Rising to the Challenge of Transforming Higher Education: Designing Universities for Learning and Teaching

85 Pages·2016·1.908 MB·English

by  Alan Bain, Lucia Zundans-Fraser (auth.)

SPRINGER BRIEFS IN EDUCATION
Alan Bain
Lucia Zundans-Fraser
Rising to the
Challenge of
Transforming
Higher Education
Designing Universities
for Learning and
Teaching
123
SpringerBriefs in Education
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8914
Alan Bain Lucia Zundans-Fraser
(cid:129)
Rising to the Challenge
of Transforming Higher
Education
Designing Universities for Learning
and Teaching
123
AlanBain LuciaZundans-Fraser
Faculty of Education Faculty of Education
CharlesSturt University CharlesSturt University
Bathurst, NSW Bathurst, NSW
Australia Australia
ISSN 2211-1921 ISSN 2211-193X (electronic)
SpringerBriefs inEducation
ISBN978-981-10-0259-5 ISBN978-981-10-0261-8 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0261-8
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2015957236
©TheAuthor(s)2016
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpart
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or
dissimilarmethodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt
fromtherelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained
hereinorforanyerrorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade.
Printedonacid-freepaper
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbySpringerNature
TheregisteredcompanyisSpringerScience+BusinessMediaSingaporePteLtd.
Preface
Serious and fundamental questions are being posed about the quality of learning
and teaching in universities. These questions relate to rapid change in the way
learning and teaching is delivered, the cost and quality of courseware, respon-
siveness to learner heterogeneity, and faculty professionalization (Bokor 2012;
Bradley et al. 2008; Norton et al. 2013). The direction universities take in
answeringthesequestionshasconsequencesfortheirdesign,theirstaffing,theway
they create and deliver their learning and teaching programs, and the way they
compete with each other. According to the proponents of transformational change
in higher education, the future services offered by universities will exist in a
nationalandglobalmarketplaceinsteadofastateandregionalone,andmoreoften
in a virtual as opposed to bricks and mortar delivery model (Harden 2012). While
the drivers for change in the university sector and associated debates have existed
for some time, there is an undoubted increasing cadence in the discussion and a
demonstrable sense offear driving a call for action within and among universities.
Increasingly, cost, competitiveness, effectiveness, and viability are linked to
responsiveness to student needs, the quality of the curriculum, the learning expe-
rience,andstudentoutcomes(Kuhetal.2015).Theresultisaheightenedfocuson
how universities are organized to deliver those outcomes.
One of the ironies of change initiatives in universities is they frequently lack a
coherenttheoryandresearchtopracticeframeworkforsuchimportantwork,which
is ironical, given that universities are the places where theories are created and
applied in so many domains. There is also a concern that the scale of change is
underwhelming, often limited to projects focused directly on improving aspects of
learning and teaching without undertaking the institution-wide structural reform
(i.e., an integrated approach to the technology, the governance, and personnel
reforms)necessarytosupportthoseinitiatives andincreasethelikelihoodthatthey
are both sustainable and scalable. Such projects are frequently positioned as
transformationalalthoughtheirscopeanddepthrarelylineupwiththerequirements
of transformational change.
v
vi Preface
Thepurposeofthisbriefistoshare anapproachtochange thatextendsbeyond
traditional strategic planning or scope–limited, project-based approaches and
includes examples of the ways in which theory and research can guide practice in
transformational organizational change in higher education.
References
Bokor,J.(2012).Universityofthefuture:Athousandyearoldindustryonthecuspofprofound
change.Australia:Ernst&Young.
Bradley,D.,Noonan,P.,Nugent,H.,&Scales,B.(2008).ReviewofAustralianhighereducation.
Retrieved from http://www.innovation.gov.au/HigherEducation/Documents/Review/PDF/
Higher%20Education%20Review_one%20document_02.pdf
Harden, N. (2012). The end of the university as we know it. Retrieved from http://www.the-
american-interest.com/articles/2012/12/11/the-end-of-the-university-as-we-know-it/
Kuh, G., Ikenberry, S., Jankowski, N., Cain, T., Ewell, P., Hutchings, P., & Kinzie, J. (2015).
Usingevidenceofstudentlearningtoimprovehighereducation.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.
Norton, A., Sonnemann, J., & Cherastidtham, I. (2013). Taking university teaching seriously.
GrattanInstitute.
Contents
1 The Self Organizing University (SOU). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 What Is the SOU? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 What Are the Expected Outcomes of the SOU?. . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 The State of Program Design and Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1 Need for Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2 Research to Practice Gap. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3 Collaboration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4 Institutional Practice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3 The SOU Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4 Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.1 Simple Rules or Commitments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2 Embedded Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.3 Similarity at Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.4 Emergent Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.5 Dispersed Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.6 Schema. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5 Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.1 Models and Analyses of Learning and Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5.2 Learning Intention and Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.3 Constructive Alignment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.4 Feedback and Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5.5 Teaching Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
vii
viii Contents
6 Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
6.1 Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
6.2 People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
6.2.1 The Project Team. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
6.3 Governance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
6.4 Technology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
6.4.1 Edge Technology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
6.4.2 Tools for Adaptive Education Systems (TAES) . . . . . . 42
6.4.3 Learning Analytics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
7 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
7.1 Baseline Assessment and Design Phase. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
7.2 Initiation Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
7.3 Scale-up Phase. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
7.4 Consolidation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Reference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
8 The Design in Practice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
8.1 Further Traction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
8.2 Application of Self Organization in Higher Education. . . . . . . . 60
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
9 Efficacy Research Underpinning the SOU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
9.1 The Self-organizing Schools Project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
9.2 From School to University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
10 Impacts and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
11 Engaging with Transformational Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
12 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Reference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Glossary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Chapter 1
The Self Organizing University (SOU)
Abstract Thischapterintroduces theself-organizinguniversitymodelincludinga
description of its elements, rationale, theoretical base, underpinning learning and
teaching research, and the role of technology. The chapter also describes the out-
comes that can be expected from using the model as a change approach in higher
education.
(cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1)
Keywords Self-organization Learninganalytics Theory Research Learning
(cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1)
and teaching model Scale Transformational change Technology system
The brief describes the theory and research literature that underpin the self-
organizing university (SOU), a transformational change model for learning and
teachinginhighereducation.Itincludes adescriptionofthecurricular contextand
need for the approach and the way multiple bodies of literature intersect in the
theory, design and practice that drive the SOU approach in five areas. They are:
context, theoretical framework, learning and teaching research, efficacy research
andtechnology.Examplesofthewayeachoftheelementscontributetothemodel
are included throughout. The context for SOU examines the following:
1. The existing state of program design, development and reform in higher
education.
2. The theoretical basis for SOU and the literature associated with that theory.
3. The learning and teaching research that provides content for the SOU.
4. The efficacy research applying the theory in K-12 and higher education.
5. The approach taken to the design, including technologies for transformational
change.
1.1 What Is the SOU?
The SOU is a multi-year transformational organizational change model for trans-
forming learning and teaching in higher education contexts. This includes:
©TheAuthor(s)2016 1
A.BainandL.Zundans-Fraser,RisingtotheChallengeofTransforming
HigherEducation,SpringerBriefsinEducation,
DOI10.1007/978-981-10-0261-8_1