This article was downloaded by: [Stony Brook University]On: 25 October 2014, At: 07:08Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Distance EducationPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cdie20

Beyond product: Materialsdevelopment as a vehicle forprofessional growthTerrie Ferman a & Manda Page ba The Learning Resources Development Unit , Building9, Salisbury Road, Ipswich Campus/The University ofQueensland , Ipswich Q 4305 E-mail:b School of Natural and Rural Systems Management ,The University of Queensland , Gatton campus, GattonQ 4345 E-mail:Published online: 17 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: Terrie Ferman & Manda Page (2000) Beyond product: Materialsdevelopment as a vehicle for professional growth, Distance Education, 21:2, 323-343,DOI: 10.1080/0158791000210208

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0158791000210208

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressedin this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education2000. Vol. 21. No. 2. pp. 323-343

© ODLAA Inc.

Beyond product: Materials development as a vehicle forprofessional growth

Terrie Ferman and Manda Page

For several years in distance education settings, teaching-learningspecialists have collaborated with subject specialists to producelearning materials. In such partnerships, while a major focus has beenon production per se, another outcome has been the professionaldevelopment of the subject specialist. This paper reports on acollaborative project where the development of learning materialsserved as a vehicle for quite comprehensive professionaldevelopment. This paper argues that such an approach, where productdevelopment and professional development are intertwined, is mosteffectively facilitated on a one-to-one basis where the specifics of theprocess are tailored to the needs of the subject specialist. Suchcollaborations are also most likely to be effective if grounded instrong theoretical principles. The case study reported here wasfounded on principles of action research.

Review of the literature - existing models of professionaldevelopment

Increasingly, professional development (PD) is a key concern of allacademics, particularly in the current demanding climate with itsemphasis on quality and accountability, an emphasis accentuated by theextensive competition caused by globalisation. However, a commitmentto PD by academics is not new. Motivated academics have alwaysengaged in informal PD activities of various kinds, for instance readingthe literature and interacting with colleagues informally (Brown &Teague 1998). A more recent informal activity involves accessing variousInternet sites, for instance those developed by learning support units ofuniversities and which are specifically devoted to teaching and learningissues. Using online support to further PD is increasing in popularity as isthe use of email discussion lists (Yetton & Associates 1997).

In recent years, increasing recognition of the importance of the on-goingPD of academic staff has resulted in the emergence of a range of formal,structured activities, some of them aimed at academics as a group, othersfocussing more on individual needs. Examples of group-focussed formalactivities include: attending seminars, workshops or short courses;

323

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

enrolling in extended teaching skills courses; attending expositions and soon. More individualised approaches include models of one-to-onecollaboration. Between these two points (of group focus and individualfocus) and, depending on the number of participants involved, are PDactivities such as attending and presenting at conferences, engaging in'excellence in teaching' activities, peer teaching, project-baseddevelopment and various forms of teamwork.

All PD activities are intended to improve the skills and knowledge of thelecturer, either directly or indirectly. Traditionally, more direct means ofPD have dominated the tertiary sector, with the most common beingconventional workshops and seminar presentations. These sessionsusually provide input on specific teaching topics (such as writingobjectives, catering to large classes, selecting appropriate technology,designing assessment and so on).

Though the generic workshop continues to be useful in some contexts(such as providing introductory overviews to more targeted subsequentPD activity), this paper proposes that a more comprehensive model of PDoffers greater potential than the workshop-centred approach. In such anapproach, workshops/seminars would be but one element in an overallprogram and not necessarily the most prominent one. This suggestion ismade for several reasons.

Despite the ubiquity of the workshop/seminar model as the centrepiece ofPD, doubts have been expressed about its effectiveness (e.g. Butler 1996;Meacham 1982; Slater 1991).

One criticism concerns the frequent use of a conference style formatwhere transmission tends to feature (Meacham 1982). The mixed natureof most groups of participants dictates the need to provide a generic 'onesize fits all' approach, rather than tailoring content specifically toparticular subjects. Even in very high quality workshops, genericsolutions are unlikely to be appropriate because of a diversity of teachingstyles and the varied workplace needs of the participants.

Generic approaches may lack relevance for most participants becausethey are 'designed for group dispersal' (Slater 1991, p. 80). Academicstaff experience context-specific difficulties and needs and thereforerequire 'particular rather than generalised attempts at solutions' (Slater1991, p. 80). The one-off nature of the workshop/seminar model cannotprovide 'the kind of on-going support so essential to successful PD'(Kember & Mezger 1990, p. 61).

One basic problem with traditional workshops is poor attendance, withlack of time the major reason (Johnston 1996). Therefore, there is a needto reach academics in other ways.

324

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Terrie Ferman and Manda Page

Also problematic is that the workshop model may be seen as a version ofthe training solution, about which some doubts have been expressed. Onereason for the failure of a training approach is that it is externally imposed(Butler 1996). Another difficulty is 'that training is not enough to meetthe demands of continuous learning' (Watkins & Marsick 1992, p. 288)which is becoming increasingly important for everyone, includingacademics.

The training solution holds that expertise will result if general principlesare applied (Butler 1996). While the acquisition of general principles iscertainly important, the application of those principles needs to take placewithin specific contexts and in response to particular needs.

As Butler (1996) points out, training courses may result in participantsperceiving PD as a matter of acquiring new techniques with the possibleeffect being a failure to focus on the requirements of particular learningcontexts.

In addition to the importance of specific learning contexts to effectivePD, one-to-one work is also critical, as highlighted by Jones and Lewis(1991) who reported that one-to-one assistance was seen by the majority(92.8%) of novice users as critically important. Such one-to-one supportis not possible within a generic workshop.

Depending on the demands and constraints of particular institutions, itmay be preferable to use an individual approach rather than a group one(Meacham 1983) as an individual approach allows 'information to betailored to the needs of the individual writer' and thus it is 'more readilyaccepted than general information about hypothetical courses' (Kember& Mezger 1990, p. 63).

Because they lack context specificity, workshops as a cornerstone of PDprograms are in danger of appearing irrelevant. However, as part of amore comprehensive, multi-faceted model (which includes one-to-oneapproaches), workshops can still retain some value. An optimum modelof PD is a mixed one consisting of numerous elements including bothone-to-one partnerships and workshops as well short courses, conferenceattendance, peer teaching and so on.

Description of and rationale for the professional developmentapproach used in this project

The major focus of this paper is to highlight the particular value whichaccrues to one-to-one collaboration where two parallel processes operated- the completion of a specific project (the development of a key learningresource) proceeding hand in hand with the PD of a lecturer.

325

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

This approach to PD could be described as 'growth through doing'. Itincorporated various components which the literature indicates areimportant in that it was needs-based and strongly grounded in practices ofaction research in its on-going emphasis on critical reflection.

The needs-based component

As prescriptive models of educational design do not suit educational orstaff development (Kember 1998; Lentell & Murphy 1993), the approachadopted here was designed to meet the specific needs of the lecturer. Thevalue of this 'tailored' approach is supported by Nation's comment that'everyone who has ever helped me ... has tailored things to suit me'(Nation & Walker 1993). This needs-responsive model is in sharpcontrast to a generic mass model of PD.

Incorporating a sense of ownership

The strong needs-based nature of this model facilitated a sense ofownership which is so important in PD activities (Ellis & Phelps 1999).The design of the collaboration was intended to give the collaborators anall-important sense of ownership of both the process and the outcomes(Kember 1998). Feeling ownership of a project is essential because 'theultimate guardians of excellence are not external forces, but internalprofessional responsibilities' (Ramsden 1992, p. 221). Because educators'are ultimately the experts in determining their professional needs' (Jones& Lewis 1991, p. 53), it is important that they 'drive' PD activities -which is what occurred during this project.

The educational designer as professional developer

Before discussing the role of the educational designer, some clarificationof terms will be helpful. The term 'educational designer' is used inpreference to other related terms including 'instructional designer','teaching-learning specialist', 'learning adviser, 'educational developer'or 'curriculum consultant'. 'Educational designer' is used to describe therole of one of the authors who works collaboratively with academics inthe design and development of learning events ranging from the macroframeworking of whole degrees to the micro design of specific learningactivities. This is an academic role, with curriculum design and materialsdevelopment as major responsibilities. It also involves undertakingresearch and presenting workshops and conference papers. While the roleincludes some project management, editorial work etcetera, the coreresponsibility is the active promotion of effective teaching practice.

While in the past in distance education settings, there may have been tosome extent a focus on package development in the work of instructional

326

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Terrie Ferman and Manda Page

designers, this emphasis has recently been widened to includeconsiderations of PD. Currently, educational designers now place greateremphasis on facilitating PD processes and activities which will havecarry-over effects well beyond product. While it is acknowledged that insome distance education contexts, the term 'instructional designer' maybe used synonymously with 'educational designer', the latter term is usedhere to highlight the PD focus of the role.

To differing degrees, it appears that teaching-learning specialists see staffdevelopment as part of their role. Inglis (1996, p. 281) found that almostall the teaching-learning specialists (including educational designers) inhis study saw their work 'as encompassing some element of staffdevelopment'. Allen (1996) found that staff development was notperceived as a major role by instructional designers. One might concludefrom this that they, nevertheless, saw PD as playing some role in theirwork.

The view which informs this paper is that PD is a crucial element ofeducational design and that PD is not separate from, but occurs through,educational design activity. PD is seen as the driving force which impelsthe work of educational designers. Thus, the role of the educationaldesigner as professional developer was crucial in the project-basedcollaboration reported here.

The primary intention of the teaching-learning specialist who manifests theconception staff developer is to increase the range of skills that the subjectspecialist brings to the tasks of package development'. (Inglis 1996, p. 284).

The educational designer identified the current levels of lecturer expertisein order to tailor the activities and tasks of the collaboration appropriately,thus facilitating individualised PD.

Other roles of the educational designer

In addition to acting as a one-to-one professional developer, theeducational designer also fulfilled a number of other roles. In Inglis's(1996) terms, these roles were: Educational process consultant (inadvising about the macro components of the subject); instructionalprocess consultant (in encouraging the lecturer to see the links betweenobjectives, strategies and assessment). The role of joint venturer (Jackling1989) was also an element in terms of the collegial relationship whichconsisted of an equal partnership informed by the different skill sets ofeach participant. Further, according to Inglis' (1996) categories, theeducational designer also acted as distance educational facilitator (inadvising on teaching and learning issues). Throughout the project, thesevarious roles operated in overlapping ways which were mutuallyenriching to the progress of the collaboration.

327

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

The action research component of the approach used

This project was strongly grounded in principles of action research.Action research concerns social practice, is participatory, with the topicbeing determined by participants, has improvement as its goal, is cyclical,and is systematic inquiry underpinned by reflection (Kember 1998).

The value of action research in achieving excellence in PD approacheshas been explored in the literature (e.g. Zuber-Skerritt 1991; 1993, 1994).Action research approaches are appropriate for educational developmentwhich needs to concern itself with pursuing change in teaching andlearning (Kember 1998). Most commonly, action research occurs inclassroom settings. However, it is equally applicable to partnershipmodels of PD.

The action research process is quite straightforward and cyclical in thatone plans, acts, observes, reflects and then continues the cycle asnecessary (Ellis & Phelps 1999). The concreteness of action research(Zuber-Skerritt 1994) is appealing to busy academics with limited interestin theory for its own sake. Action research is underpinned bycollaboration. The highly collaborative nature of the project describedhere has strong theoretical support in the literature (e.g. Chalmers &Murray 1998; Biggs & Telfer 1987; Laurillard 1993; Ellis & Phelps 1999;Zuber-Skerritt 1994).

In action research terms, the educational designer acted as a criticalfriend. However, the role extended beyond this and was one of a differentbut equal partnership to which the participants brought separate sets ofskills and knowledge. Equality of partnership is central to effective PD asis the need for 'appropriate action ...(to be) negotiated and mediatedbetween them [the collaborators]' (Slater 1991, p. 86). As well as beingcrucial to action research approaches (Kember 1998), the nature andquality of the relationship between participants is extremely important ifthe educational designer is to be effective as a change agent (Kember &Mezger 1990).

As Kember (1998) points out, in action research activities, it is assumedthat participants have some knowledge of and an interest in teaching. Thiswas very true of both participants, one of whom (the educationaldesigner) had a long and successful teaching background and the other(the lecturer) had a short but very successful teaching record. It was thelecturer's interest in teaching and her commitment to creatingopportunities for effective learning which initiated the project.

Despite the lecturer's relative inexperience, it was nonetheless importantfor the educational designer to attempt to bring to the surface thelecturer's beliefs about teaching and learning. Haughey (1989), referring

328

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Terrie Ferman and Manda Page

to distance education contexts, noted that writers are not alwayscompletely aware of either theory-in-use or of their own espousededucational philosophy. An early discussion revealed the lecturer'scommitment to engaging students in their learning. She didn't want themto feel 'lectured at' when studying by distance. Thus her (evolving)espoused theory was compatible with what she was endeavouring to dowhen selecting and developing learning resources. Thus, without a formalbackground in educational theory, the lecturer expressed some clearviews about teaching and learning.

Underlying assumptions that participants know about and are interestedin teaching will influence the relationship between the critical friend andthe participant in action research projects (Kember 1998). Participantsneed to be treated as if they are interested in and competent in teaching.Such an approach is far more professional and likely to lead to successthan the traditional deficit model approach which regards lecturers aslacking teaching expertise.

An approach which demonstrates professional respect is far more likelyto result in successful outcomes. The quality of the participants*relationship is quite crucial for

... little will be achieved if the quality of human relationships is overlookedor ignored. A project that is task oriented, without being also relationshiporiented, thereby increases the probability of its own rejection. (Davies1975, p. 372)

Because the approach was highly collaborative, both the lecturer and theeducational designer were involved in all aspects of the project, the onlyexception being that the lecturer, as the content expert, was solelyresponsible for the subject matter. Operating as a small team, theeducational designer facilitated the skilling up of the lecturer in the areasof subject design, evaluation and learning research. In this way, theeducational designer acted as a change agent.

Reflective practice as part of action research approaches and the role ofreflective practice in PD

The value of reflection to action research and (lifelong) learning is widelyacknowledged (e.g. Ellis & Phelps 1999; Brockbank & McGill 1998).The recognition of the importance of reflection in educational endeavouris not new. Almost a century ago, Dewey (1916) specified five conditionswhich promote reflection. Firstly, 'a genuine situation of experience'(Dewey 1916, p. 163) needs to exist as it did in the project reported here,the situation being the lecturer's immediate professional situation. Thesecond condition, 'that a genuine problem develop within this situation'(p. 163), was also present, as the 'problem' was the need to produce astudy guide within a tight timeframe. Dewey's third condition is that the

329

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

participant should 'possess the information and make the observations'necessary to address the situation. This condition was present as thelecturer was well informed about the situation (i.e. she knew about thesubject, the students etc.) and had herself observed that some features ofthe situation needed more attention than others. Dewey's fourthrequirement for the facilitation of reflection is that the learner be able tosuggest solutions and assume responsibility for them. In this case, thelearner was a relatively inexperienced lecturer undertaking an unfamiliartask. Her solution was to work with an educational designer. Inaddressing the task, the lecturer certainly pursued and suggested solutionsfor which she took responsibility. The fifth and final requirement whichDewey proposes for the facilitation of reflection is 'the opportunity andoccasion to test ideas by application, to make their meaning clear anddiscover for [him]self their validity' (p. 163). The lecturer had both theopportunity and the occasion to test out her ideas (in this case realised in astudy guide) by both implementing those ideas and by formallyevaluating them.

Thus, reflection was a vital component of the project. The practice ofreflection can occur in several ways, including through writing, reading,talking and listening (Butler 1996). Reflection in various forms occurredregularly throughout the project, largely through reflective dialoguesbetween the participants. These conversations were necessary tocomplete the various tasks of the project. Reflection also occurred duringpreparation for a local teaching conference as well as during two informalinterviews of the lecturer by the educational designer, whose purpose wasto identify the gains to the lecturer and to monitor her current level ofexpertise. The lecturer's responses to the questions necessitated reflectionon her professional growth. Nor was reflective practice confined to thelecturer. The educational designer regularly reviewed the steps in theprocess and the progress of the project and made adjustments asnecessary. In this way, the practice of on-going reflection supported thework of the educational designer.

Concluding comment on the approach used

It is to be expected that PD will be most successful when the specificfeatures of a context and participant are central. There is, then, a strongargument for PD approaches which are characterised by sharp targeting,particular contexts and immediate and specific needs. The value of PD isenhanced significantly when the development of a product and anincrease in participants' skills occur at the same time.

If PD is seen essentially as a learning activity, then it needs to includeactivity, interaction, collaboration and reflection (Biggs & Telfer 1987;Laurillard 1993). These features marked the project described in thisarticle.

330

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Terrie Ferman and Manda Page

Beyond meeting the immediate and specific needs of the lecturer, the one-to-one partnership continued beyond a product outcome. The continuousinterplay between product development and PD was mutually enriching -i.e. by developing a product (a learning resource), the lecturer's skillsincreased; reciprocally, her increased skills contributed to thedevelopment of the product. The appeal of such a 'development-through-product' approach is that increasingly busy academics need to maximisethe time they spend on PD activities.

Methodology

Education is about people and the personal interactions which are so vital infacilitating learning. As neither people nor interpersonal interactions arequantifiable, quantitative research methods, while valid and valuable inrespect of many contexts of educational research, cannot meet all thediverse needs of educational enquiry. Qualitative paradigms are as essentialto educational research as are quantitative approaches (Salomon 1991).

The established status of qualitative research in education has been notedby several authors (e.g. Angus 1994, Garman 1994). Indeed, qualitativemethodologies in educational research have been on the ascendancy sincethe 1980s (Garman 1994). Given its established position, a qualitativeapproach 'hardly needs to be justified' (Angus 1994, p. 15).

The methodology of the project reported here is qualitative in two of itskey features - the strong action research base and the use of case study.As a specific form of qualitative research, action research has beengaining in popularity since the 1970s, especially in areas such as teachereducation (Prideaux 1994). Action research focusses on the individualproject rather than on wider pictures.

As an instance of qualitative research, the case study approach wasextremely apt for the collaboration undertaken because, despite thesimilarity of process which might be adopted by educational designerswhen working with lecturers, specifics of that process will vary accordingto contextual need, personal preference and practical constraints. Thuseach professional relationship and each collaborative activity will beunique. 'In every case there are unique, exceptional and very particularfeatures' (Tripp 1994, p. 29). One powerful advantage of case studies istheir scope to illuminate detail and provide depth of description.

Claims of objectivity or scientific verification are not made for case studyapproaches. It is acknowledged that participant involvement in a casefurther raises the level of subjectivity. However, it is important toremember that qualitative studies reflect the self as instrument (Eisner1991). 'The self is the instrument that engages the situation and makessense of it' (Eisner 1991, p. 34). Indeed it is one's subjectivity, one's'unique signature' which 'provides unique, personal insight into theexperience under study.' (Eisner 1991, p. 34)

331

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

In that 'the term qualitative' is about 'exploring the broaderunderstanding possible in natural conversations and narratives' (Garman1994, p. 5), the qualitative approach used in this research is reflective ofthe kind of communication which occurred between the participants.

The limitations of self-report (which features in this report) areacknowledged. However, self-report and personal reflection haveconsiderable strengths.

Most qualitative research is premised upon the idea that participants' viewsof a situation and what is happening in it are absolutely essential, if not themost important data. (Tripp 1994, p. 41)

Thoughtful reflection is extremely valuable in furthering professionalgrowth and is congruent with the action learning/reflection focus of thecollaboration reported here. Subjectivity is inherent in all reflection.Given the established value of reflection in education, such subjectivity isnot only not problematic but, in fact, valuable. This report, as oneoutcome of the collaboration, in itself constitutes a reflective exercise.Since reflection is a key element in the action research approach used inthe project, it is quite appropriate that a reflective, subjective approach beadopted for this paper.

The issue of the lack of generalisability is always raised with qualitativeresearch. It has been suggested that, instead of using samples to makegeneralisations, a more useful approach is to have as the overall aim ofqualitative research, the developing of findings for comparison withothers (Le Compte & Goetz 1982). If the observations of this case studyfind commonality with observations elsewhere in the field of distanceeducation, then some confirmation of the value of what is beingattempted may be possible. Additionally, while acknowledging thatscientific generalisability will not apply, the authors are hopeful thatreaders will find the overall approach useful. As well, the kinds ofquestionnaires which were developed would, it is thought, haveapplication to the evaluation of learning materials in a range of settings.

Background to the project

In 1998, a lecturer at The University of Queensland was given the task ofdeveloping a new subject, 'Protected Area Management and Operations',for delivery to distance students.

The lecturer's brief was to design the new subject using some materialfrom an existing related subject which required substantial updating.Essentially, the existing subject consisted of readings and lecture-typenotes unsupported by learning activities.

The lecturer was expected to work with the existing material, combininginformation where necessary but was not expected to make any

332

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Tenie Ferman and Manda Page

substantial changes to the content. She approached an educationaldesigner for assistance with this task.

Because of the very explicit guidelines, the extremely tight timelines (i.e.eight weeks between time of allocation of task and due date) and thelecturer's limited experience, there was no intention to depart from aquite traditional study guide format - a 'tutorial-in-print* in Rowntree's(1995) terms where the inclusion of activities is intended to facilitatestudents' learning. Only the first three modules of this subject's studyguide formed part of this project. (Remaining material was designed by adifferent lecturer).

Having completed her PhD the previous year, the lecturer had limitedteaching experience and no experience in developing distance studymaterial. Her major aim was to make the content accessible andinteresting to students.

Following the development and implementation of the study guide, thequality and perceived usefulness of this learning resource were evaluated.In this way, the project expanded from its early limited goals into a multi-phased undertaking which extended the lecturer's professionaldevelopment beyond the materials design phase.

Intended to fulfil an immediate and urgent purpose, the project wasdriven entirely by the lecturer's expressed needs to develop a learningresource within a tight time frame. Thus, the project was underpinned bycontext-specific activity of immediate relevance.

The phases of the project

The project proceeded through the following phases: getting started;design of the study guide; implementation of the study guide; design andimplementation of the evaluation instrumentation; analysis of evaluationfindings and subsequent action.

When working through these various phases, meetings were held asnecessary. As well as face-to-face meetings, email communication wasused very effectively so that, prior to face-to-face work, the collaboratorsexchanged their most recent ideas.

Getting started

From the first point of contact, the educational designer carried out bothformal and informal evaluations of the lecturer's current level ofexpertise. It is important to carry out evaluations (no matter howinformal) of the current stage of the lecturer's expertise in order to be'sensitive to the current CBAM [concerns-based adoption model] stage ofconcern of the writer' (Kember & Mezger 1990, p. 56). This information

333

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

is also essential in successfully negotiating ways of proceeding throughcollaborations. Initially, evaluations occurred informally throughconversation. As Kember and Mezger (1990, p. 56) point out, 'a casualconversation can do much to build a relationship of trust; a formalquestionnaire would probably be counter-productive.' Later, when theprofessional relationship had been solidly established, on-goingevaluation of the lecturer's level of skill occurred more formally throughinterviews. Initially, in Butler's (1996) terms, the lecturer was a novice insubject design and materials development.

Design of the study guide

Writing objectives and designing activities

This phase of the project saw the parallel development of the study guideand the acquisition by the lecturer of subject development skills.

The lecturer's brief was essentially to retain the original content.Therefore, as the topics had already been determined, the lecturer's firstpriority was to develop interesting learning activities. Given the nexusbetween learning activities and learning objectives, the process began byexamining the existing objectives. These were refined as necessary withinthe overall organising framework of a subject planner consisting of atable with columns for topics, objectives, learning activities and learningresources. The subject planner began to take shape module by modulewith the need for periodic review and refinement.

Not unexpectedly, the writing of the first module was the most intensivein terms of time and effort. However, the benefits of adopting a thoroughapproach to this part of the development quickly became apparent.Informed by even this limited amount of subject writing experience, thelecturer found the writing of the subsequent modules less challenging.

Once the objectives were finalised, activities were designed to facilitatethe realisation of the objectives. Activities included: guided note makingexercises; accessing web sites for relevant information; pre-readingexercises; table completion; comparison exercises; representingunderstanding in diagrammatic form; guided planning for assignment;and the use of real-world aides (i.e. the CSIRO Forest Fire DangerMeter).

Selecting the learning resources

To a large extent, the learning resources had already been selected for thesubject prior to this project. The lecturer needed to update the resourcesand choose some additional readings. She also chose to incorporate somemore interesting learning resources and included related web sites and aninstance of realia (i.e. the CSIRO Forest Fire Danger Meter).

334

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Terrie Ferman and Manda Page

Designing the assessment

Once congruence was achieved between topics, objectives, learningactivities and the learning resources, assessment was addressed. In fact,this element of the subject design phase proceeded very smoothly. Withcompatibility being achieved between learning objectives and activities,appropriate assessment emerged almost as a natural consequence. In thisarea, the educational designer found it necessary to offer only limitedfeedback.

What was produced from the design phase of the project was aconventional 'tutorial-in-print' study guide with a number of web sitesincluded for extra reference for those students who had Internet access.

Implementation of the study guide

The study guide was distributed to distance students as their key learningresource. As well as being provided with the study guide, these studentshad access to email, phone and teleconference contact with the lecturer.

Design and implementation of the evaluation instrumentation

While the study guide was being used by distance students, evaluationinstruments were developed in order to collect feedback about thislearning resource from the students, the educational designer, the lecturerand a tutor.

This phase of the project proved especially valuable for the lecturer whogained skills in a new area, namely designing questionnaires. Theeducational designer initiated this part of the project by drafting aquestionnaire to which the lecturer then responded with questions,comments and suggestions. There was subsequent on-going dialogue anddiscussion to shape and re-shape the instrumentation.

Two separate questionnaires were developed - one for students, the otherfor academic staff (the lecturer, a tutor and the educational designer).

In relation to the students' questionnaire, a desire to respect the busyschedules of students resulted in the production of as focussed aninstrument as possible. The result was a 5-item questionnaire which askedstudents to:

• rate how much they had learned (on a 1-4 scale);

• rate how much they had enjoyed studying the modules (on a 1-4 scale);

• indicate which of the learning activities they had completed; indicatewhich readings they had completed;

• offer any other comments.

335

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

On reflection, both collaborators felt that the students' questionnairescould have been designed more effectively. Because the questionnairesfor the students and those for the academics used different items, it wasnot possible to compare views on the quality of the learning activities.This would have been useful data. This shortcoming will be addressed inthe next round of evaluation.

The questionnaire for the academics consisted of three sections. The firstsection required an overall evaluation of the module. Respondents wereasked to comment on five areas:

• clarity of statements of objectives (1-4 scale);

• appropriateness of the number of activities;

• appropriateness of the number of readings;

• balance between content, activities and readings (1-4 scale);

• way in which the modules conclude.

The second section of the questionnaire was extremely detailed, withrespondents being asked to consider each activity separately in terms ofits relationship to specific learning objectives and its inherent usefulness.Space was left for open-ended comment. The third and final section of thequestionnaire consisted of three components: a rating of the variety ofactivities offered (1-4 scale); the quality of the activities (1-4 scale); anopen-ended section. Because of a lack of content specific knowledge, theversion of the questionnaire designed for the educational designer'sfeedback did not include the section on the readings. Otherwise, thequestionnaire was identical to the one designed for lecturer and tutorfeedback.

This phase was characterised by an on-going process of refinement of thequestionnaires. The significant extent to which the lecturer provided inputwas a clear indicator of her increasing professional confidence and skills.

The questionnaire for academic staff was completed by the projectcollaborators plus a tutor. Thus, two of the three academic evaluatorswere also the designers of the study guide which raises the issue ofsubjectivity. Aside from the fact that the literature argues that subjectivityper se is not a negative in qualitative methodologies (see 'Methodology'section above), it is also felt that the evaluation data is legitimate becausea number of months had elapsed between the design phase and theevaluation phase of the project.

Analysis of the evaluation findings and subsequent action

An important phase in the project was for the participants to learn fromand act on the evaluation feedback. This response element is a key featureof the action research approach which underpinned the project.

336

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Terrie Ferman and Manda Page

Initially, the collaborators analysed and reflected on the evaluation dataindividually before subsequently reviewing the data together. As thepurpose of this paper is to explore a particular model of PD rather than toexamine the evaluation results per se, the findings will not be reportedhere. However, it should be noted that, on the basis of student feedback,some activities were deleted while others were modified. Most wereretained in their original form. The responses of the tutor were also notedand, in conjunction with the evaluations of the lecturer and educationaldesigner, have been incorporated into a revised version of the studyguide.

Outcomes of the project: Reflections on the partnership modelof professional development

Being context-specific and of immediate relevance no doubt contributedlargely to the success of the collaboration since PD occurs mosteffectively when it is timely, context-embedded and tailored to respond toparticular needs (Chalmers & Murray 1998; Meacham 1982). The gainsapplied to several areas.

Development of a key learning resource

The immediate goal of the project was met in the production of a sound,print study guide. Using objective criteria (in the questionnaires), thestudy guide was judged by its developers, another academic and studentsto be more than adequate. Students benefited by being provided with asound learning resource and having their opinions valued, and futurestudents will benefit from the improved version of the study guide.

Improved lecturer skills

The sources of comment for this section are the lecturer's reflections andthe educational designer's observations. While the subjectivity of thisapproach is acknowledged, it is argued that action research approaches(which informed this project) do not make claims for scientificobjectivity. Rather, it is the very element of participant involvement andreflection (i.e. subjectivity) which lends insight.

The university has gained in now having on staff a lecturer whose level ofexpertise has increased in a number of areas, including learning resourcedevelopment and subject design. In this respect, the role of theeducational designer as staff developer (whose conception is to increasethe skills of the lecturer in package development) (Inglis 1996) waseffective.

There was also an improvement in the lecturer's teaching skills (internal aswell as external), as evidenced by other forms of student feedback, includingthe end-of-semester formal evaluation measures used by the university.

337

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

Additionally, the lecturer reported an important affective benefit, namelyincreased professional confidence. This increased self-confidence isreflected in the data gathered on the two occasions during the projectwhen the educational designer informally interviewed the lecturer as away of enacting reflective practice for both participants.

TABLE 1Lecturer's self-rating of skills*

Skill

Writing objectives

Designing a study guide

Writing text for study guide

Selecting resources

Designing assessment tasks

Designing activities

Rating (time 1)

2

1

2

2Vi

1

1

Rating (time 2)

3

3

3

2'/2

3

3

* (1—4 scale, with 1 the lowest and 4 the highest)

In relation to the informal interview measure (table 1), the CBAM model(concerns-based adoption model) of Kember and Mezger (1990) and thenovice-to-expert continuum of Butler (1996), the lecturer showed cleargains as her skills increased. The lecturer, in terms of the CBAM model,demonstrated the characteristics of stage four-i.e. consequence (Kember& Mezger 1990). Stage four relates to the gathering of informal feedbackfrom students. In fact, the lecturer went well beyond this stage. Inaddition to gathering feedback (formally) from students, she also soughtformal feedback from a colleague. Perhaps most significantly of all, sheco-designed the evaluation instruments which were used to collect thisfeedback. Stage four of concern occurs when writers are more 'open toinnovative and creative ideas' (Kember & Mezger 1990). This stage wasreached quite quickly, no doubt because the lecturer approached theproject with an open mind and strong commitment.

The lecturer has gained skills as a researcher in a field very different fromher content area. As an ecologist, her usual research activity is in the fieldof quantitative methodology. The evaluation instruments used in thisproject combined qualitative and quantitative methods. Moving intoeducational research involved new ways of thinking which were initiallychallenging but increasingly engaging. The lecturer reported an interest inthe educational aspect of her work, as opposed to being focussedexclusively on content.

338

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Terrie Ferman and Manda Page

Though the lecturer reported wide-ranging gains from all phases of theproject, the evaluation phase was of particular benefit in offeringopportunities for skills development in the area of instrumentation(questionnaire) design. This was an interesting process with severaliterations of the questionnaire occurring prior to finalisation. The co-development of the questionnaires was appreciated by the lecturer whofound this activity more useful than simply using an existing instrument.She valued learning through doing as well as gaining a strong sense ofownership. She increased her repertoire of professional skills,commenting that the acquisition of skills in questionnaire design wouldbe useful in other subjects.

With the growth in the lecturer's skills, the kind of input which theeducational designer contributed underwent a change. Although Kemberand Mezger (1990) note that the amount of input contributed by theeducational designer usually declines throughout the developmentprocess, this was not the experience of the educational designer. As theproject proceeded, the type of input changed in quality as the lecturer'sskills increased. The input from the educational designer became of anincreasingly advanced and sophisticated kind as the lecturer's expertiseimproved quite rapidly.

Perhaps the extent to which the lecturer benefited is not surprising. Whileexperienced academics may be resistant to adopting appropriateapproaches for distance teaching (Kember & Mezger 1990), neweracademics are often more enthusiastic about gaining expertise in thisarea, possibly because they lack the natural vested interests of pastexperience of face-to-face teaching (Kember & Mezger 1990). Suchacademics may be 'willing to admit their inexperience' and to 'positivelyseek direction' (Kember & Mezger 1990, p. 65) which was the case here.According to Kember and Mezger (1990) these new academics maymove through the stages of concern of the CBAM model quite quickly asthey do not have to 'unlearn' past habits suitable for face-to-face teachingbut inappropriate for distance mode. It is no doubt relevant that thelecturer sought input of her own volition. This voluntary element almostcertainly facilitated the development of the highly positive partnershipwhich resulted, an observation supported by Joughin & Johnston (1994).

Gains to the educational designer

The educational designer has had the advantage of participating in andobserving the benefits of a one-to-one collaboration in project-based PD.Her commitment to contextualised and tailored PD approaches within acomprehensive model has been affirmed.

339

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

Justification for the model

Earlier in this paper, the desirability of using a combined model of PDwas explored. Such an approach would include a range of elements, ofwhich a key one would be one-to-one activities. If 'the source of anyimprovement is the individual rather than the institution' (Meacham1982, p. 248), then the case for individualised forms of PD is readilyapparent.

Individualised one-to-one collaboration of the kind used in thispartnership model of PD is time well spent, as the benefits extend beyondthe development of product. In this particular case study, the gainscertainly extended further than the immediate goals of the partnership. Anumber of incidental benefits occurred. Subsequent development sessionsbetween the collaborators have focussed on various learning issues:teaching small groups of internal students; introducing greaterinteractivity into large internal classes; using online communication.These 'beyond product' benefits support the view of Kember and Mezger(1990, p. 66) that 'collaboration often influences internal teaching as wellas external'. The value of the model used in this case study lies in the on-going interplay between product and process. Professional growthemerges through the very process of product development.

It is acknowledged that individualised approaches to PD are quite timeconsuming. However, the long-term advantages are considerable. Once alecturer is confident in planning and designing whole subjects andchoosing and exploiting appropriate learning resources, then the acquiredskills inform the design of future subjects. When each subject ismultiplied by the number of enrolled students, the beneficiaries of thelecturer's increased skills can soon number hundreds of students. Kemberand Mezger (1990) make a useful distinction between what is resourceintensive and what is cost effective. While one-to-one models areundoubtedly resource intensive, they are nonetheless cost-effective interms of on-going efficacy.

The future

The second round of this project is now in progress. In terms of product,the study guide has been improved based on student and academicfeedback collected by means of the questionnaires. The questionnaireshave also undergone modification.

In terms of professional development, the lecturer, informed by anexpanded skills set, intends to pursue educational issues within herteaching. The educational designer plans to continue to use thisindividualised approach to PD (or appropriate adaptations of it) in future

340

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Teirie Ferman and Manda Page

collaborations. Not all the work of the educational designer will involveone-to-one partnerships or small teams. However, irrespective of this, theeducational designer will seek to retain the vital element of reflection inall PD activities in which she engages.

Acknowledgment

The authors wish to express their appreciation to their colleague AlanWylie for valuable commentary on an early draft of this paper. Anyshortcomings remain the authors'.

References

Allen, M. 1996, 'A profile of instructional designers in Australia', DistanceEducation, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 7-32.

Angus, L. 1994. 'Educational policy research: Discovering problems andsolutions', in Conference Proceedings for the mini-conference, ed. J. Smyth,The Flinders University of South Australia, pp. 15-26.

Biggs, J.B. & Telfer, R. 1987, The Process of Learning, 2nd edition, Prentice-Hall, Sydney.

Brockbank, A. & McGill, I. 1998, Facilitating Reflective Learning in HigherEducation, Society for Research into Higher Education and Open UniversityPress, Buckingham.

Brown, A. & Teague, M. 1998, 'Technology choices in higher education: What'sthe best fit?', in Open Learning 98: Proceedings of the 3rd InternationalConference on Open Learning, Queensland Open Learning Network,Brisbane, pp. 357-60.

Butler, J. 1996, 'Professional development: Practice as text, reflection as process,and self as locus', Australian Journal of Education, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 265-83.

Chalmers, M. & Murray, C. 1998, 'Flexible delivery of professional development',in Open Learning 98: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on OpenLearning, Queensland Open Learning Network, Brisbane.

Davies, I.K. 1975, 'Some aspects of a theory of advice: The management of aninstructional developer-client, evaluator-client, relationship', InstructionalScience, vol. 3, pp. 351-73.

Dewey, J. 1916, Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy ofEducation, Macmillan, London.

Eisner, E.W. 1991, The Enlightened Eye: Qualitative Inquiry and the Enhancementof Educational Practice, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.

Ellis, A. & Phelps, R. 1999, 'Staff development for online delivery: Acollaborative team-based action learning model' in Conference Proceedings:Ascilite 99 - Responding to Diversity, The 16th Annual Conference of theAustralasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, ed. J.Winn, QUT, Brisbane, pp. 71-82.

341

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Distance Education Vol. 21 No. 2 2000

Garman, N. 1994, 'Qualitative inquiry: Meaning and menace for educationalresearchers, in Conference Proceedings for the mini-conference, ed. J. Smyth,The Flinders University of South Australia, pp. 3-14.

Haughey, M. 1989, 'The critical role of the educational developer', inDevelopment Design and Distance Education: A Project initiated at theThirteenth World Congress of the International Council for DistanceEducation, ed. M. Parer, Churchill, Centre for Distance Learning, GippslandInstitute.

Inglis, A. 1996, 'Teaching-learning specialists' conceptions of their role in thedesign of distance learning packages', Distance Education, vol. 17, no. 2,pp. 267-88.

Jackling, N. 1989, 'Weaving my own design', in Development, Design andDistance Education, ed. M. Parer, Gippsland Institute, Churchill.

Johnston, S. 1996, 'Finding time for professional development: A study in academicperceptions', in Research and Development in Higher Education, vol. 19.

Jones, P. & Lewis, J. 1991, 'Implementing a strategy for collective change inhigher education', Studies in Higher Education, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 51-61.

Joughin, G. & Johnston, S. 1994, 'The experience of collaboration: Writing andinstructional design in distance education', Distance Education, vol. 15, no. 1,pp. 6-22.

Kember, D. 1998, 'Action research: Towards an alternative framework foreducational development', Distance Education, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 43-63.

Kember, D. & Mezger, R. 1990, 'The instructional designer as a staff developer:A course team approach consistent with the Concerns-Based AdoptionModel', Distance Education, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 51-70.

Laurillard, D. 1993, Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for theEffective Use of Educational Technology, Routledge, London.

Le Compte, M. & Goetz, J. 1982, 'Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographicresearch', Review of Educational Research, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 31-60.

Lentell, H. & Murphy, D. 1993, Neats and scruffies: Approaches to quality inopen learning and distance education, paper presented at the CambridgeConference on Student Support in Distance Education, UK.

Meacham, E.D. 1982, 'Distance teaching: Innovation, individual concerns andstaff development', Distance Education, vol.3, pp. 244-54.

Meacham, E.D. 1983, Private communication, cited in Kember, D. & Mezger, R.1990, 'The instructional designer as a staff developer: a course team approachconsistent with the Concerns-Based Adoption Model', Distance Education,vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 51-70.

Nation, D. & Walker, R. 1993, 'Course development without instructionaldesign', in Developing Open Courses, ed. M. Parer, Churchill: Centre forDistance Learning, Monash University Gippsland Campus, pp. 115-49.

Prideaux, D. 1994, 'Joining the club: Action research and the problem offacilitation,' in Conference Proceedings for the mini-conference, ed. J. Smyth,The Flinders University of South Australia, pp. 68-76.

342

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4

Tenrie Fertnan and Manda Page

Ramsden, P. 1992, Learning to Teach in Higher Education, Routledge, London.

Rowntree, D. 1995, Developing Courses for Students, Paul Chapman, London.

Salomon, G. 1991, Transcending the qualitative-quantitative debate: Theanalytic and systemic approaches to educational research, EducationalResearcher, pp. 10-18.

Slater, G.R.L. 1991, 'Staff development programmes in universities: Acurriculum proposal', Higher Education Research and Development, vol. 10,no. 1, pp. 79-91.

Tripp, D. 1994, 'Constructing a case study,' in Conference Proceedings for themini-conference, ed. J. Smyth, The Flinders University of South Australia,pp. 27-42.

Watkins, K. & Marsick, V. 1992, 'Towards a theory of informal and incidentallearning in organisations', International Journal of Lifelong Education,vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 287-300.

Yetton, P. & Associates 1997, Managing the Introduction of Technology in theDelivery and Administration of Higher Education, Evaluations andInvestigations Program, Higher Educational Division, Department ofEmployment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Canberra.

Zuber-Skerritt, O. 1991, Professional Development in Higher Education:Theoretical Framework for Action Research, Centre for the Advancement ofLearning and Teaching, Griffith University, Brisbane.

—1993, 'Improving learning and teaching through action learning and actionresearch', Higher Education Research and Development, vol. 12, no. 1,pp. 45-58.

—1994, Academic Staff Development in Australia in the 1990s: A Government-driven Quality Agenda, Griffith Institute for Higher Education, GriffithUniversity.

Terrie Ferman is an educational designer with the Learning ResourcesDevelopment Unit (The Teaching and Educational Development Institute) at TheUniversity of Queensland. Address: The Learning Resources Development Unit,Building 9, Ipswich Campus/The University of Queensland, Salisbury Road,Ipswich Q 4305. <t.ferman@mailbox.uq.edu.au>

Manda Page is a lecturer in ecology with the School of Natural and RuralSystems Management at The University of Queensland. Address: School ofNatural and Rural Systems Management, The University of Queensland, Gattoncampus, Gatton Q 4345. <mpage@uqg.uq.edu.au>

343

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:08

25

Oct

ober

201

4