This post explores the use of technology in teaching practice within higher education. It evaluates 3 types of technology, it demonstrates how their use has impacted on student learning, and it reflects on how technology can also support teachers in developing a more reflective and effective practice. The themes covered align with UKPSF area A1, A5, K4, K5, V1, V2, V3.

​

• Description of the technology

PhET is a dynamic project founded by Nobel Laureate Carl Wieman at the University of Colorado Boulder, whose aim is to develop freely accessible math and science simulations,  that “are based on extensive education research and engage students through an intuitive, game-like environment where students learn through exploration and discovery” (PhET interactive simulations).
PhET includes hundreds of simulations covering a variety of subjects, from physics, to biology, astronomy, etc.
The uniqueness of PhET is that this technology allows for the simulation of phenomena whose underlying mechanisms are often difficult to appreciate with more traditional diagrams and/or demos.
I have stumbled across PhET when I first observed the lecture of a colleague at the Physics department 2 years ago and I have since endorsed the technology as part of my teaching (A5).  
The sections below provide some context as to how this technology has supported both my students’ learning as well as the evaluation of my own teaching practice.
 

• Context 

I use PhET to help with delivering content for a part A module on the biology of the human visual system for User Centred Design undergraduate students (A1).
The advantage of this technology is that it allows students to replicate and manipulate physical stimuli, i.e. light, and to observe in real time their potential effects on the eye. Importantly, the simulation runs on a very user-friendly platform, it is very accessible and inclusive, and it is specifically designed to maximize students’ learning (K4, K5).
I have endorsed the use of this technology as part of my teaching delivery as I found particularly useful to provide my students with the opportunity to actively “play” and manipulate those concepts that I discuss as part of my delivery of foundational knowledge. I believe this helps the students checking their own understanding frequently and as part of an active leaning process. I indeed consider the latter as an excellent opportunity for self-assessment (Dochy et al. 2006).
From a set up perspective, my lecture design requires the use of computers for the simulations, which is achieved by informing the students to bring their laptops in advance of the lecture and through our learning platform LEARN.
An important consideration is that he effectiveness of this planning and the use of technology-enhanced learning is supported by my appreciation of its feasibility within the small classroom I usually teach for this module (~20 students).
 

• Analysis of the technology

I have used PhET primarily for light-related simulations. For example, students can simulate the bending of light passing through different media, and “see” that this effect is due to light slowing down.  While the bending of light can be appreciated in a real world scenario (think of what happens to light when goes through a glass of water), its underlying physics cannot, unless specialized equipment is used. As a result of such exploratory simulations, students can therefore more easily appreciate and learn foundational content that can often be rather theoretical.
However, it could be argued that such educational benefits could be easily achieved by providing students with more traditional, passive, visual simulation. In this respect, PhET allows student to determine and “play” with the parameter of the simulation themselves and see the effects of such changes in real time. For example, in the context of the light experiment, students can actively and easily change the type of media that light passes through (air, water, etc.) and “measure” with interactive tools how much slowing of light takes place. This approach turns the student into an active explorer and learner, as it emphasizes their ability to develop learning through active experimentation.
From a pedagogical point of view, and from the teacher’s perspective, the benefits of these flexible active simulations also reside in the opportunity to develop problem-based activities where students are required to solve a specific task/question by using the simulations (K4, K5). The usefulness of this approach is twofold. First, this can be used to support a flipped-classroom learning environment, where the teacher can provide the problem and simulation in advance of the lecture and then help the students to develop their learning in the classroom by discussing their solutions and findings.  Secondly, this can be used as a way to assess learning in problem-based scenario. These simulations can indeed follow the delivery of basic content and provide the students with an opportunity to self-assess their understanding, and the teacher with an opportunity to provide feedback on areas that require further support.
In light of the above, I believe my approach and use of PhET well fits the Laurillands’ conversational model (Nleya), where the use of simulations creates adaptive and experimenting learning experiences that facilitate the development of a pedagogical dialogue with my students, which ultimately helps with providing and receiving feedback (A5, V3).   
 

• Impact on student learning and on my practice

The opportunity to introduce PhET as part of my module has proven quite successful in improving my students’ ability to fully achieve the learning outcomes intended for each lecture. This is often due to the fact that providing students with a problem-based activity where their learning is tested somewhat half-way through each lecture opens to the opportunity to quickly assess each students’ level of understanding and to provide both individual and group feedback that is timely and necessary for the students to progress without significant gaps in their knowledge that could hinder their general learning.
As well as generating timely opportunities for student feedback, this approach has also been valuable in generating opportunities for me to reflect on how my delivery and teaching approach translates into practice. From simple feedback such as how many students can actually complete the simulation-based tasks, to more complex scenarios where different students develop different ways of solving the same problem, the opportunity to receive immediate feedback on my practice and not having to wait until the end of the module, has significantly helped shaping a more reflective practice that is grounded in the students’ current needs.
 

• Advice for others

I would highly recommend endorsing the use of PhET onto any math or science course where teachers appreciate the importance of helping students developing into active learners. By exploring basic science concepts in an interactive, student-led fashion, this technology can prove valuable to maximize foundational learning and to support meaningful knowledge assessment. 

​

• Description of the technology

ESCI is a collection of Microsoft Excel Macros created by Geoff Cumming that makes it easy for students to grasp the basics of statistics and to use estimation to answer basic and more complex research questions (ESCI website).
ESCI includes several Excel Macros that help the students simulating experiments, by playing with its underlying components (e.g. sample sizes, effect sizes, etc.).
I have started using ESCI as part of my own research practice and have come to the conclusion that including an open access, excel-based, simple statistics software in the curriculum of undergraduate science students could be beneficial not to only to support their learning, but also to benefit their professional practice beyond academia, where they will be likely required to showcase numerical and IT literacy in the context of problem/research-based settings.
The sections below provide some context as to how this technology has supported both my students’ learning as well as the evaluation of my own teaching practice.
 

• Context 

I use ESCI to help with delivering content for a part B module on research methods for User Centred Design undergraduate students (A1).
The advantage of this technology is that it allows students to enter the realm of using statistics in research by first and foremost understanding the main reason why statistics is indeed needed to produce evidence that can ultimately support evidence-based decisions (K4, K5).
Students use ESCI to create simulations of experiments where they can fully control the population from which their samples are devised, the sample sizes and the sizes of the effects that they are after. ESCI provides flexibility in manipulating these parameters in real time, and importantly, it provides visually appealing images that convey core knowledge in an intuitive way.
Similarly as with the use of PhET, my lecture design requires the use of computers for the ESCI simulations, which is achieved by having my lectures scheduled in IT labs.
An important consideration is that he effectiveness of this planning and the use of technology-enhanced learning is supported by my appreciation of its feasibility within the small classroom I usually teach for this module (~20 students).
 

• Analysis of the technology

I use ESCI as my main tool to fight the challenge of delivering effective statistical and research education at an undergraduate level. The major challenge with a traditionally difficult subject such is statistics, is indeed represented by the potentially low intrinsic motivation of the students to the subject (Hoskins & Newstead 2009).
In this respect, I often use ESCI to help students understanding how the size of their sample chosen for an experiment can influence their ability to make meaningful conclusions in relation to how representative the sample is of the true population of interest.
This is a simple ability to acquire and it can indeed be meaningfully applied well beyond the context of statistics. By engaging students in understanding that “claims” require “evidence” to be robust, I have often been successful in triggering an appetite for learning “how” robust evidence can indeed be produced. 
In the context of the sample size example, ESCI allows for the visualization of a normal population (bell-shaped distribution) and the possibility for the student to randomly “pick” a set sample of observations from this population (i.e. their sample). As a result, students can then compare how far the estimation that they get from their sample is from the true population of interest.  This type of activity helps with visualizing concepts through technology that would be otherwise rather theoretical, and from which students are likely to feel detached.
From a pedagogical point of view, and from the teacher’s perspective, the benefits of these flexible simulations reside in the opportunity to develop problem-based activities where students are required to solve a specific task/question by using the simulations (K4, K5). Furthermore, I often design such activities so that students have to work in groups. Those additional aspects of socialization and information exchange set this type of technology use aside from that developed with the use of PhET, and make my use of ESCI more aligned to Salmon’s 5 steps model (A5, V3).  It is indeed a key aspect of my use of ESCI to empower students with the ability to communicate effectively the knowledge developed through the simulations run, as this is the result of “evidence” they have actively been able to produce.
 
 

• Impact on student learning and on my practice

One of the major benefits of introducing the use of this technology in the context of students’ learning and of my own practice is that my module (and practice) has become much more inclusive (V1, V2). 
For example, contrary to the traditional practice of supporting statistical courses with the use of SPSS (i.e. statistical software), I have introduced a piece of technology that is based on the use of excel, i.e. a software that is widely known by the majority of students, I feel this has contributed to remove an obstacle to inclusivity (i.e. acquiring knowledge of a specific statistical software that is not required for consolidating the learning outcomes of the module). In support of this, students’ feedback over the past 2 years has been very positive, as demonstrated by this extract from my module feedback:
“[ESCI provided] a different view of stats that was more practical and allowed me to view the data is a different way”
 

• Advice for others

I would highly recommend endorsing the use of ESCI onto any undergrad level statistic course. While its application for more complex data analyse is limited, it provides a friendly and student-centered approach to understanding why we do things the way we do when it comes to data analysis.  

​

• Description of the technology

TED talks are an online collection of videos from expert speakers on education, business, science, tech and creativity. The aim of TED talks is to provide outreach opportunities where academic or industry expertise can be conveyed in an accessible format and reach the wider public (TED website).
Interestingly, given the variety, inspiration, and sometimes unconventional nature of the videos available, TED talks represent a resource for almost any science topic of interest.
In this respect, my use and endorsement of TED talks as part of my teaching has shaped around the idea of using these videos as interventions from “(virtual) invited speakers”, presenting some of the topics covered in my lectures from slightly different perspectives than mine.
The sections below provide some context as to how this technology has supported both my students’ learning as well as the evaluation of my own teaching practice.
 

• Context 

I use TED talks mainly to help with delivering content for a part B module on research methods for User Centred Design undergraduate students (A1).
The advantage of this technology is that it allows students to be exposed to “real world applications” of the content and concepts that are covered as part of my module.
Students would usually watch the videos as part of a specific lecture, often before or after my delivery of some key concepts.
Such an approach is beneficial in stimulating critical thinking and the forming of relevant arguments on the knowledge acquired that are based on the students’ ability to craft their personal opinions based on the presentation of several lines of evidence (e.g. presented by the TED speaker and myself) (K4, K5). 
Contrary to the use of PhET and ESCI, endorsing TED talks is relatively easy as it only requires access to projectors and can be confidently run with both small and larger groups of students.
 
 

• Analysis of the technology

I use TED talks as a complementary tool to stimulate student engagement and critical thinking, particularly as part of the research methods module that I currently teach.
One of the main challenge of this module is indeed to find creative ways to stimulate independent thinking in students and to move away to the traditional practice in the discipline of statistics to rely on “prescriptive approaches” to teaching (e.g. student are often taught to use test “XYZ” to evaluate whether an effect is present, and if the test gives a value over a certain threshold then…nothing to see!).
After all, UK post-16 learning is centred on the promotion of independent learning to learn (Coffield et al. 2004), and I believe that challenging students’ critical thinking can indeed support such long term goal.
In this respect, my careful choice of TED talks is often done so that the TED speaker presents the students with contrasting arguments with the ones I have or I am about to present as part of the lecture. Such showing is then followed by groups’ debates where the students are led into the conversation by some leading questions (e.g. basic ones include checking differences in agreement with the position of the speaker by raising ones’ hand).
 
 

• Impact on student learning and on my practice

From a pedagogical point of view, and from the teacher’s perspective, the benefits of videos are several. As well as promoting a deeper understanding of the topic covered, they provide students with a platform to test their views and understanding (K4, K5). They also provide the teacher with an opportunity to develop a closer relationship and understanding of students’ individual traits, opinions, and beliefs, that can be ultimately useful to better identify individual learning styles and that can support a more personalised teaching practice (V1, V2).
In this respect, my use of TED talks is very much based on Laurillands’ conversational model (Nleya), where the use of videos creates comprehending experiences that facilitate the development of a pedagogical dialogue with my students (A5, V3).   
 

• Advice for others

I would highly recommend endorsing the use of TED talks to provide fresh, engaging, and often inspiring arguments in support or against a topic covered as part of a lecture. Practically, these videos could represent a potentially viable alternative to physical guest speakers, when attendance is limited by financial or practical resources.

​In today’s higher education landscape, the use of technology is becoming increasingly relevant, not only due to its wider accessibility and proven benefits for student learning; but also, due to the change in baseline expectations and actual technology use of higher education students. By reflecting on some examples of how different types of technology can facilitate student learning and support teachers’ reflective practice, it is hoped that the post above will provide opportunities for other peers to evaluate their practice and explore some of the benefits of the technologies proposed. 

In line with my support for the use of the technology 1 (PhET), and 2 (TED talks), my recommended piece is an actual video about a colleague’s’ experience in using PhET. Here is the link:
https://phet.colorado.edu/en/teaching-resources
​

Coffield, F, Moseley, D, Hall, E & Ecclestone, K 2004, Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and critical review, LSRC reference, Learning & Skills Research Centre, London.

Dochy F, Segers M, Sluijsmans D (2006) The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, Volume 24, 1999 - Issue 3

ESCI (Exploratory Software for Confidence Intervals) https://thenewstatistics.com/itns/esci/
Hoskins S & Newstead S (2009) Encouraging Student Motivation. In: A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher

Education. Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. & Marshall, S. (eds) 3rd edition. London: Routledge

Nleya P. Laurillard’s Conversational Framework. In: The SAGE Encyclopedia of Online Education; Edited by: Steven L.
Danver; DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781483318332.n204

PhET Intractive simulations. https://phet.colorado.edu/

​TED talks https://www.ted.com/talks

On Saturday November 21st, I was very kindly invited to give a talk on our upcoming project on skin wetness sensing and motor control in PD, at the annual PD forum of the East Midlands Research support network. With ~120 people attending, most of which affected by PD, this day was a great opportunity to exchange info with the general public about the latest developments in the area of Parkinson's research, with talks covering drug discovery, physical therapy, and assistive devices. This forum is a unique opportunity to learn from the ones who faces the challenges of PD on a daily base, so that the work we do in the lab can be further tailored to the specific daily needs of people.
A great line up of talks, a superb organizing team from the East Mid Steering Group, and a wonderful audience made for a very enjoyable day. A couple of pics to follow...

Davide