English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The implementation of technology enhanced learning in higher education is often associated with changes to academic work. This article reports on a study of staff experiences with curriculum development and teaching in multiple modes of blended and online learning in a Bachelor of Education degree. The findings indicate that the changes experienced by these teacher educators were significant but not wholesale. More specifically, the findings highlight three particular areas of change that impacted on their role as teacher educators: changed pedagogical practices, particularly in staff-student communication, interaction and relationship building with students; increasing workloads associated with flexible delivery; and changed needs for staff capacity building related to issues of quality in technology enhanced learning. Technology-Enhanced Learning (TEL) refers to situations in which technology is used to enhance the learners’ experiences. This includes online learning, blended learning and other situations in which technology is used to enrich or extend place-based (on campus) teaching and learning. Although TEL is not associated with a particular pedagogical approach, it is often associated with the use of (a) active approaches to learning which involve both creation and use of rich multimedia digital resources, (b) purposefully designed learning tasks which employ technology to promote cognitive engagement with program content, (c) collaborative learning situations in which communication is mediated by technology, (d) the personalisation of learning experiences afforded by the use of flexible learning technologies, (e) improving learners’ access to authentic learning and practice contexts with networked technologies, and (f) connecting learners with knowledgeable teachers, coaches, mentors and peers who can support learning. For many academics, the implementation of technology-enhanced learning (TEL) in university degree programs is associated with change, particularly changes to academic work. The suggested change is based on two prevalent assumptions in higher education (HE): first, that the dominant teaching model in HE is direct instruction -didactic, teacher driven and limited with respect to consideration of the particular needs of individual learners; and, second, that by its very nature, TEL represents an improvement over historically established university teaching, based on an emerging track record of learner-centric pedagogies and practices which focus on learners, their experiences and the way technology creates opportunities to cater to a variety of learner needs (see Hannafin & Land, 1997). Thus, a contrast has been created which pits the ‘old’ (or status quo) and all of the problems that may be associated with current higher education systems against the ‘new’, in which technology is meant to not only disrupt the status quo, but provide a number of solutions to cure the ills of a ‘broken’ higher education system which may be slow to change. While this contrast is both an oversimplification and a generalisation, it reflects aspects of current teacher education in Australian Journal of Teacher Education Vol 40, 7, July 2015 44 Australia, which is the context from which this formative evaluation is drawn. For reasons both historical and pragmatic, teacher education has tended to favour in-person, face-to-face teaching and learning as the preferred mode of delivery in initial teacher education. This makes the implementation of flexible TEL in the context of initial teacher education particularly interesting as a case for the study of the change associated with the implementation of TEL. This article examines the notion of change associated with the implementation of TEL in one teacher education program in Australia. In this article, the relationship between the implementation of TEL and particular changes in organisation, technology or practice is not seen as a fait accompli. Rather, the focus is the potential for change and the evaluation of change as beneficial (or otherwise) to the intended outcomes of a development process. Broadly, this article addresses the following proposition: If a shift to TEL represents the opportunity to change, what changes are necessary and beneficial to the success of the technology enhanced version of the course or program? The approach to this general question is case study in an undergraduate program in Australia. The article focuses on a large-scale curriculum development project which sought to produce multiple flexible, technology-enhanced versions of each individual unit within the degree program. Drawing from academics’ experiences within this project, the article reports on the results of a formative evaluation of the first year of the project. This article aims to improve understanding of the nature and degree of change associated with the adoption of TEL in context and the implications of these changes for the structuring and support of similar development projects.

Degrees of Change: Understanding Academics Experiences with a Shift to Flexible Technology-Enhanced Learning in Initial Teacher Education