CDIs: A team-based curriculum development approach

Dr Greg BenfieldOxford Centre for Staff and Learning DevelopmentOxford Brookes University

Rhodes University, South Africa, Curriculum Colloquium17 Nov 2010

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Overview of this session

Part 1:

CDIs: where they come from, aims and intent, what happens in them

Questions and discussion

Part 2:

Evaluation: method, findings (what seems to work)

Challenges: evolution of the approach, ‘transferability’

Questions and discussion

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Background

• Educational development and e-Learning strategy development (Oxford Brookes University)

• JISC Learner Experiences of e-Learning Synthesis and Support Project(http://mw.brookes.ac.uk/display/JISCle2/Home)

• Higher Education Academy Pathfinder Student Experience of E-Learning at Oxford Brookes Project(http://mw.brookes.ac.uk/display/GR001/Evaluation)

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Course Redesign Intensives

• encourage multi-professional, curriculum design teams• focus resources on high impact developments• speed up development times • cascade e-learning design expertise into academic schools (Benfield 2008)

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development CDI processes elsewhere

• Higher Education Academy Pathfinder Course Design projects • CHEETAH, University of Leicester• Cable Transfer, University of Hertfordshire

• HEA Pathfinder CDIs for University of Brighton

Also, • Gilly Salmon’s Carpe Diem (Salmon et al 2008)• Higher Education Academy’s Change Academy

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development CDI Principles

1. Working in extended teams(typically including learning technologist, educational developer, subject librarian, etc)

2. Challenging assumptions about the curriculum(confrontation, exposure to ‘better, alternative conceptions’ (Ho 2000))

3. Building and iteratively improving designs using peer review(Teachers tend to validate new approaches by adopting them (Eraut 1994)

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development The CDI process

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Online CDI resources

(via Brookes wiki)

Downloadable:• Presentations• Handouts• Planners• Checklists• Frameworks

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development

Any questions or discussion about the CDI process?

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Evaluating the CDIs*

3 framing questions:• what pre-requisites are required for individuals,

groups and/or institutions to gain benefit from the CDIs?

• what activities and/or elements are most effective in the CDI process?

• what are the main indicators of success of the CDIs?

*See Dempter (2008)

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Data and analysis

5 years of CDI workshop data• reports• workshop feedback• images captured in workshops• representations of designs

and• in-depth interviews (9 CDI participants across 6

programme teams)

Analysis: • inductive, interpretative, themes, categories• insights and ways to improve practice

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Scope of the CDIs

At the time of our evaluation:• 200+ staff, 35 course teams, 3 institutions have

attended CDIs since Dec 2003 (Approximately 70 of these, representing around 15 course teams, were not Oxford Brookes)

• Typical examples include • whole school of Health and Social Care to high level

engagement in e-Learning in 1 year• Fully online MA School of Built Environment)

• Since then over 200 Brookes staff in CDIs for assessment redesign, plus smaller numbers for e-learning

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Factors influencing

participation1. Management imperative

(e.g. new or renewed courses to address financial pressure, modernisation, new recruitment patterns, new markets, etc)

2. Personal and professional development(learn new skills, look at different approaches, address educational problems like workload)

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Effective activities in CDIs

1. Allocating resources to curriculum planning(time to plan, expertise on hand, license to innovate)

2. CDI design and facilitation(new ideas, expertise, ‘time to play and try things out’, concrete objectives)

3. Sharing ideas(sharing practice and debating ideas, re-examining core purposes and approaches, critical friends)

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Designing…

… & building is integral

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Critical friends

“I think the idea of us having to explain our proposal to other people and defend it, and deal with their comments, that was useful.”

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Peer review (critical friends)

promoting iterative design & development utilising peer and student feedback

(Sharpe et al 2006)

Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G. and Francis, R. (2006). "The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: a review of UK literature and practice undertaken for the Higher Education Academy." [Online] Retrieved 3 October, from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/research/literature_reviews/blended_elearning_full_review.pdf

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Perceptions of success

1. Tangible deliverables(validation documents, exemplar learning activities, etc)

2. Confidence and ownership(“probably the buy in from staff and that staff have kind of been empowered”)

3. Conceptual change(“I went in thinking I don’t want to this really, I haven’t got the skills, coming away thinking this will be good, this is going to be a good way for students to learn”)

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Perceptions of success (2)

4. Building networks(“The workshops allowed teams of staff to attend from different schools across the University and this was supportive and stimulating … and to get a bigger picture of what was happening.”)

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development Challenges

• Time• to involve multi-professional teams• involve e-Learning/educational experts• Evaluate (especially the student experience)

• ‘Experts’ willing to share• Iterative, evidence-informed redesign that

actively uses peer and learner feedback• Management buy-in• Working at programme level• Licence to innovate• Transferability?• External environment

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development https://mw.brookes.ac.uk/display/CDIs/

Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development References

Benfield, G. (2008a). ‘e-Learning Course Design Intensives: disrupting the norms of curriculum design’. Educational Developments (9.4), pp 20-22.

Dempster, J. (2008). 'External Evaluation for Oxford Brookes Course Design Intensives (CDIs).' [Online] Retrieved 6 November 2008, from https://mw.brookes.ac.uk/display/CDIs/CDI+Evaluation.

Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London, Routledge.

Ho, A. S. P. (2000). ‘A conceptual change approach to staff development: A model for programme design’. International Journal for Academic Development 5(1).

Salmon, G., Jones, S. & Armellini, A. (2008). ‘Building Institutional Capability in E-learning Design’, ALT-J 16 (2), pp. 95-109.