Monday, 27 May 2013

Strategies for Flexible Learning.

This is a work in progress, just starting to explore the strategies module and here is the link to my first strategy template.

Tuesday, 21 May 2013

Is Blended Delivery More Sustainable?

When I became involved in the 'new' model of the Bachelor of Midwifery degree, which is delivered in a blended style with all students classed as distance, I instantly thought of it as a more sustainable approach. Giving this more thought I have begun to see the swings and roundabouts from both sides and have made a quick comparison table below.

I guess my point is that sustainability is complex and what that can on the surface appear more sustainable may not in fact be. It is a balancing act.
Sustainability Comparison Table Between On Campus and Distance Delivery of the Bachelor of Midwifery Programme.


Sustainable Benefit
Sustainable Barrier or Cost
Students having to move to Dunedin to undertake the programme.
a) Utilisation of campus services, buildings etc.
b) Economic benefits for Dunedin.
c) Provides graduates into the workforce in the local area.
a) Students who are unable or unwilling to move to Dunedin lose access to the programme.
b) Does little to address workforce issues in rural areas.
c) Does not allow for expansion of the programme in to other areas.
d) Staff must reside in Dunedin limiting potentially workforce calibre.
Students can study from home and meet in satellite groups.
a) Programme is more accessible to students irrespective of their location.
b) Less need for campus buildings as students study from home, utilising existing work spaces.
c) Students are more likely to stay and work in their home area on graduation, helping address recruitment and retention issues.
d) Staff can reside in other locations increasing diversity and expertise in the school.
e) Scope for programme to expand in to other areas of NZ.
a) Shifts economic benefits out of Dunedin.
b) Students still need to access practical experiences in large hospitals so must still travel to the city.
c) Some teaching needs to be face to face again necessitating travel to the city.

Monday, 20 May 2013

Educational Sustainability.

A theme that occurs in both David Orr's speech and Ken Robinson's talk is of education being geared to meet the needs of University Entrance noting that universities do not result in producing people who will be most useful in nurturing and sustaining our world.

This led me to consider various aspects of sustainability and education, some which link snugly together, others that sit on there own. So at the risk of exposing my rambling nature here are some thoughts.

Creating an Image of Sustainability.

Sustainability is often represented with images of unfolding ferns and pure landscapes. Yet it strikes me that there are so many parts, factors, influences and a degree of the unknown that would make the image of sustainability more microbial.

That is all the great ideas, concepts, plans, goals, methods float around the atmosphere they must wait to find the right host with which to bind to effect change, like bacteria surrounding a cell. If enough come together in the right circumstances then the rate of proliferation can be great and the whole organism can change, yet if the environment is not suitable no host will be found, change cannot proliferate and we remain as we were.

Using the images and metaphors from the world of bacteria and viruses may not paint as pretty a picture as the unfolding fern or babbling brook but it does represent the random nature of how sustainable change occurs in our world.

Binding the Bacteria in Education.

Doubtless the majority of those who work at OP would claim a personal commitment to sustainability. We teach it, weave it thorough our courses and learning outcomes and hope to produce graduates who are cognisant of it as they move into the world post studying with us. Yet what is it that gets some ideas around sustainability in education to stick and how much do we lose by our hands being tied by forces we cannot control?

Flexible Learning and the Corporate Giants.

We may embrace flexible learning and the non traditional delivery methods that come with it. Methods that improve learner diversity, collaboration and learner centred learning. Yet have we considered the devices we ask our students to have to enable them to join us. Laptops, broadband, wifi, ipads, tablets, smart phones have become the enablers of sustainable learning. But what of the companies who produce these devices? What service are we giving to sustainability every time we put our educational dollars in the pockets of corporate giants where profit is king and the creed of capitalism ranks far and above a consideration of sustainability.

Sure there are sustainable features to some of these companies, but if we look at the simple fact that they are global rather than local companies we can illustrate how our reliance on them restricts our options in view of controlling our own destiny by having economic freedom. In Ella Lawton's work around 'Localisation as a Multiplier' she considers that if money is spent locally, 80% of that money will go back into the local economy, spend it globally the economic benefits drop to 20%.

Thus we can consider the sustainable benefits of changes to educational delivery, but the question remains can we reconcile these with the losses that we hand to corporate technology giants.

 Link to Ella Lawton's Tedx talk

The Challenge of Bringing Opposing Forces Together.

One of the challenges facing us when incorporating sustainability into our facilitating and learning are the opposing forces of what is demanded to be quantified and the less quantifiable ways in which people now learn.

It is interesting to read Lockwood's work on timing and content, trying to provide a guideline to us as our courses must fit into credit values and associated hours. Yet this seems to sit at the opposing end of the spectrum when considering effective pedagogy. How do we put a time around reflection  or experiential learning? How do we quantify the moment of transformational change that occurs with some learners?

How truly do we value creativity and the value of learning if it is forced to conform to an assessment and grade to produce a result that must stand up to the scrutiny of qualifications authorities and statutory bodies?

Steve Henry gives us a bit more food for thought on this here:


Lockwood, F. (2005). Estimating student workload, readability and implications for student learning and progression. Australia: ODLAA.