4 July 1999 ............... Length about 1000 words (8000 bytes).
This is a WWW document maintained by
Steve Draper, installed at http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/talks/coteach2.html.
Web site logical path:
Models for collaborative teaching
This document contains the OHP slides for a talk
[HEI = Higher Education Institution]
The structure of HE is that:
Some think world famous HEIs may dominate the market with their brand names.
- Individuals specialise in narrow topics; but are required to teach
relatively broadly: so a lot of teaching is done by people who are not leading
- Expertise is spread across the world: probably no subject where one dept.
has more expertise than the whole of the rest of the world.
But instead, perhaps multi-national consortia will provide overwhelming
combined expertise and quality through collaboration within a discipline but
Cross-HEI collaboration (cont.)
This will apply most to rapidly changing and/or new subjects where both
research and consequent teaching is most rapidly created
(and least to, say, first year statistics).
This talk concerns teaching HCI
(Human Computer Interaction)
Success may depend on quality, including originality and distinctiveness:
- Content quality from expertise of contributors in that small topic
(particularly critical for professionals)
- Original forms of learning and teaching to suit materials, target learners
(e.g. professionals in work), and a distributed collaborative course.
Distance learning / delivery =>
So author and deliverer the same person for any unit
Consortium of mainly Canadian universities, none of whom could offer the whole
A variety of kinds of unit of various sizes (to suit / attract the target
market), and some novel types.
Many variations, but one format was:
- Whole semester courses (100-130 learner hours)
- Seminar units (~ 20-30 learner hours)
- Exercises or ATOMs ( ~ 10 learner hours)
- Case studies (30-60 minutes)
TRAIL = Tertiary Reusable Atom Instantiated for Learning
- An exercise authored at one site,
- Delivered at several other sites by "local deliverers"
- Supported by a "remote expert" (usually the author)
- In later deliveries, use stored example material from earlier ones
These units called "ATOMs"
(Autonomous Teaching Objects in MANTCHI)
8 ATOMs both written and delivered.
(2 more written)
Target size of a unit is quite small:
One week's work for students on a module
(Approx. 8 hours)
All sites both authored AND delivered others' material. Probably a unique
feature. (cf. EUROMET)
(cf. the EUROMET
- Small unit size important for flexible acceptance.
(cf. the EUROMET
- Different situations / courses / HEIs require different materials and
- Small units increase the chance of being able to re-use some of what is used
- Much easier to introduce one or two ATOMs than to redesign a whole course
- ATOMs correspond to a common course planning unit: a week's student
- Most deliverers will want to try out only one or two before committing to
There are 4 web pages associated with an ATOM:
- I.e. getting the "users" perspective into the design team.
- Done by symmetrical barter, not high level market trading.
- This matches existing structure of HE: expertise spread widely, but all must
deliver broad courses.
- You get an exercise by an expert in exchange for re-using your best material.
So curriculum quality goes up and/or the quality of topics you aren't fully
And your exercise gets improved faster through use.
- After a year or two of direct support by the remote expert, you probably feel
able to do it on your own: so can see this as staff development
Preface: introduction to the notion of an ATOM
- The teacher overview page, intended for teachers browsing for ATOMs
they might choose to use in their courses.
- Teacher details: fuller notes for teachers, with instructions for
them, and rationales for why the exercise is the way it is
- The learner details page: the instructions for learners. This is
likely to have the basic explanation and description of the ATOM, and also acts
like a handout for students
- The course home page (for learners) for a particular delivery of an
Summary State the topic and type of ATOM.
How the concept fits into the course
Student prerequisite knowledge
Student prerequisite skills
Timetabling: how the activity fits into the course
Amount of student work
Amount of contact hours
Relationship to the rest of the course
Activity plan (probably a pointer to the student page)
History and admin.
Structure of the ATOM's web pages
How it fits into the course
Rationale (why is the exercise designed this way?)
TRAILs: past student work
Evaluation reports and comments
Yes: distance model, or non-collab. local model
No: Using bought-in textbook, or MANTCHI model
Re-processing through independent deliverers is a powerful extra quality check,
and teachers learn
(cf. "teachback" technique).
Small unit size increases the chance of tailoring to diverse local needs BUT
fails to re-use larger scale planning / design (e.g. of curriculum).
What does it take to support re-use of teaching materials?