Developing a Fast-track Learning Program Some ideas to make your delivery successful © Wodonga TAFE 2012

© Wodonga TAFE 2012

Developing a Fast-track Learning Program

Some ideas to make your delivery successful

© Wodonga TAFE 2012 2

• What is fast track

• Fast track is a Blended approach to delivery where students attend one class per month. It is delivered in Certificate 4, diploma and advanced diploma across the Business Management faculty.

• As an example, a student doing a Diploma in business Management attends one class most months for one year during a standard academic year.

Introduction


• Numbers of attendees.

• Resources

• Moodle access

• Content

• Assessment

• Feedback

What Problems have we had?


Identify the target market.

• Who attends a fast track group?

• Working full time• Mostly older students (post 25)• Have done previous study (may be required)• They want low cost and low time requirements

• There is a need to determine student needs and requirements

How do we make the program better?


• Make attendance compulsory

• Determine the required time for classes

• Set pre-reading and clarify resource requirements well before the class

• Contact students before the class and ensure they are attending and have what they need

• This includes moodle access

• Make sure content is not too flexible – is this BL or OL

Preparation is the key.


• Set and require pre-reading

• Look at flipping the delivery – possibly pre assess and make the attendance day a tutorial

• Use technology to support – e.g short videos, pod casts

• Determine if the content is to be different for different groups – is it able to develop one program that can be F2F BL and OL

Set content requirement


• What is constructivist learning?• It is developing built up knowledge• Not only based on study• Self paced and independent• Not just learn/assess/forget (Roscoe, 2012)

• Use methods such as portfolios and reflective practice

• Teach through assessment – make it interesting (Sharma, 2007)

• Make learning and assessment relevant

Constructivist


• Determine the time required in class

• Determine the time till assessment is due and stick to it

• Ensure the class is covering what needs to be covered face to face such as practical or hands on requirement

• Make sure class and online is not a dumping ground

• Class must reinforce online learning

• Develop a relationship

Delivery schedule


• Technology used to support students

• Community develops through:– OL is an extension of the classroom (Commeaux, 2003)– Teacher is still central to the group (Steel, 2009)– Learning however is student centered (DeZure, 2002)– Need to help non traditional students settle n and understand practices

• The group needs to interact in class and online. They need to support each others learning so the teacher does not have to.

Community of Learning


• First provide constant feedback• Feedback on receipt of assessment – stop students worrying • Feedback on assessment

• Possibly provide face to face feedback before the commencement of the next group session

• Need to note absences and treat them accordingly

• Develop Forums and email groups. Keep posts simple

Follow up


• Teachers need to be trained in how to design and develop

• Traditionally BL has been taken up by those who prefer technology but this needs to change and is changing

• Teachers need to understand that roles are changing and adapt to this

• Teacher practice will need to change. This in not F2F or OL.

• Teachers need to support students and be supported by peers/superiors

Teacher perception of learning


• Needs to be authentic, true to training package and use constructionist content if that is the developed platform

• May need to conduct some assessment face to face• Can use workplace related assessment

• Use technology – make some assessment self marking

• Set consistent assessment throughout the units

• Provide quality feedback to allow learning to continue after the assessment

Assessment


• Cost factors

• IT skills – need to be taught not assumed

• Access to IT – needs to be accessible across the cohort

• Can this be developed for PD or short courses – certainly.

• Can allow for multiple deliveries of the same content• E.g geographic. Tailored groups or delivery methods

Other Factors to consider


• This is about our future direction• We we will report back on how we develop future programs that have

different content levels• Need to ensure the program is not seen as a ‘cereal box’ qualification

• Good students will succeed no matter what the environment• We need to ensure that we do not let the majority take up all our time

while we just let the poor students be casualties of our delivery

• Be true to the literature and ensure student satisfaction is as high for Fast-track (BL) as it is for face to face

Conclusion

15

• Anderson, G. (2012). Learning in the 21st century. Bradford: Bradford : Emerald Group Publishing Limited. • Arbaugh, J. B. (2009). Research in online and blended learning in the business disciplines: Key findings and possible future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(2), 71-87.

doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.06.006 • Buche, M. W., Davis, L. R., & Vician, C. (2012). Does technology acceptance affect E-learning in a non-technology-intensive course? Journal of Information Systems Education, 23(1), 41-50. • Chen, C. C., Jones, K. T., & Moreland, K. A. (2013). Online accounting education versus in-class delivery: Does course level matter? Issues in Accounting Education, 28(1), 1-16. doi:10.2308/iace-

50303 • Cottrell, D. M., & Robison, R. A. (2003). CASE 4 blended learning in an accounting course. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 261-269. • Drysdale, J. S., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., & Halverson, L. R. (2013). An analysis of research trends in dissertations and theses studying blended learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 17(0),

90-100. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.ballarat.edu.au/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.11.003 • Dziuban, C., & Moskal, P. (2011). A course is a course is a course: Factor invariance in student evaluation of online, blended and face-to-face learning environments. The Internet and Higher

Education, 14(4), 236-241. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.05.003 • Fearon, C., Starr, S., & McLaughlin, H. (2012). Blended learning in higher education (HE): Conceptualising key strategic issues within a business school. Development and Learning in Organizations,

26(2), 19-22. • Frank, G., & Bitter, S. (2012). Student perspectives on elearning in a blended learning context. Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Government, ECEG, 79-88. • Gerbic, P. (2011). Teaching using a blended approach – what does the literature tell us? Educational Media International, 48(3), 221-234. doi:10.1080/09523987.2011.615159 • Glogowska, M. (2011). How ‘blended’ is blended learning?: Students' perceptions of issues around the integration of online and face-to-face learning in a continuing professional development (CPD)

health care context. Nurse Education Today, 31(8), 887-891. • Goodwyn, A., & Stables, A. W. (2004). Learning to read critically in language and literacy. London: SAGE Publications. • Green, N. C., Edwards, H., Wolodko, B., Stewart, C., Brooks, M., & Littledyke, R. (2010). Reconceptualising higher education pedagogy in online learning. Distance Education, 31(3), 257-273.

doi:10.1080/01587919.2010.513951 • Hiralaal, A. (2012). Students' experiences of blended learning in accounting education at the durban university of technology. South African Journal of Higher Education, 26(2), 316-328. • Holley, D., & Oliver, M. (2010). Student engagement and blended learning: Portraits of risk. Computers & Education, 54(3), 693-700. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.035 • Korr, J., Derwin, E. B., Greene, K., & Sokoloff, W. (2012). Transitioning an adult-serving university to a blended learning model. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 60(1), 2-11.

doi:10.1080/07377363.2012.649123 • Mason, R. (2005). Blended learning. ECi.Education, Communication Information, 5(3), 217-220. • Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-233. • Rastegarpour, H. (1012). What is the hoopla about blended learning: Something old is new again doi:10.1109/ICELET.2010.5708381 • Roscoe, D. (0101). Comparing student outcomes in blended and face-to-face courses. Journal of Political Science Education, 8(1), 1-19. doi:10.1080/15512169.2012.641413 • Sharma, P. (2010). Blended learning. ELT Journal, 64(4), 456-457458. • Taylor, J. A., & Newton, D. (2013). Beyond blended learning: A case study of institutional change at an australian regional university. The Internet and Higher Education, 18(0), 54-60.

doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.10.003 • Warelow, P. J., Wells, S., & Irwin, P. (2011). Flexible delivery: On-line versus bottom-line. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, the, 29(1), 55-62 Yes. • Wlodkowski, R. J. (2010). Enhancing adult motivation to learn : A comprehensive guide for teaching all adults (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley. • Wlodkowski, R. J., & Ginsberg, M. B. (2010). Teaching intensive and accelerated courses : Instruction that motivates learning (1st ed.). New York: Wiley.

© Wodonga TAFE 2012

Reference List

Documents

Developing a Fast-track Learning Program Some ideas to make your delivery successful © Wodonga TAFE 2012