Learning & Growing Together

The shared article for this Learning and Growing session on December 17, 2021 was

Students as Co-authors of an Academic Development Service: A Case Study of the Study Skills Service at the University of Bristol

This article discussed the benefits and challenges of having students assist with the development of both a program akin to the current Academic Skills Development Program and its delivery.

A summary of this analysis is here, with the ‘Now What’ section discussed during the Learning and Growing session.

Zoom recording:

Topic: Learning and Growing
Start Time: Dec 17, 2021 10:28 AM

Meeting Recording:
https://charlessturt.zoom.us/rec/share/sUd6vkyr9tEK2MJQVZyy5tSAegDVVKtCTAvWd3-iaMzbK_k4mIZIxh5cFqn4vc9a.kaRWsLyyhfCD_77T

On Friday 03.12.2021, I conducted a post-reading discussion based on two articles in ‘Conversation’: the first article was ‘It takes a mental toll’: Indian students tell their stories of waiting out the pandemic in Australia’. This was a short reading but was particularly relevant to our cohort of International students, who are mostly from South Asia. Most of the group said that they did not find the information surprising, as they expected the same results from the students, and there was a short discussion on the material. I highlighted the importance of stressing that students came from a university culture where they are supposed to be passive learners, while in Australia they are supposed to be active, and that this articles stressed that students and staff need to work together as partners. Additionally, this was supposed to be delivered during their Orientation – Students, Partners and Induction working together, and that students need to take active ownership of their own learning, and to make this clear to new students.

However, the second reading was ‘Unis are using artificial intelligence to keep students sitting exams honest. But this creates its own problems’. This reading resulted in a lot more discussion by the whole team and proved to be more cogent and relevant for our group of students. It is important to note that both readings were very recently published in ‘Conversation’ – on October 20th and November 10th 2021, so they proved relevant to the situation with COVID happening all around the world, and the impact of Omicron, which is a new variant very recently introduced in many countries, including Australia.

The Team brought up that even face-to-face learning can bring up risks of cheating by students and that some people marking exam papers may not be fair and may be biased, which I agreed with.  However, the article brought up the fact that if cheating was not addressed by institutions, it was unfair to honest students who do not cheat. Furthermore, the article also brought up the issue of Security and that simple technical tricks can bypass many of the anti-cheating protections and therefore the tools that are available so far only provide limited benefits, and that the software needed may remain surreptitiously uninstalled. In addition, students studying overseas may be at a disadvantage due to poor internet connections and may have other problems with their devices, which is what we have experienced with some of those students.

There was also the issue of lack of privacy, as video captures the indoor environment and scrutinizes faces without being noticed, which is intimate monitoring for repeat viewings by the Institutions using this software. I stressed the importance of a judicious use of video, as in the article. However, the article states that the software available to date works best on light-skinned faces and not on darker-skinned faces, which implies a hidden bias and possible discrimination that may add to societal biases. Other researchers reported similar concerns, and therefore stressed a lack of fairness with the software that is available at present, especially as it pertains to our cohort of students.

One Team member also flagged atypical eye or head movement in exam takers, which can lead to unwarranted suspicions about students who are not neuro-typical or who have idiosyncratic exam-sitting styles. The Team member mentioned reading aloud when reading, which she does even when there is no-one else in the room. That kind of behavior may lead to further surveillance and interrogation by invigilators within the university, which would not be fair to those people with those kinds of issues.

Additionally, it brought about a discussion about Surveillance culture or ‘Big Brother’, as automated exam monitoring may set a broader precedent and make monitoring of our actions more ‘acceptable’ within the broader communities. The authors mentioned that the public concerns about surveillance and automated decision-making are growing within societies. Therefore, they warned about being cautious when introducing potentially harmful technologies, especially when “they are imposed without our genuine consent”, and this is what I find particularly problematic.

Finally, the authors stress the importance of finding ways to fairly administer exams remotely, as they stress that institutions need to be accountable and transparent with students and offer alternatives such as in-person options, which are fundamental to informed consent and which would comply with what I feel would need to be considered.

The two discussions took up the whole of our allocated time of 1 hour and it was considered a well-discussed topic, which was relevant to our cohort of students and which was relevant considering the direction that online learning is going throughout the world, in this time of COVID-19 and its various variants.

https://charlessturt.zoom.us/rec/share/-sx8Vd3tIAJh3AZsZU6J87Zoq5zEgnE0ATlOISnbk6CLBeyRv1w3aiz9d_oIXw.QDEFY_fi8UD5rVkk

The article by Bailey and Withers (2018) examined, through screen capture, the processes employed by students to paraphrase short text. The authors’ found that some students made use of available word processing software with varying levels of success. Few students used external sites and the sample participants did not demonstrate the use of tools such as Google Translate and paraphrasing assistants, despite this practice being commonly observed in classrooms. The most commonly used word processing tools were the synonym finder and interaction with spellcheck to ‘approve’ changes that the software had suggested. Students in the study demonstrated varying levels of skill in utilising writing software and some demonstrated that they were able to create good work without the use of such tools. The authors’ noted that students were not making “full or efficient use of the software tools available to them, and would benefit from instruction in these” (p.185).

Discussion centred around a number of themes. These included:

• ESL students face serious language barriers that encourage the use of software however this use often creates what the article refers to as ‘word salad’. This may represent an overreliance on making word changes to create the appearance of success in paraphrasing as opposed to understanding the intent of the text and subsequently writing an effective summary. The benefit of using unhelpful techniques, (such as online paraphrasing tools and ‘word spinners’) is that the presentation of any assignment could be better than the alternative of producing nothing at all. Perhaps the true problem is a language problem rather than a paraphrasing issue or an academic integrity problem and if we could seek to manage the language difficulty then the other issues would reduce.
• Final checking of written work was not commonly observed in the study. The requirement to foster this as a crucial step in the editing process was discussed. Staff have also noted that students do not appear to be utilizing proofreading services as much online and promotion of these was discussed.
• Workshops and materials that support students to develop judicious use of writing software (e.g. Google Translate, Grammarly, Wikipedia etc) could be of benefit. As could workshops focusing on student motivation in order to increase passion and interest in their studies (thus creating increased motivation to understand content and improve how they express their ideas).
• Reading techniques such as skim reading and reading for comprehension could enhance ESL students’ ability to develop content understanding and enhance confidence.

Possible action items:

• Promotion of Study Support proofreading services to current student cohort
• Development of workshops and materials that focus on meaningful use of online tools such as Google Translate, Grammarly and Wikipedia
• Development of workshops and materials that focus on the development of successful reading strategies such as skim reading and reading for comprehension
• Investigate methods of working with previous students/successful students to provide encouragement to current students to motivate and inspire them to develop greater understanding of, and passion for, their studies

Article: Bailey, C., & Withers, J. (2018). What can screen capture reveal about students’ use of software tools when undertaking a paraphrasing task?. Journal of Academic Writing, 8(2), 176-190. https://doi.org/10.18522/joaw.456

Recording: Access here

This week we looked at the article published in the conversation titled “Students are told not to use Wikipedia for research. But it’s a trustworthy source”.

The article discuss is how Wikipedia is often seen as a source that is untrustworthy and ill-suited for academic purposes due to the ambiguity of its publishing date and authorship. Wikipedia pages are edited by multiple authors and undergo constant revision. they may also be authored by people who are not research experts in the topic area.

The article argues that despite the above-mentioned facts about Wikipedia articles, that due to both algorithmic and person-driven reviews of articles, that misinformation hardly ever remains on Wikipedia pages for long, and that peer reviewed articles are actually more in danger of misinformation due  to small panels of reviewers and it’s static nature once published.

The team discussed how discouraging students from using particular tools completely often has a counterproductive effect. these tools fulfil very specific purpose for the students, and if they do not know of any replacements that can be easily implemented that does meet the requirements of the university, they are likely to keep using the tool anyway or resort to academic misconduct. similar conversations could be had about writing and editing tools like Grammarly or paraphrasing websites.

Instead the emphasis should be on judicious usage of available tools. In Wikipedia’s case, this might be encouraging students to do their background reading through Wikipedia articles so that they might gain some familiarity with the topic before they use academic articles for the actual research purposes.

Both studies support and library teams agreed that workshops could be developed focusing on tools available to students and how to incorporate them into their study habits whilst still maintaining academic integrity.

Introverted students have often been seen as quiet, timid and often unengaged in the typically high-stimulation, social classroom environment.  This environment is experienced in different ways between students, particularly those with introverted tendencies.

The article defines an introvert as a person that reflects an inward orientation in which psychic energy is invested in internal and personal experiences such as a preference for spending time alone.  Their energy comes from within rather than external sources such as their environment.  Introverts will typically be physically and mentally drained by prolonged social situations, recuperating through time in their own company or in the company of smaller social groups of close friends, many demonstrating a particularly investment in creative or artistic work.

Introversion in the Classroom

Until recently, it was assumed that introverted students were under achievers, while more recent studies suggest that the typical classroom environment, across all ages and inclusive of higher education, is not often conducive to the learning style of more introverted students.  When forced into an educational setting that puts the student in a state of discomfort, it can be assumed that their performance will suffer due to this discomfort.

In our discussion, we addressed a number of strategies that are becoming increasingly commonplace in order to facilitate a better learning environment for introverts:

Cooperative Learning, in which students use small groups to work together, using their individual strengths to maximise their own learning and that of others, however the risk is run that the workload will not be evenly distributed; a risk present in group assignments with students of all ages.  In this situation, it is imperative for teachers to explain to their students the importance of cooperation, collaboration and personal responsibility.

Accountable Talk, where students are given the opportunity to speak uninterrupted, as it is demonstrated through the research in the article that one of the major concerns of the self-appointed introverts among the participating students was that they will not get their turn to talk, they will be interrupted or the environment will be too noisy for them to be heard.  This topic led into the concept of circle time, in which only the student in possession of a token item may speak and with careful management from the teacher, will ensure introverts will get their opportunity.

Madelle brought up the concept of the Socratic circle (see below), which tied in very well to the idea of accountable talk, in which a group of students hold a discussion under observation by other students who do not participate, but instead provide feedback to the speakers.  Following this, they swap roles and repeat the process, ensuring everybody gets a chance to speak.  We discussed toe feasibility of conducting a Socratic circle in an online environment with active speakers using their cameras and observers not, however the obstacle associated with this is encouraging students to turn on their cameras at any point.

Possible Assessment Equity for Introverts

While as operations and support staff, our influence over the assessment process is limited, we did discuss a number of ideas that could better facilitate the improved performance of introverted students, particularly pertaining to presentations and group work.  In observing students delivering presentations to an audience, one can observe the discomfort felt by introverted students as they present, which can and has caused a lowering of potential results.

Additional ASDP sessions for presentation skills were suggested, however it could be safely assumed that introverted students by their very nature will be unlikely to sign up for such a workshop, even though it would prove itself to be tremendously valuable to their confidence and presentation ability; often with the end result being insufficient as an incentive.

Recording

Article

On this Friday the 17th of September, I discussed with Study Support Team and Library Team this article: Up to 80% of uni students don’t read their assigned readings. Here are 6 helpful tips for teachers. I was interested in  looking at why uni students are not engaged with reading their textbooks and how educators can overcome this difficulty. Here are some extracts from the article:

Why are readings so often left unread? 

I have highlighted these are the main reasons for not reading textbooks:

unpreparedness due to language deficits

time constraints

lack of motivation

underestimating the importance of the readings.

We discussed also the strategies that might be used by educators to help students’ engagements such conducting workshops that teach student how to read effectively and pre class and in class activities.

More to be found in this session recording:

https://charlessturt.zoom.us/rec/share/VQd6a6iP3YB1wTdD9qWY0NkWGknu95w6xr2DtPNjaFK_c3K977sFhbwU7ihnlQfc.ZC_PULITzegKIL1v?startTime=1631838817000

On Friday 20.08.2021, I spoke and got our Study Support and Library Team to discuss Supporting international students in an online environment by Dr Amanda Müller from Flinders University.

This article was chosen since it was related to TEQSA and I wanted to check how far our Team has gone in relation to the requirements made by them. It seemed as though most of the staff agreed that we were on the right track, apart from a couple of points that were raised and discussed:

One member of staff, Peter Head, responded to my comment on “the students may need to be prompted to contribute, may be surprised if you ask for their opinion, and will need more time for a verbal reply”. He gave us some ways that he does that, by asking student questions very early and just shortly after he has presented something: He puts something on the Chat box and expects both typed and verbal answers. This is something I could consider doing more for our ASDP and ASC workshops. I managed to link that to the little time we had and how that is linked to “expect to cover less content in live online classes” and “have pre-reading activities and questions before the class”.

However, the fact that there is little time to present the ASCs, in particular, means it would make it difficult to cover a lot of material. Other members of staff agreed with this point.

I asked Lorna Clark if there was much feedback from the ASDP workshops, and she came up with the following:

• Most of the comments were favourable.
• Some students wanted the explanations delivered more slowly.
• Some students wanted more examples given to explain things in more detail.
• One student wanted us to share what problems other students have.

This last point led to some speculation as to what this last point actually meant – whether  this happens in other countries, and is therefore a cultural difference, or why they wanted to know that information?

Seham brought up the issue of Etiquette when sending emails to staff at CSU and Madelle reiterated that the Course Coordinators and others presenting should send us their slides earlier in Orientation week, so that we know what the contents are and who to refer the students to, when they come to us with questions. A consensus was reached when Madelle suggested that a couple of points for etiquette should be added to the slides for Orientation Week students.

There was a general discussion that followed about Orientation Week and that perhaps during that time, it was necessary to show students how to access the different parts of their courses online: Madelle and Lorna and some others suggested that it should be part of the Orientation, as some of us are asked, especially by overseas students, to show them where to go. There was a general consensus that that should be looked at, as an area of possible weakness, and I pointed out that we had that last year, in 202060, when the first part of the Orientation session was presented.

Some staff suggested that the Course Coordinators or other people presenting should send us the PP slides early on, so that we know what was on them, and we all agreed with that, as none of the people at the meeting that day knew definitely what was being presented by other staff during Orientation Week, whereas last year, we were sent that information. Lorna pointed out that some information was available now on the iLearn site, and we speculated on when that information was posted on the site and who was the person to contact, though the information from CSU now stated who to contact.

In all, we all agreed that we were doing most of the things in the TEQSA requirements, but that some areas may need to be modified somewhat, to make it more in line with what the requirements are. As when I asked Lorna for comments on the Essential Skills and the lead-in before that on iLearn, that guides students to the relevant authority to answer their questions, she confirmed that it does that. The problem may be that students do not know that it exists, especially if they have not attended Orientation week or the ASDPs workshops and that was the major issue we may still need to resolve.

Altogether, it was a relatively communicative and inclusive session, which lasted about 45 minutes.

The recording of the discussion is here: https://charlessturt.zoom.us/rec/share/rwqdtNdciMHhneyIeaRJarXoEEyeI5WXjIEfB_5B5v90a8oM0vM0MBzlBDTQwXsm.wKvqBFcTsn4Zdmcq

The article used: supporting-international-students-online-environment.pdf