<p></p><p>In this dissertation, I argue that there is value in treating
students as implementors during processes of educational innovation. I lay the
groundwork for this argument through a review of literature comparing best
practices in the implementation of innovations in higher education with best
practices from active learning, blended learning, and collaborative learning research.
This is followed by a phenomenographic and narrative analysis: a deliberate
combination of phenomenography and narrative analysis methods for the
interpretation of data and representation of findings, leveraging the strengths
of each approach to account for the other’s shortcomings. The result of this
work is an outcome space containing a hierarchical framework typical of phenomenography
describing the various ways in which the participating students experienced
implementation within the context of a blended learning environment called <i>Freeform</i>.
The presentation of this framework is followed by a series of constructed
narratives which contextualize how the hierarchical framework may be evidenced
in student experiences of implementation in higher education. </p>
<p><br></p><p>The hierarchical framework contains six categories of
description: Circumstantial Non-Adoptive, Circumstantial Adoptive, Preferential
Non-Adoptive, Preferential Adoptive, Adaptive, and Transformative. Proceeding
from Circumstantial Non-Adoptive and Circumstantial Adoptive to Transformative,
each subsequent category of the model characterizes implementation experiences
that are increasingly impacted by students’ own self-awareness of their
personal learning needs and subsequent self-directed learning behavior. This
represents a departure from previous implementation research in engineering
education for a number of reasons. First, it demonstrates that there is value
in considering students’ roles as implementors of educational innovations,
rather than tacitly treating them as subjects to be implemented upon. Second,
the use of the word “circumstantial” intentionally acknowledges that the
external (environmental) factors that influence implementation can be distinct
to individual implementors while remaining contextual in nature. Third, it
demonstrates that the processes of implementation which students undergo can
lead to concrete changes in learning behavior that extend beyond the scope of
the implementation itself.</p><p><br></p><p>Narrative
analysis is used to develop a series of narratives that embody the
implementation experiences communicated by student participants. These narratives
are constructed using disparate ideas, reflections, and tales from a variety of
participants, emplotting representative characters within constructed stories
in a way that retains the student perspective without adhering too closely to
any individual participant’s reported experience. This approach serves two
goals: to encourage readers to reflect on how the categories of the
hierarchical framework can be demonstrated in students’ experiences, and to
reinforce the fact that individual students can exhibit implementation experiences
and behaviors that are characteristic of multiple categories of the framework
simultaneously. It is important to remember that the categories included in the
framework are not meant to characterize students themselves, but rather to
characterize their interactions with specific pedagogical innovations. </p><p></p><p>
</p><p><br></p><p>The study concludes by interpreting these results in light of
literature on implementation and change, proposing new models and making
suggestions to faculty to inform the future implementation of educational
innovations. Faculty are encouraged to treat students as implementors, and to exercise
best practices from implementation literature when employing educational
innovations in the classroom. This includes adopting practices that inform,
empower, and listen to students, intentionally employing strategies that allow
students to exercise their own agency by understanding and utilizing
innovations effectively. Prescribing specific innovations and forcing students
to use them can be detrimental, but so can freely releasing innovations into
the learning environment without preparing students in advance and scaffolding
their resource-usage behaviors. Instructors and researchers alike are
encouraged to consider implementation from a new perspective, students as
implementors, and faculty as facilitators of change. </p><p><br></p>
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:purdue.edu/oai:figshare.com:article/13423265 |
| Date | 18 December 2020 |
| Creators | David A Evenhouse (9874256) |
| Source Sets | Purdue University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text, Thesis |
| Rights | CC BY 4.0 |
| Relation | https://figshare.com/articles/thesis/STUDENT_IMPLEMENTATION_EXPERIENCES_IN_BLENDED_LEARNING_A_PHENOMENOGRAPHIC_AND_NARRATIVE_ANALYSIS_TO_INFORM_PEDAGOGICAL_INNOVATION/13423265 |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds