J. Blumhof and D. Pearlman

Case study 4

Developing and using resources for open learning and project work

Originators: Ms Jennifer Blumhof and Ms Dessie Pearlman
Reproduced with permission from Exley, K. and Gibbs, G. (eds.) Course Design for Resource Based Learning - Science Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development (1994)

Background

The Environmental Education Action Research Group (EEARG) was set up in 1993 to further research and development into teaching and learning in higher education, with particular reference to environmental studies / sciences. It provides a focus for a co-ordinated programme of action research, encouraging collaboration and experimentation based on mutual support and shared expertise.

Action research has been defined as 'collaborative, critical inquiry by the academics themselves into their own teaching practice, into problems of student learning and into curriculum problems'. It offers professional development through academic course development, group reflection, evaluation and improved practice. The aim of EEARG is to plan educational 'experiments', act on them, observe and reflect on the results, and rigorously evaluate them before moving on to a new cycle of action research.

Resources have been developed to facilitate 'open learning' - the term is shorthand for a range of teaching and learning ideas which encourage both a logistical independence and independence of mind. To further this aim an Environmental Sciences Open Learning Centre (ESOLC) has been established at the University of Hertfordshire; it houses a collection of resources to facilitate open learning, such as course teaching packs and readers.

The rationale for fostering open learning at the University of Hertfordshire is:

• to continue a long-established practice of actively involving the students in the learning process;
• to respond to increasing student:staff ratios;
• to respond to limited library provision;
• to respond to a more varied student group arising from a more open-access policy;
• to meet the need for students to develop transferable skills;
• to enhance teaching and learning quality;
• to address the speed of change in environmental studies and to incorporate up-to-date material in the curriculum;
• to address multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary issues in environmental studies.

EEARG have created a wide range of resource packs and readers to support specific elements in the curriculum, such as the Channel Tunnel, the London Docklands, the European Environment, Rural Planning Policies, Classifying Fungi, World Population, Food Aid and Debt and the Earth Summit. Readers have also been produced to support framework projects; these include the Social Research reader and a Skills folder to help students develop transferable skills. The Social Research reader was developed because it was considered that the introduction to social research theory and technique was not only somewhat limited but was repeated by individual members of staff to their own project students.

Context

Supervisory contact time is used more productively if the student has previously consulted the Reader and clarified the questions they need to ask or the points they wish to discuss

The Social Research reader is a resource for all final-year students in environmental sciences who choose to undertake a substantial two-module, individual research project on a topic requiring research techniques more familiar to a student of the social sciences, such as survey and questionnaire work. Approximately 70 final-year students and several second-year students completing course assignments could make use of the resource in any year. The students study the Social Research reader before they seek any further assistance from their supervisor.

Aims

The producers of the reader aim to increase the standard of final-year project work by replacing much of the repetitive supervisory work that previously took place. The students gain an understanding of basic research techniques from the reader, which then leaves supervisory time for discussions of data interpretation and analysis.

Implementation

The successful use of readers in other parts of the curriculum and the feeling of tutors that they underused the valuable contact time they had with students made a proposal to adopt RBL very attractive to the staff in the division. The reader was produced by two members of staff and feedback sought at the draft stage from colleagues, and later from the students who used it. Staff who act as project supervisors are asked to make sure that any student who seeks their help with questions about social science research has first consulted the relevant section of the reader.

Student induction

Final-year projects are discussed with students during their second year. By the time they enter the third year the majority of students have already chosen their project topic. At the beginning of the final year projects are discussed in greater detail, and issues such as project management, methodology and managing time are introduced. At this time the course leader also talks to all the final-year students for 90 minutes: an overview of the whole pack is given in a 'framework lecture' and the Social Research reader is introduced to the students. The reader contains a copy of the overhead transparencies used in this lecture.

Experience of using other resources has shown that simply making the reader available to the students is not enough: they need to be clearly directed to the resource and encouraged to use it.

Resources

The reader was developed because there was no printed text which covered the range of social science research techniques at the level required by environmental studies students who are on an interdisciplinary degree programme. The reader is currently about 200 pages long, but will be revised after students have given feedback on the parts that they find most useful. It is produced in loose-leaf form for ease of use (students can more easily photocopy bits) and begins with a copy of the framework lecture. It contains sections from a wide range of textbooks, though the amount that can be used from each source is limited by copyright. Also included are introductory, explanatory and summarising notes, and articles from both academic journals and the popular press, together with worked examples of techniques.

Operation

Project students have the opportunity for regular contact with their supervisor. Ideally this time should be spent on discussing the project topic in some depth and not in giving mini-lectures on research techniques.

Three copies of the reader are kept on a 'reference only' basis in the Environmental Sciences Open Learning Centre. The centre also contains a substantial video collection, maps, periodicals, specialist reports, resource files and other readers produced in house, of which there are about ten. Working in the centre has become very popular among students, and there is standing room only at peak times. The physical layout of the space and the availability of a wide range of resources for reference facilitates learning as a communal activity, with the consequent cross-fertilisation of ideas and exchange of information; therefore the centre itself encourages and facilitates group-work skills.

Costs

It has been estimated that it has taken 75 hours of administration time and 25 hours of academic staff time to produce the Social Research reader. The reader will also need to be updated and modified in the light of feedback from the students. The printing costs of producing a 200-page document make it too expensive to distribute freely to the students. Another cost is that the open learning centre is staffed. However, the benefits in increasing the quality of contact time are thought to far outweigh any production costs.

Evaluation

Although it is too early to formally evaluate the effectiveness of the Social Research reader, it is clear from both the record of use in the open learning centre and the project work produced by the students that it is being well used, and the students speak highly of it: 'A student on placement in Europe who had heard about the reader from another student wrote asking if he could have a copy' (J.R.Blumhof, Co-ordinator of EEARG).

The staff who have developed this and other readers have evaluated their use in the following way. The potential disadvantages are that readers:

• are expensive in terms of front-loaded staff time;
• have limited 'shelf-life', and require resources for updating;
• present complex problems arising from copyright law;
• can discourage students from looking further afield for information;
• require new skills in academic staff in areas such as design, layout, etc.;
• can highlight the limitations of other resources, e.g. self-study areas.

The potential advantages are that readers:

• save staff time in the longer term;
• offer large classes access to a wide range of literature which may not otherwise be easily available;
• can demonstrate the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary nature of environmental sciences;
• offer material for mixed-experience groups that can be digested at a slower rate, or can stretch the more able students;
• can show examples of good production and presentation practices;
• can be used as a flexible teaching resource, especially for seminar and tutorial work;
• stimulate further student investigation;
• enhance student motivation and performance by facilitating open learning;
• encourage students to take responsibility for their own learning;
• allow flexibility of curriculum design.

Developments

The Social Research reader will be formally evaluated and possibly revised following feedback from staff and students. The EEARG in the Division of Environmental Sciences will continue to look for areas of the curriculum which lend themselves to RBL and the use of teaching and learning packs.

Conclusion

If students begin to resent having to find out information for themselves in other ways then this may limit the number of new readers which are produced in the future

The EEARG provides a supportive and stimulating forum for those interested in developing and evaluating their teaching. This collaborative arrangement has greatly assisted in the smooth introduction of RBL into the curriculum.

Staff involved in the EEARG have expressed the feeling that the resources could be a victim of their success Students already ask for readers for other elements of the course and have come to expect that they will be provided.

However, the value of resources, such as the Social Research reader, in encouraging deep and open approaches to student learning and the benefits for teaching staff who avoid repeating basic information to all their project students, far outweigh the potential difficulties.