Exploring the Role of Technology in Curriculum Design: A Collaborative Project

Presentation on Digital Tools and Technologies in Curriculum Design

Introduction

• Presenters:
  • Jess Humphries: Deputy Director of WIHEA (Warwick International Higher Education Academy) and Academic Developer at the University of Warwick.
  • Aishwarya: Master's student at Warwick Business School and Project Officer on the team.
  • Emily Hater: Learning Technologist from the University of Brighton.
  • Lucy Childs: Senior Lecturer from the University of Brighton.
  • Other Team Members: Matt, Hita Parsi (Academic Developer), and Ola (student).

Background and Rationale

• Project Initiation: Started in October of the previous year as a collaboration between the University of Warwick and the University of Brighton.
• Funding: Supported by WIHEA to explore collaborative projects between institutions.
• Aim: To investigate the role of technology in curriculum design and address existing research gaps.

Existing Work in the Field

• Key References:
  • JISC Reports (2015/2016): Highlighted the role of technology in enabling curriculum design and stakeholder engagement.
  • QAA's Digital Taxonomy for Learning: Provided a framework for digital learning.
  • "Beyond Flexible Learning" by Advance HE: Discussed flexible learning approaches.
  • Recent JISC Report: "Approaches to Curriculum and Learning Design across UK Higher Education" focusing on post-COVID strategies.
  • Padlet Board by Danielle Hinton: Compiled over 100 universities' curriculum design approaches.
• Vocabulary Importance: Clarified terms like hybrid, HyFlex, asynchronous, and synchronous learning.

Project Aims

• Exploration: How technology is used in curriculum design for inclusivity and accessibility.
• Gap Filling: Addressing specific gaps in existing research.
• Focus: The role of technology in the curriculum design process, not just delivery.

Institutional Approaches

• University of Warwick
  • Workshops for Course Leaders: Offering resources for departmental collaboration.
  • Moodle Site Development: "Curriculum Development Essentials" for asynchronous learning.
  • Technology Use: Padlet, Miro, Moodle, and online ABC workshops.
• University of Brighton
  • Collab Curriculum Design Process: A light-touch approach developed two years ago.
  • Process Components:
    • Planning meetings with course teams.
    • Teams area and Padlet board for collaboration.
    • Two course design workshops focusing on aims, rationale, and assessment strategies.
    • Two module design workshops on learning outcomes and learning activities.
  • Key Tools: Microsoft Teams, Padlet, OneNote, and an online toolkit.

Methodology

• Survey Design: Created to fill research gaps identified in previous studies.
• Distribution: Nationwide via various channels.
• Participants: 27 respondents, including module leaders, professional staff, and course leads.
• Survey Focus Areas:
  • Post-pandemic modes of delivery and space usage.
  • Preferred digital tools and technologies at different curriculum design stages.
  • Collaborators and stakeholders involved.
  • Time and workload allocations for curriculum design.
  • Benefits, opportunities, barriers, and challenges.
  • Reward and recognition in the curriculum design process.

Survey Findings

• Digital Tools Used:
  • AI Tools: ChatGPT, Midjourney.
  • Collaboration Tools: Microsoft Teams, SharePoint, Padlet, OneDrive, Miro.
  • Presentation Tools: PowerPoint, Google Slides, Prezi.
  • Others: Animation apps, community-building apps, data analysis tools.
• Modes of Delivery:
  • Blend of Online and On-Campus: 39% prefer online, 33% prefer on-campus.
  • Hybrid Models:
    • Hybrid: Staff decide the mode of engagement.
    • HyFlex: Students decide the mode of engagement (less common but growing).
• Stakeholders Involved:
  • Primary: Academic colleagues, professional staff in quality enhancement.
  • Others: Students, alumni, external bodies (PSRBs), employers, marketing, and communications teams.
• Accessibility and Flexibility:
  • Needs Addressed:
    • Remote work accommodations.
    • Students with part-time jobs or varying schedules.
  • Technological Solutions:
    • Collaborative platforms accessible to external participants.
    • Features like collaborative document editing, version history, security measures.
• Workload and Time Allocation:
  • Discrepancy Noted: Actual time spent often exceeds allocated time.
  • Examples: Some allocated 80 hours but spent 200 hours.
  • Lack of Formal Allocation: Many lacked official time allotments for curriculum design.
• Use of AI in Curriculum Design:
  • High Interest: 95% would use AI tools.
  • Applications:
    • Brainstorming ideas.
    • Generating content and learning outcomes.
    • Image generation.
  • AI Tools Mentioned: Generative text models (e.g., ChatGPT), AI image generators, subject-specific AI like Math GPT and Music LLM.
• Barriers and Challenges:
  • Top Barriers:
    • Limited time to learn and implement new technologies.
    • Licensing and subscription issues for preferred tools.
  • Other Challenges:
    • Technical difficulties.
    • Lack of training and support.
    • Resistance to change among staff.
• Reward and Recognition:
  • Concerns:
    • Time allocation for curriculum design tasks.
    • Recognition in promotions and leadership opportunities.
    • Compensation methods for student involvement.
  • No Clear Solutions: Highlighted as areas needing attention.

Next Steps

• Interviews: Conducting in-depth interviews to build on survey findings (two completed so far).
• Focus Areas:
  • Use of digital technology and AI in curriculum design.
  • Strategies for inclusivity and flexibility.
• Invitation: Open call for participation from other institutions and individuals.

Discussion Questions

• Examples Sought:
  • Digital technologies that have made curriculum design more inclusive, flexible, or collaborative.
  • How these technologies were implemented.
• AI Usage:
  • Do you use AI tools like ChatGPT in your curriculum design?
  • What are the opportunities and challenges associated with AI in this context?

Conclusion

• Project Status: Ongoing with evolving insights.
• Collaborative Effort: Involvement of both staff and students enriches perspectives.
• Community Engagement: Encouraged attendees to share experiences and insights.

Note: The presenters emphasized the importance of technology in enhancing the curriculum design process and are actively seeking collaborations and discussions to further this research.