探索英国大学对沉浸式课程安排的学术观点

IF 2 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Rebecca Turner, Debby Cotton, Emily Danvers, David Morrison, Pauline Kneale
{"title":"探索英国大学对沉浸式课程安排的学术观点","authors":"Rebecca Turner, Debby Cotton, Emily Danvers, David Morrison, Pauline Kneale","doi":"10.53761/1.21.2.09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examined how academic staff responded to a cross-institutional change initiative to integrate immersive scheduling into the first-year undergraduate curriculum. Immersive scheduling, also referred to as block or compressed delivery, sought to create a supportive first-year experience, to ease students’ transition to university. Adopting an immersive approach is associated with considerable change as academic staff adapt their practice to accommodate the compressed time frame of modules and embrace learning and assessment methods associated with this delivery format. In this study, we undertook semi-structured interviews with 17 academics who were leading the development and delivery of immersive modules or supporting the teaching and learning initiative. Our data indicated that academics played a significant role in the acceptance or rejection of the vision for immersive scheduling. Acceptance was reliant on academics recognising value in the vision, and this varied depending on the extent to which it resonated with local practice. In some cases, the move to immersive scheduling represented a valued opportunity to update pedagogic and assessment practices. However, in other contexts, academic resistance led to dilution of key elements of the vision, with compliance rather than innovation being the outcome. This study also highlights the value of using a combination of module delivery formats to mitigate recognised drawbacks associated with immersive delivery. We conclude this paper by proposing recommendations to support the future development of immersive scheduling in higher education institutions.","PeriodicalId":45764,"journal":{"name":"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring academic perspectives on immersive scheduling in a UK university\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca Turner, Debby Cotton, Emily Danvers, David Morrison, Pauline Kneale\",\"doi\":\"10.53761/1.21.2.09\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study examined how academic staff responded to a cross-institutional change initiative to integrate immersive scheduling into the first-year undergraduate curriculum. Immersive scheduling, also referred to as block or compressed delivery, sought to create a supportive first-year experience, to ease students’ transition to university. Adopting an immersive approach is associated with considerable change as academic staff adapt their practice to accommodate the compressed time frame of modules and embrace learning and assessment methods associated with this delivery format. In this study, we undertook semi-structured interviews with 17 academics who were leading the development and delivery of immersive modules or supporting the teaching and learning initiative. Our data indicated that academics played a significant role in the acceptance or rejection of the vision for immersive scheduling. Acceptance was reliant on academics recognising value in the vision, and this varied depending on the extent to which it resonated with local practice. In some cases, the move to immersive scheduling represented a valued opportunity to update pedagogic and assessment practices. However, in other contexts, academic resistance led to dilution of key elements of the vision, with compliance rather than innovation being the outcome. This study also highlights the value of using a combination of module delivery formats to mitigate recognised drawbacks associated with immersive delivery. We conclude this paper by proposing recommendations to support the future development of immersive scheduling in higher education institutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45764,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53761/1.21.2.09\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53761/1.21.2.09","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨了教职员工如何应对将沉浸式课程安排纳入本科一年级课程的跨院校改革举措。沉浸式教学法也被称为分块教学法或压缩教学法,旨在创造一种支持性的一年级体验,以缓解学生向大学的过渡。采用沉浸式教学方法会带来相当大的变化,因为教学人员要调整自己的做法,以适应模块的压缩时间框架,并接受与这种教学形式相关的学习和评估方法。在这项研究中,我们对 17 名学术人员进行了半结构式访谈,他们领导了沉浸式教学模块的开发和实施,或为教学和学习举措提供了支持。我们的数据表明,学术界在接受或拒绝沉浸式排课的愿景方面发挥了重要作用。接受与否取决于学术界是否认识到这一设想的价值,而这又取决于设想与当地实践的共鸣程度。在某些情况下,转向沉浸式排课是更新教学和评估实践的宝贵机会。然而,在其他情况下,学术界的抵制导致愿景的关键要素被削弱,结果是遵从而不是创新。本研究还强调了综合使用模块授课形式的价值,以减轻与沉浸式授课相关的公认缺点。在本文的最后,我们提出了支持高等教育机构未来发展沉浸式教学的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring academic perspectives on immersive scheduling in a UK university
This study examined how academic staff responded to a cross-institutional change initiative to integrate immersive scheduling into the first-year undergraduate curriculum. Immersive scheduling, also referred to as block or compressed delivery, sought to create a supportive first-year experience, to ease students’ transition to university. Adopting an immersive approach is associated with considerable change as academic staff adapt their practice to accommodate the compressed time frame of modules and embrace learning and assessment methods associated with this delivery format. In this study, we undertook semi-structured interviews with 17 academics who were leading the development and delivery of immersive modules or supporting the teaching and learning initiative. Our data indicated that academics played a significant role in the acceptance or rejection of the vision for immersive scheduling. Acceptance was reliant on academics recognising value in the vision, and this varied depending on the extent to which it resonated with local practice. In some cases, the move to immersive scheduling represented a valued opportunity to update pedagogic and assessment practices. However, in other contexts, academic resistance led to dilution of key elements of the vision, with compliance rather than innovation being the outcome. This study also highlights the value of using a combination of module delivery formats to mitigate recognised drawbacks associated with immersive delivery. We conclude this paper by proposing recommendations to support the future development of immersive scheduling in higher education institutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice
Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
18.80%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: The Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice aims to add significantly to the body of knowledge describing effective and innovative teaching and learning practice in higher education.The Journal is a forum for educational practitioners across a wide range of disciplines. Its purpose is to facilitate the communication of teaching and learning outcomes in a scholarly way, bridging the gap between journals covering purely academic research and articles and opinions published without peer review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信