centered approaches. All of the chapters present specific lessons learned, and the final chapter concludes with a number of dilemmas for using student-centered approaches.

The report includes chapters on: 

  • Introduction by Monika Nerland and Tine S. Prøitz
  • Project-based learning in Computer Engineering Education by Crina Damşa
  • Portfolio assessment in an undergraduate course in ecology by Rachelle Esterhazy
  • Group assignments and roleplay in Organisation and Management by Line Wittek & Monika Nerland
  • Simulation in a practicum course in nursing by Yngve Nordkvelle & Odd Rune Stalheim
  • Bringing work-related elements into teaching and learning of legal education by Trine Fossland & Thomas de Lange
  • Online teaching and learning in an experience-based MBA programme by Trine Fossland & Cathrine Tømte 
  • Problem-based learning in a field course in ecology research by Heidi Hyytinen
  • Large class lectures and essay writing in legal education by Heidi Hyytinen & Anne Haarala-Muhonen
  • Quality of educational practices: Lessons learned and recommendations for the future by Monika Nerland, Tine S. Prøitz, Crina Damsa, Thomas de Lange, Rachelle Esterhazy, Trine
    Fossland, Heidi Hyytinen, Yngve Nordkvelle, Odd Rune Stalheim, Cathrine Tømte, Line Wittek

Download the report here.

Report om student centered teaching methods – launch next week!

Dr Tine Prøitz, NIFU
Professor Monika Nerland, UiO

As a part of the project, researchers from sub-project C have been working on case studies of educational practices at the course level.

The report with key findings will be launched with a breakfast seminar at NIFU on 23rd of January, 2018, at 0830-1000. Tine Prøitz and Monika Nerland present the key results from the report.

Read more about the event here.

The case studies examine aspects that matter for the quality of educational practices in course designs that employ student-centered approaches. Whilst ways of engaging students more actively in their learning processes are high on the political agenda and a variety of pedagogical approaches are developed for these purposes, less is known about how such approaches are
enacted in practice and the challenges teachers and students face in this regard. The cases presented here illustrate different pedagogical designs and approaches and how they play out in different domains and program contexts. Each case study addresses three research questions:

  • What characterizes the teaching approaches and ways of engaging students in the course?
  • What challenges do students and teachers face with the given pedagogical approaches and learning activities?
  • What can we learn from this case about issues that matter for quality of educational practices?

The case studies used a common methodological approach combining participant observation, interviews with teachers and students, document analysis of course documents, and a questionnaire to the students targeting their course participation and experiences.

 

Rachelle Esterhazy: How can we help students make meaning of feedback?

Rachelle Esterhazy, UiO

PhD research fellow in the project, Rachelle Esterhazy (IPED, University of Oslo), has together with Crina Damsa published an article on Studies of Higher Education where she examines how students make sense of feebdack processes. They describe the key focus as:

This qualitative study proposes a feedback conceptualization informed by sociocultural notions, in which students co-construct meaning from the teacher’s feedback comments through interaction over time, with each other, the teacher, and relevant resources. Based on an in-depth analysis of undergraduate biology students’ discussions of feedback comments, we found that the feedback process takes the form of a meaning-making trajectory students move along by orienting towards and elaborating on both task-specific and general-knowledge content.

You can view the article here

Rachelle has also  written a blog post about her recent work on the blog of Centre ofor Research in Assessment and Digital Learning (CRADLE) at University of Deakin in Australia. You can find the blog post here

New report about educational leadership in Denmark

The Danish team from CFA has conducted a survey among study programme leaders in Denmark. The survey mirrors the Norwegian survey that was conducted earlier in 2016. In particular, focus is on how study programme leaders engage in quality work.

Associate Professor Ebbe Krogh Graversen, CFA (Picture: CFA) from the Danish team comments:

Associate Professor Ebbe Krogh Graversen, CFA (Picture: CFA)Although the Nordic Higher Education system seems similar by many, it was surprising to find so many patterns of similarities between the Danish survey results and the comparable Norwegian survey. Furthermore, the detected differences seem to be explainable by differences in recent priorities, developments and reforms within Higher Education.

The Danish and Norwegian teams are currently working in further exploring the similarities and differences between the two surveys and some possible explanations for such patterns.

You can download the Danish survey here (pdf, in Danish).

View also the earlier published Norwegian survey results here (pdf, in Norwegian).

More detailed comparative analysis will be conducted in the coming months.

 

Working paper: What do the CAP data say about conditions for teaching in universities?

Research Professor Per Olaf Aamodt (NIFU)
Research Professor Per Olaf Aamodt (NIFU)

NIFU researcher Pr Olaf Aamodt has re-analyzed some of the data collected in the CAP study, with specific focus on conditions for teaching. Data collection for the CAP (the Changing Academic Profession) project was done in 2007-2008, thus Aamodt cautions that it is possible that there have also been changes in the last 8 years. At the same time, the data can provide valuable inputs to current debates on educational quality.

A key conclusion from the empirical data is that Norwegian professors in average work about 50 hours a week, with about equal share of time on education and research. While these patterns are rather similar to other countries, the data also shows disciplinary differences. The data also shows that there is also great variety in how many students academic staff teaches. Staff report high levels of satisfaction with technical and administrative facilities, but there is general dissatisfaction with lack of basic administrative support (i.e. assistants/secretary).

Educational practices are largely evaluated by students, in a sense rather natural as student feedback on teaching is mandatory. However, there is little evidence of peer feedback on teaching, and Aamodt questions whether such feedback could also contribute to increased quality in educational practices?

Download the working paper here (pdf, in Norwegian).