I am currently at the International Conference on Open and Innovative Education in Hong Kong where the conversation is around using technology to engage learners and innovative pedagogies.  There are some really interesting papers from across the world.  The focus is  on how education is changing and needs to change for the future.  A whole range of new pedagogies are being shared with opportunities to attend workshops and explore key aspects with delegates from across the world.

We have all recognised the importance of active learning in engaging students and supporting them in improving their progression.  I have particularly enjoyed Mike Sharples’ (co-author of Innovative Pedagogies 2016, Open University,http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/innovating/) workshop where he presented arguments to support the use of a range of pedagogies, each focussing on active learning and drawing on literature to support his arguments.  He presented the concept of ‘spaced learning’ drawing on Kelley and Whatson’s (2013) research in the area of neuroscience.  We were all challenged to try this process of learning with our own students.

Mike also shared some new findings of how flipped learning, which we have been using at Nottingham Trent University for several years, is improving learning and progression.

The final pedagogy he shared was ‘conversational learning’ through group work, sharing how the FutureLearn platform has been developed by linking conversations, small group discussions and peer review into a MOOC platform.

Course mapping is based on early planning in how much time is spent on assimilative learning, finding information, communication, production, assessment, and interaction (Rienties & Toetenel, 2016).  This article indicated that, across 150 modules, there was a clear relationship between the way courses were designed and the outcomes; higher satisfaction from students on courses with assimilative learning through a range of media and discussion;  courses where students worked together improved retention;  courses with lower success rates were those with assimilative learning at the core of the design.

The course that I lead, the Doctorate in Education (Ed D), has gone through a process of revalidation as part of the Professional Doctorate suite.  This has involved us in rethinking the content and delivery with some really interesting and challenging discussions in developing a course that is delivered by a multi-disciplinary team.This conference is providing a ‘space’ for me to reflect on our pedagogy and how we need to develop this further to support our students, all of whom are taking the Ed D part-time while working full-time, mainly in schools or universities.  A challenge for the summer for us all is perhaps to take time to reflect on how we are changing our pedagogy to increase engagement, progression, and dare I say, enjoyment of our students.

Kelley, P. & Whatson, T. (2013). Making long-termmemories in minutes: a spaced learning pattern frommemory research in education.Frontiers in HumanNeuroscience, 7, 589.

Sharples, M., de Roock , R., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Koh, E., Kukulska-Hulme, A., Looi,C-K, McAndrew, P., Rienties, B., Weller, M., Wong, L. H. (2016). Innovating Pedagogy 2016: Open UniversityInnovation Report 5. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

Rienties, B. & Toetenel, L. (2016). The impact oflearning design on student behaviour, satisfaction andperformance: a cross-institutional comparison across151 modules. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 333-341.

Toetenel, L. & Rienties, B. (2016). Analysing 157learning designs using learning analytic approachesas a means to evaluate the impact of pedagogicaldecision-making. British Journal of EducationalTechnology, 47(5), 981-992.