This design based research proposal is based on a short non-award course called Preparation for Success in Health. This short course, 5 weeks in duration, focuses on such skills as study skills for university, 21st Century skills as well as gaining an inside knowledge of what university is like and what to expect at university, all through a health lens. The course tries to be as authentic as possible, enrolling students as university students so that they can access all the resources a university student would, the course is also operated through the learning management system Moodle. The course uses Conley’s model of College Readiness (2008) to inform what needs to be taught in the course. The four facets of college readiness are:
- Key Cognitive Strategies – problem solving, research, can reason, argument or prove theories and arguments in their work, can use interpretation to critically think, uses precision and accuracy;
- Academic Knowledge and Skills – students possess key content, knowledge and vocabulary in the core academic subjects of Math, Science, Social Studies, Languages and Arts (relevant to what the student would be studying).
- Academic Behaviors- behaviors that reflect students’ time-management, self- awareness, self-monitoring, self-control, general study skills.
- Contextual Skills and Awareness (College University Knowledge)- involves knowing the systems of the university, how to navigate these systems and also how to interact with a wide variety of different people at university, academics and peers.
Figure 1. Facets of college readiness. Source: Conley (2008, p. 24).
The students who are enrolled in this course live in regional, rural and remote parts of Queensland and are in grades 10, 11 and 12 at high school in these regions. As the course is federally funded through the Higher Education Participation Program (HEPP), many of the students of the course may fall into one or more of the HEPP categories:
Issues that have arisen, revolve around the dichotomy of what needs to be taught and how it needs to be taught, so that students get an authentic experience of university, and teaching so as students use and become proficient in 21st Century Skills. The issues surrounding the course content, outcomes and assessment revolve heavily around the idea that the course is about giving an authentic experience of what university is like. Courses at the university where this course is housed and taught are still using a learning management system to teach their courses, what Moore (1993) describes as a transactional distance approach, where the course materials are housed online, with possible videos or lectures, is instructor led and completed in an allocated timeframe according to the curriculum (Downes, 2005). This style of teaching and learning is not constructivist or connectivist in its approach, but is rather still very behaviourist and lends itself to students being very led and not always autonomous, which then can lead to issues of a student not using their critical thinking skills, not being collaborative in their approach to learning and not using other higher order thinking skills. Despite this, the Preparation for Success in Health course revolves around preparing high school students for what to expect at higher education, and the reality is a learning management system is what is currently being used at a large majority of higher education institutions in Australia (Open Colleges, 2015).
Other issues connected to moving this course to a more heutagogical approach, revolve around the students’ ability to be able to connect when they may have a limited ability to do this, because they may lack the resources or skills to do this. As previously stated, many of the students of this course live in regional, rural and remote locations in Queensland. As well they may come from a Low Socio-Economic Status backgrounds and therefore may have limited access to up-to-date and reliable technology (Isolated Children’s Parent’s Association, 2011). This creates equity issues if all students are not able to access the same technology in the first place.
Huetagogical approaches to teaching and learning are being adapted and integrated into this course to align the course more to a student - centred approach, as well as authentically teaching 21st Century Skills through this approach. As well, it is hoped that through the use of these new approaches, students will be able to authentically connect with health professionals as well as others and each other to answer their questions and help them to seek the knowledge that they require, relying less on the teacher to answer these questions, thus empowering the student.
Description of the research questions
Literature Review
Student-centred learning according to Lea, Stephenson & Troy (2003) focuses on, “reliance upon active rather than passive learning, an emphasis on deep learning and understanding, increased responsibility and accountability on the part of the student, an increased sense of autonomy in the learner, an interdependence between teacher and learner” (p. 322). Widening Participation has led to significant changes in how universities approach teaching and learning. Because of the diversity of students, shifting to a more student-centred focus can meet the needs of all students, regardless of background (Lea et al., 2003).
Heutagogy puts the student at the centre of their learning and revolves around the premise that the learners determine their own learning and learn how to learn through self-determined approaches (Hase & Kenyon, 2000). In a Heutagogical approach to teaching and learning, “learners are highly autonomous and self-determined and emphasis is placed on development of learner capacity and capability with the goal of producing learners who are well-prepared for the complexities of today’s workplace” (Blaschke, 2012, p. 56). Blaschke (2012) also suggests that Heutagogy can be used as an appropriate framework for the digital age as students can use the internet and networks to determine and add to their learning. In a heutagogical approach, students need to develop both competencies and capabilities (Hase & Kenyon, 2007). Hase and Kenyon (2007) discuss capabilities as using one’s competence in unfamiliar situations. Being capable in a familiar situation or learning event, and having the knowledge and skills to navigate in a familiar situation is not showing higher level thinking. Hase and Kenyon (2007) suggested that learning wasn’t just about reproducing work in familiar situations, it needed to be transformative and self determined, “an integrative experience where a change in behaviour, knowledge, or understanding is incorporated into the person’s existing repertoire of behaviour and schema (values, attitudes and beliefs)” (p. 112). To be a capable learner through this lens, students have to show:
This type of learning and teaching takes the explicit teaching of study skills and how to learn out of the teacher’s hands and moves them into the students. Students don’t then learn how to learn through a transmissive approach, but rather through a self-determined approach that relies heavily on their experiences, what they deem they need to know in order to come to conclusions about what they are learning. Wingate (2006) suggests a “bolt on” approach to study skills is not as effective, thus integrating study skills into the flexible curriculum is a better approach because “learning is developed through subject teaching” (p.457), rather than in isolation.
What are 21st Century Skills in relation to study skills and online learning and how do they relate to a heutagogical approach to teaching and learning? The Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (2009) conducted research around what 21st Century Skills were and how they were being exhibited by learners, in light of the new demands learners were having in the 21st Century. The framework of these skills and competencies showed several dimensions, as shown in Table 1.
The students who are enrolled in this course live in regional, rural and remote parts of Queensland and are in grades 10, 11 and 12 at high school in these regions. As the course is federally funded through the Higher Education Participation Program (HEPP), many of the students of the course may fall into one or more of the HEPP categories:
- are from non-English speaking backgrounds (NESB);
- have a disability;
- are women in non-traditional areas;
- identify as indigenous;
- are from low SES (socioeconomic status) locations based on postcode of permanent home residence; and
- are from regional and remote locations based on postcode of permanent home residence.
Issues that have arisen, revolve around the dichotomy of what needs to be taught and how it needs to be taught, so that students get an authentic experience of university, and teaching so as students use and become proficient in 21st Century Skills. The issues surrounding the course content, outcomes and assessment revolve heavily around the idea that the course is about giving an authentic experience of what university is like. Courses at the university where this course is housed and taught are still using a learning management system to teach their courses, what Moore (1993) describes as a transactional distance approach, where the course materials are housed online, with possible videos or lectures, is instructor led and completed in an allocated timeframe according to the curriculum (Downes, 2005). This style of teaching and learning is not constructivist or connectivist in its approach, but is rather still very behaviourist and lends itself to students being very led and not always autonomous, which then can lead to issues of a student not using their critical thinking skills, not being collaborative in their approach to learning and not using other higher order thinking skills. Despite this, the Preparation for Success in Health course revolves around preparing high school students for what to expect at higher education, and the reality is a learning management system is what is currently being used at a large majority of higher education institutions in Australia (Open Colleges, 2015).
Other issues connected to moving this course to a more heutagogical approach, revolve around the students’ ability to be able to connect when they may have a limited ability to do this, because they may lack the resources or skills to do this. As previously stated, many of the students of this course live in regional, rural and remote locations in Queensland. As well they may come from a Low Socio-Economic Status backgrounds and therefore may have limited access to up-to-date and reliable technology (Isolated Children’s Parent’s Association, 2011). This creates equity issues if all students are not able to access the same technology in the first place.
Huetagogical approaches to teaching and learning are being adapted and integrated into this course to align the course more to a student - centred approach, as well as authentically teaching 21st Century Skills through this approach. As well, it is hoped that through the use of these new approaches, students will be able to authentically connect with health professionals as well as others and each other to answer their questions and help them to seek the knowledge that they require, relying less on the teacher to answer these questions, thus empowering the student.
Description of the research questions
- Does restructuring the Preparation for Success in Health course to include a Heutagogical approach, allow students to collaborate, critically reflect and provide feedback in an open online environment?
- Does shifting the knowledge acquisition into the students’ hands mean they will access a wider variety of sources of information, including health professionals to answer their questions and build on their own ideas of what appropriate knowledge is?
- Will the students engage in the Preparation for Success in Health course more authentically if allowed to be more self-directed in their approach to learning, thus engaging in deeper cognitive learning?
Literature Review
Student-centred learning according to Lea, Stephenson & Troy (2003) focuses on, “reliance upon active rather than passive learning, an emphasis on deep learning and understanding, increased responsibility and accountability on the part of the student, an increased sense of autonomy in the learner, an interdependence between teacher and learner” (p. 322). Widening Participation has led to significant changes in how universities approach teaching and learning. Because of the diversity of students, shifting to a more student-centred focus can meet the needs of all students, regardless of background (Lea et al., 2003).
Heutagogy puts the student at the centre of their learning and revolves around the premise that the learners determine their own learning and learn how to learn through self-determined approaches (Hase & Kenyon, 2000). In a Heutagogical approach to teaching and learning, “learners are highly autonomous and self-determined and emphasis is placed on development of learner capacity and capability with the goal of producing learners who are well-prepared for the complexities of today’s workplace” (Blaschke, 2012, p. 56). Blaschke (2012) also suggests that Heutagogy can be used as an appropriate framework for the digital age as students can use the internet and networks to determine and add to their learning. In a heutagogical approach, students need to develop both competencies and capabilities (Hase & Kenyon, 2007). Hase and Kenyon (2007) discuss capabilities as using one’s competence in unfamiliar situations. Being capable in a familiar situation or learning event, and having the knowledge and skills to navigate in a familiar situation is not showing higher level thinking. Hase and Kenyon (2007) suggested that learning wasn’t just about reproducing work in familiar situations, it needed to be transformative and self determined, “an integrative experience where a change in behaviour, knowledge, or understanding is incorporated into the person’s existing repertoire of behaviour and schema (values, attitudes and beliefs)” (p. 112). To be a capable learner through this lens, students have to show:
- Self efficacy in unfamiliar situations and reflecting on the learning process;
- Appropriate values to make appropriate learning decisions;
- Teamwork and the ability to work collaboratively, including effective communication;
- Being creative, adaptable and flexible;
- Learning how to learn and knowing how to do this.
This type of learning and teaching takes the explicit teaching of study skills and how to learn out of the teacher’s hands and moves them into the students. Students don’t then learn how to learn through a transmissive approach, but rather through a self-determined approach that relies heavily on their experiences, what they deem they need to know in order to come to conclusions about what they are learning. Wingate (2006) suggests a “bolt on” approach to study skills is not as effective, thus integrating study skills into the flexible curriculum is a better approach because “learning is developed through subject teaching” (p.457), rather than in isolation.
What are 21st Century Skills in relation to study skills and online learning and how do they relate to a heutagogical approach to teaching and learning? The Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (2009) conducted research around what 21st Century Skills were and how they were being exhibited by learners, in light of the new demands learners were having in the 21st Century. The framework of these skills and competencies showed several dimensions, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Framework for 21st Century Skills and Competencies. Source: (Ananiadou & Claro, 2009, pp. 9 -11).
When looking at the 21st Century Skills and competencies and comparing them to the capabilities a student must use through a heutagogical approach, there are many similarities. In both, students must work collaboratively, communicate effectively, behave ethically, think creatively and be autonomous in their learning. Therefore, perhaps if students are using heutagogy in an online environment, they may inherently be developing their 21st Century Skills, without a transmissive approach to teaching and learning.
One of the main principles of heutagogy revolves around the double loop learning process and self – reflection, see Figure 2. (Eberle & Childress, 2005, as cited in Eberle 2009). Double-loop learning is “non-linear". It allows the students to react to problems, question what they have studied, and reflect on existing theories, values or assumptions that they feel are being challenged” (Eberle, 2009, p. 183). Thus this process allows students to critically reflect on the learning decisions that they make.
When looking at the 21st Century Skills and competencies and comparing them to the capabilities a student must use through a heutagogical approach, there are many similarities. In both, students must work collaboratively, communicate effectively, behave ethically, think creatively and be autonomous in their learning. Therefore, perhaps if students are using heutagogy in an online environment, they may inherently be developing their 21st Century Skills, without a transmissive approach to teaching and learning.
One of the main principles of heutagogy revolves around the double loop learning process and self – reflection, see Figure 2. (Eberle & Childress, 2005, as cited in Eberle 2009). Double-loop learning is “non-linear". It allows the students to react to problems, question what they have studied, and reflect on existing theories, values or assumptions that they feel are being challenged” (Eberle, 2009, p. 183). Thus this process allows students to critically reflect on the learning decisions that they make.
Figure 2. Double-loop learning (Eberle & Childress, 2005, as cited in Eberle 2009, p. 183).
In regards to design and the heutagogical approach, as discussed by Narayan and Herrington (2014), (which was largely derived from Blaschke, 2012; Hase, 2011; and Hase & Kenyon, 2007) encompasses:
These design perspectives and approaches will need to be considered when realigning the Preparation for Success in Health course.
Heutagogy in Practice
There have been many approaches to heutagogy in teaching and learning in a higher education setting. Some of these approaches have been theoretical in their insights, aligning curriculum of a certain discipline to the theory, others have been used in real courses. Bhoryub, Hurley, Neilson, Ramsay & Smith (2010) researched and aligned the use of a heutagogical approach to nurse education. They made links between complexity theory where, “phenomena are unpredictable and significantly influenced by agent interaction” (p. 323), and nurse education where the learner, “encounters novel and unexpected practice based events; an ideal scenario for the self-directed learner” (p.323).
Academics at a South African university used heutagogy to implement an online teacher training course (Msila &Setlhako, 2012). They stressed the need for their students to be “self-determined, innovative and creative” and this was achieved through activities such as the students completing a portfolio and interacting and collaborating online (Msila & Setlhako, 2012, p. 140).
The principles of huetagogy have also been used to support academic staff who were learning to teach online in professional development course (Northcote & Boddey, 2014). The students in this case were academics that were involved in refining their own professional development to address their teaching and learning needs with Moodle.
At Matthew Moss High School in Roachdale UK, students came back to school on a Saturday to embrace a self-determined learning approach to social learning. The students chose what they were learning and how they were learning. They learnt in self-organised groups, and were mentored by older high school students. The purpose of this was so students could be independent learners, collaborate, self-diagnose and self -actualise (Engaged Learning, 2014).
Description of the proposed intervention
In regards to the Preparation for Success in Health course, and embedding a heutagogical approach to the teaching and learning of the course, the following interventions will be put in place:
Impacts that these interventions may have on the student are as follows:
Impacts that these interventions may have on the teacher/ lecturer/ course coordinator are as follows:
Plan for Implementation
Firstly, the Preparation for Success in Health course would need to be restructured, taking out the many discussion forum posts, reworking the course content so that it is not prescriptive and linear, but prompts the students to use the study skills through their actions, rather than the students being explicitly taught study skills and university knowledge.
Secondly, the assessment would need to be reworked to incorporate the reflective learning process. This would need to include instructions and guidance for students who may not know how to do this. As part of this process consideration would need to be given to how students could give each other feedback about each other’s learning and thinking.
Thirdly, expectations of the students and the teachers would need to be made explicit at the start of the course. As this course is being reworked to include a new teaching and learning approach, the course would need to exhibit this shift and explain to the students very clearly what is going to happen in the course and why this approach has been taken.
Lastly, the course coordinator would need to undertake further research and training in Web 2.0 technologies and try some of these to utilize the best functions for the tasks listed above. As well as this, further thought needs to be considered for how to link the student’s reflections back to a central place so that all students can access other student blogs. Training and advice needs to be sought to do this.
The course restructure, alignment and training needs to be completed by February 2016 with a peer review being conducted before this date. As part of the evaluative process or double-loop learning, the lecturer of the course will evaluate the changes to the course in June 2016 as well as the course progresses and make changes as they see fit.
References
Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 41: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/218525261154
Bhoryrub, J., Hurley, J., Neilson, G.R., Ramsay, M., & Smith, M. (2010). Heutagogy: An alternative practice based learning approach. Nurse Education in Practice, 10(6), 322-326.
Blaschke, L.M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self-determined learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), 56-71. Retrieved from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1076/2113
Conley, D.T. (2008). Rethinking college readiness. New England Board of Higher Education, Spring 2008, 24-26.
Department of Education and Training (DET). (2008). The review of higher education: Final report. Retrieved from http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv32134
Downes, S. (2005). E-learning 2.0 [Web-log post]. Retrieved from http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1104968
Eberle, J. (2009). Heutagogy: What Your Mother Didn't Tell you About Pedagogy and the Conceptual Age. Proceedings Of The European Conference On E-Learning, 181-188.
Engaged Learning. (2014, March 30). And on the sixth day [Web log post]. Retrieved October 23, 2015, from http://engagedlearning.co.uk/and-on-the-sixth-day/
Hase, S. (2002). Complexity and heutagogy. Invited paper at a symposium held at Middlesex University, UK.
Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. Ultibase, RMIT. http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/dec00/hase2.htm
Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2007). Heutagogy: A child of complexity theory. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 4(1), 111-119.
Kimber, K., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2010). Secondary students’ online use and creation of knowledge: Refocusing priorities for quality assessment and learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(5), 607-625.
Lea, S. J., Stephenson, D. & Troy, J. (2003). Higher Education Students’ Attitudes to Student Centred Learning: Beyond ‘educational bulimia’. Studies in Higher Education 28(3), 321-334.
Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. Theoretical principles of distance education, 22. Retrieved from http://www.c3l.uni-oldenburg.de/cde/support/readings/moore93.pdf
Msila, V., & Setlhako, A. (2012). Teaching (still) Matters: Experiences on Developing a Heutagogical Online Module at UNISA. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, 69(International Conference on Education & Educational Psychology (ICEEPSY 2012), 136-142. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.392
Narayan, V., & Herrington, J. (2014). Towards a theoretical mobile heutagogy framework. Rhetoric and Reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology. Paper presented at the Ascilite Conference. Retrieved from http://ascilite.org/conferences/dunedin2014/files/fullpapers/138-Narayan.pdf
Northcote, M. T. & Boddey, C. (2014). Using the Self-Determined Learning Principles of Heutagogy to Support Academic Staff Who are Learning to Teach Online. Education Conference Papers, Paper 9. Retrieved from http://research.avondale.edu.au/edu_conferences/9
Open Colleges, InformED. (2015). Learning Management Systems. Retrieved from http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/teacher-resources/learning-management-systems/
Stephenson, J. (1994). Capability and Competence: Are they the same and does it
matter? Capability, 1 (1): 3–4.
Wingate, U. (2006). Doing away with ‘study skills’. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(4), 457-469.
In regards to design and the heutagogical approach, as discussed by Narayan and Herrington (2014), (which was largely derived from Blaschke, 2012; Hase, 2011; and Hase & Kenyon, 2007) encompasses:
- An open or flexible curriculum that recognises the fluid nature of learning.
- The learner as the driver in determining his/her learning path, context, activities and journey not just the teacher.
- The learner is involved in the design of the assessment or ensures flexibility for the learner to be able to apply it within his/her context.
- Learning is collaborative.
- Coaching and scaffolds are provided to the learner when needed.
- Learner directed questions; this provides an opportunity for true collaboration between the teacher and the learner with regard to the content and process. The questions also provide clarity on what guidance, scaffold, and support is needed by the learner.
- The learner creates contextually relevant content according to his/her knowledge and learning needs.
- Encourage reflective practice for deep learning through:
- learning journals;
- experiential learning or action research within real world context; and
- formative and summative assessment with the view of ‘assessment for learning’ to provoke thinking and reflection. (Narayan & Herrington, 2014, p. 152).
These design perspectives and approaches will need to be considered when realigning the Preparation for Success in Health course.
Heutagogy in Practice
There have been many approaches to heutagogy in teaching and learning in a higher education setting. Some of these approaches have been theoretical in their insights, aligning curriculum of a certain discipline to the theory, others have been used in real courses. Bhoryub, Hurley, Neilson, Ramsay & Smith (2010) researched and aligned the use of a heutagogical approach to nurse education. They made links between complexity theory where, “phenomena are unpredictable and significantly influenced by agent interaction” (p. 323), and nurse education where the learner, “encounters novel and unexpected practice based events; an ideal scenario for the self-directed learner” (p.323).
Academics at a South African university used heutagogy to implement an online teacher training course (Msila &Setlhako, 2012). They stressed the need for their students to be “self-determined, innovative and creative” and this was achieved through activities such as the students completing a portfolio and interacting and collaborating online (Msila & Setlhako, 2012, p. 140).
The principles of huetagogy have also been used to support academic staff who were learning to teach online in professional development course (Northcote & Boddey, 2014). The students in this case were academics that were involved in refining their own professional development to address their teaching and learning needs with Moodle.
At Matthew Moss High School in Roachdale UK, students came back to school on a Saturday to embrace a self-determined learning approach to social learning. The students chose what they were learning and how they were learning. They learnt in self-organised groups, and were mentored by older high school students. The purpose of this was so students could be independent learners, collaborate, self-diagnose and self -actualise (Engaged Learning, 2014).
Description of the proposed intervention
In regards to the Preparation for Success in Health course, and embedding a heutagogical approach to the teaching and learning of the course, the following interventions will be put in place:
- The course structure will be changed to have information for the students, but the students learning and what they will be learning will be directed by the students themselves. The course coordinator will be a learner in this process also, offering guidance when needed, but allowing students to investigate ideas and concepts for themselves.
- The students will negotiate their assessment, through the use of a student contract (Blaschke, 2012) they will need to explore a general idea of what further work and study in health may look like, but they will need to research what health discipline they would like to look at, in regards to a health problem that they would like to investigate.
- As part of the assessment, students would be required to reflect on their process of learning in an open online environment. Part of the double-loop process focuses on students being able to reflect and question why they have done what they have done, and assess whether they would do things differently. These reflections could be done in a learning journal or a blog, where other students could give feedback, which would also help the student to inform their thinking and learning practices, adding to the double-loop learning process (Blaschke, 2012).
- Lastly open discussion forums in the Learning Management System would be left for students to discuss what they are learning and where their learning is moving as well as pose questions.
Impacts that these interventions may have on the student are as follows:
- Students may improve on their reflective and critical thinking skills through offering feedback and reflecting on how and why they went about learning in the manner they did (Eberle, 2009).
- Students may find information to meet their needs rather than just using the course materials set out for them.
- Students may struggle to use technology appropriately, or may have issues with finding appropriate technology to meet their needs.
- Students may struggle with critical thinking or reflection.
- Students may receive more feedback, which will inform their learning and thinking skills.
- Students may learn how to give effective feedback.
- Students may learn or extend on how to work collaboratively.
Impacts that these interventions may have on the teacher/ lecturer/ course coordinator are as follows:
- More work up front to implement and change the course, but less one-on-one work down the track.
- Insight into how students think and what they are interested in learning and how they learn.
- Epistemological changes in their approaches to teaching and learning and what this looks like, and the actions a teacher does in a course that uses a heutagogical approach.
- Less control over the students and their learning.
- More critical thinking and work may need to be done on the assessment and how heutagogy is assessed.
Plan for Implementation
Firstly, the Preparation for Success in Health course would need to be restructured, taking out the many discussion forum posts, reworking the course content so that it is not prescriptive and linear, but prompts the students to use the study skills through their actions, rather than the students being explicitly taught study skills and university knowledge.
Secondly, the assessment would need to be reworked to incorporate the reflective learning process. This would need to include instructions and guidance for students who may not know how to do this. As part of this process consideration would need to be given to how students could give each other feedback about each other’s learning and thinking.
Thirdly, expectations of the students and the teachers would need to be made explicit at the start of the course. As this course is being reworked to include a new teaching and learning approach, the course would need to exhibit this shift and explain to the students very clearly what is going to happen in the course and why this approach has been taken.
Lastly, the course coordinator would need to undertake further research and training in Web 2.0 technologies and try some of these to utilize the best functions for the tasks listed above. As well as this, further thought needs to be considered for how to link the student’s reflections back to a central place so that all students can access other student blogs. Training and advice needs to be sought to do this.
The course restructure, alignment and training needs to be completed by February 2016 with a peer review being conducted before this date. As part of the evaluative process or double-loop learning, the lecturer of the course will evaluate the changes to the course in June 2016 as well as the course progresses and make changes as they see fit.
References
Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 41: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/218525261154
Bhoryrub, J., Hurley, J., Neilson, G.R., Ramsay, M., & Smith, M. (2010). Heutagogy: An alternative practice based learning approach. Nurse Education in Practice, 10(6), 322-326.
Blaschke, L.M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self-determined learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), 56-71. Retrieved from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1076/2113
Conley, D.T. (2008). Rethinking college readiness. New England Board of Higher Education, Spring 2008, 24-26.
Department of Education and Training (DET). (2008). The review of higher education: Final report. Retrieved from http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv32134
Downes, S. (2005). E-learning 2.0 [Web-log post]. Retrieved from http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1104968
Eberle, J. (2009). Heutagogy: What Your Mother Didn't Tell you About Pedagogy and the Conceptual Age. Proceedings Of The European Conference On E-Learning, 181-188.
Engaged Learning. (2014, March 30). And on the sixth day [Web log post]. Retrieved October 23, 2015, from http://engagedlearning.co.uk/and-on-the-sixth-day/
Hase, S. (2002). Complexity and heutagogy. Invited paper at a symposium held at Middlesex University, UK.
Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. Ultibase, RMIT. http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/dec00/hase2.htm
Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2007). Heutagogy: A child of complexity theory. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 4(1), 111-119.
Kimber, K., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2010). Secondary students’ online use and creation of knowledge: Refocusing priorities for quality assessment and learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(5), 607-625.
Lea, S. J., Stephenson, D. & Troy, J. (2003). Higher Education Students’ Attitudes to Student Centred Learning: Beyond ‘educational bulimia’. Studies in Higher Education 28(3), 321-334.
Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. Theoretical principles of distance education, 22. Retrieved from http://www.c3l.uni-oldenburg.de/cde/support/readings/moore93.pdf
Msila, V., & Setlhako, A. (2012). Teaching (still) Matters: Experiences on Developing a Heutagogical Online Module at UNISA. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, 69(International Conference on Education & Educational Psychology (ICEEPSY 2012), 136-142. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.392
Narayan, V., & Herrington, J. (2014). Towards a theoretical mobile heutagogy framework. Rhetoric and Reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology. Paper presented at the Ascilite Conference. Retrieved from http://ascilite.org/conferences/dunedin2014/files/fullpapers/138-Narayan.pdf
Northcote, M. T. & Boddey, C. (2014). Using the Self-Determined Learning Principles of Heutagogy to Support Academic Staff Who are Learning to Teach Online. Education Conference Papers, Paper 9. Retrieved from http://research.avondale.edu.au/edu_conferences/9
Open Colleges, InformED. (2015). Learning Management Systems. Retrieved from http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/teacher-resources/learning-management-systems/
Stephenson, J. (1994). Capability and Competence: Are they the same and does it
matter? Capability, 1 (1): 3–4.
Wingate, U. (2006). Doing away with ‘study skills’. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(4), 457-469.