I am enjoying the ALT 2021 conference recordings! Tonight, we watched the session entitled “The road to DELLHE – developing Leadership Literacies for pedagogically and ethically sound Digital Education” by Deborah Arnold, Albert Sangrà, and Sharon Flynn. Arnold shared their recent doctoral research. Sangrà is Arnold’s Ph.D. advisor. The DELLHE Framework is the Digital Education Leadership Literacies for Higher Education, “a set of mindsets, attitudes and behaviours which enable HE leaders to address complex problems relating to the integration of Digital Education.” Arnold presented a diagram with five dimensions. The sustaining framework addresses the link between ethical uses of learning technology and the environment, for example. Arnold asked about the impact of learning technologies on the natural environment and ethical/non-ethical uses of learning technologies. Arnold spoke about the representation (attitudes and mindsets) and communication (behaviors and actions) by leaders about the environmental and ethical concerns about learning technology use. Arnold conducted semi-structured interviews in three European universities. The qualitative interpretation of the interviews led to differences by country (France, Belgium, and the UK) in awareness of environmental issues. Flynn then spoke about the Framework for Ethical Learning Technology (FELT) proposed by ALT recently. The framework has four dimensions: awareness, professionalism, care and community, and values. They mentioned mapping this framework onto other ones, including Arnold’s DELLHE framework. There are, as mentioned, similarities between the two frameworks. The presenters polled the audience asking them to select one of a list of five policies that needs the most attention in higher education. Most (28%) mentioned “developing policies for safe, legal and ethical use of educational technology.” A close second was a tie between “being accountable and prepared to explain decision making” and “promoting fair and equitable treatment, enhancing access to learning.” This last one was the one that I selected. This session made me think about visiting the DELLHE and FELT frameworks as part of the BIT 295 experience.
The next session I watched was entitled “The other side of the story: students’ experiences of online tutorials” by Kathy Chandler. Chandler has been researching the student experience as part of their doctoral research. Chandler used Wooclap for interaction, and I wanted to use this tool as part of a talk. The research questions focused on the narratives of students’ experiences of synchronous online tutorials in a health and social care module and how they vary (and what factors account for the variation). A second question addressed what can be learned about the needs which drive the preferences students express regarding synchronous online instruction in this course. The last research question Chandler wanted to study was “how does hearing about students’ experience of synchronous online tuition impact on tutors’ reports of their thinking and practice?” Chandler asked the audience: “have you ever participated in a research study and thought that the survey or interviewer was asking the wrong questions?” I have! The methodology Chandler chose was one I do not know anything about: experience-centered narrative approach. Ten students kept diaries of their experience/interpretation of 21 tutorials in an undergraduate health and social care module. Chandler used the voice-centered relational method to analyze the data. There is so much to learn about interviews and qualitative analyses! Chandler explained that many of the students that took part in the study had children around them or family. Students also expressed different preferences: everyone expressed a strong preference for typing rather than using the microphone. One question that Chandler asked was “what is the ideal number of students for a tutorial session?” From previous studies, Chandler mentioned that students report a preference for smaller groups. The students in Chandler’s study reported keeping the number low enough so that the tutors can effectively interact with students and acknowledge contributions from all students. Students wanted active tutorials, and Chandler brought up the Community of Inquiry framework to indicate the teaching presence and social presence. Chandler concluded that educators should have an awareness of students’ contexts including their caring or family responsibilities, distractions, desire for connection, and not wanting to use a microphone. Tutors, suggested Chandler, can meet the needs of students by understanding the challenges of distance learning, being encouraging and helpful, and working well with co-tutors. I thought it was nice to see that acknowledging differences in power and providing opportunities for students to connect with others. Chandler also shared considerations for university administrators to help educators create more interactive and encouraging tutorials. This ties back to the ethical use of learning technologies and frameworks for considering ethics and access.
