I was looking through the BLOG and realised that all of this year, the dissemination group haven’t given an account or reflection of what we have done this year… So here goes.

We started of the year by re-designing the SAN welcome pack. We wanted to make it easy to read, easy to understand all the terms (IBL, SAN, CILASS, SA… look how we now take them all for granted) and attractive with photos, colour and something better than the previous one. As a team, Laura, Rosie, Sarah and myself wrote up the new bits for the welcome pack and then Sarah took it home and make it look fantastic! Many of you will have seen the finished outcome by now (especially ou new ambassadors), and your opinions on how (if at all) it could be improved will be much welcomed.

We then got the chance to be part of something new and exciting for CILASS: the ‘crucIBL’ newsletter - which ever so cleverly includes IBL in the title, and the name was thought up by someone from the school of Management who won the competition to pick a new name for our newsletter.

newsletter

This year, we produced two newsletters, with the help of the CILASS core team and we got a chance to write and reserach our own articles. Sarah wrote an article in both issues about a project that the school of architecture were working on with an exhibition in Barnsley, Rosie wrote up her experience of performing in an original spanish opera which was performed for the first time in England here in Sheffield, Laura worked on a graveyard project with the school of archaeology who looked at gravestones and I gave a diary entry of a Geography field trip! All of these articles have a reflection of the IBL process that students went through and what they learned from each of their projects but I am not going to tell you how looking at gravestones or singing in a Spanish opera encompassed IBL - oh no - Go and look at our newsletter, which we are very proud to present, and read about what we, and other students learned!

Current issue of crucIBL: http://www.shef.ac.uk/content/1/c6/07/93/44/crucIBL%202%20-%20final%20version.pdf 

Its the start of another week, and I feel a little bereft, as I have no LTEA conference to occupy me this week! Only a pesky dissertation, but we won’t mention that…

I’ve had plenty of time to reflect on last week’s conference now, and my feelings, both at the time and now, are overwhelmingly positive. At the end of the conference, we all had what i think Sabine has recently referred to as a ‘warm fuzzy feeling’, a sense of pride in the fact that we as students had helped to make the conference a success. Many of the delegates expressed to us their positive feelings about the conference, and said how great it was to have students both helping to organise it and also participating in the sessions. I would like to think we hopefully added to the discussions and maybe even allowed some people to really see things from the ’student perspective’.

So, what were the highlights of the conference for me? Well, the food wasn’t bad. Apart from that, its very hard to pick!

• The opening plenary activity was a great way of getting everyone together to kick off the discussions, and really helped everyone come to a clear idea of what they wished to get out of the conference and the questions they wished to pursue, which were all brought together by….
• …the wiki! I though this was a great way of pulling different strands of the conference together, and allowing people to reflect (something we’re very big on in the IBL world!) on their experiences
• The hosted conversations - some people may not have deemed these a success because there were not necessarily a lot of people in attendance, however, to me this contributed to their success - so much of the conference involved ‘big’ ideas, and talks within large groups, so it was nice to sit down and have some conversation delving into the ‘nitty gritty’ of the implementation of IBL, where people could converse freely and possibly more comfortably.
• theatre two point oh# - although I wasn’t able to actually attent the workshop presented by Tom Szekeres and Laura Jenkins, I heard an awful lot of positive feedback on it, people came away inspired and enthused about student initiated projects, and heartened by the sight of students taking owership of their learning. I know an awful lot of work went into the project, and the feedback was testament to the vision and motivation of those concerned. Hopefully we can see more student-led initiatives in the future, with the help of CILASS.
• “Skills without frills: presenters not included” - again I couldn’t be physically present at this session, but due to a privileged position as a member of the film group, I got to see a video of this session - see Lucie’s post below on this session for more - needless to say, this innovative way of presenting and facilitating went down a storm!
• I also enjoyed the various discussions centering around the student as researcher, a topic I was particularly interested in, as I am someone who comes from a very research-orientated department myself, and am hoping to take up a research career myself. I very much believe that there is no reason why undergraduates cannot contrbute meaningfully to the research process and it was great to hear people seriously discussing how this could realistically happen.

This is only a brief selction of my own experiences, and I have to say the most positive one was merely being able to talk to members of staff from various universities as an equal, and to feel like my views were welcomed and valued. I think everyone involved in making the conference a success deserves a big pat on the back, particularly of course the CILASS core staff team, and the delegates themselves, for being so inspiring and enthusiastic!

It’s now the day after the closing of the LTEA ( Learning Through Enquiry Alliance) conference 2008, and my head is beginning to clear. I attempted to write about my experience of this event last night, but I was “all conferenced out” as fellow student ambassador Barbara put it - my mind was just a sea of tags:

conference tag cloud

It was an intense week. In the days leading up to the event’s opening on Wednesday, I worked with the CILASS core team to help prepare the conference Wiki, a virtual space in which delegates could share, discuss and reflect upon their experiences of Inquiry-based learning. Aside from passive use of Wikipedia, I had no prior experience of working with Wikis, and thus found myself engaging in an intense IBL activity on my computer. Once I’d familiarised myself with the basic structure, I was surprised by how easy it was to manipulate; this has encouraged me to contemplate how I might include a wiki within my own website (another project to add to the IBL-inspired list!).

In addition to co-ordinating the wiki, my duties (most of which were of course shared with my amazing friends in the Student Ambassador Network) included: taking photos (that was a self-assigned role! Thanks for indulging me, CILASS), processing and uploading them to Flickr throughout the conference; ensuring that the technology was working for those presenting; uploading powerpoints to Slideshare (still a lot to do there); facilitating sessions; being available for delegates should they have any problems; watching over the luggage, drinking coffee, and eating chocolate.

Thinking about it all now, a few episodes come to mind. I’d like to share those with you.

It’s Wednesday morning, 9am. As the other Student Ambassadors arrive there’s a feeling of great excitement and happiness in the office: the months of preparation are over, and it’s too late to worry about anything. We’re blowing up balloons to tie to lamp-posts in order that delegates don’t get lost on their way to the Keynote in Firth Hall. Turns out that Jamie is a Balloon-mungster, and prior to joining the CILASS team was at the forefront of a new movement which campaigned to promote the simultaneous blowing up of multiple balloons. Jamie’s love of balloons spreads across the office, and before long the balloon bath is the hottest attraction in Sheffield.

jamie sabine natalie and the balloons

natalie balloons balloons_8061

11am, and the delegates are now arriving. They are greeted by the blue T-shirts and big smiles of the Student Ambassadors - a welcome sign of the kind of atmosphere that will embody the entire three-day conference.

IMG_0589

It’s now Wednesday afternoon and I’m facilitating a presentation by four members of Sheffield Hallam University’s CETL. They’ve all been using Inquiry-based technologies to help enhance the learning and teaching experience. As I sit there hearing about their successes I find myself getting tremendously excited and inspired - the work that these tutors are putting in to help students become autonomous learners really is something to be shouted about. When bringing the session to a close, I think it might be appropriate to offer a quick bit of feedback as the only student in the room:

“I’m very happy to have just completed a four-year degree, and am looking forward to moving on into the workplace. But I tell you, hearing what you’re doing with IBL inspires me to such an extent that I’m thinking I’d like to start another undergraduate degree!”

And I meant it. I am so impressed by the effort that is being put in by IBL-orientated staff to help students engage with their subjects, and by the positive results they are achieving. People must be told about IBL! It should become a norm for prospective graduates attending university open days to ask, “Could you tell me what inquiry-based learning techniques are employed within the department?”

We’re now between sessions, the busiest time for me and my USB stick. Myself, Pam from the CILASS core team and Pepe the penguin have to make sure that the presenters in all five of the simultaneous sessions hosted in various spaces around the IC have their presentations/videos lined up and are ready to roll. Remarkably, there’s not a single problem with the technology at any point during the conference - it all goes like clockwork.

pepe and the conference flash drive_8470

The next parallel session has begun, and I’m back in the office processing photos and slides. We’re all buzzing - things are going really well. I’m starting to think about what a great team we make, students working with the core CILASS staff. I reckon we could be hired out (at great expense, of course) to dazzle and amaze conference delegates around the world!

Conference GCHQ:

Conference GCHQ

Tom, Barbara and Nat point delegates in the right direction:

the road to the keynote_8356

It’s nearing 7pm - time for the conference dinner at Whirlebrook Hall. Myself, Nat and Sabine have a true Inquiry-based learning journey to the venue as we don’t know where it is: we stop at two pubs and a private house to Inquire as to where we might find it. Finally we locate it, and we’re actually almost the first to arrive (further proof of the effectiveness of IBL)! Champagne in hand we move out to the terrace, where I soon whip out my camera once again to try and capture the atmosphere. Dinner is then served: a melon slice creation, soup and then a main dish of goats cheese wotsit on rice. Delicious. Finished off with a dessert, and more wine. I must come to these conferences more often… I’m really happy to have the chance to talk with Pam and Sabine. I learn about giving birth, and breastfeeding, things I feel I ought to know about in preparation for the birth of our children in 2010 / 2011.

Nat, the new CILASS Student Co-ordinator for the Student Ambassador Network

conference dinner_8267

Tom, and Laura: Clearly the stress of being the outgoing SAN co-ordinator is getting to her

they weren't always that way

Day two of the conference, and we’re on the coffee. It’s going to be a long one, but with a timetable in my pocket detailing what needs doing when, it’s actually pretty relaxing. It offers reassurance that things are going to happen as planned anyway, just do your bit: the power of teamwork.

Now and then someone will come into the office raving about this AMAZING session that they’d just been to - onto the award winning CILASS student blog it goes.

The delegates are happy. The keynote address, given by the President of the University of Miami, is both relevant and thought-provoking. As the day moves on so notifications of changes to the Wiki increase in number - it’s being used as hoped!

Thursday evening sees us take a coach from the IC to The Edge, the new student village where the delegates are staying. I’m happy, relaxing with friends, eating olives and parsnip crisps, chatting with a member of Sheffield Hallam’s CETL. We’re then ushered through to a large room adjoining the bar: time for a bit of entertainment and reflection with Playback Theatre (York).

conference playback theatre_8387

Playback Theatre are quite remarkable. Consisting of teachers, counsellors and actors, they literally play back to the audience thoughts and feelings that have arisen from the conference. An academic might express her feeling of fear that arises from embarking upon new adventures in IBL, and the joy of then seeing students come into their own through the new module. The actors listen to the story, and then spontaneously create a short performance that sums it up. There’s little in the way of ‘lines’ as such,rather, movement and sounds take centre stage. I was delighted, amused and entertained by their production. Others in the audience were deeply touched; tears were shed. For me, it highlighted just how much passion the delegates had for what they were doing, how, at the end of the day it’s about doing the best one can to make a difference, and finding satisfaction though helping others.

The closing plenary saw us once again in Firth Hall, summing up the questions and ideas that had arisen through the conference. Thanks were then given, with special mention made of the CILASS core team, and the Student Ambassadors. My mind flicked back through the previous few days, and indeed us SA’s really had had a positive impact upon the entire conference. By participating to the extent that we did, we were able to not only paint the place with bright happy blue t-shirts, but also to provide the student point-of-view in many of the discussions - this of course is vital as students are half of the equation when it comes to Learning and Teaching.

I feel that this conference was a model for what a conference should be, and I hope that everyone who attended from other universities goes home and sets up their own Student Network!

Me, demonstrating the brand new CILASS student website - made BY students, FOR students

san skills session_8408

The overall feeling I have looking back on the LTEA Conference 2008 is one of gratitude. Gratitude for having been able to take part in such a fantastic event. Gratitude for having been a part of such an amazing team made up of such genuinely lovely people.

IMG_0623

There was very much a feeling of partnership between students, staff and visiting delegates throughout, with little sign of hierarchy. I felt very much valued and appreciated as a student: this makes me feel incredibly positive about the future of higher education in the UK, and I won’t hesitate in moving back to the UK from Japan 10 or 15 years down the line in order that my own (as yet to be conceived!) children are able to benefit from it.

Long Live IBL!

theatre two point oh_8339

With the LTEA Conference over and half of my life packed into boxes ready to head back home, my time at University has finally come to an end (for now…). I could not have imagined when I started that during my time as an undergraduate I would be leading a teaching and learning project, presenting at conferences, or able to talk to academics as colleagues rather than as superiors. However, through our involvement in theatre two point oh #, Laura Jenkins and I have been entrusted with and empowered by the project, and I hope that we have demonstrated how effective student-led initiatives can be.

The experience has been invaluable with respect to both our futures. Laura has succeeded in gaining entry to a much sought-after graduate programme in advertising, and while I have not yet decided on my next move, I feel that my involvement in such a project has opened many doors. I feel confident about my personal prospects, and may yet be persuaded by my involvement with ttpo# and the SAN to pursue some kind of further activity in Higher Education (we’ll see…).

Returning to the more general subject of student-led (co-)curricular activity, I think that CILASS are to be commended for their openness to us and their bravery in granting funding to ttpo# - there was surely an element of risk in handing over such a large amount of responsibility and indeed giving us control over a not unsubstantial budget. We hope we have done a good enough job to have opened the door to any of our peers who wish to expand their curricular involvement beyond their degree course into a similar kind of leadership role. We are pleased to see on the CILASS website that there is now a page for Student-led projects - so let’s hope this can be added to in future!

Today I hosted a conversation where present was Sabine Little from CILASS at the University of Sheffield, Ian Tindall from Anglia Ruskin University and myself.
Even though there were only three of us in this session we did manage to continue the hosted conversation for the 50 minute session and talked about a wide variety of student experiences in the University environment.
The aim of my hosted conversation was to discuss my experience as a student working with staff to review an IBL project and how I feel it was of benefit to the project itself, the staff working on the project and my own learning experience. As a Student Ambassador, one of our roles is to work with the staff in our department on CILASS projects and departmental projects concerned with the student teaching and learning experience and one such project which I used here as an example of student involvement.

We also discussed the process of Small Group Instructional Diagnosis (SGID). Typically the SGID process divides up a lecture theatre into small groups of 6 people where they answer three questions to review the module, typically being:

1. What you liked best about the module?
2. What you liked least about the module?
3. What you feel you as students could do to improve the module?

As a student I found it helped me tremendously to identify the skills that the students were gaining from the IBL activity from the responses they gave me and also the problems that needed to be overcome. I also found that I helped and added something to the feedback that from a staff perspective might not have been clear. Sabine already knew of my involvement in this process and so it was mainly me presenting to Ian what I had done and learnt from it.
Although Ian found the process and interesting one of student evaluation, he didn’t think it would work in his institution which is mainly dominated by mature students and we began to discuss his methods of teaching and student evaluation, explaining that it was all done online which in the evaluation process, can sometimes be good as the students express what they feel, but sometimes are a little too harsh possibly because the lack of face to face contact makes this easier to do, with little thought of the consequences on staff.
We then discussed how students and learners change dramatically from the primary school level to University level and it is the point in-between from age 10-18 that it all changes. I identified the ‘spoon fed’ approach adopted in secondary school and college and this is also a stage where students begin to question their own answers before presenting them to classes which is why student interaction in IBL activities and lecture theatres in often limited in the student response. I feel this is because of the lack of confidence of many students when they first arrive at university and this ‘fear factor; mentioned by Sabine of students being wrong.
A way to break down this issue was suggested that instead of a question posed to the entire lecture theatre, instead break the big group into smaller groups or talk to the person next to them activity to voice their opinions in small groups before feeding back to the lecture theatre. From experience I have found this a more successful method and Ian and Sabine agreed that this is the way to engage students and build the all important trust and friendships that are so vital to student learning in the initial transition to University life.
It was a shame that this session wasn’t attended by more from different institutions, possibly with a student faculty similar to the one CILASS hosts for the student ambassadors as it would be interesting to see if anyone thinks that these ideas presented and experiences I know that many of the Student Ambassadors gain from, could be adopted by another institution or alternatively give us ideas and suggestions for improvement.

Hi everyone!

Realised we haven’t been very good at keeping you up to speed with what we’re up to recently, probably because we’ve been so snowed under with filming and editing! For the last four or five months, among other things, we’ve been filming and editing the film for the History Department: ‘HorrIBL History? A Student Perspective of Inquiry-Based Learning in the History Department’.

This has been a really major project, as we had to film various different sessions (including one hour and a half long session for me, with a hand-held camera!) and then try to make a ten minute, comprehensive film, demonstrating the ways in which students not only use, but benefit from IBL in the History department. This was to be shown at the History Department Away Day on 28th May, and was basically designed to ’sell’ IBL to the History staff. So out of the hours and hours of footage we’d managed to amass between the four of us, we had to somehow cut it all down into a ten minute film!

We did manage it eventually, but that was after some serious five hour sessions with the laptop, going over the same bits of footage again and again and again…! It was a labour of love, but I think we’re all very proud of it now!

Other things we’ve been doing have been filming ‘Ensemble 360′ in the Music Department - one of their IBL modules involving a quartet of various musicians, and a small group of students, who had to write pieces for the musicians to perform - an exploratory experience.

We also filmed a really exciting session for the English Department, where they had a magician in to teach a small group of students some magic tricks and short routines, which the students were then going to incorporate into a whole act, to perform in Blackpool, fully made up and in silly costumes! I wish I could have seen the finished article!

Anyway, enough from me, I’m just about to finish capturing some footage of one of the sessions from the LTEA, and maybe try to do a bit of editing.

Sadly I won’t be part of the Film Group next year as I’ve finished Uni…sob!!

But Claire is extremely capable, I hope she keeps you all up to date! Good luck to everyone leaving, and to those staying, keep up the good work! :)

It seems so! There was a great reaction to the session facilitated via a video slide show by Jamie Wood, Sabine Little, Laura Jenkins and Louise Goldring (who was present, and was the only facilitator not to be filmed). Everyone was very impressed by the ‘element of surprise’ at not knowing who would be speaking next and whether they would be in the room or on the video! The session was titled ‘Skills without Frills: presenters not included’, and it brought about a great deal of discussion about the skills that the SAN have developed through their work with CILASS and how these skills can be put to good use in the future, when applying for jobs. There were quotes around the Collaboratory from Student Ambassadors, and video clips from the IBL Cafe on ‘The SAN and Employability’, as well as some audio clips playing in the background while the delegates had a chance to look around.

There were some really interesting discussions (which I got the chance to overhear from behind my camera!), and what I found really interesting was that the two tables actually drew similar conclusions to each other, and both the conversations went down a very similar route, despite the fact that they started with quite different ideas. There were discussions about the nine ‘employability skills’ which all employers look out for in interviews, and about whether they really were the skills that are necessary to be a good employee, or if these skills actually just help you to fit the bill when it comes to getting through the application stages.

Hopefully the big sheets of paper everyone was writing on will be ‘copy-cammed’(!) and everyone will be able to see the ideas that came out of the discussion.

Thanks to everyone involved for a really interesting session!

How am I going to blog that?

I have just attended a well structured and very very very interesting session on: “Cultural Academy: a new approach to cultural enquiry”, by Vasso Vydelingum from the University of Surrey. I am just going to start this article by a quote from his presentation: “Learning about culture is a life-long learning conversation”. Yeah, this is true.

In the University of Surrey, they have been aware of the different cultural backgrounds students were from, and the different approaches to learning those backgrounds could trigger. So this idea merged: they were going to launch a student-led conference on cultural differences. They contacted students by email, and chose the most motivated ones to organise and make this conference a great success. There were 3 workshops, taking place over 3 months. The first one was entitled: “Me and My Culture”, and the successive ones opened up to the global culture. People were asked to bring a cultural gift, which illustrated a significant part of their culture.

Several interesting points have emerged from this conference: communication takes place in each culture, but in a different way: Chinese people for instance are much more visual and keen to use symbols than British people.

So in our workshop, after the short presentation, we were asked to put on a sticky note what “I am” and what “I am not”. Interestingly enough, it was quite hard to define ourselves without being compared to somebody else, but the “I am not ” part was more challenging to write… Then, after sharing what we wrote, we had to answer a short questionnaire about our name: where does it come from? Has it got its meaning? Once again we shared our answers and it was interesting to see that names meant a lot more than just an appellation: they were a reflection the family’s beliefs, passions, or tradition. A discussion started after that but time constraint was stronger and forced us to close the session.

However I managed to have a conversation with the presenter and he said how much he had appreciated the fact that I had asked how to pronounce his name! This may sound quite simple but I asked him because people had mispelled my own name and that I had not appreciated that. It is as if somebody was calling someone else that was not me!

I think that being aware of the different communicative and procedures across countries is very important because one can offend somebody from another country very easily, even not on purpose. Or one can feel rejected/not integrated because of cultural practices (go to the Pub, being very open about one’s life…)

So this workshop showed how the university dealt with the large number of international students and created an original event… I like that :-)

There is only one more session left on day two of the LTEA conference, so I thought this was an ideal time to blog my thoughts on the day so far.

This morning, I was able to attend a ‘hosted conversation’ with Claire Allam from the Learning and Teaching Support department of the University of Sheffield. We began by commenting on what a good idea the hosted conversations were - they are really flexible, with only a broad theme to guide the conversation, allowing a more organic dialogue to develop than that which might occur within a more traditional given-paper format. We then moved on to discussing the overarching theme of this particular session - ways of assessing student’s inquiry based learning. Firstly, should we assess what students have learnt, or the process they used in order to learn? We concluded that some sort of balance was generally most desirable. We also discussed how to make students feel comfortable with methods of assessment that may differ from traditional essays and exams. Claire used the example of modules in which students have used film-making as a tool for inquiry, but instead of being assessed on the finished film (these were not film studies students), they were assessed on their reflections on making the film and how it helped them engage with the subject matter. This took away the fear of failure somewhat, and allowed the students to attempt bolder ideas than they may have done had the finished product been marked. Everyone seemed to agree that reflection should be a key component in the assessment of  inquiry-based learning methods, but only as long as it was done in a sufficiently critical manner. This then moved the conversation on to the question of what exactly critical thinking is… no conclusions reached there! We all came away from this session with food for thought.

This afternoon I attended a hosted conversation with based on the topic of ‘Engaging undergraduates in research that contributes to the research effort of the University’, a full review of the meeting will possibly be written up on the Wiki by a delegate at the meeting but here are my views on the conversation and ideas developed so far….

Firstly I would like to say how much I enjoyed this hosted conversation and wish it could have continued as I believe some really interesting debatable topics were established and ideas put forward for further discussion. Maybe some of these could be continued if we meet again throughout the conference or even be discussed on the Wiki. I would like to put forward a few points that I feel I could have raised in the discussion but time limited us.

In regards to the view that undergraduates cannot contribute to ‘research’, I believe this to be wrong. As I mentioned towards the end of the discussion, my dissertation topic this summer is an original piece of research in respect that this has not been conducted on the Cornish peninsula and therefore results that I find will contribute to ‘new knowledge’. Fair enough, some people may contradict this and say that land-sea breeze convergence (the arrival of an onshore wind from opposite sides of peninsular that interact) has already been discovered and therefore I am not contributing to new knowledge, however, I argue that I am testing the theory in a new place and establishing what factors influence where this zone of convergence happens. This is the same concept of what academics use in their own research papers, as they test the initial theory devised by an earlier academic on a different location and see if it still conforms, while they also aim to find something new – precisely what I am aiming to do myself, therefore is this not classed as research?

I would also like to argue that my dissertation tutor will enhance their knowledge based on my research, which is of course interest to them in their own field or research and will possibly contribute to their own future research.

The only downside to undergraduate research is the limiting factors that perhaps restrain students from coming to a sound conclusion that can be referenced by academics and termed ‘valid’. These are time, resources and assistance. A student only has a year to produce their dissertation which involves the initial idea, planning, design, data collection, analysis, discussion and conclusions and academics have a longer period of time to conduct their research as they don’t have to work to a deadline: especially not that like the student experiences due to assessment criteria. I would also like to put forward the point that students are limited by money and equipment, as they do not have access to funding to visit places like Iceland which may be in their research interests due to high tuition fees. Also I have found that staff requests and needs come above students, whereby students have to alter their dissertation needs if equipments is not available due to staff usage – this again relates to the argument of hierarchy within the University. I also would like to point out that dissertations are individual projects due to plagiarism issues and therefore assistance is limited but when an academic conducts a piece of research, they can collaborate, discuss, work with others and seek advice more readily than a student can or would even be allowed.

Therefore I conclude that it is the restrictions imposed by the University system that prevents students from contributing to what many see as ‘real research’ as apposed to ‘student research’ which can be frowned upon or not seemed worthy.