ESCalate: Join the Discussion

ESCalate at BERA 2011

noreply@blogger.com (Jocelyn) — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:38:00 +0000

There was a great buzz this year at the annual conference of the British Educational Research Association, which met at the Institution of Education, University of London from 6th to 8th September. Nearly 1000 delegates turned up, including some 300 from overseas. Highlights included a keynote lecture by Baroness Onora O'Neill on 'intelligent accountability', which discussed the potential distorting effects of accountability systems and the importance of retaining trust and commitment. The relevance of this was picked up by ESCalate's Director, Andrew Pollard, when he introduced the panel of the Research Excellence Framework to the conference. There was discussion of how powerful, centrally-managed initiatives must be so careful in going about their business. Some have been concerned about the policies of the Higher Education Academy in this respect - but BERA was also an occasion when ESCalate was able to welcome Kathy Wright, the HEA's new lead on Education. Kathy was introduced to senior representatives of many education associations, including SRHE, BERA, BESA and FACE, and to colleagues from the four countries of the UK who have worked with ESCalate. The subject centre also sponsored two poster competitions and Andrew Pollard presented the prize winners prior to the Presidential Lecture by Professor Mary James. She too argued that there need to be more alliances within our subject community. ESCalate's publications, made available at this event, simply flew off the shelves. Overall then, BERA 2011 was a considerable showcase for research in the fields of Education and Teacher Education and ESCalate was delighted to have taken part - albeit for the last time.

Earli 2011 @University of Exeter

noreply@blogger.com (Jocelyn) — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 20:59:00 +0000

The European Association of Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) host a biennial conference which, this year, was held at Exeter - EARLI 2011. The conference is one of, if not the largest, I have ever attended - I heard there were over 2000 delegates. Certainly there were between 17 and 23 parallel sessions at any one time during the paper presentations which spread across the entire campus and five refreshment halls. The presentations are organised by Special Interest Groups (SIGs) into themes and I was impressed by the invited symposia for each SIG which brought together some of the most well-known names in the fields of education and educational psychology. The weather and campus grounds were lovely which was just as well as we were walking what felt like several miles a day between sessions however, regularly getting out into the fresh air just helped stimulate thinking following a presentation.

The conference theme was Education for a Global Networked Society and I followed sessions that largely focused on learning through collaboration and creative use of digital tools. However, you could have followed many other themes that included assessment, conceptual change, early childhood, motivation, teacher education, religious or moral education, instructional design, social interaction, professional development, neuroscience in education, cultural diversity and metacognition amongst others.

I noticed two reoccurring foci that were novel (well to me). The first being self-regulation which was presented variously as time-on-task, a metacognitive process, a reflective task and in relation to synchronous online learning environments. The second was the role of external representations and my sincere thanks go to Shaaron Ainsworth and Anniken Furberg who in separate presentations gave me much food for thought about the role images and animations play in supporting learning through multimedia resources. Look out for Shaaron's paper in Science last week on 'Drawing to Learn in Science'.

Two other keynotes I particularly noted were Andrew Pollard & Mary James' distillation of the 10 year Teaching and Learning Research Project (TLRP) into ten evidence-informed principles for teaching and learning or pedagogies that ground learning throughout all sectors. And Michael Reiss who raised questions about the role school science currently plays. He then presented a framework for conceptualising the scope of science education that emphasised the whole life course before, during and beyond formal education and the importance of informal, outside school science learning.

HEA Conference 5-6 July 2011

noreply@blogger.com (Jocelyn) — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 21:22:00 +0000

I have just returned from the Academy's Annual Conference held this year at the East Midlands Conference Centre at Nottingham University. The highlight of the two days was the Question Time Panel session reflecting on the recent White Paper ” Students at the Heart of the System ” and the consequent challenges and changes to the sector over the next five years. It was chaired by Mike Baker – columnist and broadcaster and featured:

Alex Bols – NUS Head of Education and Quality

Ann Caesar – PVC (Education and Student Experience) at Warwick University

Claire Callender - Professor of Higher Education Policy (Birkbeck) and Studies (IoE)

Stephen Jackson (Director of Reviews, QAA)

Wes Streeting (Chief Executive of the Helena Kennedy Foundation

The following challenges for the sector were quickly identified.

Student identity, student engagement and how students view themselves. Much recent discourse in HE has been about students as co-producers even agents for change. How does this square with the student as consumer view prevalent in the White Paper?

The emphasis on competition between Universities, even though individuals collaborate (the work the HEA funds is a good example of this) institutions compete and this will become more intense.

Data management issues allied to the increased expectations on information provision, concerns over its reliability, purpose and possibilities of misinterpretation. Students will need guidance and support to make good use of it. Also what about alumni, students are investors and changes reflect on their degree currency?

The widening participation agenda appears to have been displaced by a focus on social mobility. Yet this is unlikely to be helped by the abolishment of the EMA and increased fees (especially likely to impact on mature students’ applications). The proposed National Scholarship has been described as a sham. Even the 20,000 extra AAB places are more to be accessed by the aspiring middle classes than those of lower SES. Why are universities deemed solely responsible? Involving other stakeholders in student education seems sensible.

The entry of private providers into the HE market. What about the criteria needed to be met to become a degree awarding institution? Currently requires a track record. Quality assurance concerns arise over the proposed ‘risk’ basis to QA itself. There will be an opportunity for a lower rate of engagement with the QAA for low risk institutions. Concerns over unpredictable outcome of the changes eg increased competition, involvement of private providers and commitment to deregulation.

The 'fudge' between opening HE to market forces and public control of the sector. Read as if it was a model of naked consumerism based on pre-conceptions and assumptions. It may well have been better to go more fully for Lord Browne’s original proposals.

Other issues raised by the audience and discussed with the panel included:

How do OER and other collaborative initiatives fit within this new model? This led to the reflection that institutions are more likely to form networks and partnerships so that groups of HEI and FECs will be in competition. In addition institutions will be looking to secure recruitment from overseas which raises questions over the coherence of the government’s current policies with the Borders Agency aiming to reduce numbers of incoming international students by 20,000.

Where is creativity (often cited along with flexibility as a key attribute of employability) in the new system? This led to an animated discussion about detrimental impact on creativity of the proposed differential funding for the sciences and the arts and humanities. It was noted that the eBacc was forcing youngsters into a one-size fits all system, that government rhetoric was focused on production of science graduates whereas, in fact, the creative industry is one of the biggest in Britain and a world leader.

Lastly it was pointed out that the White Paper was ‘oddly quiet’ about the relationship between research and teaching, teaching quality will be the new order of things however, there is a gap as to how this will be researched and developed. The role of research informed teaching practice is currently important for an institution to be given degree awarding powers.

In a final round up the panel members were asked on the spot to grade and comment in a word on the White Paper. It was awarded a mean average of 4/10 and described as ‘misguided’, ‘misleading’, ‘muddled’ and ‘leading to uncertainty’.

The new Initial Teacher Training strategy

noreply@blogger.com (Lyndsay) — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 11:20:00 +0000

On 27 June 2011, the government published its proposals for reforming teacher training, building on the previous white paper The Importance of Teaching. This strategy document is intended to provide the basis for discussion with providers, teachers, head teachers, pupils, parents and the general public before the final policy is announced later this year and changes are put in place for courses starting in 2012. A brief summary of some of the key points is provided below.

You can make your voice heard by going to the DfE's consultation page by 29 July.

The TDA are hosting a series of consultation meetings about the strategy for current and potential providers of ITT. These meetings run between 4 and 12 July, and you can sign up on the TDA's website.

Funding

The fees for both PGCE and undergraduate teacher training programmes will be set on the same basis as other undergraduate courses, so up to £6,000 or £9,000 where a Fair Access agreement is in place. From 2012, providers will not receive grants from the government for running ITT courses, but the strategy envisages that funding per trainee from all sources will remain stable between 2011/12 and 2012/13. The Teaching Agency (which will replace some of the functions of the TDA) will provide some direct funding to support ITT programmes in parts of the country where tuition fees may not fully cover progamme costs where this is in the public interest.

Bursaries will be available for students, differentiated by the potential achievement of the trainee and the priority of the subject or phase. Trainees could be classified as having "outstanding", "good" or "satisfactory" potential (mapping to whether they have a first, upper second or lower second class degree) and the level of their bursary would reflect this. There will be no DfE funding for trainees who do not have a second class degree or higher. Consideration is also being given to provide higher bursaries to trainees who are recruited and selected by schools with high levels of free school meals.

Recruitment of trainees

There is a strong emphasis in the strategy on improving the quality of students recruited onto teacher training courses. The strategy document notes that currently more teachers are trained than go into the profession, and aims to reduce this wastage and raise entry criteria by becoming more selective, a move that is also reflected in differential bursary rates. Pre-entry tests in literacy and numeracy will be required for PGCE trainees, though ICT tests will no longer be required.

A single application gateway will be introduced that allows parallel applications to all providers. The allocation of numbers of places will be determined by quality of provision as judged by Ofsted inspections, as it is now, but also by the use of employability data, published by provider and subject.

Undergraduate ITT courses will continue to be allocated places from 2012/13, but recruits must be of “at least the same quality” as those on typical PGCE courses.

Partnerships and providers

The vision over the next five to ten years is of schools increasingly taking much of the responsibility from government for managing the system of initial teacher training. Universities are nevertheless expected to continue to play a role in most teacher training through their partnerships with schools, acting as providers to teaching schools, and the best universities will be encouraged to form University Training Schools. Reflecting this, the strength of partnerships between universities and schools will have a stronger emphasis in inspections, with shared staff between HEIs and schools, and representatives of HEIs on governing bodies to be applauded.

Teach First will be expanded and plans for Teach Next – for professionals with a few years work experience – will be developed. This strategy document sets out an aim to expand the Graduate Teaching Programme but recognises that the higher cost per trainee of this programme makes this difficult without asking for a greater contribution from the school. The requirement that GTP trainees are ‘supernumerary’ to a school’s core staff may therefore be removed and trainees allowed to take on more teaching responsibilities, allowing schools to include funding for trainees in their core staff budgets.

Finally, the content of teacher training programmes will have a greater focus on behaviour management, and for primary teachers, the teaching of systematic synthetic phonics.

2nd TEAN Conference 'The Important Role of HE in Teacher Education'

noreply@blogger.com (Jocelyn) — Sun, 05 Jun 2011 15:17:00 +0000

Professor Jean Murray opened this second annual conference for the Teacher Education Advancement Network on 20 May 2011 with a stimulating keynote that started with a review of teacher education across the UK (from the Escalate booklet) and ended with a call to teacher educators everywhere to speak up about and for their profession. Talking about the Coalition Government's technicist view of teaching as a craft, she made the point that if teacher education remains 'a hidden profession' then we can continue to expect misunderstanding about what we do.

The rest of the day presented a variety of activity with round table discussions and workshops as well as research papers. Many presenters were disseminating results from ESCalate funded projects (my apologies I could not get to them all) and the book of abstracts is available from the conference web page. The variety in the sessions worked particularly well and I came away with many new ideas on the pros and cons of co-teaching with trainees, on different ways of conceptualising research informed pedagogy, on modelling as a teaching strategy and on the role of HE in teacher education.

All in all, it was a most enjoyable and informative day and I would to thank the TEAN team for organising it. I recommend keeping an eye on their Storehouse for the complete papers which will be available in time.

ESCalate’s Third Annual Student Conference – Enterprise and Employability

noreply@blogger.com (Lyndsay) — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:58:00 +0000

Last week saw ESCalate’s third student conference take place at Liverpool Hope University. Staff and students from a range of Education disciplines came together to discuss the very timely themes of enterprise and employability.

Dr Martin Carey, chief executive of Business Gateway & Urban Hope at Liverpool Hope welcomed us to a very appropriate venue – the new EDEN (education and enterprise) building, home to the university’s education faculty but also designed to be used by Liverpool’s wider education community for continuing professional development and to enable businesses to benefit from the knowledge, research and expertise of the university.

Dr Wendy Bignold, Vice Dean of Education at Liverpool Hope University set the scene for the day with her opening plenary session. She encouraged us to view enterprise as something broader than simply a business or industry-focused activity, as activity that is purposeful and creative and involves developing and applying innovative approaches to practical situations. Linking this notion of the ‘enterprising student’ to employability and education, Wendy went on to discuss how employers wanted employees who would not just fit in to their workplaces but who would be able to transform their organisations. Such students need to have a vision of the future – of their future selves and the possible futures of the organisations in which they work – a vision that Wendy saw as at the heart of what enterprise education could offer. She also related this vision to the work of education in supporting and nurturing traditions of a civil society: students who had been transformed themselves in the course of their education are themselves equipped with transformative potential that they can bring to the workplace.

Two parallel sessions in the morning and afternoon offered delegates some choices in the morning and afternoon sessions, and we were particularly pleased that several sessions involved students themselves presenting - offering hands-on practice of employable skills in the process. One of the themes that I spotted running across several sessions was the exploration of employability for students studying Education, a subject that has sometimes been thought of as a vocational course inevitably leading to becoming a teacher. Namrata Rao and Anesa Hosein shared data showing that while most students on an Education Studies module at Liverpool Hope wanted to be teachers, only 13% actually were working as teachers after graduating, and they worked with students to expand their definitions of what it is to be an “education professional”. Students Bryony-Anne Bennett and Jennifer Cahill from Liverpool Hope showed how, through working with Lynne McCann, they had found opportunities to use their knowledge and skills of education in ‘real world’ projects, and were planning on setting up their own business to continue working in the world of education, though not as school teachers.

The importance of reflection and the emotional aspects of learning and working were also themes running through some of the presentations I was able to see. Work-based learning can be very challenging and Fran Myers of the Open University showed how students who vented their frustration and confusion on online message boards often had very different perspectives of their course upon later reflection, while Shirley Potts of Liverpool Hope drew attention to the importance and challenge of honest reflection in coming to a more nuanced understanding of the issues for students on disability studies courses.

Dr Paul Redmond, Head of Careers & Employability at the University of Liverpool provided a memorable and engaging keynote presentation, opening with an unsettling set of figures he termed ‘crunchonomics’, including the fact that there are currently 70 graduates being produced for every ‘graduate job’ available. This particularly harsh economic moment has only served to intensify the ‘war for talent’, he argued, in which employers have at their disposal an increasing range of ‘weapons of mass rejection’. Getting noticed and getting employed is increasingly competitive for current graduates, and Paul pointed out a sharp contrast between the desired goals of Generation Y (born after 1978) and the realities of the labour market. In this market, it’s not just the hard currencies of educational credentials and skills that count, but the soft currencies: the social and cultural capital of who you know, where you went to university, how you dress and your extra-curricular activities that mark you out as ‘employable’ in certain sectors. Creating a convincing narrative that draws together these hard and soft currencies (and – if you’re a man – avoiding shirts with pockets) is the challenge for today’s graduates.

Joe Gazdula, Lynne McCann, Helen Jamieson and Leanne Thompson pulled the day together in a closing plenary panel session, offering a hopeful note in spite of the current economic outlook, looking for what opportunities may be offered by the recession. There were some questions about the importance of volunteering and extra-curricular activities for employability and enterprise, and whether, if volunteering is embedded in the curriculum is it still voluntary (and when does volunteering become exploitation if we look at the current debate about internships). While we might traditionally have thought of education as a subject only for those with a vocation to teach, this conference showed how employability and enterprise are certainly not strangers to these education staff and students.

Presentations from speakers, including the keynotes, will be available from the event page on the ESCalate website in the next week or so.

A big thank you to Liverpool Hope for hosting the event and to all our speakers and delegates for a very interesting and enjoyable day.

Higher Education in FE:FE-HE Collaboration;Drivers of Change

noreply@blogger.com (Stephen Rose) — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:05:00 +0000

Last week I attended this important HE in FE Conference which asked and attempted to answer key questions about the future of this sector of HE provision in the light of recent changes to the funding landscape and how existing and new partnerships and collaborations between universities and FE Colleges delivering HE might be affected.
Professor Christine King, Vice-Chancellor Emeritus, Staffordshire University set the scene in her upbeat keynote address to conference. Professor King observed that society and the economy is changing - 'fact' and that within this landscape students want and need to learn in different ways leading to a re-defining of HE and a possible move away from the traditional forms of delivery and access points. HE in FE has traditionally offered opportunities to 'non-traditional' students and it is likely that the sector will continue to widen participation and support its HE students by offering local and flexible provision which meet the needs of students and support their changes in life.
John Widdowson, Principal, New College Durham endorsed Professor King's optimism and highlighted the excellent track record of HE in FE provision built on local provision,a clear focus on teaching and student support and progression opportunities to further HE study and employment. The future HE landscape will almost certainly require the construction and roll out of innovative curriculum models which the HE in FE sector have a good track record of developing again with a view to flexible and agile provision.
Dr Ian Tunbridge, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Thames Vally University emphasised that in the new future for HE primacy of the learner must be of the utmost concern in the wake of an era of 'initiatives'- HE in FE has a good record of providing access to students who enjoy small group tuition and committed teachers on programmes that meet need and develop skills for employment - 'good value learning, good quality with employment prospects'.
Steve Kendall, Associate Dean of Partnerships, University of Bedfordshire considered that HE in FE should aim wider as well as higher and offer opportunities to the newly unemployed, the disengaged and provide skills for those in work - 'a new workforce for a re-generated economy'. The sector should take every advantage in exploiting new communication channels and flexible ways of learning which fit into working lives.
The conference served as a timely reminder that the HE in FE sector has an important role to play in the new, emerging HE landscape and must continue to maintain sustainable and committed collaborations between FE colleges and HEIs.

Implications of the white paper for HEI's working with schools.

noreply@blogger.com (Jocelyn) — Tue, 08 Feb 2011 14:17:00 +0000

On 31 January I attended a UCET (University Council for the Education of Teachers) seminar at Sheffield Hallam University on the implications of the white paper for working with schools. Higher education institutions (HEIs) were well-represented in the audience (several were from new universities), with some school and college leaders, education consultants, and people from education agencies such as the TDA.

The focus of the afternoon was on partnership work, specifically around Teaching Schools, with workshops on how HEIs can respond to the recent DfE white paper “The Importance of Teaching”.

Julie Hughes, from the Teachers’ Development Agency (TDA), outlined the changes and uncertainty about TDA’s funding and future role, and described changes in how they were working with schools. At the end of November, they put out a call for schools who were interested in working with the TDA on leadership and partnership. It was made clear that no funding was available for this, and schools would be responsible for funding their own participation. The response to this call was far greater than the TDA expected – more than 260 school partnerships responded (most with some kind of HEI involvement). In all, 3138 schools were represented (secondary, primary and special schools), with group sizes ranging from 3 or 4 schools up to 30 or more schools. Around 43% of these partnerships were led by Training Schools. Julie felt that schools were very aware that they were now responsible for their own CPD and school improvement, and were looking within partnerships for knowledge and expertise about their own particular context and appropriate models to deal with their own problems.

There was an underlying message that HEIs need to actively promote themselves to schools as training providers. Even though more Teaching Schools are being set up, they will not have the capacity to cope with the numbers of trainee teachers. Furthermore, as members of the audience pointed out, HEIs bring a distinct fund of knowledge that simply is not available in teaching schools particularly around theory and research in relation to practice. The TDA was attempting to promote itself here as a partnership broker, acting as a link between schools and HEIs.

Jonathan Gore from the National College was the final speaker. He did not give much of an indication of the National College engaging with HEIs at all – there was little clarity on what role the National College envisages for HEIs. Perhaps this is because the National College sees itself as a competitor with HEIs when it comes to teacher training?

On the ground, there was little certainty about what the future will hold. There is, as yet, no clear direction on what University Training Schools will be, and how these will sit alongside Teaching Schools. The purpose of the workshops at this meeting was to discuss how HEIs can influence the direction of this to our (relative) advantage. The environment is not yet fixed, and there is much that is able to be influenced, particularly in terms of process. A summary of the points raised at the workshops will be circulated later. For now, though, it is clear that many universities will be pushing to be involved with school partnerships around training schools. We need to be at the forefront of this, leading the way in working with schools, not following others.

Jo Rose, Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol

Exploring young children’s everyday lives

noreply@blogger.com (Lyndsay) — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 18:50:00 +0000

This two-day event, organised by the Toys and Technology research team at the School of Education at the University of Stirling drew on the team’s ESRC-funded project Young Children Learning with Toys and Technology at Home (2008-2011). It brought together researchers exploring the everyday lives and learning of children under five years.

Pia Christensen set the theme of the event with a keynote presentation: ‘Ethnographic lessons from studies of young children’s lives’. Coming from an anthropological perspective, she explored some of the issues around doing ethnographic research with young children. Christensen beautifully described the research process itself as a form of communication and dialogue in which we try to find sensitive and appropriate ways to listen to and understand what our research participants are saying. Finding ways to include participants’ voices in our research with young children for whom verbal conversation is not their primary means of communication is a central concern for many early childhood researchers. Tapping into children’s existing cultures of communication – through gesture, play, song, drawing, photography – is therefore at the heart of research with young children as we try to understand their experience, understandings and meaning-making from their points of view.

The theme of children’s voices returned throughout the event, allowing different researchers to explore this theme from different angles and even question whether “Children’s Voice” was now a ‘new orthodoxy’ that could sometimes be applied unreflectively without considering how we act on what we learn from listening to children.

Doctoral students presented their work and a substantial period of time was dedicated to feedback from a panel formed of Alan Prout, Pia Christensen and Lydia Plowman and questions from the audience. As well as giving students some experience of and opportunities for viva preparation, this format also provided a chance for reflection and extended discussion of some very interesting work – an opportunity that the usual five-minute Q&A sessions in conferences rarely afford.

It was exciting to see work in progress and the enthusiasm and insight of the doctoral students presenting their work who dealt with diverse topics including:

Multi-sensory methodologies in researching nature’s kindergartens
Four year olds' spatial drawings
Bilingual Gaelic and English speaking children’s social use of language
The meanings and use of objects children bring to nursery settings

Alan Prout’s closing comments on the first day crystallised some of the recurring tensions and complexities of doing research with young children and the researching ‘everyday life’.

Studying children and childhood is not a completely different process from studying adults: children share in the language, cultures and technologies that we all use. Prout went on to say that we do not need different methods or theoretical approaches that we would use with adults because we are studying children. Rather, we need to adapt our methods in light of our participants’ abilities to engage with them, so verbal, physical or literacy skills might demand different methods, but ‘children’ and ‘childhood’ don’t form a completely separate category of enquiry.

Researching the nature of ‘everyday life’ requires us to make decisions about which aspects to attend to; it is not possible to encompass all of ‘life’ in our research. In doing so, we step into the natural flow of everyday life and freeze particular moments and aspects in order to analyse them. By foregrounding some aspects and backgrounding others, by making choices about what is important and what is not, we necessarily change the nature of the natural ebb and flow of everyday life.

Teacher Education Scotland

noreply@blogger.com (Jocelyn) — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 22:02:00 +0000

This one day conference, set up by Holyrood magazine in Edinburgh, enabled us to hear from Graham Donaldson himself about the underpinning themes in his recent, national review of Scottish Teacher Education. He had been asked by the Scottish Government to undertake this review on his retirement as Chief Executive of HM Inspectorate of Education. Overarching themes in the review are the recognition that teaching is both complex and challenging, it requires the highest standards of professional competence and commitment and that high quality people achieve high quality outcomes for young people. The full review is worth a read, for someone immersed in the fallout from the English government’s recent White paper it is a breath of fresh air. It contains a wide range of recommendations including an emphasis on partnership between all bodies involved in teacher education: schools, colleges, universities, local authorities and professional associations and on the development of CPD throughout a teacher’s career through establishing communities of practice.

The day itself was chaired by Mark Stephens, a broadcaster well known to the Scottish audience, who was not afraid to challenge the assorted academics, teachers and other education professionals present and enabled several lively question and answer sessions. Other presenters included Tony Finn from GTCS who spoke on developing teacher professionalism, Chris Day from the University of Nottingham who spoke on Teacher Quality and Student Outcomes making reference to the VITAE project, Aline-Wendy Dunlop from the University of Strathclyde who spoke from her extensive experience of working with early years professional, Pamela Munn from the University of Edinburgh who spoke on teacher knowledge highlighting three vital conditions for change in the sector. These were congruence of values, nature of pupil assessments (teachers always want their pupils to be seen to do well) and accountability and monitoring at national and local levels. This was followed by a response from each of the main Scottish political parties to the Donaldson review which were broadly welcoming though separate concerns about numbers of ITE students being trained came up in the discussion.

The focus changed in the afternoon to effective CPD with a series of speakers highlighting the importance of collaboration, self-evaluation, experiential learning, reflection (facilitated by video observation) and enquiry for successful and engaging professional development. It was suggested that CPD should be contextualised, personally owned and externally stimulated i.e. through challenging assumptions, stimulating ideas and illustrating new approaches. All set in the context of “how I can use this with my pupils/staff?”. I was particularly interested to hear about the way GLOW (Learning and Teaching Scotland’s national VLE with a range of online tools including web conferencing and chat) was being used for formal and informal CPD. The afternoon flew by.

Learning Without Frontiers 9-11 Jan 2011

noreply@blogger.com (Jocelyn) — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:21:00 +0000

Learning Without Frontiers (LWF) - is new style conference that brings together the renowned Handheld Learning, Game Based Learning and Digital Safety events and communities. LWF brings together leading disruptive thinkers and practitioners from the education, digital media, creative, technology and entertainment sectors to explore, share and demonstrate how new disruptive technologies are driving radical efficiencies and improvements for learning whilst offering equality of access. More details of the official conference including keynote speakers such as Jimmy Wales and Karen Cator from the US and Josie Fraser, Tim Rylands and Stephen Heppell from closer to home are at http://www.learningwithoutfrontiers.com/lwf-london-2011/ and if previous year's Handheld Learning events are anything to do by there will also be linked videos there soon.

Sadly I didn't find funding for the whole event however, attended the free Sunday where I was delighted to meet up with old and new friends and to debat the merits of the iPad, the new tablet phones and even schools in supporting learning. See http://www.hightechhigh.org/ for details of schools in San Diego County that embody the High Tech High design principles of personalization, adult world connection, common intellectual mission, and teacher as designer.

It was a packed day. Teachers and researchers heard about a wealth of new apps from Tony Vincent, James Clay and colleagues and from over a dozen Teachers with Tech in the International Best Practice session. The day also hosted several 'unconferences' including a MirandaMod, a TeachMeet and a well attended introduction to Edupunk from Steve Wheeler. All whilst immersive story telling and Jason Bradbury's show were happening alongside. My thanks to Graham Brown Martin for an entertaining, thought provoking and awareness raising day.

SCETT Conference: In Defence of Teacher Education

noreply@blogger.com (Celia Tidmarsh) — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 09:26:00 +0000

The Standing Committee for the Education and Training of Teachers (SCETT)
Annual Conference, London.

1:30-5:30pm, 26/11/2010.

In Defence of Teacher Education

By coincidence this Annual Conference was scheduled to take place soon after the publication of the government’s White Paper on education so it was able to focus on questions posed by the Paper about the future of teacher education. The format of the Conference was of three panels of high level speakers, and each panel led a debate on a particular question relating to teacher education and the possible implications of the government proposals included in the White Paper. Speakers on the panels were representatives of various different groups involved or affected by the education of teachers – the 4 main teaching unions, organisations with remits relating to teacher education, and Higher Education academics (from the Institute of Education, London). Each panel was allocated time for the speakers to give perspectives on their particular question followed by contributions from the floor.

The panels’ questions and membership were as follows:
Panel 1: What do teachers want from teacher education?
Speakers: Darren Northcott (NAS/UWT), Dr Mary Bousted (ATL), and Russell Hobby (NAHT) (NUT rep Christine Blower was ill)
Panel 2: Who will lead the fight for teacher education?
Speakers: James Noble-Rogers (UCET), Lee Davies (IfL) and Prof Dennis Hayes (SCETT)
Panel 3: What role has higher education in teacher education?
Speakers (all from IoE): Prof Gary McCulloch, Dr Shirley Lawes and Prof Michael Young.

Considerable debate was generated and over the course of the afternoon a number of common concerns emerged and were discussed. The main points are summarised below:
- The current system of teacher education is clearly facing changes that threaten to weaken it fundamentally not only as a result of what is being proposed in the White Paper but also in relation to other policies such as the Academies Bill in which it is stated that there is no longer a requirement for Academies to employ only those with QTS.
- The White Paper is underpinned by a belief that teaching is a craft, to be learned ‘on the job’ by sitting alongside someone doing that job. It was strongly argued by speakers from the panels and from the floor that this belief is flawed and that teaching must be recognised as a complex set of skills and knowledge.
- There was considerable consensus that the current system is not perfect - but also very strong agreement within the Conference that there are elements worth saving, and a major one of these is the input from Higher Education (HE). It is clear from union research involving practising teachers that theoretical perspectives are valued and that HE needs to be at the heart of providing these. Combination of theory and practice is needed – pointed out that not unique situation as other professions deal with this too.
- We need to concentrate on the provision of effective on-going CPD, particularly good quality subject-based CPD that is in need of transforming. (Cf below for link to article on this by Dr Boulsted, ATL, in recent TES). Professional knowledge and understanding is dynamic and changes over time – this reveals the potential for a framework of CPD to be extended and be underpinned by a relationship between schools and HE. A well-received suggestion was that ITT should not be overloaded– that we need CPD ‘journeys’ throughout teaching careers (again, pointed out that this was not an issue only faced by teaching profession) –
- University Training Schools – very interesting idea but not anticipated before White Paper – we need to know more as they could provide opportunities.
- Debate about how far we can ‘educate’ rather than ‘train’ when complying to the Standards – obviously not a new issue. Questions need to be considered such as what should the theoretical underpinnings be in teacher education? What does ‘theory’ look like? How does ‘knowledge’ fit into education? Master’s credits can provide the space for ‘education’ rather than training but no mention of Master’s level in the White Paper
- The taking on of ITT responsibilities will be worrying to many schools,and seen as problematic. White Paper focus is based on a view that schools are the only worthwhile unit – this is a mistake. Most Head Teachers are happy to use expertise from elsewhere to create a culture within which everyone can progress – the government proposals do not tackle this.
- We should see the White Paper as an opportunity, and need to get to grips with what’s right, what’s wrong with what we’ve got. Aim for a proper debate with the government on what we want in Teacher Education.
-
-
In summary, as was to be expected at an event such as this, there was wide-ranging and impassioned debate about which elements within our current system that should be defended, and the nature of that defence, in the face of the challenges found within the White Paper. Within these discussions there was some optimism expressed that the White Paper offered opportunities as well as challenges. It was clear by the end of the Conference that there was consensus about the essential role that debate of this level and nature is to play if we are to achieve a system of teacher education that does justice to the complex nature of what it is to be a teacher.

Links:

Standing Committee for the Education and Training of Teachers (SCETT)
www.scett.org.uk

http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6064239

Scholarly activity and research within Further Education Colleges

noreply@blogger.com (Stephen Rose) — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:32:00 +0000

Developing and enhancing the practice and management of scholarly activity and research within Further Education Colleges

Kingston College, Kingston upon Thames, London 26^th November 2010

This event, one of a series designed to support practitioners wishing to engage with scholarly activity/research and to allow managers to receive information in regard to successfully managing it within their institutions, was hosted by Kingston College in their purpose-built Higher Education Centre.

The format of the day divided the group into a Practitioners strand and a Managers’ strand with the two groups coming together for an afternoon plenary. Angus Carpenter, Head of City College Norwich’s dedicated Research Unit ran the sessions for the Managers and Becky Turner from the University of Plymouth led the sessions aimed at Practitioners.

After a warm welcome to the day from Peter Mayhew Smith, Principal of Kingston College the two groups enjoyed stimulating input and debate sustained by a variety of invited speakers who had between them considerable experience of developing Higher Education opportunities within Further Education Colleges. Key issues addressed within both strands included the meaning of scholarly activity/research and how to build a research ethos; the key research processes, including research design/dissemination; making funding applications; key resources to support their engagement with scholarly activity; considerations for and management of scholarly activity/research within an FEC; and the institutional impacts from Scholarly Activity / research.

FECs providing HE are not research intensive institutions and staff working within them are more likely to be teaching practitioners as opposed to teacher researchers. Nonetheless there is an increasing expectation that FECs delivering HE will need to create and sustain a recognisable ‘HE ethos’ within which staff are able to engage in scholarly activity and research to support teaching and learning, to meet the requirements of IQER, FDAP Education Strategies and update subject knowledge.

The importance of research and scholarly activity as integral factors within FECs’ planning and management of their HE provision is constantly highlighted as an area for improvement. Of course the life of an HE in FE practitioner differs from that of a ‘university lecturer’ and it is often ‘research’ that is cited as the main activity that divides the two camps.

An FEC delivering Higher Education can develop a research culture which might valuably contribute towards creating and sustaining an identifiable ‘HE ethos’ within the institution by supporting Teaching staff as they undertake research as part of higher degrees and recognising research activities as being part of the HE lecturer’s everyday practice. Time and a physical space might also be allocated for Research and Scholarly Activity, strong links forged with partner Universities distinctive HE events might be offered and Professional Recognition could also contribute to create a distinct ‘HE brand’ within the institution which would support parity of esteem and duties between the two practice contexts.

The HEA supports Research and Scholarly activity within FECs and advises..

‘Scholarly activity is an essential component in delivering higher education programmes, not only in keeping up to date with your subject, but also carrying out pedagogic or disciplinary research as part of your continued professional development. It is also a requirement for achieving professional recognition in the higher education sector’.

Subject Centres, including ESCalate have been instrumental in supporting research and scholarly activities which have raised the profile of HE within FECs, encouraged teaching staff to join a wider research community beyond the immediate institution, have their work published and gain professional recognition

These events make a real contribution to supporting HE in FE (which accounts for 10% of HE in the UK) and create valuable networking opportunities where practitioners and managers can share experiences and begin to build support mechanisms across and between institutions.

Links and resources..

HEA – HE in FE

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/universitiesandcolleges/heinfe

HEA/ESCalate – Teaching, Learning and Assessment in HE in FE

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/universitiesandcolleges/heinfe/teaching

Developing HE Research and Development facilities within FECs

http://escalate.ac.uk/7756

Michael Gove's Education White Paper

noreply@blogger.com (Lyndsay) — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 18:38:00 +0000

As can hardly have been missed, the schools white paper was published today, 24 November 2010, setting out the policy direction of the Coalition Government, including some radical proposals for changing the nature of initial teacher education (ITE) in England.

Drawing heavily on Michael Barber’s 2007 report for McKinsey and the think tank Policy Exchange’s 2008 report ‘More Good Teachers’, the white paper focuses on improving the quality of teaching through recruiting high-achieving academic graduates to the profession and shifting the balance of teacher education from universities to schools.

Graduates who do not have at least a 2:2 will not receive funding for initial teacher education from September 2012 and the recruitment process will include a more rigorous basic skills test with fewer opportunities for retakes, while assessments for aptitude, personality and resilience may also become part of the selection process. Incentives for recruiting good graduates in shortage subjects could take the form of paying off student loans or sponsoring degrees in return for a commitment to teach following graduation as currently happens in the armed forces.

More initial teacher training is to take place ‘on the job’, with school-centred initial teacher training (SCITT) and the graduate teacher programme being expanded, despite yesterday's report from Ofsted that a greater proportion of higher education-led partnerships were found to be outstanding than SCITT partnerships or employment-based routes. The paper envisages a national network of Teaching Schools, on the model of teaching hospitals, which would see schools leading initial training as well as continuing professional development of teachers and head teachers, with the National College providing quality assurance of Teaching Schools. Three key initiatives will be used to deliver this school-based training. First, the existing Teach First programme – which recruits academic high-flyers to teach before starting other careers – will be expanded, to train over 1000 teachers over the next five years. Alongside this will be ‘Teach Next’, recruiting professionals from other careers into teaching, offering a fast-track route to leadership roles, producing 200 new teachers by September 2013. Finally, the ‘Troops to Teachers’ programme will provide funding for graduates leaving the armed services to train as teachers. The key functions of the Teacher Development Agency in recruiting and training teachers will be transferred to the DfE by 2012.

Exactly what this means for universities and university-led courses such as the B.Ed., M.Ed. and PGCE is not explicitly spelt out, though the direction suggests that PGCEs may become more school and teacher-led while B.Eds may see their support reduced. A consultation on funding initial teacher education will open in early 2011 which should provide more detail on the future funding arrangements of these courses. With the predicted number of new teachers produced by Teach First and Teach Next relatively modest at fewer than 1,500 over the next five years, university education departments may continue to have an important role to play, though perhaps in quite a different way. Some higher education institutions will be invited to open University Training Schools, based on the Chicago ‘lab schools’ model.

A review of teacher performance standards and codes of conduct and new QTS standards will also have important implications for the content of initial teacher education programmes, likely to see the foregrounding of synthetic phonics, early mathematics, behaviour management and SEN. Universities may also be asked to work with the National College to develop new qualifications for the National Professional Qualification for Headship from September 2011.

As the recent Ofsted report showed, universities working in partnership with schools provide outstanding initial teacher education. Strengthening and developing these partnerships with schools, possibly through models such as Lab Schools may support strong programmes that draw together experience of ‘on the job’ teaching with a toolkit of knowledge and practices. A programme of continuous professional development that allowed teachers to learn from their peers as well as accessing useful evidence and support from universities and other providers should also be welcomed. Removing universities from the equation altogether would seem unlikely to raise the status of teachers, and would cut off the teaching profession from the latest evidence and understanding in education. At present, schools can already be reluctant to take part in teacher training partnerships due to time and finance constraints and their priorities of teaching the learners in their care; schools that are outstanding at teaching children are also not necessarily equipped with the resources, time, knowledge and skills to provide all of a new graduate’s initial teacher education. Schools working in partnership with higher education institutions can provide a more thorough and balanced initial teacher education than a purely school-centred route.

ESCalate will continue to support and work with university and FE education departments to provide initial teacher education programmes.

Innovating e-Learning 2010, the JISC online conference

noreply@blogger.com (Stephen Rose) — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 15:31:00 +0000

I am currently attending this online conference hosted by JISC which is subtitled 'Bringing Innovation to Life:from Adversity comes Opportunity'! It's been an interesting day so far not least from the perspective of the online experience provided by Elluminate which enables participation via a variety of screen-based tools. Lots of interesting comment by both presenters and 'attendees'. I will update and try to capture a few key messages as the four day event unfolds!

Preparing for Success: supporting international students in the disciplines

noreply@blogger.com (Fiona Hyland) — Sun, 14 Nov 2010 09:36:00 +0000

On Friday 12th November 50 subject practitioners and EAP (English for Academic Purposes) teachers came together to explore the role of lecturers in the preparation of international students for study in the UK.

This event at the University of Southampton, one of a series of events coming from the HEA/UKCISA ‘Teaching International Students’ project, was a collaboration with the Subject Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies and as a member of the TIS team I was very grateful for their support and that of all the speakers!

For me, the theme of the day was ‘partnerships’. In discussion groups I began to hear examples of practitioners breaking out of traditional silos to seek new collaborations across the university to bring about more integrated disciplinary and learning support from day 1 of students’ arrival to the UK and even pre-arrival.

We heard further examples from speakers Liz Hauge & Natalie Lee (University of Southampton) and Sandra Hayward & Andrea Sweetman (University of Nottingham) who spoke about their programmes in Law and the Built Environment respectively.

What seemed to work? Suggestions included:

• Having EAP teachers and other learning support practitioners based within disciplinary departments.
• Conducting a needs analysis before designing a pre-sessional course.
• Setting entry requirements on language tests such as IELTS at levels appropriate to the discipline in question (e.g. law, IELTS 7.0).
• Creating discipline-specific pre-sessional and in-sessional courses – using for example:
o the referencing system associated with the discipline
o relevant case examples
o fun sessions such a film club on subject-related topics
• Bringing in subject practitioners to lead guest lectures and workshops.

There are challenges with these approaches of course, Diana Ridley of Sheffield Hallam University carried out a survey of EAP pre-sessional provision and found some respondents suggesting that tailored programmes are difficult with such a wide variety of disciplines on offer and very different student cohorts.

Despite the challenges, participants seem buoyed by the opportunity to share practice and the new connections they made. I invited delegates to think about ways they could contribute their expertise to the development of TIS resources around the induction of international students. I warmly welcome their and your suggestions! fiona.hyland@bristol.ac.uk

HE in FE post Browne Review

noreply@blogger.com (Stephen Rose) — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 09:32:00 +0000

Last week the HE in FE Subject Centre Network got together in London. Understandably quite a lot of our discussion centered on the Browne Report and its implications and signposts for HE delivered in Further Education Colleges. The Association of Colleges AoC) notes that
39% of those entering higher education are College students.168,000 students study higher education in a College, generally on a part-time basis around work or family commitments. College higher education students are generally older than typical university students and often have vocational, rather than academic, qualifications.
(http://www.aoc.co.uk/)
Further Education Colleges (FECs) can offer HE through funding from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) in partnership with a university and provide HE opportunities for many students who are either unable to or don't wish to study away from their home area. HE in FE plays an important role in widening participation and access to HE allowing many, particularly adult learners to improve their skills and employment prospects. Many students undertaking HE in FE are only able to study part-time and typically study alongside part-time employment and family commitments.
The Browne Review recommends new support for the costs of learning for part-time students and an increase in support for living costs for students from low income backgrounds. HE in FE providers, notably Stella Mbubaegbu, Principal of Highbury College, Portsmouth see this support as grounds for optimism for the future of HE in FE and the widening participation agenda. Foundation Degree programmes which make up a significant part of the HE in FE landscape offer many benefits beyond affordability as Highbury's Principal observes and should be acknowledged by e.g. ensuring that the proposed 10% increase in the number of HE places recommended by Lord Browne should go to FECs. Foundation Degrees and associated 'top up years' at partner universities or within the FEC itself should continue to offer a real alternative to students who will, possibly increasingly be looking for a lower-cost alternative to university study.
As the 'employability agenda' begins to figure ever higher in the concerns of HE institutions and amongst financially-astute learners it is timely to celebrate the achievements and opportunities provided by the HE in FE sector. Post-Browne part-time students would benefit from the recommended abolition of up-front course fees affording them parity with full-timers and allowing them to continue working alongside their studies and manage often restrictive budgets more easily.
Teachers working within mixed economy practice or solely delivering HE in FE might see grounds for optimism post-Browne for the continuation and sustainability of their work in this important sector and welcome potentially greater opportunities and choices for their students.

ISSOTL - it has international in the title and it actually means it!

noreply@blogger.com (Fiona Hyland) — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 20:07:00 +0000

From Julie Anderson

This was my second time at an ISSOTL (International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning) conference for ESCalate and one of the really enjoyable aspects of attending and presenting at it again recently (October 19 – 22nd, 2010, Liverpool, UK) was that when it has international in the title, it actually means it!

For the first morning’s session of parallel papers I found myself listening to a South African academic refer in passing to Zulu students (!), followed by a Scottish based discussion around the issues facing remote Open University students in the highlands and islands, ending with a paper based around teaching and learning in Dublin, Ireland. And that was all before the first coffee break!

During the rest of the four days I talked with and listened to presentations by people from places as far afield as Sweden, New Zealand, hitherto unknown ( to me anyway) parts of the USA and various locations across Australia. There were also of course many more local academics to hear such as some talking about aspects of student assessment from Liverpool (who left their session early to catch the ferry across the Mersey; there’s a song in there somewhere) as well as many other universities in the UK.

The Higher Education Academy was also represented amongst the delegates by colleagues such as David Sadler (Director of Networks) and Rachel Segal, amongst others.

ESCalate was represented by myself giving a paper on student anxiety in the classroom - and Ruth Pilkington doing a poster presentation on her work, ”Investigating Dialogue: how effective is it for assessing learning from practice”, which was attracting a lot of interest and attention when I saw her!

The conference was smaller than I remembered it when I attended in Sydney three years ago. It was suggested that this was a sign of our economically difficult times. During the first evening’s welcome it was mentioned that there were 375 delegates from 27 countries. 22 were presenting although unfortunately 40 papers that had been accepted were withdrawn mostly, it was thought, because they had not obtained funding to attend. However, Professor Michele Lamont, one of the keynote speakers, didn’t make it because she got caught up with the strikes in France.

Despite all that it was another good if varied event. The four keynotes overall were a particular strength. Graham Gibbs spoke the first evening about being guarded in our generalisations and that context is so important, something that was then quoted widely throughout the rest of the conference. Ray Land stepped in for the absent Professor Lamont and spoke about venturing into strange places and preparing graduates for the 21st century. His very visual talk included a You Tube clip about the five minute university and various images of Cyclops (I wouldn’t want you to go away with the erroneous impression that it was all serious – although even these asides were making important points). Jude Carroll spoke often very movingly about her work around International students with Janette Ryan, in summary reminding us that difference is not deficit; and the conference ended on Friday morning with an excellent presentation by Ray Land and Eric Meyer on threshold concepts (and a little on troublesome knowledge) something that they also talk about in the new book. It was remarked on by the ISSOTL president Gary Poole that it was a compliment to them that a large number of delegates remained and got later trains and planes so that they could hear their talk which for me personally was the highlight of the conference. I would recommend going to the ISSOTL site at http://issotl10.indiana.edu/ to read more about some of the conference presentations in due course when they have been uploaded - and considering going yourself next autumn when it is over in the USA. For anyone from any discipline serious about teaching and learning, it is a good event to participate in.

Julie Anderson
Senior Lecturer in Postgraduate Professional Development
University of Plymouth

NUS/UKCISA event - International students and students' unions

noreply@blogger.com (Fiona Hyland) — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:02:00 +0000

I felt privileged to speak at the NUS & UKCISA training event in Bradford last week 'International students and students' unions: creating a global future for all students' - 13th October.

About 80 NUS officers and international student representatives came together from across the UK to listen to invited speakers and to discuss issues such as:

* Enhancing global employability
* Making immigration simpler
* Living in the UK
* Internationalising further education colleges
* Making international student fees more transparent

Christina Yan Zang, the NUS International Students Officer, launched the NUS 'Charter for becoming a global university' which lays out a 10-point agenda for NUS work in this area. I look forward to seeing how their work develops in parallel to the work of so many institutions and other stakeholders in areas such as increasing student mobility and meeting the targets of the Bologna process.

I was asked to speak about the academic experiences of international students (slides available on ESCalate's website) and was ably assisted by Colin Neville of Bradford University who spoke about issues of academic misconduct and referencing.

The Browne review – what does it mean for Education subjects in HE?

noreply@blogger.com (Lyndsay) — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:36:00 +0000

The long-awaited Browne review reported on Tuesday 12^th October, recommending a significant shake-up of the funding system for universities and a distinct change in the relationship between universities and students.

The review panel took “a reduction in public investment in higher education as a binding constraint”, and so the question has focused on how to shift the balance of funding away from direct government funding towards graduates shouldering a greater share of the financial burden for their higher education.

Browne recommends that universities are allowed to set their own fees for undergraduate courses, with a ‘soft cap’ of £6000, above which they would need to pay back a percentage to the Treasury. This figure is deliberately lower than the fee - around £7000 - that universities may need to charge to replace funding lost from the HEFCE grant, aiming to drive efficiencies in the sector. Vince Cable’s response in parliament suggested the government would, however, consider raising this soft cap to £7000. Charging fees higher than the ‘soft cap’ would also oblige universities to demonstrate that the additional funding was being used to improve quality of courses. With the bulk of tuition being funded by students themselves and with the HEFCE grant cut for many courses, the Browne report recommends that some public funding may be needed to ensure that students continue to study expensive clinical subjects and priority subjects such as science and technology, clinical medicine, healthcare, and language courses. Education has not been, at this point, identified as a priority subject. In Scotland, students’ tuition fees are currently fully funded by the Scottish government, a situation that Vince Cable described as “unsustainable”. It remains to be seen how the Scottish government will respond to any changes in the English higher education funding system.

Students’ loans would attract a ‘real’ interest rate, reflecting the rates paid by government, and students would be expected to pay off the full cost of their loans, though if not repayed after 30 years they would be written off. Actual monthly repayments, however, would be determined solely by their earnings, paying back 9% of any salary over £21,000. Part time students would have access to the same support as full-time students. Estimates suggest that students paying £6000 per year, plus taking extra loans for living expenses could expect to graduate from a three-year degree with debts of between £30,000 and £40,000.

The thinking behind these recommendations is to create a more competitive market in higher education, with caps lifted on the number of students universities can take, and universities competing to attract greater numbers of students. This was also the intention behind introducing student fees of £3000 back in 2001; at that time, all but three universities opted to charge the full amount. If these recommendations are accepted, we will need to wait and see the extent of variation in fees offered by universities. Putting this in the context of other cuts to universities’ funding, and more cuts expected in the Comprehensive Spending Review, many may find it difficult to offer three-year degrees for significantly less than £6000. One suggestion is that universities may be encouraged to offer two-year ordinary degrees, and there may also be more incentives to promote distance learning options in order to offer more affordable degrees.

With students paying more for their degrees and leaving with an estimated £30,000 worth of debt, it is expected that they will demand much more from universities in terms of teaching quality, and become much more conscious of the likely ‘return on investment’ they will see in the form of their subsequent employment and salary. Browne recommends a Student Charter containing information such as employment outcomes and contact time which will form part of students’ university application process, and a stronger system of careers advice to guide students through the application process. This focus on informing the student consumer may see even greater emphasis given to measures of student satisfaction such as National Student Survey. With the quality of teaching becoming increasingly important, Browne recommends that new academics take a ‘teaching training’ qualification, to be accredited by the Higher Education Academy; this emphasis on good teaching was welcomed by the HEA. Overseeing the competitiveness of the HE sector, and maintaining a baseline of ‘quality’, would be a new body formed from the merger of HEFCE, QAA, Office for Fair Access, and the Office of the Independent Adjudicator.

The review proposes no changes to funding models for postgraduate taught courses. The general view taken in the Browne recommendations is that postgraduate taught courses offer largely private, rather than public benefits, and therefore should not attract the same level of support as undergraduate courses. There remains a question about what this means for PGCE courses which clearly do offer wider public benefit. It is not yet clear whether the current cap on fees for PGCE will also be lifted, and if it is not, how these courses will be funded. If PGCE courses need to become more competitive it is possible that we will see further growth of school-centred initial teacher education and part-time courses. It is also at this stage not clear whether paying higher fees for undergraduate degrees will have an impact on the number of students choosing to sign up for further study.

The review is, at this stage, only a set of recommendations and we will need to wait for funding proposals to be put before parliament and a further round of consultation before legislation is passed. However, Vince Cable’s initial response in parliament was to accept the “broad thrust” of the recommendations, and it possible that many of these measures will come into effect for students entering Higher Education in 2012.

Engage 2010

noreply@blogger.com (Jocelyn) — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 16:21:00 +0000

Escalate was represented at Engage 2010, a Public Engagement conference on 23rd September at the University of Bristol where we shared what we'd learned (from a recent external evaluation) about aiming to be an engaged organisation. This was:

to aim for a supportive community of practice with shared values;
to ensure a route for incoming (bottom up) innovation/interaction (ie don't fret about deciding what to do or what people will want - ask);
to provide both large and small scale events and activities

There were a range of presentations from organisations across Bristol as well as University colleagues, my thought to take away was "the importance of themes". The most successful projects involved public engagement around a strong theme.

DfE ‘Supporting better use of research by practitioners and policy staff’

noreply@blogger.com (Fiona Hyland) — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:39:00 +0000

Development day for education researchers in the UK – Supporting better use of research by practitioners and policy staff. Run by the Department for Education, in London on 28 September 2010.

The day in London included sessions looking at examples of projects that had successfully engaged with policymakers, and with practitioners, a presentation considering the experience of brokering research between researchers and policy makers in the Dutch Government, and presentations from a teacher and civil servants on how they engage with research. This provided a wide range of perspectives from “either side”, and from an intermediary perspective as well.

So was the day useful? From my perspective, I got most from the stuff around engaging with policy (and cringed inwardly about previous responses to the then DCSF when they asked about my work…). I enjoyed the session from Brenda Taggart, outlining the experiences of the EPPSE (Effective Pre-School, Primary & Secondary Education) project in engaging with policy makers. On the one hand, this project is something that most of us can only aspire to – centrally funded, and now more than 13 years in duration and still ongoing – and this puts them in an enviable position when it comes to influence and visibility. On the other hand, Brenda’s comments on what made the relationship with policy work included some comments that I felt could apply to projects that I am working on – and some of which were included anyway in the design of the CReSt 14-19 project (Centre Research Study: analysing the response to the 14-19 educational reforms in schools and colleges). Brenda outlined that policy makers usually ask fairly simple questions. As we all know, research rarely provides simple findings, but Brenda recommended trying to develop answers to policy questions that are true to the complexity of the research, but are presented in a straightforward way.

A further hint was that policy makers like to see how this could lead to policy change, and tend to like (realistic) recommendations for policy developments that are clearly rooted in the research findings. From the civil servants, we heard how they like research that is simply presented in plain English, with precision in the conclusions and detail about how widely applicable it is likely to be. They wanted to know how a policy should be rolled out (should it be a recommendation, or a mandate), and whether it would be good value for money in terms of cost of implementation and expected gains (especially important in these straightened times).

There was a continuous message through all of this that policy makers tend to prefer large-scale quantitative research with strong findings, preferably backed up and explained by qualitative work. Those who compile research briefings said that they felt that smaller scale research, from either tradition, was still useful in terms of contributing to the overall picture – but the message was clear: if you are after star status in terms of policy influence, you need a big, longitudinal study with mixed methods.

There were undercurrents among the audience that if you were challenging the current political ideology, then you did not have a hope in hell of being noticed. This was mediated somewhat by Brenda, who suggested that there is a large element of luck and timing in terms of impact – what you are doing at the moment might not be taken up immediately, but a few years down the line might have considerable impact, when your pet issue becomes the story of the moment. This was also picked up on by Rien Rouw, when discussing research brokering, who outlined that research and knowledge is just a very small part of the many factors that feed in to policy development. And although one of the stated objectives of the day was to discuss the kind of support researchers would like from the department to improve the reach and impact of their research, the focus of the day seemed to be much more “this is how policy makers work – and this is how you can fit in with this”. But hey, that’s the world we live in and let’s face it – are we really going to change the way they work?

A bonus of the day was the opportunity to have help from the research summaries crew on developing summaries for policy of our own existing work – I’ll be sending a draft in of the CReSt project findings from the last year for comment within the next month.

Jo Rose, Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol

Academies and ‘free schools’ – the next steps for policy

noreply@blogger.com (Fiona Hyland) — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 09:19:00 +0000

Westminster Education Forum Keynote Seminar:
Academies and ‘free schools’ – the next steps for policy

This was a well-organised morning seminar held in central London at BMA House, Tavistock Square. It consisted of three well-balanced panel sessions, each chaired by an MP and followed by a Q&A session. The day started with an introduction by Dr John Pugh, MP and member of the Liberal Democrat Treasury team who set out some of the current issues/dilemmas. This was followed by an interesting synopsis of the latest National Audit Office report on whether the Academies programme is delivering value for money. As might be expected, this was complex. There was evidence that the number of FSM (free school meals) pupils had gone down in these schools (suggesting a more mixed intake) and that they had had successes in reducing the number of NEETs (not in education, employment or training). But there was less evidence of academies supporting local schools, and there were dangers when schools came into the programme too quickly. There were also some governance concerns, with regard to conflicts of interest and responsibilities, and financial risks for the future in terms of a higher proportion of young teachers. The full report can be found at: www.nao.org.uk/publications/1011/academies.aspx

The second panel session addressed the future of the academies programme with contributions from the head of a grammar school, the Anti Academies Alliance, ARK schools, the National Governors’ Association, and a local authority representative. It became clear that there are now at least three types of academy: original academies which replaced failing schools in difficult circumstances, those who have been encouraged to seek academy status because of their ‘outstanding’ Ofsted rating, and ‘free’ schools set up by interested groups such as local parents. Again, panel members gave interesting presentations from their particular points of view.
Finally, there was a panel which addressed the development of ‘free’ schools in line with the Swedish model. Graham Burns, a solicitor, spoke of concerns with regard to the current legal framework governing academies and ‘free’ schools, Susanne Wiborg spoke of the inconclusive evidence from Sweden where ‘free’ schools have existed since the early 1990s, Bob Johnson from the NASUWT spoke of concerns with regards to teachers’ pay and conditions and the managing director of Kunskapsskolan (which runs ‘free’ schools in both Swenden and England) spoke of the 1,000 ‘free’ schools that have been set up in Sweden over the last 15 years. Again, a lively Q&A session followed.

The Westminster Education Forum puts on many such events, it claims to be completely impartial and has no policy agenda of its own. More details can be found at www.westminstereducationforum.co.uk

Elizabeth McNess, Senior Lecturer, Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol.

Student Engagement Development Day

noreply@blogger.com (Teresa Nurser) — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:37:00 +0000

This was an Academy & Subject Centre working meeting - 14th September, NUS Headquarters, London.

Fiona Hyland and I travelled down to London to attend a meeting looking at student engagement activity taking place throughout the Academy and HE institutions. The day started with a presentation by Vicki Trowler summarising the literature in this area. We learnt about the behavioural, emotional and cognitive aspects of student engagement and considered negative, positive and non-engagement reactions. Vicki’s review (which will posted shortly on the Academy website) highlighted that there are gaps in the literature and that the student voice seems to be missing.

The day continued on and we separated into parallel sessions where Fiona heard about Scotland’s student-led teaching awards project from Alastair Robertson and I went to a session led by Birmingham City University about creating student academic partnerships and supporting student research that directly benefits both curriculum design and students' experiences at university. This was especially inetresting for me in light of the work we are currently undertaking with University of Exeter's Students as Change Agents project.

After this, Dale Potter led us through a group card exercise which challenged our definitions of student engagement. Dale had previously presented this at our Student Conference back in the Spring. This left us well placed to hear from colleagues within the Academy about examples of their work in this area including student focus groups (Economics Network) and web resources (Engineering Subject Centre).

Ant Bagshaw and colleagues from the NUS then talked to us about how they interact with students and how the NUS operates and suggested ways in which the Academy and its subject centres could involve students.

All in all, this day complements the work we are currently involved with and both of us found it a valuable and thought-provoking day.

If you would like to know more about the work the Academy are doing it has a collection of resources in this area.

Education: what’s the brain got to do with it?

noreply@blogger.com (Neil Ingram) — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:07:00 +0000

A discussion meeting chaired by Baroness Estelle Morris, with the key note speaker the Honourable David Willetts MP, as part of the Royal society’s Brain Waves study.

Tuesday 7 September 2010. Event supported by the Royal Society and the Wellcome Trust.

Despite the rigors of an underground strike that gridlocked London’s overground, the large meeting room is full in the Royal Society’s elegant mansion house. Ten round tables seat over eighty people. Sarah-Jayne Blakemore wryly notes that it looks like a wedding reception. If so, it is celebrating the wedding of neuroscience and education and we, representing educational research, neuroscience, school teaching and policy makers, are there to cheer and offer our best wishes. Yet, the future for the happy couple may not be easy and smooth. They come from such different cultural backgrounds and think in very different ways.

Uta Frith and Estelle Morris open up the proceedings by expressing the hope that rigorous evidence-based findings could be used to inform policy and eventually teaching practice. Barbara Sahakian gave an introduction to neuroscience, showing how research impacts on the way that we see the real world. The brain is a plastic structure, it develops in response to experience. Thus the hippocampus of the brain, that organises memory, gets bigger in London taxi drivers after they have learned to navigate London’s streets. Working memory (of the kind we use to remember information briefly) leads to the development of new brain cells. The number of years of secondary education has a significant effect on delaying the onset of dementia in older age.

The majority of the time was spent in discussion of various topics, tweeting key comments into the blogosphere (#neuroed, if you want to follow) until the volume of ideas entering cyberspace was too much for the good keepers of Tweetville. Teachers broadly welcomed the input of neuroscience, but noted that there were a lot of neuromyths (drinking water, omega 3, brain gym training and so on) that were proposed as a universal solution to all ills, only to find later that they are not as effective as they claimed.

Neuroscience is making spectacular progress, largely thanks to new advances in imaging technology and the ability to manipulate individual brain cells and there is certainly a need to get ‘key ideas’ out into the educational world clearly and effectively. CPD would seem to be one way to do this. Blogs may be another.

David Willetts closed proceedings with a speech emphasising the importance of science and education. He is a fan of Ben Goldacre, Uta Frith and Sarah-Jayne Blakemore, but not of the standards of University teaching. He raised a clear flag that this issue would likely be passing across the agenda of the Coalition government.

It was hell getting there and back again, but the event itself was thoughtful, powerful and realistically optimistic. It was a small contribution to a larger report to be produced by the Royal Society, which we will await with interest.

Neil Ingram

University of Bristol

7/9/10