Paradigms 20 Journal for Research and Innovation in Teaching and Learning at CPUT
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
paradigms
AUGUST 2017 ISSUE 20
20
Journal for Research and Innovation
in Teaching and Learning at CPUT
creating futures A
INNOVATION JOURNEYS
(PARADIGMS 20)
August 2017
Convener
Puleng Sefalane-Nkohla
Editor
Jenny Wright
Design and Layout
Bridgette Hunt
Administrator
Jean Collins
ISSN 1025-2398
AUGUST 2017 ISSUE 20
Contents
Introduction 2
An evaluation of a Teaching Assistant programme
at a University of Technology: A World Café approach 3
Xena Cupido (cupidox@cput.ac.za)
Service learning support for new lecturers at a university of technology 11
Hanlie Dippenaar (dippenaarh@cput.ac.za) and Martin Braund (martin.braund@york.ac.uk)
Exploring computer-based language learning to develop
academic literacies of first-year students 23
Hanlie Dippenaar (dippenaarh@cput.ac.za) and Mpho Matthews (MatthewsMp@cput.ac.za)
Puleng Sefalane-Nkohla (sefalanep@cput.ac.za) Thembinkosi Mtonjeni (mtonjenit@cput.ac.za)
and Misiwe Katiya (katiyam@cput.ac.za)
Perceptions of a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning programme 33
Salochana Lorraine Hassan (hassanl@cput.ac.za)
Learning in sites of practice through a CHAT lens 40
James Garraway (garawayj@cput.ac.za) and Jolanda Morkel (MorkelJ@cput.ac.za)
Epistemological Access through Blogging – A Multimodal Approach 48
Theodore Rodrigues (rodriguest@cput.ac.za)
Implementing a constructivist blended learning approach
in a third-year entrepreneurship education class 60
Zayd Waghid (waghidz@cput.ac.za)
1
paradigms
Introduction
The edition covers a wide range of topics relating to the various RIFTAL research
projects conducted by the writers that contributed to the current issue of Paradigms.
Dippenaar et al., Bangui et al. and Waghid report on the use of ICT in education. Dippenaar
et al. are focusing on computer assisted language learning in Chemistry and Education.
This is an important project for first year students, as they may struggle with the particular
norms of writing at university, and in particular fields of study. Bangui et al. explore the use
of instant messaging platforms in supporting tutorials in Engineering.
Students take lessons provided in instant Linguistic hybridity of English Additional Language
messaging platforms enthusiastically and this has (EAL) students studying at a South African university of
proven to have great potential to enhance teaching technology has been a concern of Rodriguez’s. He tracks
and learning. The article by Waghid breaks new efforts to improve EAL students’ epistemological access
ground in proposing the use of computer-assisted and ultimately, their academic success by employing a
collaborative learning platforms in the field of social language ecology perspective within a cognitive semiotic
entrepreneurship. framework.
Supporting staff through the teaching assistant
programme is a new initiative funded by the Teaching
Development Grant (TDG). It has proved to be effective
in providing more face to face contact with students
as well as helping staff to prepare lectures. Cupido
reports on the impact of Teaching Assistant Programme
in promoting dialogue and reflection between lecturers
and teaching assistants. She further recommends the
expansion of this programme in coming years.
Enhancing the scholarship of teaching is a recent
course offered by Fundani. As Hassan reports, the
course has been enthusiastically taken up by CPUT staff
as both a means to publish in Higher Education (HE) but
also to advance their careers as lecturers.
Garraway’s article also breaks new ground in
analyzing the nature of ‘participation’ in the foundation
classroom through the lens of social justice theory. He
proposes that creating just teaching environments is not
only good in itself, but may also enhance disciplinary
knowledge acquisition.
2
AUGUST 2017 ISSUE 20
An evaluation of a Teaching
Assistant programme at a
University of Technology:
A World Café approach
XENA CUPIDO
Abstract
In the context of higher education in South Africa, student engagement and support is considered one of the
strategic objectives to address issues related to student retention and success. In response to the diverse needs
of the student body, academic support structures have been established to provide an enriching experience for
students. In 2014, the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) initiated an institution-wide Teaching Assistant
(TA) programme Dialogue about the collaborative project between lecturers and TAs was needed to promote
discussion and reflection in a manner that was meaningful and engaging, as well as to evaluate the impact of the
programme. This paper reports on the impact evaluation of the Teaching Assistant Programme through a qualitative
conversational process using the World Café approach. This approach enabled lecturers and TAs to engage in
constructive dialogue around a set of critical questions. The findings suggest that the collaborative nature of the TA
programme positively contributed to teaching and learning in departments, but highlighted the administrative and
institutional challenges which hindered the experience. The paper concludes with the collective recommendations
which emerged through the participatory methodology of the World Café and the value of supportive collaborative
interactions between lecturers and TAs to enhance teaching and learning at CPUT.
A need for Teaching Assistants appropriate skills, knowledge, values and attributes to
achieve success in the world of work. They contend that
The South African higher education landscape there is a strong drive to build and create knowledge
has increasingly experienced significant shifts, such through different academic projects to provide authentic
as an increase in student numbers, a call for equitable opportunities for students to learn both generic and
access and greater student support to enhance professional competencies, as well as to build networks
opportunity for student success. These shifts come and pathways for employment after graduation (Kendall
at a time of dwindling resources. Coupled with the and Schussler 2012).
rising demand for higher education necessitated the
development of student support services and structures Employing teaching assistants (TAs) to assist in
to improve student retention and reduce attrition. A undergraduate teaching has been considered a viable
challenge encountered by many institutions is learning solution. Meadows et al. (2015) point out that teaching
how to maintain the quality of teaching and learning assistants have made an important contribution to
in the current educational climate (Muzaka 2009). In undergraduate teaching in higher education through
addition, Hénard and Roseveare (2012) argues that, their work as assessors, tutorial leaders, and laboratory
within the current educational climate, universities have demonstrators, among other responsibilities. They
the responsibility to prepare graduates who have the suggest that TAs may be considered academics of the
3
paradigms
future, as they are inducted into the academy through and administrative support. The role of the TA was to
various teaching and learning activities expected of assist academic staff with lesson plans, implementation
them. Goodhand, Graham and Ogilvie (2015) support of lectures, classes, tutorials, practicals, development
this idea by stating that students who explore their and implementation of educational technology. In
discipline in postgraduate studies often begin to perceive addition, they provided individual support to peer-
the opportunity of a career in higher education, having tutors through the provision of tutor material, as well
acquired specialist knowledge and been employed as as to support the tutorial programme within a specific
a TA. This reasoning was strongly considered in the discipline or subject.
development of the TA programme at CPUT.
As the TA programme is fairly new at CPUT,
At CPUT, a TA was defined as a registered senior mostly anecdotal evidence was available concerning
undergraduate student (BTech) or any postgraduate the programme’s success. Examples of the anecdotal
student who teaches (usually undergraduate students) evidence submitted by departments as part of the 2015
part-time, on a paid basis, for a department, whilst Teaching Development Grant Report suggests that
also engaged in other academic activities such as pass rates seemed to have improved where TAs were
research and administration. Similarly, Dotger (2011, appointed. While no empirical evidence was available
158) describes TAs as being required to “navigate a to support this claim, possible reasons given for the
complex environment while learning to teach, balancing increase in the pass rate have included the improved
teaching with their research responsibilities as they quality of teaching, as lecturers were able to spend more
study their discipline”. The role requires them to act as time with students studying at-risk subjects. Lecturers
a link between lecturers and students, while orientating reported that, where TAs assisted with administrative
themselves to the implicit rules and expectations tasks, lecturers could provide one-on-one assistance
associated with their context. during tutorials. Submissions also indicated that the
availability of a TA during consultation times after
Other international models have conceptualised the class created a safe, non-threatening space for less
TA programme as a means of engaging postgraduate confident students to ask follow-up questions. The
students through employment and, in doing so, support received by lecturers from the TAs included,
sustaining the postgraduate programme. Through coordinating tutors;assistance with the management of
various funding mechanisms, the recruitment of TAs has tutorial activities, all of which enhanced the teaching and
helped to promote an active research culture which, in learning process.
turn, has contributed to an institution’s broader research
mission. The recruitment of TAs has also provided an The support lecturers received from TAs was cited
opportunity to develop and mentor future academics. as one of the reasons for apparent improvements in the
The developmental nature of this approach can be student pass rates, although this needs to be explored
viewed as a cost-effective solution to supplement the further. The lack of empirical evidence appears to be
regular supply of lecturers and offer a valuable internship aligned to a global trend of gathering data related to
model for future academic staff (Park and Ramos 2002). TA programmes mostly from self-reported surveys or
interviews administered to TAs at the conclusion of their
training (Wyse, Long and Ebert-May 2014). The purpose
The teaching assistant of the current evaluation was thus largely to contribute to
programme at CPUT addressing this gap in knowledge.
Increasingly, large classrooms and the diversity
of students’ academic and social backgrounds have Key theories in collaborative learning:
necessitated student support beyond the classroom. A feature of the teaching assistant
Strydom, Basson and Mentz (2012), in their student programme
engagement report, stated that improving the quality
of teaching and learning in these circumstances is a In preparing lecturers and TAs for their role in theTA
national imperative for higher education institutions. In programme, a collaborative approach was adopted
2014, a TA programme was established at CPUT, in part in the training of the TA programme. The aim was to
to overcome this challenge, as well as to prepare TAs to encourage that a similar approach be adopted in the
provide lecturers and students with needed academic implementation of the programme at departmental level.
4
AUGUST 2017 ISSUE 20
However, it was important to recognise that TAs Mayer (2004, 14) defines this constructivist learning as
lacked the formal, substantive professional training to an “active process in which students are active sense
prepare them as educational practitioners or facilitators. makers who seek to build coherent and organized
While it was a prerequisite that TAs have disciplinary knowledge”. Students co-construct their learning, with
expertise in the discipline they teach, evidence shows the lecturer serving as a guide or facilitator. Neo and Neo
that effective teaching requires much more than subject (2009) found that constructivism helps students develop
knowledge (Ball and Bass 2000; Gardner and Jones problem-solving skills, critical thinking and creative skills,
2011). For example, pedagogical content knowledge and apply them in meaningful ways.
(the intersection between one’s content knowledge and
the ability to think about the best ways to approach The TA training was structured to include instances
teaching that content to students) is also essential for of situated learning, which Dotger (2011) describes as
effective instruction. The implication was that TAs would individuals learning within a group. This requires that
be required to attend a training programme, along with supervising lecturers attend the training along with their
the supervising lecturer. Smith and MacGregor (1992) TAs so that they collectively engage and intellectually
suggest that collaborative learning encompasses a contribute various perspective and ways of thinking.
variety of educational approaches which involve the Dotger (2011) suggests that situated learning provides
combined intellectual efforts of TAs and lecturers. structure for explaining how newly appointed TAs enter
Framed by Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory (SCT), the academic community of practice with established
the collaborative nature of the TA programme was based norms, structures, and ways of knowing.
on the premise that learning is a social process activated
through the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) The joint training enabled lecturers and TAs to build
(Dillenbourg 1999). Based on Vygotsky’s perspective, a common discourse around shared norms, language,
the interaction between the TA and the lecturer and activities (Resnick 1991), which helped to develop
constituted the learning process (Lantolf and Pavlenko the academic identity of the TA as they became more
1995; Lantolf and Thorne 2006). Vygotsky’s (1978) knowledgeable in their own discipline.
theory posits that working with a more capable (more
knowledgeable) person (lecturer) is pertinent to personal The aim of this research was to conduct an impact
(TA) development. TAs, working in close proximity (social evaluation of the TA programme of the collaborative
level) with the supervising lecturer, eventually internalise learning approach between lecturers and TAs. As the
the academic role. Mentoring (involving guidance programme has been implemented since 2014, it was
of, and collaboration with, the TA) occurs through important to establish whether the programme was
this process, while the lecturer engages in academic working and to gain feedback from participants to
activities. Collaborative learning that takes place within improve programme delivery and implementation.
the TA programme in the Vygotskian tradition aims at
enhancing social interaction among students, or between
students and the lecturer, and essentially assists the TA Research design: A World Café
in advancing through the Zone of Proximal Development approach
(ZPD). Vygotsky (1978, 86) defined this as “the distance
between the actual developmental level as determined The World Café has been described by Aldred
by independent problem solving and the level of potential (2009; 2011) as a social constructivist approach in
development as determined through problem solving which one moves from problem solving, to learning from
under adult guidance or in collaboration with more what works well. The purpose of adopting the World
capable peers”. Café approach was to collectively evaluate the impact
of the Teaching Assistant Programme. Lecturers and
Johnson and Johnson (2000) emphasise TAs participating in the World Café gave input through ,
that student-lecturer interaction helps to develop sharing knowledge gained, contributed to the agenda by
understanding of content and develop the necessary highlighting the challenges experienced which stimulated
skills to negotiate meaning. This can only occur when innovative thinking that led to participants exploring
students and lecturers are willing to talk and listen to possible solutions f Jorgenson and Steier (2013) suggest
each other. They add that such collaboration requires that the methodology is effective when one is wanting to
a shift from a lecturer-centred model to one which is achieve whole-system change involving large numbers
designed by both lecturers and students. Similarly, of participants in new forms of collective experiences.
5
paradigms
Kotzé et al. (2013) state that conversations, as a form • What collaborative stories can you share about its
of engagement method, assume that people develop roaring successes or catastrophic failures? What
critical consciousness and co-create meaning via the conditions supported or got in the way of doing great
dynamic networks of dialogue in which they engage. By work?
creating networks and webs of conversation, participants • How would you describe the impact of the TAs
were able to connect ideas and people, forming a larger initiative in the subject or department or Faculty?
framework of meaning and ideas which, in turn, will
further inform the cultural, political and social structure The key concepts and themes were harvested
of these networks. Kotzé et al. (2013, 496) propose after each question had been answered. By harvesting
that conversational networks have the potential of responses to questions in this manner, participants
“enablement, co-learning, and social transformation”. collectively assisted in a thematic analysis of the
discussions. At the end of the process, the main ideas
An essential component of meaningful engagement were summarised in a group plenary session and follow-
is creating an environment that is conducive for open up possibilities were discussed to elicit the “collective
conversation. Tan and Brown (2005, 84) outline the intelligence” from the participants (Hurley and Brown 2010).
core design principles which make the World Café a
“powerful conversational process” and
which, in doing so, promote constructive
dialogue, build personal relationships,
and encourage collaborative learning.
The design principles are premised on
the assumption that people already have
within them the wisdom and creativity
to confront even the most difficult
challenges. FIGURE 1 World Café Method
The principles which guided the collection and The advantage of this method is that it is grounded
analysis of data included: setting the context; creating in the following processes (see Figure 1):
a hospitable space; exploring the questions that
matter; encouraging contributions; connecting diverse (1) clarifying the purpose of the conversation, which
perspectives; listening together for patterns and insights; was to establish the collaborative experiences of TAs and
and sharing collective discoveries (Tan and Brown 2005, lecturers; (2) exploring critical issues and questions which
84). focused on the challenges and successes of TAs; (3)
engaging key stakeholders, such as academic staff and
A café setting was arranged to encourage TAs, directors, and teaching and learning coordinators;
conversation and for participants to move between (4) using a collaborative social approach, such as the
tables and share ideas related to the question under World Café method that focuses on the physical and
discussion. A host was stationed at each table to capture social space to encourage collaborative learning (Hurley
the thoughts and ideas of participants. In this way, and Brown 2010); (5) guiding collective intelligence
conversations and ideas could be linked and developed towards effective action which results in improving
as participants moved between groups. Participants collaborative relationships between academic staff and
were requested to note their ideas on newsprint, TAs; and (6) fostering innovation capacity development
cards and paper that were made available for sharing that harnesses the skills, knowledge and personal
key insights as they moved between tables in several qualities of TAs and lecturers.
evolving rounds of conversation. Brown (2002) advises
that, as the conversations link and connect, knowledge
sharing grows. Participants begin to discover patterns, Study participants
themes, and deeper questions. The collective wisdom
of the group becomes more accessible, and innovative All TAs and lecturers who attended the required TA
possibilities for action are revealed. training were invited to participate in the World Café,
this providing equal opportunity for participation. A
Included in the impact evaluation was a set of total of 67 participants indicated they would attend;
questions for lecturers and TAs to consider: however, only 38 participants arrived on the day of the
6AUGUST 2017 ISSUE 20
evaluation. The response rate was therefore 57%. A lecturer. As one lecturer reflected:
total of 20 TAs and 12 lecturers were present on the I was able to focus on the quality of teaching
day. The ‘other’ delegates indicated in the table were a because I had more time available.
Head of Department (1), a Teaching and Learning Co-
ordinator (1), a Student Engagement Co-ordinator (1) and Kendall and Schussler (2012) found that the
Administrators (3). contribution of TAs not only supported and improved
instruction at the tutorial and/or laboratory level, but that
TABLE 1 Faculty representation at World Café the engagement of TA in all aspects of a course, such
as curriculum development, teaching and assessment,
FACULTY NUMBER PERCENTAGE helped the lecturers with their own development as
instructors. Lecturers and TAs seemed to have created
Applied Science 1 2.6%
partnerships, in which the “voice” of the TA could be
Business 7 18% heard. The social process of learning referred to by
Vygotsky (1978) seemed indicative in the working
Education 1 2.6%
relationship created between the lecturer and the TA. The
Engineering 22 58% TA was enabled to take a more active role in the learning
process and, in doing so, the collaborative process
Health and Wellness 1 2.6%
helped to facilitate and improve teaching and learning.
Other 6 16%
38 100 When asked about collaborative failures, various
tensions emerged which related mostly to non-
academic challenges, such as the appointment of TAs
Findings and discussion within departments, clearer role definition and resource
allocation.
In this section, the findings of the World Café
evaluation will be discussed according to the guiding Included in the tensions was the perceived overlap
questions which were presented to the participants on between the role of the TA and the tutor. As one TA
the day of the evaluation. noted:
There needs to be a clearer definition between the
Collaborative successes and failures TA and the tutor role, as there is some confusion in terms
of the roles and responsibilities.
The first question asked participants to reflect
on collaborative stories of collaborative successes The appointment of TAs led to tensions within
or catastrophic failures. There seemed to be general departments, as the selection and appointment of TAs
consensus amongst participants that the TA “made a within departments was not explained explicitly enough.
difference” in terms of improving teaching and learning Even though clear criteria was made available there
practices. The view expressed was that TAs created a appeared to be a lack of communication in this regard.
link between the lecturer and the students and created As a lecturer suggested:
an enabling environment in which communication and It was not clear who gets a TA in our department.
feedback improved. As one participant suggested, The allocation of TAs to lecturers therefore created
… students felt more comfortable speaking to the a certain amount of tension among academic staff. TAs
TA and they [TAs] were considered students themselves. reported that they often eventually worked for more than
one lecturer, which created a unique set of challenges
In large classes, the TA was described as particularly different to those involved if one only had one supervising
beneficial regarding feedback on formative assessments. lecturer. Amongst the challenges was the uncertainty
Lecturers explained that the support provided by the TA of time allocation, as TAs (who are students) are only
through assistance with marking, management of large allowed to work 40 hours per month, and not more than
classes, assistance in practicals and the development 10 hours per week. In the case of a shared TA, time
of tutorials, enabled lecturers to provide students with needed to be distributed among lecturing staff, which
timely feedback on assessments. Stated benefits resulted in TAs feeling overwhelmed.
extended to the teaching and learning practices of the
7paradigms
A further challenge mentioned by TAs was the the TAs helped improve communication, as discussions
uncertainty about reporting lines. This often resulted could take place about “teaching and learning issues”.
in uncomfortable spaces for TA as there were no clear The TAs’ contribution here was considered impactful,
guidelines, in some cases, of who would effectively as a TA suggested that lecturers may have, “a blind
manage the TAs when they are shared between spot which TAs can mediate and help the lecturer to
lecturers. When such situations did arise, it caused understand what students see”. In this way, the lecturer
“disharmony” and “infighting” between members of was able to “reflect on lecturer’s own practice”.
academic staff. The implication for collaborative work
becomes more challenging under these circumstances. The introduction of the TA programme was further
Following on from this complexity was insufficient described as being capable of “building the academic
infrastructure support, such as limited office space and pipeline.” The TA programme was able to offer TAs a
the lack of resource allocation. This created tensions for real opportunity to experience various aspects related to
the TAs and was considered problematic when trying to being an academic.
work collaboratively.
Gardner and Jones (2011) refer to the developmental
Pezzella (2014, 52) describes the role of the process of the TA programme as crucial for the
Teaching Assistant as sometimes being quite strengthening of the programme in departments.
“ambiguous”, even though still considered rewarding; More importantly, the reflections, whether through
but he suggests that there has to be a shift from the conversations or reflective journals, were considered
perception of TAs being the ‘donkeys’ of the department “real-time feedback” and provided a way in which both
(Park and Ramos 2002) who can be given multiple tasks lecturers and TAs could improve and develop their
simultaneously. This seems to have been the experience teaching skills.
for some TAs, which makes the case for the TA role to be
more carefully considered so that lecturers facilitate the In developing the potential of future academics
necessary skills of TAs so as to develop their confidence through exposure to academic practices, reflective
and advance their possible future careers as academics. journaling helped in raising awareness and enhanced
the practice of experienced teachers, as well as the
professional development of the TAs’ academic potential.
Impact of the Teaching Assistant The TA programme as recognised by Gallego (2014, 97),
programme has had a twofold effect, “it can have a positive impact in
the professional growth of graduate students in faculty-
Lecturers and TAs were asked to reflect on the like positions… and contributes to enhancing the quality
impact of the programme within departments. Despite of education received by undergraduate students.
the challenges experienced, it emerged that the TA
programme cultivated an “approachable, strong culture of it can have a positive impact in the professional
engagement” through the sustained interaction between growth of graduate students in faculty-like positions,
lecturers and TAs. As TAs participated more widely within which consequently has a twofold effect. It contributes
the development of the teaching and learning process, to enhancing the quality of education received by
research projects which resulted helped in facilitating undergraduate students and better prepares the future
scholarship and research skills of the TA. professoriate.
The partnerships that developed through the
collaboration “contributed positively to teaching and
learning practices”, and opportunities for “inter-disciplinary Summary and conclusion
knowledge took place, e.g., Science and Engineering.”
This was considered a major contribution, as TAs was In summary, the evaluation of the TA was located
given the opportunity to work across various disciplines. within a social change agenda which sought to
The inter-disciplinary exchange led to the creation of extrapolate the aspects which strengthen the lecturer-
opportunity for faculties and departments to share TA relationship, as well as develop innovative and
practices, which would not have occurred previously. collaborative solutions to current educational challenges
faced by higher education institutions (Brown and Isaacs
Further, participants stated that the conversations 2005). The TA programme provided a unique opportunity
and reflections that emerged between the lecturers and for lecturers and TAs across faculties and departments
8AUGUST 2017 ISSUE 20
to work collaboratively and co-create possible teaching recommended that more attention be given to how best
and learning solutions for implementation. While the to incorporate and utilise TAs within departments. As
TA programme is not free of flaws and challenges, this the uptake of TAs increase within faculties and because
first step has been helpful in exploring the potential of TAs play an increasingly important role, attention to their
TAs as future academics and in finding creative ways to development is critical for fulfilling higher education’s role
establish spaces for open dialogue. From the evaluation, of providing effective learning experiences for students
it can be established that the TA programme certainly (O’Neal et al., 2007). Building on this first conversation,
contributed positively to , teaching and learning within departments could focus on what has been reported to
faculties. As the programme develops and evolves, it is improve and strengthen the programme.
References
Aldred, R. 2009. From community participation to organizational therapy? World Café and appreciative inquiry as
research methods. Community Development Journal 46: 57 – 71.
Aldred, R. 2011. From community participation to organizational therapy? World Café and Appreciative Inquiry as
research methods. Community Development Journal 46 (1): 57 – 71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsp039
(accessed 7 July 2017).
Ball, D. L. and H. Bass. 2000. Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing
and using mathematics. In Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics, ed. J. Bowler,
83 – 104. Westport, CT: Ablex.
Brown J. 2002. The World Café: A resource guide for hosting conversations that matter. Mill Valley, CA: Whole
Systems Associates.
Brown, J. and D. Isaacs. 2005. The World Café: Shaping our futures through conversations that matter. San
Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Dillenbourg P. 1999. What do you mean by collaborative learning? In Collaborative-learning: cognitive and
computational approaches, ed. P. Dillenbourg, 1 – 19. Oxford: Elsevier.
Dotger, S. 2011. Exploring and developing graduate teaching assistants’ pedagogies via lesson study. Teaching
in Higher Education 16 (2): 157 –169.
Gallego, M. 2014. Professional development of graduate teaching assistants in faculty-like positions: Fostering
reflective practices through reflective teaching journals. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning 14 (2): 96 – 110.
Gardner, G. and G. Jones. 2011. Perceptions and practices: Biology graduate teaching assistants’ framing of a
controversial socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education 33: 1031 – 1054.
Goodhand, K., Graham, H. and C. Ogilvie. 2015. Transitions to teaching in higher education. Paper presented at
Enhancement and Innovation in Higher Education Conference, 9-11 June 2015. Glasgow, UK.
Hénard, F. and D. Roseveare. 2012. Fostering quality teaching in higher education: Policies and practices. An
IMHE Guide for Higher Education Institutions, 7 – 11.
Hurley, T. and J. Brown, J. 2010. Conversational leadership: Thinking together for a change. Oxford Leadership
Journal 1 (2): 1 – 9.
Johnson, D. W. and F. P. Johnson. 2000. Joining together: Group theory and group skills. 7th ed. Boston: Allyn
and Bacon.
Jorgenson, J. and F. Steier. 2013. Frames, framing, and designed conversational processes: Lessons from the
World Café. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 49 (3): 388 – 405.
Kendall, K. D. and E. E. Schussler. 2012. Does instructor type matter? Undergraduate student perception of
graduate teaching assistants and professors. CBE – Life Sciences Education 11: 187 – 199.
Koen, M. P., Du Plessis, E. and V. Koen. 2015. Data analysis: The World Café. In Research using data analysis:
Qualitative designs and methods in nursing, ed. M. De Chesnay, 181 – 196). New York: Springer Publishing
Company, LLC.
9paradigms
Kotzé, M., Seedat, M., Suffla, S. and S. Kramer. 2013. Community conversations as community engagement:
hosts’ reflections. South African Journal of Psychology 43 (4): 494 – 505.
Lantolf, J. P. and A. Pavlenko. 1995. Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Annual Review of
Applied Linguistics 15: 108 – 124.
Lantolf, J. P. and S. L. Thorne. 2006. Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mayer, R. E. 2004. Should there be a three strikes rule against pure discovery? The case for guided methods of
instruction. American Psychologist 59 (1): 14 – 19.
Meadows, K. N., Olsen, K. C., Dimitrov, N. and D. L. Dawson. 2015. Evaluating the differential impact of Teaching
Assistant training programs on international graduate student teaching. The Canadian Journal of Higher
Education 45 (3): 34.
Muzaka, V. 2009. The niche of graduate teaching assistants (GTAs): Perceptions and reflections. Teaching in
Higher Education 14 (1): 1 – 12.
Neo, M. and T.-K. Neo. 2009. Engaging students in multimedia-mediated constructivist learning: Students’
perceptions. Educational Technology and Society 12 (2): 254 – 266.
O’Neal, C.,Wright,M., Cook, C., Perorazio, T. and Purkiss, J. 2007. The impact of teaching assistants on student
retention in the sciences: Lessons for TA training. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5): 24–29.
Park, C. and M. Ramos. 2002. The donkey in the department? Insights into the graduate teaching assistant
(GTA) experience in the UK. Journal of Graduate Education 3: 47 – 53.
Pezzella, A. 2014. There is more to a GTA than meets the eye. Health and Social Care Education 3 (1): 51 – 53.
Resnick, L. B. 1991. Shared cognition: Thinking as social practice. In Perspectives on socially shared cognition,
ed. L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, and S.D. Teasley, 1 – 20. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Smith, B. and J. MacGregor. 1992. What is Collaborative Learning? In Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for
Higher Education, ed. A. Goodsell, M. Mahler, V. Tinto, B. L. Smith and J. MacGreger, 9 – 22. University Park,
PA: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning and Assessment.
Strydom, J. F., Basson, N. and M. Mentz. 2012. Enhancing the quality of teaching and learning: Using student
engagement data to establish a culture of evidence. Pretoria, South Africa: Council on Higher Education.
Tan, S. and J. Brown. 2005. The World Café in Singapore: Creating a learning culture through dialogue. Journal
of Applied Behavioral Science 41: 83 – 90.
Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Wyse, S. A., Long, T. M. and D. Ebert-May. 2014. Teaching assistant professional development in biology:
Designed for and driven by multidimensional data. CBE-Life Sciences Education 13 (2): 212 – 223.
10AUGUST 2017 ISSUE 20
Service learning support
for new lecturers at a
university of technology
*HANLIE DIPPENAAR AND MARTIN BRAUND
*Corresponding authors
Abstract
Community engagement has become relevant in most undergraduate programmes at tertiary institutions
as an integral part of South African Higher Education and a criterion for quality assurance. Service Learning is
the term often used for the operationalization and associated pedagogy of Community Engagement. This article
focuses on the extent to which new lecturers at a University of Technology perceive the institution as supportive
in developing a scholarship of Community Engagement and are prepared to implement Service Learning.
The question addressed is whether the institution provides the necessary support to lecturers to incorporate
Community Engagement and Service Learning into their teaching programmes. The article describes a case
study conducted over two years at a University of Technology, which looks at the perceptions of new lecturers
regarding institutional and faculty level support to incorporate community engagement as SL programmes. New
staff members attended a session on Community Engagement in Higher Education Institutions as part of their
induction programme. Data on their perceptions were gathered through surveys, and an analysis was done of
their reflections in an assignment after completion of the induction programme. It was found that new lecturers do
not feel motivated to take on Community Engagement and Service Learning as part of their career trajectories.
Recommendations on how to support new lecturers are made, based on the findings and conclusions.
Keywords: Community engagement, service learning, Higher Education, induction
programmes, professional development.
Background partnerships, where both the university and the
community benefit from the involvement. Service learning
Community Engagement (CE) is an important part is further defined by the Council for Higher Education in
of lecturers and students’ holistic experience of Higher South Africa (CHE), as an operational component of CE:
Education and has become an integral part of South
African Higher Education (Hall 2010, 1). For the purpose A structured learning experience that combines
of this article, we define community engagement as any community service with preparation and reflection.
involvement by students or lecturers in communities, Students engaged in service learning provide community
usually in the form of reciprocal, collaborative service in response to community-identified concerns
11paradigms
and learn about the context in which service is provided, points out that new lecturers have, “subsystems which
the connection between their service and their academic lead to preconceived notions of teaching, research and
coursework, and their roles as citizens (CHE 2011, 76). professional development” (Nicholls 2005, 618) and will
focus more on that which is most rewarded extrinsically.
Although the discussion on CE is relevant, He points out that the context and the environment in
this paper deals with service learning (SL) as an which new lecturers find themselves are very important
operational application of CE and therefore the term and influence decisions regarding teaching and learning,
SL (service learning) is used henceforth, except where as well as perceptions of academic scholarship and
discussion warrants consideration of SL within a wider identity.
conceptualisation of community engagement. Service
learning projects are usually focused on addressing New lecturers are often young, with limited
societal problems, enhancing professional development experience of HEIs, and in need of mentorship to guide
of students and collaborating with communities (Human- them in the tertiary environment (Underhill, Clarence-
Vogel and Dippenaar 2013). Fincham and Petersen 2014, 359). A study done by
Iglesias-Martínez, Lozano-Cabezas, and Martinez-Ruiz
As pointed out by Butin (2006), HEIs are increasingly (2014) on the challenges experienced by new lecturers,
encouraging a scholarship of engagement where does not even address community engagement at all,
theory and practice are linked. Butin describes this as but limit their study scope to a lack of proper preparation,
a paradigm of teaching and learning which, “breaches command of subject content and the transmission
the bifurcation of lofty academics with the lived reality of knowledge and learning as the most important
of everyday life to promote critical inquiry and reflective challenges experienced.
practice across complex and contested local, national,
and international issues” (Butin 2006, 473). Butin’s Novice lecturers find it hard to make the transition
earlier research (Butin 2003) shows that SL enhances from student to academic and to establish a publication
cognitive, affective and ethical outcomes, fostering a record. They often experience pressure to ‘publish or
more active citizenry and promoting a scholarship of perish’; a well-known slogan since the early 1930’s
engagement among teachers and institutions. CE should (Rawat and Meena 2014), but lack guidance on how to
not be seen as an ‘add-on’ to ‘normal’ academic work, get into publishing (Geber 2009). Many new lecturers
but integrated into teaching, learning and research (Kruss also experience heavy teaching loads and large classes
2012). SL projects are usually focused on addressing (Feigenbaum and Iqan 2015) but their focus is often on
societal problems and collaborating with communities establishing a research record, rather than teaching and
(Human-Vogel and Dippenaar 2013). learning or community engagement.
Goorlay (2011, 593) points out that many new Winberg (2017) points out that lecturers currently
lecturers “enter academia from established careers in face many challenges such as pressures of mass
professional, clinical or creative practice on the basis of higher education, fiscal constraints, rating systems,
their work experience”. He further identifies three factors new technologies and changing attitudes towards
that contribute to the challenges experienced by new accountability. She points out that higher education is
lecturers, particularly those joining in mid-career and going through change amidst calls for decolonisation
describes these as “the potential loss of perceived status of the curriculum, with lecturers taking up to 10 years
and confidence; the encounter with a radically different, to feel they ‘belong’ to an institution (Winberg 2017,
‘ mismatching’ ethos and required subjectivities; and 1440). In addition, expansion of student numbers and
the sense of invisibility within an unfamiliar and possibly expectations of society, add more stress to lecturers.
isolating set of practices and emotional landscape”.
Leibowitz (2017, 4595) points out that learning to
This article looks at the lecturer who is new to teach is not a skill that is acquired once off, but is an on
service learning, and their perceptions regarding going process which requires an enabling environment,
institutional and faculty level support to incorporate rather than new policies and incentives. New lecturers
CE as SL programmes in their new context. The are often guided through induction programmes (as was
new lecturer operates within her/his own contextual the case here) to initiate a process of change, internally
microsystem, as well as in the mesosystem of the as well as externally. Internal influences would potentially
institution (Bronfenbrenner 1994, 1648) and is influenced affect new lecturers’ beliefs and conceptions of teaching,
by experiences within these systems. Nicholls (2005) while external influences would focus on coping in the
12AUGUST 2017 ISSUE 20
workplace itself (Pickering 2006). Lambright and Alden Daniels 2009). Hanson (2003, 139) states that, even if
(2012) found that many new lecturing staff members appropriate staff development programmes are offered to
were still working towards achieving their own academic new lecturers, they need to see that their efforts to apply
qualifications, which added to stress levels and time these ideas are valued and rewarded. A new lecturer
constraints. who does not have faculty and institutional support will
be embarking on a very lonely journey, experiencing “a
Teferra (2016, 1874) points out that novice sense of isolation, uncertainty, conflict between multiple
academics depend on the guidance of experienced roles, dependency on management, having to deal with
lecturers to assist them with curriculum development, expanding administrative loads and juggle work and
exam/lecture preparation, and assessment as they often home responsibilities” (Pickering 2006, 9).
start their teaching careers without having any meaningful
training in teaching. New lecturers are not adequately It is often hypothesised that it is lecturers in the
prepared during their postgraduate studies to enter into ‘soft’ sciences (education, psychology, human or social
their new career. They might be able to conduct research sciences) rather than in the ‘hard’ sciences (mathematics,
but are not prepared for simultaneously participating in physics, chemistry, biosciences or engineering) who
research, teaching, and service (Dominguez-Whitehead are more often involved in CE initiatives. Butin (2006)
and Moosa 2014, 263). This poses the question of found that, in the hard sciences, where lecturing often
whether new lecturers can be expected to be involved in predominates as the teaching style, lecturers may
SL or whether they should not rather, as Erasmus (2007) display antipathy to SL. He further points out that SL is
suggests, partner with more experienced lecturers, overwhelmingly implemented by the “least powerful and
whom she refers to as “champions of service learning” most marginalised staff (for example, people of colour,
(Erasmus 2007, 113). These are the lecturers who could women, and the untenured)”, by the “softest” and most
take the lead in introducing new lecturers to service “vocational” disciplines and fields (education, social work),
learning. and with “minimal exchange value (tenure and promotion
prioritisation)” (Butin 2006, 475).
The new lecturer who sees value in incorporating
SL is often motivated by a sense of civic responsibility Jordaan (2014), a practising SL lecturer at
(Westheimer and Kahne 2004). Enablers or constraints the University of Pretoria who sends around 1,600
to novice lecturers’ uptake of CE and SL is an important Engineering Built Environment and Information
and current debate in higher education (HE), especially Technology (EBIT) students to work on SL projects on
at a time when HE in South Africa is at cross roads trying an annual basis, describes the implementation of SL
to balance issues of workplace (market) demands versus as extremely challenging because of large numbers of
knowledge autonomy within a context of inequality. diverse students, various campus-community partners
However, despite being motivated or seeing the need for with different needs and few available resources. She
SL in teaching and research, new lecturers need to be points out that the successful facilitation of modules
empowered and supported by the institution to embark adopting and incorporating SL depends significantly on
on this, often unfamiliar, road. Liebermann explains: successful partnerships between students, lecturers and
community actors.
It is essential to empower faculty (staff), students,
and other administrators, to develop authentic, In a country-wide study by Kruss et al. (2012), it was
reciprocal, and mutually beneficial partnerships with found that lecturers from UoTs are less involved in CE/SL
community and civic leaders. It is they, after all, who than their counterparts from traditional older, established,
will be creating and sustaining the community-engaged research-based institutions. They found that academics
partnerships from conception to implementation at UoTs might be hesitant to engage in CE/SL because
(Liebermann 2014, 14). of a lack of institutional support, whether in the form
of “clear structures, policy, recognition as scholarship,
As pointed out by Dallimore et al. (2010, 19), the SL administration systems, different priorities of universities
process begins with the recruiting of enthusiastic faculty and partners, financial resources or conceptual clarity”
members. However, although the wider concept of CE (Kruss et al 2012, 41). Another significant trend evident
provides opportunities for academics to live out their from their survey is that lecturers who do not participate
moral citizenship and responsibility, SL (in the context of in CE/SL often experience a lack of fit between SL and
this study) is often perceived as a burden on especially their academic identity, and they receive little recognition
new lecturers who are already overloaded (Albertyn and for CE/SL activities (Kruss et al. 2012, 97).
13paradigms
Context of the study Theoretical framework for study
New lecturers who participated in this study all took The study is informed by Lazarus’s (2009) report
part in a compulsory one-year teacher development explaining the Community Higher Education Service
induction programme (TDP) required of all new staff. Partnerships (CHESP) initiative, which originated in 1998
One of the modules of this programme deals with to support CE in higher education. Through CHESP,
‘Community Engagement in the curriculum’. This mechanisms to facilitate CE and SL programmes in
is an introduction to CE and is meant to guide staff higher education were developed. These included the
involvement with, and implementation of, SL. The following: the appointment of an executive person for
TDP programme runs over one year, but only one CE; establishing a CE Unit at institutions; appointing
formal afternoon session is allocated to CE. Thereafter, senior academic and support staff responsible for
participants work on assignments and send drafts of operationalising CE and SL; establishing institution-wide
their assignments to the TDP lecturer for comments. and faculty-based committees responsible for CE and
The assignment requires of lecturers to plan an SL SL; and including CE and SL in staff promotion and
initiative relevant to their discipline and to comment reward systems (Lazarus 2009, 106). Lazarus’s report
on practical implementation of the project. Lecturers concluded that it is critical to build capacity in HEIs and
were not required to start a SL initiative per se, among academics to institutionalise CE and SL (Lazarus
but were encouraged to explore the possibilities of 2009, 107; Furco 2001, 70).
implementation and reflect on their own contexts and
opportunities for introducing a SL project as part of This call for capacity building is further informed by
wider community engagement. By the end of the year, Furco’s (2002) categorisation of the important elements
these novice lecturers were required to submit a final of service learning and his self-assessment rubric for the
CE assignment as part of their TDP portfolios. institutionalisation of service learning in higher education.
These were designed to assist the higher education
In the light of demands on HEIs to support lecturers community in evaluating the development of service
and students, it is relevant to determine the perceptions learning at an institution. Furco’s work forms the main
of new lecturers on the support they receive from theoretical framework guiding this study, so it is relevant
their institution and faculties when incorporating CE in to explain what he sees as the most important elements
teaching, learning and research. The following research to consider. Furco’s (2002, 3) five categories used to
questions were chosen to guide the study to explore describe SL concern these:
perceptions of new lecturers.
• Philosophy and mission of service learning, which
defines service learning and describes the strategic
RQ1: How many new lecturers who have completed planning, alignment with institutional mission and
the SL training have implemented CE/SL in their educational reform efforts.
curricula? • Faculty support for and involvement in service
RQ2: Do new lecturers feel supported to implement a learning that includes awareness, involvement and
SL project? support, leadership, incentives and rewards for faculty
RQ3: What are the challenges towards implementation members (lecturers).
of SL and what enablers are necessary towards • Student support for and involvement in service
developing a scholarship of CE? learning that includes awareness, opportunities,
leadership, incentives and rewards.
• Community participation and partnerships that
In an attempt to answer these questions, this includes community partner awareness, mutual
article describes the perceptions of new lecturers on understanding, voice and leadership.
developing a scholarship of CE and implementing SL • Institutional support for service learning that
into teaching programmes. This study was done after a includes a coordinating entity, policy-making, staffing,
once off workshop on CE, which formed part of a longer funding, administrative support, evaluation and
programme of professional development. Although the assessment.
study is limited to one institution, and the findings have
particular relevance for that institution, the theoretical For the purposes of this study, we focus primarily
framework used for reflection and the general issues on two of Furco’s categories, as these deal with support
have wider relevance and applicability for the community given to new lecturing staff, namely at Faculty and at
of higher education in South Africa. Institutional levels.
14AUGUST 2017 ISSUE 20
Faculty support for service learning implies a high leadership and emphasised in faculty incentives and
level of staff awareness, involvement, and individual rewards. Staff who are involved in service learning
personal support to staff. Furco (2002, 7) describes receive recognition for it during the campus review,
faculty support as follows: tenure, and promotion process. Faculty staff are
encouraged and are provided with various incentives
Faculty knowledge and awareness, present when such as mini-grants, sabbaticals and funds for service
a substantial number of faculty members know learning conferences so as to pursue service learning
what SL is and can articulate how it is different from activities.
community service, internships, or other experiential
learning activities. The importance of this support at faculty level is
echoed by Slamat (2010) who suggests that HEIs
Faculty involvement and support, implying that put in place a clear system of support, rewards and
a substantial number of influential faculty members incentives for service learning initiatives by staff.
participate as instructors, supporters, and advocates Slamat adds that the system should be audited and
of SL and support infusion of SL, both into the profiled to encourage staff to explore possibilities.
institution’s overall mission and faculty members’
individual professional work. Institutional support for service learning is
described by Furco as the existence of an effective
Faculty leadership, which can be identified when a coordinating entity requiring clear policies at the
highly respected, influential group of faculty members institution and sufficient staffing, funding and
serves as the campus service learning leaders and/or administrative support (Furco 2002, 9). The institution
advocates. assists with evaluation and assessment of initiatives.
Staffing, funding and administrative support provide
Faculty incentives and rewards, where Faculty the logistical underpinning of a successful CE
support is often initiated and driven by the faculty initiative.
Table 1 provides examples of how Furco envisages institutional support at each of three stages of development.
Stage One is the Critical Mass Building stage, where the institution and/or participants start to recognise service learning
and develop awareness across the institution. Stage Two is the Quality Building stage, where the focus is on the “quality”
of service learning activities rather than quantity. Stage Three is the Sustained Institutionalisation stage where a campus
has fully institutionalised service learning inherent in the context of the institution as illustrated in Table 1.
TABLE 1: Furco’s self-assessment rubric for the institutionalisation of service learning identifying staged institutional
support (Furco 2002, 42)
STAGE 0NE STAGE TWO STAGE THREE
Critical main building Quality building Sustained Institutionalisation
Coordinating entity No campus-wide Coordination limited to parts A coordinating entity
coordination for SL of the campus or some for SL devoted primarily
faculty/students to assisting the various
campus constituencies in SL
implementation.
Policy making entity The institution’s official and The institution’s official and The institution’s policy-
influential policy-making influential policy-making making board(s)/
board(s)/ committee(s) board(s)/ committee(s) committee(s) recognise
do not recognise service recognise service learning service learning as an
learning as an essential as an essential educational essential educational
educational goal for the goal for the campus, but no goal for the campus and
campus. formal policies have been formal policies have been
developed. developed or implemented.
15You can also read
