The journey continues
Finding literature that applies to my focus is proving to be quite the challenge. I've begun to take a slightly different tactic. Instead of looking for lit that is specifically on "Team and individual project management (of multiple projects) w/ a focus on eLearning projects in a cooperate environment," I'm simply looking for ARP/PAR that involve at least one of those things. PAR in a collaborative team environment, PAR w/ project management as the emphasis, PAR w/ cultural change as a context, PAR with personal change as a context. I'm looking specifically for projects that involve professional adults working either individually or in groups to improve their own process and I'm trying to stay away from projects that are student centered - although in some cases those are providing valuable insight as well (especially one where the students were college engineering students who needed to develop their project management skills). Giving myself permission to expand my search in this manner has helped me "think outside the box" a bit as I try to apply other contexts to my own.
Also of invaluable help has been a colleague and friend who recently completed her MA in instructional design and educational technology. As part of that process, she conducted an ARP on Knowledge Management (KM). She has been extremely generous and kind in sharing her experience, her research, and in agreeing to serve as a "critical friend" for my own project. This will be interesting as she will very likely also be an active participant (one of the more enthusiastic ones I would guess) in my project. Must remember to ask Madre if it is OK for an active participant to also serve as a critical friend. If that is not advised - then it will be difficult for me to decide which role would be more valuable - both for my development and hers.
Ok - here is are some observations/reflections on one of the articles I've read (already posted to BB - but I wanted it here as well).
Staff development for online delivery: A collaborative, team based action learning model. By Allan Ellis and Renata Phelps
Australian Journal of Educational Technology 2000, 16(1), 26-44
Retrieved 9/14/04 from here:
(Found via the eLearning guild resource search.
Summary and insights gained:
A. Ellis and R. Phelps of Southern Cross University describe the early phases (cycles) of a project focused on developing a model for delivering online learning. This model required that the team (educators at Southern Cross in the School of Social and Workplace Development) "...do more than develop new technical skills." The researchers and team members recognized that "Online development and delivery requires new pedagogical approaches, challenging previous practices with regards to assessment, group interaction, and student/teacher dialogue... Online delivery challenges traditional notions of academics working in isolation and instead brings together teams of people each with unique skills, into a course design and development team." The educators involved in this project were themselves Action Learners. Collaboration was the key to their success. Another significant factor was that the participants held collaborative meetings very early in the process (beginning of phase/cycle one). These initial meetings involved the majority of the staff within the school. During the initial meetings a "shared understanding about the values, motives, philosophical and ideological foundations upon which the project was founded" was developed. Although the entire staff did not participate deeply in the initial project development, most did "maintain regular monitoring/observation of the progress of the project, knowing that they would, in the near future be developing units themselves." This whole staff "buy in" was another key to success. The early meetings resulted in a high level of enthusiasm at the outset. This enthusiasm proved to be invaluable for the long-term success of the project. The participants agreed that the initial meetings were "well worth the investment."
One of the significant lessons learned was that the participants preferred to play an integral part in the development of the of the actual course work/course materials in addition to the development of the "new pedagogical approaches." They recognized that a successful online learning model must involve "more than just moving current paper-based teaching materials onto the web and [learning] a few 'cookbook' approaches to on-line delivery." The staff preferred to learn and use current technology to support sound pedagogical strategies, they wanted to "own" the technology and fully integrate its use into their daily work. They didn't want to give up their responsibility for their curriculum development to someone else (such as a professional instructional designer). They wanted expertise in that area available to them as needed but want to maintain their on integrity. One of the team members made this analogy, "...a scaffolding built up with experts but if that scaffolding is taken away, the building still stands." I LOVE that analogy for the role of the expert in a DL or CP! I'll probably use the analogy when working with my team... and in other online forums I to which I belong.
So - what have I learned from reading this article/paper? That to affect change for a team, collaboration is key and key to collaboration is enthusiasm. Key to the enthusiasm is shared goals and early (and continual) communication. Another key is empowering the team members to "own" the process and the project at all levels.
During the this process at Southern Cross, the team members were interviewed in two stages (at the beginning of a phase/cycle before the project activities occurred and again at the end). These interviews served as the formal "reflection." The interviews were "conducted in a collaborative context, not as a 'researcher and subject' but as a process of producing a communal record for all the projects team's benefit and all staff were enthusiastic about the value in documenting the process." Discussion questions were developed and provided but "served as a guide only." This bit of information was valuable to me as I have been struggling some with how to develop a plan that could include reflection time for my team. I am hesitant to ask them to journal or fill out surveys as I dont believe that would engender the kind of enthusiastic participation I hope to develop. However, my team loves to share with each other in a conversational format, meetings like the ones used by the researchers at Southern Cross might provide an excellent reflective context for my own project.
Also of invaluable help has been a colleague and friend who recently completed her MA in instructional design and educational technology. As part of that process, she conducted an ARP on Knowledge Management (KM). She has been extremely generous and kind in sharing her experience, her research, and in agreeing to serve as a "critical friend" for my own project. This will be interesting as she will very likely also be an active participant (one of the more enthusiastic ones I would guess) in my project. Must remember to ask Madre if it is OK for an active participant to also serve as a critical friend. If that is not advised - then it will be difficult for me to decide which role would be more valuable - both for my development and hers.
Ok - here is are some observations/reflections on one of the articles I've read (already posted to BB - but I wanted it here as well).
Staff development for online delivery: A collaborative, team based action learning model. By Allan Ellis and Renata Phelps
Australian Journal of Educational Technology 2000, 16(1), 26-44
Retrieved 9/14/04 from here:
(Found via the eLearning guild resource search.
Summary and insights gained:
A. Ellis and R. Phelps of Southern Cross University describe the early phases (cycles) of a project focused on developing a model for delivering online learning. This model required that the team (educators at Southern Cross in the School of Social and Workplace Development) "...do more than develop new technical skills." The researchers and team members recognized that "Online development and delivery requires new pedagogical approaches, challenging previous practices with regards to assessment, group interaction, and student/teacher dialogue... Online delivery challenges traditional notions of academics working in isolation and instead brings together teams of people each with unique skills, into a course design and development team." The educators involved in this project were themselves Action Learners. Collaboration was the key to their success. Another significant factor was that the participants held collaborative meetings very early in the process (beginning of phase/cycle one). These initial meetings involved the majority of the staff within the school. During the initial meetings a "shared understanding about the values, motives, philosophical and ideological foundations upon which the project was founded" was developed. Although the entire staff did not participate deeply in the initial project development, most did "maintain regular monitoring/observation of the progress of the project, knowing that they would, in the near future be developing units themselves." This whole staff "buy in" was another key to success. The early meetings resulted in a high level of enthusiasm at the outset. This enthusiasm proved to be invaluable for the long-term success of the project. The participants agreed that the initial meetings were "well worth the investment."
One of the significant lessons learned was that the participants preferred to play an integral part in the development of the of the actual course work/course materials in addition to the development of the "new pedagogical approaches." They recognized that a successful online learning model must involve "more than just moving current paper-based teaching materials onto the web and [learning] a few 'cookbook' approaches to on-line delivery." The staff preferred to learn and use current technology to support sound pedagogical strategies, they wanted to "own" the technology and fully integrate its use into their daily work. They didn't want to give up their responsibility for their curriculum development to someone else (such as a professional instructional designer). They wanted expertise in that area available to them as needed but want to maintain their on integrity. One of the team members made this analogy, "...a scaffolding built up with experts but if that scaffolding is taken away, the building still stands." I LOVE that analogy for the role of the expert in a DL or CP! I'll probably use the analogy when working with my team... and in other online forums I to which I belong.
So - what have I learned from reading this article/paper? That to affect change for a team, collaboration is key and key to collaboration is enthusiasm. Key to the enthusiasm is shared goals and early (and continual) communication. Another key is empowering the team members to "own" the process and the project at all levels.
During the this process at Southern Cross, the team members were interviewed in two stages (at the beginning of a phase/cycle before the project activities occurred and again at the end). These interviews served as the formal "reflection." The interviews were "conducted in a collaborative context, not as a 'researcher and subject' but as a process of producing a communal record for all the projects team's benefit and all staff were enthusiastic about the value in documenting the process." Discussion questions were developed and provided but "served as a guide only." This bit of information was valuable to me as I have been struggling some with how to develop a plan that could include reflection time for my team. I am hesitant to ask them to journal or fill out surveys as I dont believe that would engender the kind of enthusiastic participation I hope to develop. However, my team loves to share with each other in a conversational format, meetings like the ones used by the researchers at Southern Cross might provide an excellent reflective context for my own project.
posted by susan @ 1:01 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home